PRESIDENT TALKS ISIL WITH MILITARY/CIVILIANS ON HIS NATIONAL SECURITY TEAM

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT

President Barack Obama addresses reporters at the Pentagon, July 6, 2015, after meeting with Defense Secretary Ash Carter, left. Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, chairman of the joint Chiefs of Staff, stands at right. DoD photo by Glenn Fawcett. 

Obama Discusses Anti-ISIL Strategy With National Security Team at Pentagon
By Jim Garamone
DoD News, Defense Media Activity

WASHINGTON, July 6, 2015 – President Barack Obama discussed the strategy to degrade and ultimately destroy the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant with civilian and military leaders of his national security team at the Pentagon.

The president spoke to the press following the meeting. He stressed that the strategy will take time to work, and that there is no substitute to working through indigenous forces in the region.

The strategy harnesses all elements of American power including military, intelligence, diplomatic, economic development, “and perhaps most importantly the power of our values,” Obama said.

Long-Term Campaign

The strategy envisions a long-term campaign, he said.

“ISIL is opportunistic, and it is nimble,” the president said. “In many places in Syria and Iraq, including urban areas, it’s dug in among innocent civilian populations. It will take time to root them out.”

American and coalition partners will help out with training and air support, but it must be local fighters who take the fight to the terrorists, he said.

“As with any military effort, there will be periods of progress but there are also going to be some setbacks, as we’ve seen with ISIL’s gains in Ramadi in Iraq and in Central and Southern Syria,” Obama said.

There Has Been Progress

Still there has been progress, he noted, with more than 5,000 airstrikes that have taken out thousands of fighting positions, tanks, vehicles, bomb factories and training camps.

“We’ve eliminated thousands of fighters, including senior ISIL commanders,” the president said. “Over the past year we've seen that, when we have an effective partner on the ground, ISIL can be pushed back.”

ISIL lost the Mosul Dam, Mount Sinjar and Tikrit.

“Altogether, ISIL has lost more than a quarter of the populated areas that it had seized in Iraq,” he said. “In Syria, ISIL lost at Kobani. It's recently endured losses across Northern Syria, including the key city of Tal Abyad, denying ISIL a vital supply route to Raqqa, its base of operations in Syria.”

The terror group is vulnerable and with help local forces can push back the extremists, Obama said.

Intensifying Efforts

“ISIL’s recent losses in both Syria and Iraq prove that ISIL can and will be defeated,” he said. “Indeed, we're intensifying our efforts against ISIL’s base in Syria. Our airstrikes will continue to target the oil and gas facilities that fund so much of their operations.”

The coalition – including many local nations – will continue to go after ISIL’s leadership and infrastructure in Syria, he said.

“Partnering with other countries, sharing more information, strengthening laws and border security allows us to work to stem the flow of foreign fighters to Syria as well as Iraq and to stem, obviously, the flow of those fighters back into our own countries,” the president said. “This continues to be a challenge. And working together, all nations are going to need to do more. But we’re starting to see some progress.”

Ramping Up Training

The United States is ramping up training and support of local forces, he said. “As I’ve said before, this aspect of our strategy was moving too slowly, but the fall of Ramadi has galvanized the Iraqi government,” Obama said.

In Anbar province, Iraq, more Sunni fighters are coming forward and they are being supplied. The president told his team to do more to train and equip anti-ISIL forces in Syria, too.

Again, the president called for a broader political effort in the region.

“Now all this said, our strategy recognizes that no amount of military force will end the terror that is ISIL unless it’s matched by a broader effort, political and economic, that addresses the underlying conditions that have allowed ISIL to gain traction,” he said.

“So as Iraqi cities and towns are liberated from ISIL, we’re working with Iraq and the United Nations to help communities rebuild the security, services and governance that they need, and we continue to support the efforts of Prime Minister (Haydar) Abadi to forge an inclusive and effective Iraqi government that unites all the people of Iraq, Shia, Sunni, Kurds and all minority communities,” the president said.

In Syria, Obama called for the Syrian people to unite against ISIL and begin the “political transition to a new government without Bashar al-Assad, a government that serves all Syrians.”

Security Team Members

The national security team met in Defense Secretary Ash Carter’s conference room. Meeting with Obama and Carter were: Deputy Defense Secretary Bob Work; Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; Navy Adm. James Winnefeld, the vice chairman; Marcel Lettre, the acting undersecretary of defense for intelligence; Gen. Ray Odierno, Army chief of staff; Gen. Joseph Dunford, Commandant of the Marine Corps; Army Gen. Frank Grass, the chief of the National Guard Bureau, Army Gen. Lloyd Austin, the commander of U.S. Central Command; Army Gen. David Rodriguez, the commander of U.S. Africa Command; Army Gen. Joe Votel, the commander of U.S. Special Operations Command; Adm. Michelle Howard, the vice chief of naval operations; Gen. Larry Spencer, the Air Force vice chief of staff.

Also included were U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power, Deputy Secretary of State Tony Blinken, CIA Director John Brennan, White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough, National Security Advisor Susan Rice and Lisa Monaco, assistant to the president for homeland security and counterterrorism.

DOD ANNOUNCES ADDITIONAL LABS RECEIVED LIVE ANTHRAX SAMPLES

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
Pentagon Provides DoD Laboratory Review Update
By Army Sgt. 1st Class Tyrone C. Marshall Jr.
DoD News, Defense Media Activity

WASHINGTON, June 8, 2015 – As part of its ongoing laboratory review, the Defense Department today announced additional laboratories and one new state have been added to the list of sites that received low concentrations of live anthrax samples.

In line with Deputy Defense Secretary Bob Work’s pledge of a transparent DoD laboratory review process, Pentagon spokesman Army Col. Steve Warren provided the update to reporters on the number of labs and locations which received the samples.

Warren said 66 laboratories in 19 states and Washington, D.C., as well as three foreign countries are now known to have received the live anthrax samples.

“The new state that we’re adding is Pennsylvania,” he said. “Thirty-one people remain on post-exposure prophylaxis, so that’s no change.”

In addition to Washington, D.C., Warren said the states identified as having received live samples are California, Utah, Texas, Tennessee, Virginia, Massachusetts, Wisconsin, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Delaware, Washington, Illinois, Florida, Arizona, Ohio, North Carolina, Rhode Island and Pennsylvania.

“The [number of] countries remain the same,” he said, citing Australia, South Korea and Canada.

These locations include all identified academic, federal and civilian facilities affected, Warren said.

DOD VIDEO: FLAG UNFURLED FOR 9/11

STRONG RELATIONS STRESSED BETWEEN U.S.-ISRAEL

FROM:  DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 
Senior U.S., Israeli Defense Officials Meet, Stress Strong Relations
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Jan. 15, 2014 – Acting Deputy Defense Secretary Christine H. Fox and the director general of Israel's Defense Ministry reaffirmed the strength of the U.S.-Israeli defense relationship in a meeting at the Pentagon today.

This was retired Maj. Gen. Dan Harel's first visit to the United States in his current capacity, and Fox's first official foreign delegation meeting since she took office last month, said James Swartout, a spokesman for the acting deputy secretary, in a statement issued after the meeting.

The defense leaders committed to working closely to ensure Israel has the capabilities it needs to maintain its qualitative military edge, Swartout said, noting Israel's acquisition of several advanced capabilities from the United States, including the V-22 Osprey, which the United States has not released to any other nation.

“This decision underscores that military-to-military cooperation between the United States and Israel is stronger than ever,” he added.

BRIEFING BY SECRETARY OF DEFENSE HAGEL,UNDER SECRETARY HALE

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 
Presenter: Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel October 17, 2013
Department of Defense Press Briefing by Secretary Hagel and Under Secretary Hale in the Pentagon Briefing Room


SECRETARY OF DEFENSE CHUCK HAGEL: Good afternoon. I wanted to make some brief comments this afternoon regarding the reopening of government. I'm going to take -- after I make a statement, a couple of questions, and then I'm going to ask Bob Hale, our comptroller, to take some questions regarding the specifics of the reopening.



This morning, I announced that the Department of Defense is resuming operations now that Congress has restored funding for DOD and the rest of the federal government. While all of us across the department welcome the fact that the shutdown is now behind us, I know that its impact will continue to be felt by all of our people. All of them, in different ways, had their lives affected and disrupted during this period of tremendous uncertainty. In particular, I am deeply aware of the harm that this shutdown inflicted on so many of our civilian personnel.



All of our leaders, civilian and military alike, deeply regret what this shutdown has done to our people, and we'll work to repair the damage beginning today. Echoing what President Obama said earlier today, I want all of our civilian personnel to know that the work they do is critically important to this department and this country. It matters to this department, and it matters for the country.



The military simply cannot succeed without our civilian employees, and the president and I appreciate their professionalism and their patience throughout this very trying period. Now that this latest budget crisis has become history, and we have come to an end, we have an opportunity to return to refocusing on our critical work.



But it's important to note that Congress did not remove the shadow of uncertainty that has been cast over this department and our government much of this year. Like much of the rest of the government, DOD is now operating on a short-term continuing resolution which limits our ability to start new programs, and the damaging cuts of sequestration remain the law of the land.



In the months ahead, Congress will have an opportunity to remove this shadow of uncertainty as they work to craft a balanced long-term spending bill. If this fiscal uncertainty continues, it will have an impact on our economy, our national security, and America's standing in the world. And if the sequester level continues, there will also be consequences.



Earlier this year, in our Strategy Choices and Management Review, DOD explained how the continuation of these abrupt cuts put us at risk of fielding a force that is unprepared due to a lack of training, maintenance, and the latest equipment. DOD has a responsibility to give America's elected leaders and the American people a clear-eyed assessment of what our military can and cannot do after years of sequester-level cuts. In the months ahead, we will continue to provide our best and most honest assessment as Congress works to establish the nation's long-term spending priorities.



That is my statement, and I'd be happy to respond to a couple questions. Thank you.



Lita?



Q: Mr. Secretary, you mentioned consequences. As you look down the road -- I think Mr. Hale addressed this at one of his briefings -- there already are some reviews of how many civilians and how much force reduction overall there will have to be, reductions in force. Can you talk a little bit about, as you look ahead, what are you warning Congress and the country about in terms of the number of forces that you're going to have to cut in order to meet these lower budget levels, the number of civilians you may have to lay off? And what does that do to U.S. readiness and morale of your workforce?



SEC. HAGEL: Well, I'll -- I'll leave the specific numbers to Bob Hale, but let me respond in a general way to your -- your questions.



Let's start with the impact on morale. I don't think anyone questions that the uncertainty that shutting down the government and closing down people's jobs has brought a great amount of not only disruption to our government, to our country, but to their lives, to the civilian personnel whose lives have been disrupted by this particular shutdown.



Then you add further to that the uncertainty of no authorizations, no appropriations, and living in a world of continuing resolutions, of continuing sequestration, the uncertainty of planning, not just in an agency or a department, or certainly all the elements of the Department of Defense, but in personal lives. I mean, people have to have some confidence that they have a job that they can rely on. I know there are no guarantees in life, but we can't continue to do this to our people, having them live under this cloud of uncertainty.



So morale is a huge part of this. We won't be able to recruit good people. Good people will leave the government. They're not going to put up with this. Good people have many options. So that's one part of it.



I have said many times, the chiefs have said, General Dempsey has said over the last few months that as we have had to close down training facilities, and our training, we've had to stand down wings, and not allow many of our -- our wings to fly, the steaming of our ships. We've had to pull back the longer-term investments that are required to keep the technological edge that this country has always had.



I mean, these are all dimensions of sequestrations, of uncertainty, of not knowing or not being able to plan what's coming. Sure, that adds to impact on our readiness, and, sure, that eventually will present capability issues for us.



So these are not new issues. I've talked about them, General Dempsey, all of our leaders; all of our chiefs have talked about them. That's part of the point the president has made, I have made continually through this process over the last few months.



I noted again in a statement that we've got to have some certainty here of being able to go forward. We've got a QDR that you all are -- are familiar with, that we're going through that review. We've got a budget resolution that we are preparing within this institution and within the White House budget that we will present a budget to Congress, as we do each year. To try to plan for a budget with this kind of uncertainty alone, how are we going to fulfill our strategic commitments? What impact is this having overseas with our allies?



I've been to, as many of you know -- some of you have been with me on these trips -- to the Asia Pacific area three times since I've been secretary of defense. Secretary Kerry was there recently. The president pulled his trip down last week because of the shutdown.



Our allies are asking questions, can we rely on our partnership with America? Will America fulfill its commitments and its promises? These are huge issues for all of us, and they do impact our national security and our relationships and our standing in the world.



So these are the broad general areas of consequences of not being able to plan and prepare because of that uncertainty that we're living under. The specific numbers, Lita, I'll leave for Bob Hale.



Thom?



Q: Thank you, sir. On the sequester moving ahead, you know, you spent a lot of time in the Senate, you know how -- how the Hill works. You have a good sense of the American people. So in your current position, Mr. Secretary, is it your sense that the sequester-level cuts, those are the new reality, and rather than uncertainty, isn't that what you should be planning against, given Congress's will, the will of the people?



SEC. HAGEL: As you know, Thom, everyone in this room knows that the so-called sequester, which is a product of the Budget Control Act of 2011, is the law of the land. And we have to plan and prepare, to your point, with the facts as they are and the realities as they are.



If you recall, when I implemented and directed the strategic management review and choices, which I noted in my comments here, it was to prepare this institution for different scenarios of different numbers, and certainly the numbers that we know are there that we have been living with this year reflected under sequestration are numbers that we've got to prepare for. We plan also for the continuing resolution numbers. And we plan also for our budget numbers.



Now, I don't know -- you started your question to me, Thom, about my service in the Senate -- I don't know if a compromise can be reached, if some kind of an agreement can be reached to deal with these issues. That's part of the uncertainty.



So we have to plan for every eventuality here. And you can't take an institution like this, as you all know, because you've been around here a long time, and turn these things around in a month, in a week. This is the national security of America we're talking about. And so it does take thought and it does take planning -- we're talking about people's lives -- as we bring down and draw down by law our force structure.



We know that, and we're planning for that. And you've heard me say many times, you've heard General Dempsey say many times that the abruptness and the steepness of those cuts give us no flexibility to glide it down in a responsible way to make sure that our resources match our mission, our -- our mission matches our resources, and that we are able to fulfill the strategic interest of this country.



GEORGE LITTLE: One final question.



Q: Mr. Secretary, you spoke a minute ago about morale of the civilian workers at the department. Are you at the point yet where you have -- you or General Dempsey have concern about troop morale, given all of this? What indicators might concern you? And how are you watching that, given what you said about they're not being allowed to train and to fly and all of that? Are you now worried about the troops?



SEC. HAGEL: We are always worried about the troops. The reason I noted the civilian personnel specifically is because the civilian personnel were the ones affected by the furloughs and the shutdown. As you know, our uniformed military was protected in that.



But the same uncertainty, certainly, resides in the uniformed military community, different dimension of it, of course, but questions I get all the time from our junior enlisted, from our officer corps, from our senior officer corps, future, I get -- what is the future for me as an E-5, starting a family, for example? And I got these questions two weeks ago when I had my monthly luncheon with junior enlisted members of our services.



I get these questions all the time. Mr. Secretary, can you give me an honest answer -- in one case last week, two weeks ago, I had one service member say, my wife asked me to ask you, do I have a future? Do we have a future?



And these are young men and women who are very proud to be in the military, want to stay in the military. They have a purpose to their lives serving in the military. But they also have to ask the question, when you're 25 or 30 years old, if you have a family, you want to start a family, can I support that family? I mean, what kind of a future am I giving my family if I'm not sure where all this is going?



So, yes, it affects our uniformed military. Yes, we are vitally concerned about the morale of our military. But the civilian workforce are the ones that have been obviously touched directly by the shutdown and, of course, the furloughs that we've seen this year.



Thank you. And Bob Hale will respond to more specific questions you've got. Bob.



UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE ROBERT F. HALE: Well, good afternoon. Let me just start by joining the secretary in thanking our civilian workforce, all of our workers, but especially our civilians for their patience through this. And I'd add the senior commanders and managers have helped me a great deal as I work to help the department get through this.



So when I read the OMB message about 2:30 this morning saying government was reopened, I felt like I could stop beating my head against a wall, but I got to say it would have felt a lot better never to have started beating my head against a wall. So with that, I'll stop and -- if you have questions.



Q: I wonder if there is any estimate of what costs the Department of Defense incurred as a result of the shutdown, including the -- you know, the workers at the beginning who were not working and that -- that money was wasted. Is there any cost estimate?



UNDER SEC. HALE: Well, we know at a minimum there are about $600 million of lost productivity, if you will, from at that point almost 400,000 civilians that we had on furlough for four days. There were a number of other costs where I can't put a number on them. We built up interest payments because we were forced to pay vendors late. We had to cancel training classes, so we had to bring the people home on -- on orders and then send them right back again. So there were a lot of costs of those sort.



I can't quantify those, but it's at least the $600 million to start with in essentially lost productivity.



Q: Can you just take a stab at the layoff and attrition...



UNDER SEC. HALE: The layoffs?



Q: The layoffs -- layoffs that are coming down the road and reductions in force?



UNDER SEC. HALE: Well, you know, he said he'd defer to Bob Hale. Bob Hale is going to defer to the future, because we haven't decided.



But, look, if we face budgets at the BCA cap level, roughly $50 billion less in '14, we're going to have to get smaller. I can't tell you exactly how much. Yes, that will mean fewer civilians. We will try to avoid reductions in force. We'll keep them at an absolute minimum. We would look to do this, if we have to, through attrition, but, yeah, we're going to get smaller. I just can't tell you exactly how much.


Q: Mr. Hale, you've had an entire couple of hours to pull your numbers together. Do you have any idea yet of the impact of this on programs and the -- whether, you know, some testing's been delayed, that sort of thing, and also just the friction costs to both you and to the companies?



UNDER SEC. HALE: Well, we -- we were relatively fortunate in the government. We had a partial appropriation. The Pay Our Military Act was in appropriation, so we kept -- except for that first four days, most of our civilians working, all of our military.



I think that limited the disruption, but it was there. I'm sure we delayed testing, though I can't quantify it for you. My guess is that we will be able to catch up reasonably quickly for those kinds of delays, backlogs of vouchers we haven't paid.



I'm a lot more worried about the morale effects on all of the -- of all of our people, but especially our civilians. And you've heard that story, but I think we all are concerned. I mean, it's not just this event. I mean, we've had three years of pay freezes, although I noted the CR did not prohibit the -- or either the military or civilian pay raise, so -- so far, it's still in place. We've had three years of pay freezes. We had the sequester furloughs, now the shutdown furloughs.



I mean, my own people are kind of looking at me and asking the question -- most of them are seniors, so they'll probably stick around, but you wonder what the folks out in the field are saying. "I'm not so sure I want to work for this government." So we need some stability, and we need to keep telling them they're important, and then we need to show it, through things like pay raises and no more furloughs, et cetera. That's the bigger -- that's the bigger concern to me.



Q: Do you know of any new starts that are being delayed because of the CR?



UNDER SEC. HALE: Oh, yes. I mean, the CR will delay -- well, now you're going to test my memory. I can see the sheet. I can't remember. So I'm going to have to get back to you. I don't want to name something that's wrong.



There are no huge ones, but there are a number of smaller programs that under the continuing resolution we are not allowed to do new starts, rate increases, no military -- new military construction projects.



Perhaps one of the biggest problems is -- is the fact that we essentially required under the CR to buy the same ships this year as last year, because Congress appropriates by ship, and we have to repeat last year. It's a Groundhog Day approach to budgeting.



So there are lots of disruptions. I can't remember -- I can't remember the specifics. They're not in my head. I'm sorry.



Q: Mr. Hale, is the likelihood of sequestration informing your recruitment numbers now, either for civilian or for uniformed members? And wouldn't the responsible thing be to be slowing down in that recruitment so that you don't have to let people go who will only just...




UNDER SEC. HALE: Right. We're going to -- we're going to start executing at the continuing resolution level or a little lower, because of the enormous uncertainty and the possibility that sequestration in January, if it occurs, could take us down to the BCA cap level.



And, yes, I think that will cause us to begin to reduce or think in terms of reduced size and reduced recruiting. You're exactly right. I mean, we don't want to -- on one hand, we don't want to commit ourselves in this period too much in a period of enormous uncertainty in case -- in case we are able to do things we think that are important, but we do need to slow down. And we will slow down our execution, at least to the CR level, and probably a little bit south of that, just because there's so much uncertainty.



We're only three weeks into the fiscal year, and we're still kind of plus or minus $50 billion in what we're going to spend this fiscal year. That's not a comfortable position, particularly for our comptroller. So it's a challenge.



Q: Excuse me. So have there been orders issued to the components and the services to spend at the BCA level? And, secondly, with the CR, is there the kind of flexibility in moving money around in accounts that you -- that you need to -- to cope with sequestration.



UNDER SEC. HALE: I mean, we haven't issued any formal orders. We've discussed with the services to execute at the continuing resolution level and maybe somewhat south of it. And we'll have to work with them on specifics as -- as time develops. And -- what was your second question again? I got...



Q: About flexibility.



UNDER SEC. HALE: Yeah, flexibility. No, I mean, we have very little flexibility under continuing resolution. It gives us money in budget accounts, like Air Force procurement and Army active O&M. It just gives us a dollar figure and says that you can't do new starts, no -- no rate increases, no new military construction projects, and you get then a little more than 25 percent of it to cover October 1st through January 15th.



Beyond that, though, we've got to kind of be looking at the fact eventually we'll get some kind of appropriations, so we -- we need to be careful on where we spend that money, and we can't move between those accounts at all. And generally we aren't allowed to reprogram when we're under continuing resolution. So for a while, we kind of have to hold our breath and -- and try to look to the future and be as conservative as you can. If that's a vague answer, it's because things are kind of vague. It's not a good way to run a railroad.



Q: Going back to the secretary's comments regarding his doubts on Congress reaching some sort of compromise, is there anything that -- that can be said that hasn't been said already by the department to convince lawmakers that, you know, this cliff is coming? Or is it just a matter of continuing to sort of beat the drum on -- on the dangers of sequestration?



UNDER SEC. HALE: You mean that can be said to sort of help the process along? I mean, we'll be helpful in any way we can. We'll work through the administration. The president has a plan. He enunciated -- announced it with a budget, in terms of a plan to reduce the deficit and -- and to provide for discretionary spending, which is the level we submitted the budget at.



We certainly support that plan. We understand there's going to be negotiations, and we'll help them in any way we can. I don't think there's any one thing we can do, but we stand ready to assist through OMB and the administration to help the negotiators any way we can. We want them to succeed.



Q: Tuition assistance, G.I. Bill, what happens with that going forward? What's the situation now?



UNDER SEC. HALE: I mean, I assume -- we will -- we will, I think, pay tuition assistance. G.I. Bill is funded in another agency, but the tuition assistance we will pay, I think more or less at the levels that were programmed. I mean, we're not planning to cut it back substantially.



Now, we continue to look at it in the context of overall budget reductions. And there may be some -- some trims, but we know it's an important program, and we won't stop it, and we will continue to fund it.



There may have been some temporary interruptions during the shutdown, but -- but we'll continue to support the program. We know it's important to our people.



Q: Mr. Hale, you've had a chance to look, I think, at all the services' initial 15 proposals and their alternate proposals with sequestration. How much of -- I guess, of an "oh, wow" factor is there in the alternate proposals, in your opinion, sir?



UNDER SEC. HALE: Well, I mean, there are far-reaching changes. It shouldn't be surprising when you take about $50 billion in fiscal 2015. And there were some funds that were taken out right at the end game by the president. The president proposed some cuts in discretionary spending, as well, in that budget package that we didn't fully accommodate, so pretty good-sized reductions.



There are force cuts. I mean, I'm not going to give you specifics, because I don't feel I should, but I'm not surprised. And you saw the SCMR, and it's often usually in those ranges, within the ranges of the SCMR. I'm not surprised. But I think all of us are aware that it will be a somewhat different, smaller military if -- if we have to go through with those cuts.



But we are looking at them actively. And -- and we will be as prepared as we can, within the limits of time that we have, to be ready for a wide range of contingencies, because we know that's what we face.



STAFF: Last question from Thom Shanker.



Q: Thanks. In past years, it's been the business practice of this department, as you approach the end of the fiscal year, to hold some money back. You obviously don't want to overspend your budget accidentally. I'm just curious how many tens of millions or hundreds did you end the year with? And can you now apply that money in some way to mitigate the strain?



UNDER SEC. HALE: Well, there are several kinds of money we get. A number of the operating dollars, military personnel and operations and maintenance, expire, those you can't spend them after September 30th. It will tell you something about the real-time nature of our accounting systems that I don't know yet for sure what we obligated. But I think that we will have obligated the great majority of those funds. We usually try to.



Other funds that -- investment ones, we get two years for RTD&E, three years for procurement. And there I think you would see our obligation rates fairly low right now for a couple reasons, uncertainty, but also, frankly, I mean, our contracting officers were concentrating heavily on the one-year money in those last days. And we had had to cut back on -- on them because of sequestration.



So my guess is, we've pretty well obligated, though I don't know for sure on the operating accounts. I think that's not true on the investment accounts. And there are some -- we'll try to pick up the pace as best we can. And let's hope there's no further disruption that occurs in January.



STAFF: Thank you very much.



Q: Thank you, sir.

PRESIDENT OBAMA REVIEWS INTERAGENCY COUNTERTERRORISM PLANS WITH OFFICIALS

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 
Obama Reviews Interagency Counterterrorism Plans
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Sept. 10, 2013 - President Barack Obama met with Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and other officials tuesday to review interagency counterterrorism planning on the eve of the 12th anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States, Pentagon Press Secretary George Little said.

Before that meeting, Little added, senior military planners briefed Hagel on the Defense Department's worldwide security posture.

In close coordination with the State Department, the Defense Department has undertaken a number of efforts over the past year to increase security planning at U.S. embassies and installations around the world, including augmenting the role U.S. Marine security guards play in certain situations, the press secretary said in a statement.

"The Department of Defense has also developed, trained, and sustained, innovative force options, both at sea and at U.S. bases in Europe, Africa, and the Middle East," he said. "These forces are operating at a high state of readiness and are complemented by air assets and other platforms that can help respond to a variety of contingencies."

Hagel thanked Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as well as the Joint Staff and combatant commands, for working closely with one another to support efforts across areas of responsibility, the press secretary said. The secretary also offered his appreciation to "the men and women standing watch on this day and every day around the world," he added.

A White House statement issued after the meeting said the national security team is taking measures to prevent 9/11-related attacks and to ensure the protection of Americans and U.S. facilities abroad.

COUNTERTERRORISM PLANNING FOR 9-11

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT, PENTAGON 
Statement by Pentagon Press Secretary George Little on Counterterrorism Planning for the Anniversary of 9/11

This afternoon, Secretary Hagel participated in a meeting with President Obama to review interagency counterterrorism planning on the eve of the 12th anniversary of September 11, 2001. Prior to that meeting, Secretary Hagel was briefed by senior military planners on the Department of Defense's worldwide security posture.



Over the past year, the Department of Defense in close coordination with the Department of State, has undertaken a number of efforts to increase security planning at U.S. Embassies and installations around the world including augmenting the role U.S. Marine Security Guards play in certain situations.



The Department of Defense has also developed, trained, and sustained, innovative force options both at sea and at U.S. bases in Europe, Africa, and the Middle East.  These forces are operating at a high state of readiness and are complemented by air assets and other platforms that can help respond to a variety of contingencies.



Secretary Hagel thanked General Dempsey, the Joint Staff, and Combatant Commands for working closely with one another to support efforts across areas of responsibility and offered his appreciation to the men and women standing watch on this day and every day around the world.

READOUT: SECRETARY OF DEFENSE HAGEL'S CALL TO EGYPTIAN DEFENSE MINISTER AL-SISI

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 
Readout of Secretary Hagel's Call with Egyptian Minister of Defense General Abdul Fatah al-Sisi from Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

           Pentagon Press Secretary George Little provided the following readout:

           "Today Egyptian Minister of Defense Al-Sisi called Secretary Hagel in Malaysia to discuss developments in Egypt. Minister Al-Sisi updated Secretary Hagel on the security situation throughout Egypt, as well as progress on the political roadmap. Secretary Hagel stressed the importance of an inclusive, transparent political process that includes all Egyptians, and that differences must be resolved without violence. Minister Al-Sisi also updated the Secretary on security developments on the Sinai Peninsula, and Secretary Hagel expressed appreciation for Egypt's efforts to ensure the security of the U.S. Embassy facilities and all U.S. personnel serving in Egypt."

SECRETARY OF DEFENSE HAGEL AND CHINA'S MINISTER OF NATIONAL DEFENSE GENERAL WANQUAN

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 
Presenter: : Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel and China's Minister of National Defence General Chang Wanquan
Department of Defense Press Briefing with Secretary Hagel and Gen. Chang from the Pentagon

           SECRETARY OF DEFENSE CHUCK HAGEL:  Good afternoon.  Today, I'm pleased to welcome Minister of Defence General Chang to the Pentagon.  We just finished a very productive meeting, where I restated that the United States is committed to building a positive and constructive relationship with China.  The China-U.S. relationship is important for stability and security in the Asia Pacific and achieving security and prosperity for our two nations in the 21st century.

            One of the themes we emphasized today was that a sustained, substantive military-to-military relationship is an important pillar for this strong bilateral relationship.  The United States welcomes and supports the rise of a prosperous and responsible China that help solve regional and global problems.

            Our goal is to build trust between our militaries through cooperation.  The United States has invited for the first time the PLA navy to join our largest multilateral naval exercise, RIMPAC, that will take place next year.  This morning, General Chang and I have affirmed that we will continue expanding our defense exchanges and joint exercises.  Earlier this summer, for the first time, Chinese midshipmen joined in a multinational exchange program at the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis.

            Today, our Military Maritime Consultative Agreement Working Group is meeting in Hawaii to discuss humanitarian assistance and disaster relief.  And this weekend, our navies will conduct another counter-piracy exercise in the Gulf of Aden, building on the first-ever joint counter-piracy exercise we held last year.

            General Chang brought up two of the initiatives that President Xi proposed to President Obama at their summit in June, one, a way to notify each other of major military activities, and, two, rules of behavior for military air and naval activities.

            I welcomed this discussion and noticed that the transparency that we've had is important to reducing the risk of miscalculation and avoiding unintended tensions or conflicts.  Our staffs are exploring those initiatives and will continue discussing them.

            General Chang and I have also both welcomed this recent establishment of the new U.S.-China cyber working group as a venue for addressing issues of mutual concern in the area of cyber.  We discussed a number of regional security issues, as well, including North Korea, the East China Sea, the South China Sea, and I reaffirmed longstanding U.S. policies on these issues.

            With respect to competing maritime claims, I noted that while the United States does not take a position on sovereignty in these cases, we do have an interest in these claims being resolved peacefully, without coercion.  The general and I affirmed the importance of maintaining open channels of communication, and we agreed that it's important to continue high-level visits, such as, as you all are aware, General Dempsey's visit to China earlier this year.

            General Odierno and General Welsh will visit China later this year, and PLA Navy Commander Admiral Wu will visit the United States.  Today, General Dempsey also offered to host his counterpart, PLA General Fang, for a visit to the United States next year.

            In our meeting this morning, General Chang invited me to visit China next year, and I enthusiastically accepted.  I look forward to seeing him again at next week's ASEAN defense ministers meeting in Brunei, as part of my trip to Southeast Asia.  I'll also visit Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Philippines on this trip.

            Now I'll ask General Chang for his comments before we take questions from all of you.  Thank you very much.  Thank you.

            GENERAL CHANG WANQUAN (through translator):  Friends from the press, good afternoon.  At the invitation of Secretary Hagel, I am leading this senior military delegation from the People's Liberation Army to visit the United States, bringing the friendship from the Chinese people and the Chinese military.  The purpose of my visit is to implement the important consensus reached by President Xi Jinping and President Obama of building a new model of major country relationship based on mutual respect and win-win cooperation, to further increase mutual understanding, to enhance mutual trust, to promote mutual cooperation, and to push forward the sound and stable development of our national and military relations.

            In the -- in the past few days, we visited U.S. PACOM, U.S. NORTHCOM, and NORAD.  We were well received and experienced warm hospitality from the American people and from the officers and soldiers of the U.S. military.  Here let me say thank you on behalf of all my colleagues.

            This morning, Secretary Hagel and I had a candid and deepened exchange of views over our national and military relations, international and regional security issues, and other issues of common concerns.  We reached five agreements.

            Firstly, we both agreed that our military-to-military relationship is an important component of our overall bilateral relations and that the current military relationship is gaining a good momentum.  We both agreed to earnestly implement the important consensus reached by the two presidents during their Sunnylands summit to work together to strengthen our military relationship and attempt to elevate it to a new height.

            Secondly, we both agreed to continue to strengthen our high-level visits, deepen our consultations and dialogues in order to increase our mutual trust.  Specifically, the U.S. welcomes the visit by the PLA chief of general staff in 2014.  China welcomes the visit by U.S. secretary of defense and chief of naval operations in 2014.

            Secretary Hagel and I agreed to set up an exchange mechanism between the PLA Strategic Planning Department and J5 Strategic, Plans and Policy, U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff.  We also agreed to take use of mechanisms, such as defense consultative talks, military maritime consultative agreements, to actively explore a notification mechanism for major military activities and continue to study the rules of behavior on military air and maritime activities.

            Thirdly, we both believe that the Chinese and the U.S. militaries are carrying an increasingly important responsibility in maintaining peace and stability in the Asia Pacific region.  Both sides agreed to play a constructive role in regional affairs, promoting the positive interaction between the two militaries in this region.  We also agreed to strengthen coordination and cooperation under Asia Pacific multilateral security dialogues, mechanisms, and frameworks.  China will participate in the Ring of Pacific exercise in 2014, as invited.

            Fourthly, we're in agreement that the two militaries share wide common interests and foundation for cooperation in nontraditional security areas.  We both agreed to further enhance exchanges and cooperation in humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, counterterrorism, anti-piracy, and peacekeeping.  We both confirmed to conduct the first China-U.S. humanitarian assistance and disaster relief exercise with active force in Hawaii this November.  We also agreed to have an exploratory discussion on logistics issues in support of nontraditional security missions later this year.

            Fifthly, we both agreed to further deepen military archives cooperation, setting up a military archives cooperation mechanism in which both sides can build upon the existing cooperation of the PLA assist in U.S. to search those missing in actions and strengthen a two-way exchange of related military archives and materials.

            At present, the China-U.S. relationship is in a new historical era.  Building a new model of China-U.S. military relationship can help us to increase strategic trust to reduce strategic risks and to maintain world peace and regional stability.  China is ready to work with the U.S. to seriously implemented our presidents' important consensus, to -- to raise our military-to-military relationship to a new height by strengthening our dialogue, communication, and practical cooperation, and by properly handle our disputes and differences.

            Thank you.

            SEC. HAGEL:  Thanks.

            GEORGE LITTLE:  We'll now move to questions.  There will be two per side.  And we'll pause for translation after each question.  And we'll start with Bob Burns of the Associated Press.

            Q:  Thank you.  General Chang, a question for you.  The U.S. has spoken quite a lot recently about pivoting to Asia.  I'm wondering if you see justification for a larger U.S. military presence in the Asia Pacific.  Do you see evidence of that yet?  And do you think it's helpful or harmful that the U.S. is trying to increase its influence in the region?

            A question for Secretary Hagel on Egypt, in light of the violence there in recent days.  You had quite a series of contacts with General Al-Sisi in recent days.  Given what transpired over the last several days, do you feel that your message fell on deaf ears?  And also, what's the way ahead, in your view?  Do you need to cut off military-to-military relations?  Do you stop arms transfers?  And do you -- are you concerned about the safety of U.S. military personnel in the Sinai, where there's been a lot of violence lately?  Thank you.

            GEN. CHANG (through translator):  Regarding the U.S.-Asia Pacific rebalancing strategy, I would like to first make a point by quoting the chairman of the People's Republic of China.  President Xi used to say that the Pacific is wide enough to accommodate both two great countries, China and United States.

            It's always the Chinese position to welcome the U.S. to play a constructive role in the Asia Pacific.  And we also noted the U.S. statement many times, that the U.S. rebalancing strategy is a comprehensive one, incorporating areas such as economics and social and also including military.

            It is also worth to be noted that certain Asia Pacific nations have noted that the military aspect has been highlighted in this comprehensive strategy, including to strengthen the military deployment in the region, enhancing the U.S. alignments in this region by conducting military cooperations and military -- joint military exercises.

            We also noticed that the frequency and intensity of such kind of joint military exercises are increasing upon the recent time.  From certain degree, this kind of intensified military activities further complicated the situation in the region.

            China is a peace-loving nation.  And we hope that this strategy does not target a specific country in the region.  And the development of China is not only conducive to our own country, to the entire region, but also to United States.  Being together with all the Asia Pacific countries, regional countries, including United States, it is a common aspiration of all of the countries that we wish to have peace in the region.  Therefore, it is our hope that this rebalancing strategy is a constructive one that could help the peace and stability in the region.

            And on the other hand, we would like to have this rebalancing strategy balanced on different countries, as well, because the essence of rebalancing is -- is balance.  It would be a -- it would be a balancing strategy if such kind of factors are taken into consideration.  What is the most important is China is ready to work with the United States to maintain the regional peace and stability.

            Thank you.

            SEC. HAGEL:  Bob, yes, I have had many phone calls with General Al-Sisi over the last five weeks, but so has all of our national security team been involved in working with the Egyptians on dealing with this -- this issue.  I say that because we've all consistently framed the same message.

            As President Obama said last week, the violence must end, national emergency lifted.  The interim government of Egypt must get back to an inclusive approach to reconciliation in Egypt.  All of us have consistently said that.

            The United States has a longstanding relationship with Egypt that's based on our respect for the people of Egypt, the country of Egypt.  We have interests, clearly, in the Middle East, interests that include hopefully a development of some progress toward an Israeli-Palestinian settlement.  So we continue to work with the Egyptian interim government, as well as the Egyptian military.

            Yes, we are concerned about our people, Americans, all Americans in Egypt.  Protection of Americans in Egypt, not just only our diplomats, but all Americans, is of the highest priority.  And we all -- all the American government officials, including American military, have been working very closely with the Egyptian military and police to assure the security and protection of Americans in Egypt, and we'll continue to do that.

            Q:  Are you concerning reducing that -- the peacekeeping force?

            SEC. HAGEL:  As President Obama has said, we're reviewing every aspect of our relationship with Egypt.  Thank you.

            (UNKNOWN):  Now Xinhua News Agency, please.

            Q (through translator):  My question goes to General Chang.  General Chang, you just mentioned for many times about the meeting between President Xi Jinping and President Obama and that the two presidents agreed to build a new model of bilateral relationship.  And at the same time, President Xi proposed to build a new model of military relationship in accordance to the new model bilateral relationship.  So my question is, what is actually the concept of this new model of military relationship?

            GEN. CHANG (through translator):  Thank you for your question.  As we all know that President Xi summarized in three points the new model of this major country relationship between China and the United States, no confrontation, no antagonism, and respect each other towards win-win cooperation.

            We believe as a new model of military relationship in accordance with the new model of bilateral relations, there are some is and some isn't in this concept.  Firstly, it is a relationship in which both sides respect the other side.  It is not a relationship dominated by either side alone.

            Both sides respect the others' vital interests and major concerns, pay attention to the others' comfort level, not forcefully imposing one's will onto the other, or not gaining one's own interests at the expense of interests of the other.

            Secondly, it is a relationship of cooperation and win-win.  It is not a relationship of zero-sum game or antagonism.  Both sides work hard to expand our mutual interests and areas of cooperation to take measures to effectively manage our fractions and risks towards the ultimate goal of cooperation and win-win to avoid the recidivist trap.

            Thirdly, it's a relationship of mutual trust.  It is not a relationship of mutual suspicion.  Both sides view each other's strategic intention in objective manner to push forward those mechanisms that help mutual trust to refrain from words and actions that could pose negative effect upon mutual trust, not to make unwarranted accusations and to reduce misperception and miscalculations.

            Fourthly, it is a relationship featuring exchanges and cooperation in many areas.  It is not a relationship that is imbalanced and only focused on few areas for cooperation.  A healthy and mature military-to-military relationship should be a comprehensive one, instead of an imbalanced one.  In order to build a new model of military relationship, we need more substantive exchanges in wider areas and more practical cooperation in more diversified forms.

            Finally, it is a relationship of openness and inclusiveness.  It is not a relationship of exclusiveness or selfishness.  While working to ensure the stability of China-U.S. relationship, it is imperative to work with other international community members to strengthen communication, coordination and cooperation, to maintain strategic balance and stability of the world, and in particular of Asia Pacific region.

            I'm not sure if I've made my point clear or not.  Thank you.

            MR. LITTLE:  We'll turn now to Jim Miklaszewski of NBC News.

            (LAUGHTER)

            Q:  It easily translates.  For General Chang, you spoke today of mutual trust, yet there are persistent reports that the Chinese government and military have launched cyber attacks against U.S. government targets and interests.  What -- what is your response to those reports?

            And given the fact that this cyber working group has been put together, what steps are the Chinese willing to take to restore the kind of faith and confidence between the Chinese and the U.S. on that front and reduce the potential threat for any cyber warfare?

            And for you, Mr. Secretary, despite the persistent pleas from the U.S. government, your own personal efforts, the bloodshed today in Egypt continues.  In what appears to be a further blow to democracy, there are reports the government is prepared to release the convicted former president Hosni Mubarak from prison and additional reports that the Saudis have pledged to make up any shortfalls that the Egyptians may run into if the U.S. cuts back any further aid.

            And -- and one housekeeping measure.  Is the U.S. prepared to cancel or at least postpone the shipment of Apache attack helicopters to Egypt?

            GEN. CHANG (through translator):  Actually, complete -- trying to complete our extra missions regarding answering questions.  As we all know that cyber is a completely new domain, and cyber security has been a worldwide difficulty.

            It is always the Chinese government's position to take peaceful use of cyberspace.  We oppose of having any kind of arms race in the cyber domain, and we oppose of taking use of information and technology to conduct any kind of operation and hostility towards another party in the cyber domain.  And we oppose of taking advantage of the information -- the technological advantage to weaken other parties' sovereign control in this -- in this domain.  And we are opposed of taking any kind of double standard in this domain.

            China is one of the primary victims from hacker attacks in the world.  We are faced to severe threats coming from those cyber attacks.  The Chinese government consistently oppose and cracks down the cyber crimes according to our laws.  And the Chinese military has never supported any form of hacker activities.

            Regarding how to solve the cyber security issue, I believe it requires the common exploration and cooperation between China and United States, rather than ungrounded accusation or suspicion.  I believe that Secretary Hagel touched upon this issue in his -- in his remarks that we will work to cooperate to try to solve this issue.

            Thank you.

            SEC. HAGEL:  Jim, three parts to the question.  I don't know about a Mubarak report.  I'm not aware of it.  I can't help you.

            Saudi Arabia.  As you know, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Kuwait announced a couple weeks ago that they committed to a considerable amount of assistance to Egypt.  The specifics of your question regarding Saudi Arabia, I -- I don't know about those specifics.

            Your question regarding cancellation of Apache helicopters or other parts, as I said to Bob, we're reviewing all aspects of our relationship.

            Q:  But given all that, Mr. Secretary, is the U.S. powerless to effect any change, to bring an end to the bloodshed in Egypt right now  And why not answer the calls from Capitol Hill in particular now, just pull all the aid out, if they're not cooperating or don't appear to be cooperating at any level?

            SEC. HAGEL:  Well, first, there's not a consistent call from Capitol Hill one way or the other, as you know, on this issue.  But more to the point, we have serious interests in Egypt and that part of the world.  This is a very complicated problem.  We continue to work with all the parties to try to help as much as we can facilitate a reconciliation, a stop of the violence.

            Our ability to influence the outcome in Egypt is limited.  It's up to the Egyptian people.  And they are a large, great, sovereign nation.  And it will be their responsibility to sort -- to sort this out.  All nations are limited in their influence in another nation's internal issues.  I don't think the United States is without influence, but that has to be a collaborative effort focused on what the Egyptian people want, supporting the Egyptian people.  And we believe, as I've said, the president's said, Secretary Kerry has said, Ambassador Patterson, Deputy Secretary of State Burns, that should come as an inclusive, open, democratic process, allowing all people to have a role in the future of their country.  Thank you.

            TRANSLATOR:  Do want that translated, sir, for the benefit of the Chinese minister?

            SEC. HAGEL:  He did that exactly right.

            (LAUGHTER)

            Thank you.  I didn't realize I spoke that long.  I'm sorry, Jim.

            (UNKNOWN) (through translator):  Now last question from (inaudible)

            Q (through translator):  I have two questions respectively for General Chang and Secretary Hagel.  For General Chang, how do you see the current Asia Pacific security situation?  And how do you see the interaction between PLA and the U.S. military in the Asia Pacific?

            And to Secretary Hagel, would you like to elaborate a little bit on how -- what substantive steps should the U.S. take in building such kind of new model of relationship?

            GEN. CHANG (through translator):  I understand our friends from the -- press friends' concern about the Asia Pacific security situation.  It is also one of our major concerns, because the regional security situation is closely linked to the overall peace and stability -- stability in the world.

            And I have several points to make.  Firstly, the current situation in Asia Pacific is generally stable, but there remains some hot spots and sensitive issues.  Some hot issues are heating, while some other sensitive issues are getting more even sensitive.  Improper handling of these issues could lead to a severe impact on the overall security situation in the region.

            Secondly, the Chinese people always have their love on peace.  China always is a staunch defender of the peace and stability in the Asia Pacific.  We always insist that related disputes be solved through dialogue and negotiation.  However, no one should fantasize that China would barter away our core interests.  And no one should underestimate our will and determination in defending our territory, sovereignty, and maritime rights.

            Thirdly, the Asia Pacific is our common homeland.  Nations big or small, strong or weak, should make positive and constructive efforts for promoting regional peace and stability.  Any action that leads to trouble or provocation, any action -- unwanted action out of the self-interest or further complicates or magnifies the situation would be highly irresponsible and will not lead to a favorable result.

            And as just as I mentioned before, that we believe peace is the essence of Pacific, which means the Ocean of Peace in Chinese, or the essence of rebalance is balance.  For any country to make a strategic readjustment, it is imperative to take regional peace and stability in mind and is important to balance the security concerns of different -- different regional countries.

            The Asia Pacific is a region where the interests of China and United States intertwine the most and where China and United States interact most frequently.  The two countries enjoy huge space and potential for cooperation in this region.  The People's Liberation Army is ready to work with the U.S. military by strengthening our communication, coordination, and cooperation to pay more concerted contribution to the regional peace, stability, and prosperity.  Thank you.

            SEC. HAGEL:  As to your question regarding new models for our two countries, specifically military-to-military relationships, let me begin this way.  I think it's fundamental to the efforts that are underway, as General Chang and I have both noted, and President Xi and President Obama noted, to develop relationships, avenues of opportunity for transparency, for understanding each other's intentions far better than we have in the past.

            To carry forward the facilitation of those efforts require institutions, institutions of common interests, like what General Chang talked about this morning in his opening statement, as well as some of the specific items that I addressed, working groups for every general area of challenge, senior-level leadership exchanges, which I noted a number in my remarks, as did General Chang, those are the forms that you build in order to address the great challenges and issues and differences between our countries.  And that's what we're doing.

            Thank you.

            GEN. CHANG (through translator):  Thank you.

            SEC. HAGEL:  Thank you all.

            MR. LITTLE:  Thank you, everyone.

ARMY CUTS 12 BRIGADE COMBAT TEAMS

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Army to Cut 12 Brigade Combat Teams by 2017, Odierno Says

By Claudette Roulo
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, June 25, 2013 - As part of its force restructuring due to the Budget Control Act of 2011, by the end of fiscal year 2017 the Army will reduce its number of brigade combat teams from 45 to 33, the Army's chief of staff announced today.


In addition, Army Gen. Ray Odierno told reporters at a Pentagon news conference, the Army will shrink its active component end strength by 14 percent, or 80,000 soldiers, to 490,000, down from a wartime high of 570,000 troops.

The Army National Guard will cut 8,000 soldiers, he said, without making any force structure changes. And the Army Reserve will skip a planned force increase and maintain its current size of 205,000.

In all, 12 brigade combat teams will inactivate, the general said, including two brigade combat teams, stationed at Baumholder and Grafenwoehr, Germany, already scheduled to inactivate in fiscal 2013.

Two brigade combat teams will remain in Europe to fulfill strategic commitments, Odierno said.

One brigade combat team will inactivate at each of the following installations: Fort Bliss, Texas; Fort Bragg, N.C.; Fort Campbell, Ky; Fort Carson, Colo.; Fort Drum, N.Y.; Fort Hood, Texas; Fort Knox, Ky.; Fort Riley, Kan.; Fort Stewart, Ga., and Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Wash.

"In the future, we will announce an additional BCT to be inactivated, which will bring the number of BCTs to 32, but that decision has yet to be made," the general said.

The Army is in the process of undergoing one of its largest organizational changes since World War II, Odierno said, noting that today's announced end strength and force structure reductions are the result of provisions of the Budget Control Act of 2011 that aren't related to sequestration spending cuts. "We are taking these actions as a result of the Budget Control Act of 2011," he added.

Full sequestration beyond the current fiscal year could require another reduction in the Army's active, Guard and Reserve force structure by as much as 100,000 soldiers combined, Odierno said.

"Our decisions are in line with the fiscal year '13 budget submission, which implements a $487 billion reduction in DOD funding based on the Budget Control Act of 2011," he said. The Army's share of these cuts amounts to $170 billion, Odierno noted.

"If sequestration continues into fiscal year 2014, Army reductions to end strength, force structure and basing announced today will be only the first step," said he added.

The Army led an exhaustive review before deciding where and how to cut, the general said, looking at the environmental and socioeconomic impacts of the reductions. The final decision was based on a number of criteria, Odierno said, including the ability to train, provide for soldiers and families and the ability to expand and regenerate forces.

Geographic distribution also was considered, not only to minimize cost and environmental and socioeconomic impacts, but also to ensure the Army was in line with the rebalance to the Asia-Pacific region directed by the 2012 strategic defense guidance, he said. The 33 remaining brigade combat teams will be reorganized, Odierno said.

"We will add a third maneuver battalion and additional engineer and fires capability to each of our armor and infantry brigade combat teams in order to make them more lethal, more flexible and more agile," the general said.

The changes will reduce the overall number of headquarters while sustaining as much combat capability as possible, Odierno said. "As we inactivate brigade combat teams, we will reinvest some of the soldiers, equipment and support personnel into the remaining brigade combat teams," he added.

DOD CREATES TISSUE BANK FOR STUDY OF TBI

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
DOD Establishes Tissue Bank to Study Brain Injuries

American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, June 14, 2013 - The Defense Department has established the world's first brain tissue repository to help researchers understand the underlying mechanisms of traumatic brain injury in service members, Pentagon officials announced yesterday.


The announcement follows a symposium that Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel convened, in which a group of senior defense officials and experts in the medical field and from outside organizations discussed advancements and areas of collaboration regarding traumatic brain injury.

"We have been at war for more than a decade, and our men and women have sacrificed," said Dr. Jonathan Woodson, assistant secretary of defense for health affairs. "The military health care system is bringing all the resources it can to better understand how to prevent, diagnose and treat traumatic brain injuries and to ensure that service members have productive and long, quality lives.

"Our research efforts and treatment protocols are all geared toward improving care for these victims," Woodson continued. "And that will have benefits to the American public at large."

The Center for Neuroscience and Regenerative Medicine Brain Tissue Repository for Traumatic Brain Injury was established at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda, Md., with a multiyear grant from the U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command to advance the understanding and treatment of TBI in service members.

"Little is known about the long-term effects of traumatic brain injury on military service members," said Dr. Daniel Perl, a neuropathologist and director of the brain tissue repository. "By studying these tissues, along with access to clinical information associated with them, we hope to more rapidly address the biologic mechanisms by which head trauma leads to chronic traumatic encephalopathy."

CTE is a neurodegenerative disorder that involves the progressive accumulation of the protein tau in nerve cells within certain regions of the brain. As the tau protein accumulates, it disturbs function and appears to lead to symptoms seen in affected patients such as boxers and, more recently, football players with multiple head trauma.

Defense Department researchers will look at the brain tissue samples to characterize the neuropathologic features of TBI in service members. Important questions to be addressed include "What does blast exposure do to the brain?" and "Do the different forms of brain injury experienced in the military lead to CTE?"

Service members exposed to blasts "are coming home with troubling, persistent problems and we don't know the nature of this, whether it's related to psychiatric responses from engagement in warfare or related to actual damage to the brain, as seen in football players," Perl said. "We hope to address these findings and develop approaches to detecting accumulated tau in the living individual as a means of diagnosing CTE during life -- and, ultimately, create better therapies or ways to prevent the injury in the first place."

"We are learning though the process of discovery the effects of repetitive mild traumatic brain injury, and also how to prevent this issue of chronic traumatic encephalopathy," Woodson said. "The brain tissue repository will enable us to learn even more about how we can treat injuries and prevent future calamity for service members."

THE ARMY BIRTHDAY CELBRATION SPEECH BY SECRETARY OF DEFENSE HAGEL

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Army Birthday Celebration

As Delivered by Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, Pentagon Auditorium, Washington D.C., Thursday, June 13, 2013

Thank you. Thank you. Good morning. Happy birthday. Mr. Secretary [McHugh], thank you for your leadership and what you continue to do for this institution, General Odierno, for your leadership at a very challenging time in the history of the United States Army.


Sergeant Major Chandler, thank you. You and your enlisted men and women continue to inspire us all. I want to also acknowledge and thank the DOD leadership present here today for what you continue to do for this institution and for our country. Thank you.

Special acknowledgement and happy birthday to our oldest Army veteran here, wherever he is, Colonel Wittich, where is Colonel Wittich? Colonel Wittich happy birthday. Thank you. You've never looked better and more fit.

Also, our youngest Army representative here, I think is here somewhere, Private First Class Selig? And thank you, as we thank all of our members of the United States Army here today and all over the world, and we thank and celebrate those who have served in the United States Army and our veterans, and in particular, as Secretary McHugh noted, our wounded warriors here today and their families. Thank you for what you've done.

I will begin my brief remarks with an acknowledgement, as the Chief and Secretary have already noted, to the families of our Army – current Army, our past Army, our future Army, for what you've done. And I think General Odierno said it pretty well. The sacrifices that families make are not covered in great glory or attention, but they deserve as much recognition and thanks as do our members. So to the families, thank you. Thank you.

As has been noted, a 238th birthday is rather significant. That represents an institution that has essentially been around longer than the republic and has grown as vibrantly and effectively and been as important to the world and to this republic as any one institution.

General Odierno talked about trust. And as we all know, that is the coin of the realm. And I would add one component to that, and that's confidence. I don't know of an institution in our country that has held the trust and the confidence of our citizenry more than the United States Army and the military.

That's rather significant, through the history of this country, I don't know of another country in the world that can say that. And that is the result of many, many things. But more than anything else, it's just as General Odierno talked about what has defined and shaped the culture, but it's the definition of why we have an Army. And I'll share with you two examples of what I'm talking about.

Over the last two days, I have had the great privilege of revisiting my former home, the Congress, in hearings. It's always a joyous event as many of you know, especially our distinguished leaders in the front row here. And you're always much enhanced and you earn your pay, of course, but you always learn a hell of a lot. And you're much enhanced as you leave those hearings, of course.

Two interesting questions were asked during those three hearings, yesterday in particular, and they came from the House Budget Committee. One was about the Army and our military doing humanitarian work. Why would the military, the Army, be focused, have in its budget assistance for natural disasters around the world? And why is that important to your mission? Or is that your mission? We thought the Department of Defense was about the security of our country.

Well, it gave me an opportunity to address that, because many times that component of our force structure is lost. And I said, bottom line, when you look at what the soldier is about, more than any other part of our society, it's about preserving the peace, because it's the soldier, when we don't have peace, that makes the sacrifices.

And so MacArthur said it eloquently. Other great leaders in our country's history in the Army have said it. The soldier wants peace more than anyone else. And so when you look at investments in helping others – and we have countless examples from every war, over the 238 years of this institution – great photographs of American G.I.'s in World War II bending down on their knees, giving a young German boy or girl a chocolate bar.

Former Chancellor of Germany Helmut Kohl used to tell the story, the first orange – the first orange he ever saw in his life, he was seven years old. The American troops were marching into this German village, and every German citizen was scared to death, thinking that they would be massacred. And the American troops hugged these children, gave them chocolate bars and oranges. And Kohl tells that story – told it many, many times, and tears would come to his eyes when he would tell that story.

The point being, what is a better investment in peace and stability and security and developing friendships and partnerships for the future of the world than what our military does in that capacity? Yes, we fight wars. We're the best at it, have been, will continue to be. But there's another dynamic to what you do.

Another question I was asked yesterday: "Well, Mr. Secretary, can you address the issue of the bifurcation, the split, misunderstanding in our society today when we have 1 percent of our population serves in the military? Is that healthy? Should we change that? Are you disconnected from society?"

Good question. It's a question, as a matter of fact, when I was in the United States Senate, I more than occasionally spoke on, on the Senate floor. But part of the answer I gave back to the congressman was acknowledging it's a relevant question, it's an important question, but part of the way I would answer it – and I did answer it – is the continued astounding confidence and trust the American people have in this institution. In Gallup's last 15 years of most trusted institutions in America, the military is in the stratosphere. Everybody else isn't doing well. But the military has stayed way the hell on top.

And so that's good news, in many ways. You could also say, well, yeah, but it's that one percent that bears all the burden, makes all the sacrifices, does all the fighting, does all the dying. That's true. But even with that difference, there is still an astounding respect for our military in society. Even though they are disconnected, probably more so than at any time in the history of this nation, and it still connects and resonates with the American public.

Now, those values that were instilled and shaped this institution 237, 238 years ago just weren't a narrative. They had to be sustained over 238 years - duty, honor, country. I don't know of an institution that's done that better than this institution.

Thank you for what you are doing, what you've done, and what you continue to do for this country. These are difficult times. I don't have to tell any of you, especially for our Army leadership having to deal with the budget issues and these – these great uncertainties that hang over all of us.

But if you ever want to put your money on an institution, you want to put it on the Army, because the Army has weathered a lot of things and our military has, and we'll get through this. And we will rebalance. And we will adapt, as we always have. And that'll be much because we will go back and stay anchored to the traditions and the values and the family and the partnerships of who we are as not just American citizens, but part of a remarkable, remarkable institution that we celebrate today and we recognize today.

Now, for 12 years, when I was in the Senate, I had the privilege of serving the state of Nebraska, and every June 14th, if the Senate was in session, I would go to the Senate floor, and I would give a happy birthday speech to the Army. So it became the only thing I was ever known for, actually.

It would be brief, of course, and substantive, as all my speeches were, but I'd always end it with a birthday greetings and a happy birthday and a very healthy "hooah!"

There we are. Happy birthday.

U.S. DEFENSE SECRETARY HAGEL MEETS WITH GERMAN DEFENSE MINISTER THOMAS de MAIZIERE

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, left, welcomes German Defense Minister Thomas de Maiziere at the Pentagon, April 30, 2013. The two defense leaders met to discuss issues of mutual concern. DOD photo by U.S. Marine Corps Sgt. Aaron Hostutler

FROM: U.S DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Hagel Hosts German Defense Minister at Pentagon

American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, April 30, 2013 - Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel hosted German Defense Minister Thomas de Maizière today at the Pentagon and commended Germany's leadership in Europe and among the NATO allies, Pentagon Press Secretary George Little said.

In a statement summarizing their meeting, Little said the two leaders discussed Germany's essential support to allied operations in Afghanistan.

"Secretary Hagel thanked Germany for its vital leadership within the International Security Assistance Force, particularly its leadership of Regional Command North," Little said. "Secretary Hagel applauded Germany's recent announcement to continue security support to Afghanistan post-2014 and discussed U.S. considerations for an enduring presence."

Hagel also appreciates Germany for its support to NATO's defensive mission in Turkey along the Syrian border, the press secretary said. Noting that Germany, the Netherlands, and the United States have contributed Patriot anti-missile batteries to augment Turkey's defenses, he added that "the mission demonstrates the solidarity of the alliance against common threats."

The two defense leaders also discussed NATO's future and the importance of the alliance, Little said.

"Secretary Hagel affirmed that NATO is not only the cornerstone of the transatlantic relationship, but the benchmark for multilateral security cooperation around the world," he said. "The leaders discussed ideas for improving NATO's capabilities and approaches for ensuring NATO remains capable of meeting future security challenges."

THE COUNTERTERRORISM FOREFRONT

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Partner Capacity Moves to Counterterrorism Forefront
By Amaani Lyle
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, April 10, 2013 - As al-Qaida affiliates seek sanctuary in North Africa and the Middle East, the United States must continue to take decisive action and help partners improve their capacity to thwart terrorist organizations, a senior Pentagon official said yesterday on Capitol Hill.

In testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee's emerging threats and capabilities subcommittee, Michael A. Sheehan, assistant secretary of defense for special operations and low-intensity conflict, praised the special operations community for continually targeting key al-Qaida leadership and networks within countries of varying capabilities.

The United States "cannot allow al-Qaida to have sanctuary with impunity," Sheehan said. "A year ago, if I testified from here, I would've been talking about al-Qaida controlling massive swaths of territory in Yemen ... and Somalia. In both cases, they've been rolled back," he added.

Components of the U.S. strategy involve developing innovative, low-cost and "small-footprint" approaches to achieve security objectives, Sheehan explained.

"The task of training, advising and partnering with foreign military security forces has moved from the periphery to become a critical skill set across our armed services," Sheehan said.

In Yemen, Sheehan said, multinational forces worked with Yemenis to roll back al-Qaida. And in Somalia, which has no functioning government, the United States worked with the African Union in a United Nations peacekeeping operation to eject terrorists.

"The French have pushed [al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb] out of the major cities in north Mali, and we're working to create a U.N. operation to follow that," he said.

Sheehan told the senators that legislation authorizing training and equipping of host-nation forces, particularly in Yemen and East Africa, has been "fundamental" for the United States in successfully building antiterrorism capacity during efforts targeting al-Qaida over the past year.

In Syria, Sheehan said, al-Qaida in Iraq's network, operating under the name al-Nusrah Front, has sought to portray itself as part of the legitimate Syrian opposition to President Bashar Assad's regime.

"Al-Nusrah Front is, in fact, an attempt by [al-Qaida in Iraq] to hijack the struggles of the Syrian people for its own malign purposes, attempting to establish an al-Qaida-governed state in the region," he said.

PENTAGON SAYS THREATS FROM NORTH KOREA NOT HELPFUL

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
North Korean Threats Help No One, Pentagon Official Says
By Claudette Roulo
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, March 26, 2013 - The newest threats by North Korea follow a well-worn pattern designed to raise tensions and intimidate others, Pentagon Press Secretary George E. Little said today.

According to news reports out of North Korea this week, long-range artillery and strategic rocket units have been ordered to prepare to deploy.

The United States is concerned by any activities on the Korean Peninsula that could raise tensions, Little said in a meeting with reporters. "It's not just artillery," he noted. "North Korea has nuclear capabilities, so the full range of their arsenal is of concern to the United States and to our South Korean allies."

North Korea's threats help no one, Little said, and serve only to further isolate North Korea and undermine international efforts to ensure peace and stability in the region.

The decision earlier this month to place 14 additional ground-based interceptors at Fort Greely, Alaska, and Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif., was based in large part on growing threats from North Korea, Little said.

In addition to the recent mobilization order, in recent months North Korea has conducted nuclear testing, placed a satellite into orbit and continued development of its intercontinental missile program. "The facts are that the North Koreans are developing their missile capabilities in violation of international law and norms of international behavior," Little said, "and they need to stop."

The chairman of South Korea's Joint Chiefs of Staff and the U.S. general who commands the U.S.-Republic of Korea Combined Forces Command announced March 24 that they had signed a combined plan to counter threats from North Korea. The classified agreement is led by the South Korean Joint Chiefs of Staff and supported by U.S. Forces Korea, Little said. The agreement is part of a robust architecture supporting a larger joint planning effort that has been under way for some time, he added.

"We are moving forward to take new steps on a combined command and control structure for the [U.S.-South Korea] alliance," Little said. The counter-provocation plan serves as a representation of the continued development of strategic, operational and tactical cooperation, he said.

"It improves our combined readiness posture and allows immediate and decisive response to any North Korean provocation," Little added.

"It's very important that we do everything we can to stabilize the peninsula and not take rhetoric to where it shouldn't go," he said, "and that's what the North Koreans are doing right now, and that should cease."

The United States takes everything the North Korean government says and does seriously, Little said.

"We continue to urge North Korean leadership to heed the president's call to choose a path of peace and to come into compliance with North Korea's international obligations," he added

SECRETARY OF DEFENSE HAGEL SAYS BALLISTIC MISSILE INTERCEPTOR NUMBERS WILL INCREASE TO PROTECT U.S.

First U.S. Anti-Ballistic Missile Site.   Located In N. Dakota.  Credit:  DOD.

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Hagel: U.S. Bolstering Missile Defense
By Amaani Lyle
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, March 15, 2013 - The United States will add more ground-based ballistic missile interceptors to its arsenal to guard against increased threats from North Korea and Iran, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel announced today.

North Korean and Iranian missile capabilities have increased and the United States must stay ahead of that threat, Hagel said. Both have developed longer range ballistic missiles, and North Korea has now conducted three nuclear tests, followed by stepped up threats against the United States and South Korea.

The Pentagon will deploy 14 more ground-based interceptors in locations at Fort Greely, Alaska, and Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif, Hagel said, boosting the total number from 30 to 44. The added interceptors will provide a nearly 50 percent increase in U.S. missile defense capability, Hagel said.

"The United States has missile defense systems in place to protect us from limited ICBM attacks, but North Korea in particular has recently made advances in its capabilities and is engaged in a series of irresponsible and reckless provocations," Hagel said.

Last month, North Korea conducted its third nuclear test. In December 2012, the North launched a satellite into orbit, demonstrating an intercontinental ballistic missile capability. In April 2012, Pyongyang also displayed what appeared to be a mobile intercontinental ballistic missile capability.

Hagel also said the United States will team with Japan to deploy an additional advanced radar there. The radar will provide improved early warning and tracking of any missile launched in North Korea at the United States or Japan.

Hagel said DOD is also conducting environmental impact studies for a potential additional interceptor site in the United States. Officials are looking for two sites on the East Coast and one on the West. While the administration has not made a decision on whether to proceed, conducting environmental impact studies will shorten the timeline of construction should a decision be made, he explained. Hagel also announced plans to restructure the SM3-2B program, a land-based standard missile, with plans to deploy it as part of the European phase-adapted approach. "The purpose was to add protection of the U.S. homeland already provided by our current GBIs [ground based interceptors] against missile threats in the Middle East," Hagel said.

The secretary said shifting resources from the "lagging program" to fund the additional interceptors and kill vehicle technology that will improve performance of the GBI and other versions of the SM3 interceptor allows the U.S. to add protection against missiles from Iran and North Korea sooner.

Hagel reemphasized the United States' "iron-clad" commitment to missile defense. "The missile deployments the United States is making in phases 1 through 3 of the European phase-adaptive approach, including sites in Poland and Romania, will still be able to provide coverage of all European NATO territory as planned by 2018," he said.

The overall result will improve the U.S. ability to counter future missile threats from Iran and North Korea while being good stewards of taxpayers' resources, Hagel said.

"The American people expect us to take every necessary step to protect our security at home and U.S. strategic interests abroad," he said. "But they expect us to do so in the most efficient and effective manner possible."