Sean Parnell (00:00):
Hey, good afternoon, everybody. Thanks for joining me today. I'll start off with a few things at the top and then I'll get to some of your questions here at the end. But let's start off with Ukraine, because I'm sure that a lot of you all have a lot of questions about that. The Department of Defense continues to provide the president with robust options regarding military aid to Ukraine, consistent with his goal of bringing this tragic war to an end. And at the same time, the department is rigorously examining and adapting its approach towards achieving this objective while also preserving U.S. military readiness and defense priorities that support the president's America First agenda.
(00:47)
This capability review, and that's exactly what it is, it's a capability review, is being conducted to ensure U.S. military aid aligns with our defense priorities. And we will not be providing any updates to specific quantities or types of munitions being provided to Ukraine or the timelines associated with these transfers. But the secretary will continue to make recommendations to the president for his decision on military assistance to Ukraine going forward. We see this as a common sense, pragmatic step towards having a framework to evaluate what munitions are sent and where. But we want to be very clear about this last point. Let it be known that our military has everything that it needs to conduct any mission, anywhere, anytime, all around the world. We have the most lethal fighting force in the world.
(01:44)
If you need further proof of that, look no further than Operation Midnight Hammer and the total obliteration of Iran's nuclear ambitions there. So switching to Iran, and based on the success of the U.S. and Israeli military strikes, Iran is much further away today from a nuclear weapon than they were before the president took bold action to fulfill his promise to the American people. And that promise was, Iran will not have a nuclear weapon. And after the 12-Day War between Iran and Israel, we have a ceasefire and we finally have peace. And the Department of Defense will support the diplomatic mission to continue that peace by ensuring that we maintain capability across the Middle East so that the president and the Secretary of Defense have a range of military options available to defend both our citizens, our troops, our forces in the region. And as such, we don't have any force posture updates at this time in the CENTCOM AOR.
(02:45)
Okay, let's transition to ICE and the Department of Homeland Security and our partnership with them. The department continues its important work in securing our borders and supporting the Department of Homeland Security. Approximately 8,500 military personnel assigned to Joint Task Force Southern Border continue to enhance U.S. Customs and Border Patrol's capacity to identify, track, and disrupt threats to border security. Since the secretary authorized enhanced detection and monitoring on March 20th, Joint Task Force Southern Border has conducted more than 3,500 patrols, including more than 150 trilateral patrols with CBP and the Mexican military. The strong partnership and coordinated efforts between the Department of Defense and Customs and Border Patrol yielded exceptional results between June 28th and June 30th, with zero got-aways across the entire southern border during that timeframe.
(03:46)
We have made incredible progress and will continue to work towards achieving 100% operational control of the border. And recently, Secretary Hegseth directed the secretaries of the Air Force and the Navy to take necessary action to establish national defense areas along the U.S.-Mexico border. The South Texas NDA, administered by the Department of the Air Force, will include federal property on and along 250 river miles of the Rio Grande River. The Yuma NDA, administered by the Department of the Navy, will include approximately 140 miles of federal property along the U.S.-Mexico border near the Barry M. Goldwater Range in Arizona. These will be the third and the fourth designated national defense areas along the border and will continue to enhance the department's ability to protect the southern border from unlawful entry.
(04:46)
The National Guard is also playing an essential role in protecting the U.S. southern border from illegal entry and maintaining the sovereignty, the territorial integrity, and the security of the United States. Over 4,200 Texas National Guard soldiers and airmen on state active duty continued to support Operation Lone Star, and nearly 70 Florida National Guard members are on state active duty as well. They're conducting base camp security at Alligator Alcatraz. In the greater Los Angeles area, approximately 5,000 military personnel assigned to Task Force 51 continue the important mission to protect federal functions, personnel, and property in that area. These federalized California National Guard and U.S. Marines have supported more than 170 missions in over 130 separate locations from nine federal agencies, including the Drug Enforcement Agency, U.S. Marshal Service, ICE, and the Department of Homeland Security.
(05:47)
Okay, so let's switch gears to the budget. I want to take a minute from the podium today to applaud the Senate on passing the president's one big, beautiful bill, and I would urge the U.S. House of Representatives to do the same. This bill's necessary investments in shipbuilding military ships, aircraft, icebreakers, unmanned systems, artificial intelligence, $25 billion for the development of Golden Dome. All of these things directly help achieve the president's peace through strength agenda and will help equip our war fighters to protect the homeland against 21st century's threats. This reconciliation bill is a once in a generation opportunity to revolutionize our nation's defense capabilities by investing heavily in service member quality of life, including housing modernization, child care, education reforms, health care improvements. All of these things are great, and the department is just laser focused on getting our war fighters the funding they need to execute their mission.
(06:53)
Let's talk about recruiting briefly. A strong and lethal military, as many in this room know, requires capable recruits and we're excited to announce that the Air Force and Space Force have both hit their recruiting goals three months ahead of schedule, thanks to President Trump and Secretary Hegseth. Leadership enthusiasm to serve is at all time highs. Since November 5th, 2024, the U.S. military has seen the highest recruiting percentage of mission achieved in 30 years. Let's talk UCOM real quick. Over the weekend, U.S. Air Force Lieutenant General Grynkewich was officially confirmed as the next Supreme Allied Commander Europe and the U.S. Commander of European Command. He officially assumed command of the U.S. military mission in Europe during a change of command ceremony in which U.S. Air Force General Dan Razin Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, served as their presiding officer. General Grynkewich relieved General Chris Cavoli, who's retiring from military service after nearly four decades. So congratulations to you, Chris, on a successful career. We're also very proud to have Grynch at the helm in Europe.
(08:11)
And in closing, before I take some of your questions, I just want to take an opportunity to recognize the career of Lita Baldor, who's retiring after 20 years covering the Department of Defense. I want to thank Lita for her dedication to covering the issues, the operations of this department, and the people of this department in depth. And she's made my job and those who had it before me a hell of a lot more difficult, but we get it, that's her job, to ask those tough questions. So to Lita, congratulations, good luck in everything that you want to do, and thank you for everything that you gave this department. And finally, as our nation commemorates its 249th birthday on Friday, let us never forget that the freedom we enjoy in America is never free.
(09:01)
Our freedom is ensured by the men and women in uniform, spanning here at home and across the globe, who dedicate themselves to its preservation. So let us never forget our fallen who made the ultimate sacrifice. Let us never forget their families who continue to carry that very heavy burden. And as we celebrate the 4th of July with family and friends at backyard barbecues, wherever it is that you celebrate this nation's independence, please remember that the very best of our nation remains forward and on watch. And so, thank you all for your patience during what is a longer than normal topper. And with that, I would love to take some of your questions.
(09:44)
Rebecca?
Rebecca (09:45):
Hi. Yeah. So obviously with respect to Ukrainian aid, the United States announced that they are going to be withholding certain aspects of aid. Ukraine responded by saying that this is going to embolden Russia. What is the department's response to that argument?
Sean Parnell (09:59):
Well, the president's strategic outset with regards to Ukraine and Russia has been one of peace. He campaigned on this when he was asked on a Town Hall with CNN about that war. He said he wanted to just stop people from dying. And so peace has been the president's highest aspiration. We here at the department support those goals and those missions, but it's important to remember that the stuff that I mentioned in my topper. What we've done here at the Department of Defense is create a framework to analyze what munitions we're sending where, to help the president and the Secretary of Defense make decisions. And so, ultimately, our job here at the Department of Defense is to pursue the president's America First agenda and make sure that we achieve peace through strength throughout the world.
Rebecca (10:45):
Thank you.
Sean Parnell (10:46):
How about Olivia?
Olivia (10:48):
Thank you. As you said, the Air Force and Space Force hit their recruiting goals three months early, and the Navy announced that they did the same a month ago. What does Secretary Hegseth attribute these increases to after the Biden administration saw drops in recruitment and failed to meet those goals?
Sean Parnell (11:02):
Well, I think we recently stood up a recruiting task force here a couple of weeks ago to analyze and look at just these types of questions. Recruiting is a constellation of different things, and one of the things that we recognize here at the department, to answer your question directly, I believe that, with President Trump as a commander in chief and Secretary Hegseth at the helm here in the DOD, leadership matters. And certainly, their leadership and moral clarity, as it pertains to certain issues, not just here within the department, but all around the world, has inspired people to want to join and serve this country in great numbers. But as we stand up this recruiting task force, one of the things that I recognize right off the bat was the idea of propensity. And what I mean by that is, how we here in this department ask questions about people who might want to serve this country.
(11:55)
And if you're an 18-year-old kid, propensity essentially means, do you see the U.S. military as a viable career path moving forward? And so, in the late 1980s, that number was somewhere between 25 and 27% of the country who believed that service was a viable path forward. After 9/11, we believe that number was somewhere between 25, 27%, fluctuating a couple of years thereafter. But in between, that number has steadily fallen to, I think we're somewhere between only 7% and 11% of this country see military service as a viable career path moving forward. And so, obviously, at this department, we recognize that that number is probably unsustainable. And while we have great recruiting numbers now, it might not always be the case. And so, one of the things that we're trying to achieve with this recruiting task force, is answering the tough question about how do we set the conditions here culturally in this country to have more kids want to serve the country and see it as a viable career path?
(12:57)
One of the interesting things about that is the idea of the intersection between propensity and proximity, and the idea that, when people are exposed to and see somebody in uniform on a day-to-day basis, their desire to serve this country skyrockets. Something we're up to 50% that they see military service as a viable career path. And I think over the last 15 or 20 years, while much of the research is borne out that the U.S. military is largely a legacy force, in other words, grandfather served, father served, more likely for their son or daughter to serve. I think that's part of the reason why, they're exposed to somebody in uniform.
(13:36)
So part of the question that I'd like to answer as part of this, that the department would like to answer as part of this recruiting task force, is the intersection between propensity and proximity. And if we can get servicemen and women in every community in the country, involved in community events, exposed to our kids in their high schools, whatever, I think that will help us solve our recruiting problem. So I think the secretary is looking at a constellation of different things to sustain the momentum that we have now, but the reality is, is that leadership matters and the president and the secretary are inspirational leaders.
(14:07)
Tara?
Tara (14:08):
Thank you for doing this.
Sean Parnell (14:10):
You're welcome.
Tara (14:12):
How much did Iran's retaliatory strike against Al Udeid persuade the department to look at the stockpiles, because it did take enormous amount of Patriots to defend that base against the ballistic missiles. And then, secondly on Iran, again, have you had time now to do a deeper assessment of the damage to the nuclear facilities and have there been any sort of air patrols or anything like that to gather additional information?
Sean Parnell (14:40):
And so I'll answer your second question first. Our assessment of the battle damage around Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan remains unchanged. We believe, and certainly all of the intelligence that we've seen, have led us to believe that Iran's… Those facilities, especially, have been completely obliterated. And the interesting side point about this, Tara, is that all of the conversations that we've had since Operation Midnight Hammer, with our allies all around the world, but certainly also in the region, they say a couple of things. They share our sentiments about the degradation of Iran's nuclear program and the fact that we have degraded their program by one to two years. At least intel assessments inside the department assess that, and I think their intelligence shares that conclusion.
Tara (15:30):
Does current assessments by this department think it's been degraded or delayed by one to two years?
Sean Parnell (15:35):
I think we're thinking probably closer to two years, like degraded their program by two years. But what we've seen, in fact, just universally among our allies, was them congratulating the United States, the president, and the Secretary of Defense on that bold operation, and the idea that American action in Iran has set the conditions for global stability. You think back during my time in Afghanistan, when we would do sensitive site exploitations in Afghanistan, something like 20 years ago, almost all of the weapons that we pull out of those sensitive site exploitations were Iranian weapons. Iran has been a major exporter of terror all around the world, and nations the world over have been subject to their terror. So I think that nations all around the world, they know that when America is strong and speaks clearly, the world is a better and more stable place. And so, I think it pertains, to get to your first question here and now… Remind me what you asked again.
Tara (16:44):
How much did Iran's retaliatory strike on Al Udeid press the department to look at the stockpiles?
Sean Parnell (16:50):
Right. Well, we're always assessing our munitions and where we're sending them. And part of what we wanted to do here at the department was, again, create a framework. We can't give weapons to everybody all around the world. We have to look out for America and defending our homeland and our troops around the world. So that's something that we always do, both before and after operations, and it's the president's job, along with the Secretary of Defense, to determine how we use those weapons.
Courtney (17:19):
Can I follow up on that? You said in your opening, just to Tara's first question, or I guess the second question that you answered first. You said in your opening that this led to the obliteration of Iran's nuclear ambitions. And I wonder if the assessment that you're citing is not that the program is degraded, but that Iran no longer has the ambition to even create a nuclear weapon. Is there an intelligence or assessment that says that?
Sean Parnell (17:42):
Well, we believe that sending bombers from Missouri, 37 hours, on a mission, not a single shot fired at them, took a very strong psychological toll on Iranian leadership. We also believe that the degradation of the facilities at Fordow, Isfahan, and Natanz degraded their physical capability of constructing a bomb. And it's not just enriched uranium or centrifuges or things like that, we destroyed the components that they would need to build a bomb. And so, when you take that constellation of different things into consideration, yeah, we believe that Iran's nuclear capability has been severely degraded, perhaps even their ambition to build a bomb. Ultimately, the president has said he's not going to allow them to build a bomb. The Israelis are not going to allow them to have a bomb. And they know that. And I think that factors into their decision making process.
Courtney (18:34):
Is that a final assessment that you're citing there, or is there still more information coming in?
Sean Parnell (18:37):
The assessments are ongoing. And every day that goes by, the intelligence picture that we have gets clearer and clearer. And as we get those updates, Courtney, we'll keep you updated.
(18:46)
Mike? Okay, no. Okay, Noah?
Noah (18:51):
Could you be more specific about the nature of the pause in weapons being provided to Ukraine? When did it begin? What munitions are being affected here? And then, who was involved in the review that you're describing right now? And is that still ongoing or is it over?
Sean Parnell (19:05):
I can't go in detail about what weapons were paused and when, and what we're providing and when. Ultimately, the president and the secretary will make those decisions about what happens with those weapons systems. Obviously, keeping in mind that the president was elected on an America First platform to put America first. And so, our job, as political appointees here in the Department of Defense, is to provide the president a range of options to do just that.
Speaker 7 (19:32):
Thank you. Is the Pentagon working on a joint fitness assessment test, which is a PT test that all service members would have to take, in addition to the one that they have to take for their services? If so, what will the standards be?
Sean Parnell (19:46):
Well, we're currently reviewing that right now, so I don't have any details to provide on that yet. But when we get them, I will let you know.
Speaker 7 (19:52):
So you are looking at a possible PT test for all service members, in addition to what they have to take?
Sean Parnell (19:57):
We're evaluating standards across the board.
(20:01)
Wallace?
Wallace (20:03):
Right here. I wanted to ask a question pertaining to Syria. I was going to ask, does the U.S. have plans to continue to draw down the Trump presence in Syria? And if so, are they confident that the current Syrian government can successfully keep under detention of the 10,000 ISIS fighters currently there?
Sean Parnell (20:25):
Well, certainly the president has talked about expanding our relationship with Syria, and I think we have high hopes there. But right now, we've still got about 1,500 troops thereabouts in Syria, but we're not going to comment further on forced posture there. But we're optimistic about the future in Syria, as the president has already said before.
(20:43)
Mike?
Mike (20:43):
I do remember my question now. Sorry.
Sean Parnell (20:45):
I thought I saw you with your hand up.
Mike (20:46):
Yeah. Do you all believe that the Biden administration, the past four years, basically opened up the door to Ukraine and say, "Take whatever you want," and without much idea to keep control of the inventory? And is that one of the reasons why you want to see what's in the storage or not?
Sean Parnell (21:06):
Absolutely. I think that, for a long time, four years under the Biden administration, we were giving away weapons and munitions without really thinking about how many we have. And I think that this president was elected on putting this country first and defending the homeland, and then you couple that with our national defense strategy and a shift to the Indo-Pacific. And part of our job is to give the president a framework that he can use to evaluate how many munitions we have and where we're sending them. And that review process is happening right now and it's ongoing.
(21:40)
Hailey?
Hailey (21:41):
Thank you so much. Thanks for doing this, Sean. On Iran, the IAEA chief said this weekend that he believes Iran could begin enriching uranium within months. Does the department disagree with that? Are you saying the secretary does not share that?
Sean Parnell (21:54):
Well, I'm not going to comment on anything with the IAEA and Iran, but our assessment of Iran's nuclear program remains unchanged.
Hailey (22:01):
Could you also provide an update on the review panel on Afghanistan and what work has been done there thus far?
Sean Parnell (22:07):
Yeah. We've got a great team coming together, most of whom will be here in July. And Hailey, I think that's a great question. I just want to say, our strategic outset here for this review, you think back to the Vietnam War and helicopters on embassies, and I got to believe that there were a lot of first lieutenants, captains, majors who witnessed that, who fought in that war and thought, "Boy, I wish we could have ended this war differently." And some of those first lieutenants, captains, majors, I'm sure, stayed in and became one star, two star, three star generals, and then maybe led and commanded in Operation Desert Storm. And I find that interesting, because in Operation Desert Storm, there's a clear mission, clear end state, American troops withdrawn when that end state was realized. And I feel like many of those one star, two star, three star generals perhaps retired after Desert Storm and a lot of that institutional knowledge and that pain that was experienced during the withdrawal in Vietnam was probably lost.
(23:04)
And then, flash forward 10 years, 9/11 happens. 20 years of war in Iraq and Afghanistan. And we find ourselves at the end of the Afghan War in a remarkably similar situation that we were in Vietnam. So the question that I have here, that the department has, is what happened? How do we, as a department, make sure that something like in Vietnam and something there again that happened in Afghanistan, never happens again? Helicopters in embassies in Vietnam, helicopters in embassies in Afghanistan. It's just not the desired end state that we were looking for in those conflicts. And so, how do we get an assessment at the tactical, strategic, and maybe presidential level? And questions that were, "How was intel reported during the withdrawal? How do we structure our report in the micro, at the tactical level, to answer a lot of the questions that the American people had?"
(23:56)
Questions like, "Why did we abandon Bagram? How did we end up in Kandahar?" All of these questions are the types of questions that we're going to be asking. But ultimately, it's about weaving these lessons learned into doctrine. And the idea that maybe we can use this review to reform the way that we evaluate and promote young non-commissioned officers and young officers. For example, if you read the Afghan reports that came out every June, regardless of who the task force commander was in Afghanistan, those reviews were remarkably similar, but the end state was a disaster. So I think, if you think back to my time in Afghanistan as a young commander, giving battlefield update briefs as a captain to my battalion commander, if I were constantly saying that my area of operations was a disaster, it didn't have the ammo or troops that I needed to accomplish the mission, the likelihood of me getting promoted was probably not great.
(24:54)
So how do we set the conditions here in the department to create a sense of honesty, where officers are reporting what they believe to be accuracy? They're concerned about maybe their area of operations, they're concerned about the truth and maybe less about their careers. And that's not an indictment on the officers and the DOD, it's just the way that our system is constructed. And so we've got a great team that we've put together, many of whom will start in July, where the real work will start. Just had a great meeting with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs about this and how the Joint Staff can help collaborate on this. But I'm very optimistic about where we're going with this review, Hailey.
Hailey (25:33):
Have you started interviews for this report or just what all has happened?
Sean Parnell (25:35):
Oh, sure. Yeah. We've done interviews, we've had meetings. We're getting a lot done. I feel really good about it. I'll take one more question.
Speaker 11 (25:49):
Thank you.
Sean Parnell (25:49):
Go ahead. Go ahead.
Speaker 11 (25:52):
Thank you, Sean. I have a question. So Iran, China, and Korea. Iran has signed a deal with China to purchase 40 Chinese fighter jets. What are your concerns about the Iran and China military cooperation?
Sean Parnell (26:08):
Well, obviously, we're watching that. We're very concerned about that, especially as we look to shift force posture to the Indo-Pacific. But ultimately, I think that what we're doing here at the Department of Defense, building up our military with historic recruiting numbers, peace through strength. Ultimately, it's about reestablishing deterrence to make our enemies think twice about doing things that we wouldn't want them to do.
Speaker 11 (26:36):
Korea and regarding the reduction of U.S. troops in South Korea, are there any specific plans for reducing the member of U.S. troops in South Korea and changing their rules? And when will the time be?
Sean Parnell (26:57):
Well, normally we don't comment on forced posture reviews here from the podium. It's something that we always do. And you've been covering this building for a long time, we've got an ironclad alliance with the Republic of Korea, and we're going to remain true to that alliance. But okay, thanks everybody. So we'll do this again very soon. We'll talk soon. Thank you, everybody. Have a great day.
