Index

Pentagon Spokesman's Regular Briefing, Oct. 26



DoD News Briefing



Thursday, October 26, 2000 - 2:45 EDT



Presenter: Mr. Kenneth H. Bacon, ASD PA



Q: Now on Aden. Can you fill us in on the threat escalation situation
there, in Aden?


Bacon: I cannot. There was a bomb threat there, as you know, aimed
against the hotel. Fortunately, nothing has happened at this stage.
But we did receive a called-in threat, and security measures were
taken. The ambassador has addressed that from the theater. And I
really don't have anything to add to what she said.


Q: Where was the call received? And when? At the embassy?



Bacon: I don't know those details. She's spoken to that, and those are
available on the wires. There have already been extensive wire service
coverage of this. She's made a statement about it, and I don't have
much to add to what she said.


Yes?



Q: Can you tell us about the video teleconference that the secretary
had this morning with the CINCs, as to topic, and so forth?


Bacon: Sure. The secretary held a video conference call with all the
commanders in chiefs, as well as the service chiefs and the service
secretaries. And the topic was force protection. This was chaired by
the secretary and by General Shelton, the chairman of the Joint
Chiefs.


The format was that the secretary and the chairman each made opening
remarks, and then, through the wonders of electronics, they spoke to
the commanders around the world, the regional commanders: the European
Command, the Pacific Command, the Central Command and the Southern
Command, and also General Schwartz, who is the commander of our forces
in Korea. In addition, they spoke with the functional commands: the
Strategic Command, Special Operations Command, the Transportation
Command, Joint Forces Command - and I'm sure I've left one out, but
all the regional and functional commands.


And as I said, the topic was force protection. The goal basically was
to make a good system better, and to use the concern that's been
generated by the attack against the Cole as an opportunity for the all
CINCs, commanders in chief, to make sure that they are reviewing their
force protection postures and their procedures; to make sure that
they're making any necessary changes.


And it was actually very useful because every commander in chief got
to hear what the other commanders in chiefs were doing.


And they were also able to bring up some common concerns that they all
share.


Q: What kind of concerns?



Bacon: Well, for instance, resources. We have funded all force
protection measures, but obviously if there's going to be enhanced
force protection in certain ways, it would require greater resources.


Q: Well, did Secretary Cohen or General Shelton say it's clear now
that we need to make some improvements, and here's some things we need
to do? Or did he just say what's your ideas?


Bacon: No. They - and I don't think I'll get into specifics, because
it's not very worthwhile to protect our troops by listing specific
comments that were made, but both the secretary and the chairman had
some specific directions that they gave, and then the commanders
reported back on actions that they are taking and actions that they
plan to take and actions that would be worthwhile to take in the
future. One common concern for instance is using more - finding new
technological solutions to question like perimeter defense, security,
detection. That's something we've devoted a lot of time to, a lot of
money, but we do have some other projects in the pipeline. They could
be accelerated over time. But that's one aspect that everybody
commented on, the need to embrace and utilize the latest technology
for force protection, perimeter defense, detection, et cetera.


Q: Was there any discussion of perhaps - and this is a view that is
expressed by other agencies - that the Defense Department gets too
bent or too worried in the aftermath of a situation like this? In
other words, a speech from headquarters saying, you know, take all the
necessary precautions, but don't go crazy.


Bacon: Well, I'm glad you have raised that particular point. First of
all, I don't believe, and I know Secretary Cohen does not believe that
one can be overzealous in pursuit of force protection. But you have to
take this in context, and the context is, we have a worldwide mission
to perform, and we are not going to stop performing that mission. We
need to remain forward-deployed. Our ships will be at sea. Our
soldiers will be exercising around the world. Our airmen will be
flying. Our Marines will be deployed in their amphibious ready groups.
And the Coast Guard also will continue to patrol sea lanes around the
world.


So, given the fact that we are a power with worldwide
responsibilities, we have to figure out how best to deploy in ways
that reduce the risks our troops face.


We will never be able to eliminate the risks, but we can take steps to
reduce the risks. And, as I've said many times, and as the secretary
has said, there is no absolute level of force protection; you never
reach a perfect level of force protection. It's something for which
you always strive. And this was just another part of our effort to do
a tough job a little better than we're already doing it.


Q: How did they discuss the nature of the threat? I mean, I think a
question on a lot of people's minds is whether the U.S. believes
there's some broader attack going on here that goes beyond any
specific incident?


Bacon: Well, I think everybody who makes a career of serving in the
military understands that we live in a dangerous world. And so the
idea that we live in a time of threat isn't new to any of the CINCs.


There was no specific discussion of threats. What there was was a
general and universal appreciation of the fact that our soldiers,
sailors, airman, and Marines face threats everyday. And that we have
to do the best possible job we can to protect them against those
threats.


So, there was not - this was not an opportunity - the purpose of the
call was not to talk about threats, it was to talk about force
protection.


Yes.



Q: Can I have two questions that came out of testimony that was on the
Hill yesterday?


Q: Could I ask you one question before we - just on the same thing?



Bacon: Sure.



Q: I know that the secretary has occasional radio teleconferences with
the CINCs, but is it at all unusual to have that broad of a
participation of - you know, there were commanders and surface chiefs
and surface secretaries all at one time? Is that normal?


Bacon: I can't - I mean, he has video conference calls frequently.
Usually they're a little more specific than this as to participants;
maybe a smaller group. But this isn't unusual for him to do that. I
don't know when the last time he did it was. But this is an important
issue and everybody sees it as an important issue. They did before the
call, and they did certainly after the call.


Q: Did it - still following up on that --



Bacon: Sure.



Q: Did anyone during this conference call express concern that current
force protection measure are inadequate?


Bacon: No. People talked about steps they are taking to make a good
system better.


And I think there is wide appreciation throughout the military, from
the newest private to the most senior admiral, that the Pentagon has
done an awful lot since Khobar Towers in 1996, and that force
protection is atop everybody's list of priorities. But it doesn't mean
that there aren't ways to improve force protection, and the point of
this conference call was to focus on some of those steps that can be
taken.


Barbara?



Q: If you say there's a growing understanding that you possibly need
to improve and possibly need more resources, what steps are you going
to take now to put together a pool of money and fund some of these
improvements, and where will the money come from? Do you have any kind
of ballpark figure, what you're looking at here?


Bacon: No, I don't think we're looking at that stage. But I - in my
conversations with commanders around the world, they generally say
that if they make specific requests for force protection, those
requests are granted. I can't say that happens in every particular
case. I mean, everybody has to set priorities.


But you have to realize that the easiest way to protect our forces, I
suppose, would be to bring them back and to put them into huge,
well-protected forts in the middle of nowhere in the United States.
We're not going to do that. We have to continue to sail, we have to
continue to deploy. And so the question is, given our worldwide
responsibilities, how do we perform them in the safest possible way?


Q: Just a small point. Was the Coast Guard included in this meeting?



Bacon: The Coast Guard was not included in this particular SVTS
[secure video teleconference system].


Yes?



Q: (Off mike) - what time was it, and how long did it last?



Bacon: It began at 11:00 and ended at 12:16.



Q: One-six?



Bacon: One-six.

....

Q: Ken, earlier this week, a local television station in New York did
a series of pieces where the reporter apparently went out and rented
motorboats and went to three different naval facilities on the East
Coast, and during the course of several hours on the water, went right
up to submarines, to ammunition ships, and the Enterprise. They never
encountered any security, they were never told to go away, they never
saw any water-borne security of any kind.


First of all, do you have a comment on what it tells us about how open
we are in our country? Is it something that the Navy or the Pentagon
should be concerned about?


Bacon: I didn't see the report, so I'd better not comment on it. All I
can tell you is that it's very clear to me, following the conference
call this morning, and certainly before the conference call, that
security is a concern all around the world, not just in the Middle
East, not just in Asia, not just in Europe, but in the continental
United States as well.


Q: Well, Ken, what John is describing is no secret to any boater who
has been out there. You know, it's pretty common knowledge that you
can bring your private craft fairly close to U.S. naval vessels. And
the public might be surprised to find that out.


But is there going to be any change in that procedure?



Bacon: I'm not a boater, so I can't - I don't know whether it's
common knowledge or not. But I can tell you that all security
procedures are under review. Whether there will be a change or not, I
can't predict at this stage.

....

Q: Is it a concern that a small boat goes up and the guy puts his hand
on the hull of the Enterprise or touches a U.S. submarine while it's
sitting in a domestic port?


Bacon: Well, as I said, there are - there is a review going on now of
force protection all around the world. That was one of the points of
the conference call. And I cannot comment specifically on what the
Navy procedures are on any base domestically.


Q: However, you did say that all the forces in the United States were
at Threatcon Alpha.


Bacon: I didn't say that.



Q: But immediately following the attack on the Cole, there was a
notice put out that all forces worldwide would be at least at
Threatcon Alpha.


Bacon: That is correct.



Q: So these boats in question should have been under that threat --



Bacon: Well, I'm not going to comment on this specific incident that I
have - I'm sure this was an ABC station that did this.


I did not see the reports. (Laughter.) But maybe you could make them
available to me, and I'll send them to the Navy, and they can comment.
But I can't comment on these specific details.


Q: When will Admiral Gehman and General Crouch be in Aden? How long?
And what's their --


Bacon: I'm not going to give their itinerary, for obvious reasons.



Q: They're there now?



Bacon: I'm not going to give their itinerary.



Yeah?



Q: In Aden, can you talk about the plans for the next days and weeks,
about what the footprint will look like in Aden, and what the forces
will be doing and that sort of thing? It's about 5,000 people now?


Bacon: Well, there are 5,400 people afloat on a number of ships. And
there are, I think, about 280 people in Aden on the ground. That
number is coming down and, I anticipate, will continue to come down.


The attorney general noted today that the FBI is beginning to bring
back some of its investigators because they've completed their work.
They're bringing back much of their equipment as well. They had a
laboratory set up over there. And they've reached the point where they
can repatriate these agents and bring them back to the United States,
and so they're doing that. And as the investigatory footprint shrinks,
I assume that the security footprint that - would shrink as well. But
that's going on now and, I think, will continue to over the next few
days.


Yes?



Q: I know you don't like to talk about specific threats, but there was
a piece on the wire overnight that contained specifics about the
threat in Qatar and Bahrain, talked about the threat against the
school in which American children went - go, talked about threats
against the embassies. Can you in any way talk about that?


Bacon: I'm not going to talk about --



Q: It cited a "senior Defense official."



Bacon: I'm not going to talk about anything specific. I think it's
very clear that in Bahrain and Qatar, where we have Threatcon Delta,
Threat Condition Delta, that there have been threats, sometimes
multiple threats, and that they're ones we take seriously. Therefore,
we've put our forces there on the highest state of alert.


Q: Aside from Bahrain and Qatar, are there any other places in the
world where U.S. forces are at Threat Condition Delta?


Bacon: Yemen.



Q: And Yemen. What about Threat Condition Charlie? Are there any --



Bacon: Well, throughout the Middle East in the CentCom AOR, Charlie
exists except in the places where Delta is the applicable level.


Q: You said that the FBI finished its work. Which part of their work
have they finished?


Bacon: Well, I think they should talk about their own project. I only
mentioned it because they come back in Air Force planes, so that's why
I know that they're leaving with some of their equipment. But I think
it's more appropriate for the FBI to describe the scope of their work
and the schedule of it than for me.


Q: Ken, is there any consideration or move afoot to bring home
dependents from Bahrain, military dependents?


Bacon: Not that I'm aware of at this stage.



Q: Ken, for the second time, the president of Yemen has made reference
to a particular group that's being focused on in terms of
responsibility. I'm wondering, at the Pentagon, how much credibility
or authenticity the Pentagon puts in the comments of the president of
Yemen.


Bacon: First, I'd like to say that the Yemeni government continues to
be extremely cooperative and they're working in partnership with us --
Director Freeh has said that we're the junior partners in this effort
-- to get to the bottom of what happened and who's responsible. Beyond
that, I can't comment on any particular names right now.


Yes?



Q: Ken, if military aircraft, you said, were bringing back FBI
personnel, have any U.S. military aircraft brought back any
Arab-speaking suspects on behalf of the FBI or the Justice Department?


Bacon: I can't answer that question. That's really a question for the
FBI to answer, what's happening in their investigation.


Yes?



Q: A few years back, I know the Marine Corps FAST [Fleet Antiterrorism
Security Team] teams were, I guess - that accompanied Navy ships were
pared back. Is there any talk now to at least incorporate those on
some ships that are now deployed somewhere or anything like that? I
know at the hearing yesterday it was mentioned that this particular
crew, it was the first time that they were actually in this area, so I
didn't know if that was one of --


Bacon: This particular FAST team, or the crew of the Cole?



Q: The crew of the Cole.



Bacon: I can't say specifically whether there is thought being given
to deploying FAST teams or groups of Marines with every - additional
Marines with every naval ship.


What I can tell you is that we're looking at a variety of potential
changes - the services doing that on their own, and we're doing it
corporately at the Department of Defense. And, of course, we'll be
helped in that effort when we get the reports back from General Crouch
and Admiral Gehman, when they complete their work.


Q: Thank you.



Q: One more. Now that you have specified the threat conditions in
Yemen, Bahrain and Qatar as Delta and Charlie, can you give us your
assessment as to where Incirlik is?


Bacon: I could, if I knew, but I'm just not sure I know accurately
what it is.


Q: Can you give us any update on what the actual security threat is at
Incirlik?


Bacon: No, I can't.



Thank you.



Q: Okay, thank you.