DEPUTY PRESS SECRETARY SABRINA SINGH: Let me just get settled here. OK. Good afternoon. Just a few things at the top and then happy to jump in and take your questions. As you know, on Wednesday, Secretary Austin concluded his 11th trip to the Indo-Pacific. With stops in Tokyo, Japan and Manila, Philippines, the Secretary participated in a series of historic engagements as part of the department's ongoing work to bolster our partnerships and alliances to advance a shared vision of regional peace, stability, and deterrence.
Highlights from the trip included two plus two meetings with the Secretary's Japanese and Philippine counterparts as well as a historic first ever trilateral ministerial meeting between the US, Japan, and the ROK. Additionally, the secretary made a trip to Subic Bay in the Philippines where he met with service members and DOD personnel hard at work strengthening our defense industrial bases like never before.
The Secretary's 11th trip to the region highlighted yet again how under the leadership of the Biden-Harris administration, the United States is delivering historic results in the Indo-Pacific. The United States is operating with our partners and allies more closely and more capably than ever, and together, we are working to ensure a free and open Indo-Pacific.
Switching gears, Secretary Austin spoke with Israeli Minister of Defense Gallant this morning about the destabilizing threats posed by Iran, its partners, and proxies. The Secretary reiterated ironclad support for Israel's security and informed the minister of additional measures to include ongoing and future defensive force posture changes that the department will take to support the defense of Israel.
Secretary Austin highlighted that further escalation is not inevitable and that all countries in the region would benefit from a de-escalation in tensions, including through completing a Gaza ceasefire and hostage release deal. He also stressed that the unprecedented scale of US support for Israel since October 7th should leave Iran, Lebanese Hezbollah, and other Iranian backed terrorist groups with no doubt about US resolve.
Switching gears, the Senate this week confirmed more than 3,000 officers nominated throughout the Air Force, Army, Marine Corps, Navy, and Space -- Space Force. The Senate also fully confirmed Dr. Michael Sulmeyer to be Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy. Together, they will all continue to be great leaders within our -- within our department and will ensure we remain the finest military in the world.
The Senate Armed Services Committee also voted this week to advance Tonya Wilkerson, nominee to be Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security. We now urge the Senate to confirm all of our civilian and military nominees waiting for action on the Senate floor. Excuse me.
And finally, the Department of Defense, in coordination with the Department of Veterans Affairs, developed Airborne Hazards and Open Burn Pit registry to assist service members and veterans in documenting potential exposure to airborne hazards during overseas deployment. The VA announced updates to the Burn Pit Registry yesterday and registry updates will now allow service members and veterans to provide more feedback, expand participation criteria, automatically include participants, and simplify registry requirements. To learn more, visit the registry site at www.publichealth.va.gov.
And with that, I'd be happy to take your questions. Tara, why don't you start us off? Yeah.
Q: I wanted to ask about the Middle East. What if any sort of contingency planning is occurring to assist Americans in evacuation if that's needed? And what types of force posture changes are being considered to better protect troops if this escalates?
MS. SINGH: I'll take the second question first. So as you know and as we've demonstrated since October and again in April, the United States's global defense is dynamic and the department retains the capability to deploy on short notice to meet evolving national security threats. So as a result the Secretary will be directing multiple forthcoming force posture moves to bolster force protection for US forces region wide, to provide elevated support to the defense of Israel, and to ensure the United States is prepared to respond to this evolving crisis.
In terms of what specifics that means, I don't have that for you right now. Again, that's something that the Secretary will be directing at a later time. But when we have more specifics, I'll certainly come back to you. In terms of planning measures, we are planning organization, as I know you've heard us say before. So I'm not going to engage in hypotheticals, but of course we always have contingency plans in place, but again just not going to go down the hypothetical route.
Q: So on the force posture changes though, you say at a later date, are we talking, I mean, within hours, within a couple of days, by this weekend and would these troops be being pulled from the Indo Pacific or are these domestic forces that would be sent?
MS. SINGH: In terms of specific troops or capabilities, again, this is something that's with the Secretary and the Secretary will be deciding. I don't have a specific timeline for you once we have more information, as you know, we'll certainly provide it. But at this moment, I just don't -- I just don't have that.
Oren?
Q: I just want to be clear here. Yesterday, President Biden spoke with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and spoke of and I quote here, new defensive US military deployments.
MS. SINGH: Yeah.
Q: Those haven't been ordered yet. He was speaking hypothetically yesterday or has -- have they been decided and ordered at this point?
MS. SINGH: The Secretary and the president have been in close conversations about this. The Secretary will be directing forthcoming force posture moves to bolster our force protection.
So there's a commitment that was made in the call with the president and Prime Minister Netanyahu. In terms of what specific units, what specific capabilities, that's something that the secretary will decide. I don't have an exact timeline of when that decision will be made, but that was a commitment that the president reiterated to Prime Minister Netanyahu that you saw on the call yesterday.
And again, the secretary reiterated that in his call with Minister Gallant that happened earlier this morning.
Q: And just to be clear on the wording here because the word defensive is very prominent in what you're saying. There are no--it is purely defensive. Is this ground based air defenses? Is it air defense is based on destroyers and you're not shifting any offensive capabilities?
MS. SINGH: So appreciate the question. So again, these are defensive capabilities. As we have done before, since October 7th and what we did on April 13th, all of our capabilities that we have there in the region are defensive and to send a message of deterrence. The secretary on his call committed to Minister Gallant that the United States will stand with Israel in their self-defense.
So these would be defensive capabilities, if needed.
Q: Thank you.
MS. SINGH: Yeah. Phil?
Q: I just have a couple of follow ups. So the secretary has not yet decided on what capabilities to deploy, but does that mean also that he's not necessarily decided whether there's a need for additional forces beyond what's already in the region right now? And I'm talking about additional, even if there were some troops rotating in or rotating out, additional kind of the status quo as it stands, not the actual units?
MS. SINGH: So there could be additional units that come in with additional capabilities as those capabilities would need to be operated by additional people. But again, I'm not going to get ahead of any decisions that the secretary has not made yet. All I can tell you is that he, in his call with Mr. Gallant, committed to bolster force protection in the region.
And of course, as Oren was saying earlier, additional defensive capabilities if needed for the support of Israel.
Q: I guess what I'm trying to understand is does that mean a plus up or not in terms of overall US forces and capabilities in the region?
MS. SINGH: It certainly could mean additional capabilities and people in the region as those people would have to operate if the secretary decides to include more defensive capabilities. They're going to need to be operated by additional people. So again, I don't have the decision yet from the secretary.
The secretary, it's something that he's going to continue to weigh and when we have more to read out, we certainly will. Tony.
Q: A couple, of the units that are already in the region, is it possible that the secretary would order a repositioning of the 24th MEU and the Theodore Roosevelt Carrier battle group from the Gulf of Oman up this Red Sea and through the Strait of Suez Canal off of Israel and Lebanon? Is that a possibility?
MS. SINGH: So, you have to remember that the ARG/MEU has always been operating within the Eastern Mediterranean, so she remains in the eastern Mediterranean. And just like we saw with the Eisenhower Carrier strike group that was in the CENTCOM AOR earlier this year, the Eisenhower continued to move around within the AOR. So the TR could move around within the AOR, but of course, I'm not going to get ahead of any movements or force posture changes that the commander decides to make or that the secretary decides to make.
Q: A force posture in those cases could be repositioning of ships already in the region versus bringing in new vessels from Asia or something?
MS. SINGH: There could be a repositioning of assets, but again, that's something that the secretary will be directing and I'm not going to get ahead of any decisions that the secretary has made at this time.
Q: Do you think it's possible he can do this today or later today?
MS. SINGH: I don't have a timeline for you.
Q: Thank you.
MS. SINGH: Yeah, of course. Yeah.
Q: Thank you, Sabrina. For the Italian television, what kind of talk or coordination the Pentagon has or having or had with state like Italy or Southern European state it can be more involved in support of the US in case of Iranian attack to Israel? And the second question is instead the kind of talk to the Pentagon is having with their Arabic state that are part of the deal, the negotiation that now have to be neutral between Iran and Israel? So those are my two questions. What's the strategy?
MS. SINGH: So we're always in touch with our partners and allies. As you've seen with the events of October 7th and you've also seen with the coalition of Operation Prosperity Guardian, that is allies and partners coming together in the region either to support in the defense of Israel or to ensure that commercial shipping can continue through the Red Sea and ensure that the international rules based order is upheld.
So this is something that we're always in touch with our allies and partners on. In terms of any calls to read out, I don't have anything more additional to provide, but I can assure you that at all levels of government, whether here at the department or somewhere else, we are always in communication when it comes to what is happening in the region and of course, closely coordinating with our partners.
Q: Maybe I haven't asked what I meant, is like if the Pentagon have asked for military support on the Mediterranean, close to Israel, to the European Union?
MS. SINGH: I don't have anything to read out. But as you know, Operation Prosperity Guardian is a coalition of like-minded nations coming together to ensure that commercial trade can continue to flow through, but also responding to the ongoing attacks from the Houthis that they continue to lob at our ships, allied partners and ships and commercial vessels.
So I just don't have anything more to read out for you, but I would point you to the fact that we have this large coalition that's already operating within the Red Sea. Charlie?
Q: Yes, thank you. Sabrina, when it comes to a timeline, the US military isn't the only one who gets a vote. There will be a window that we've been expecting learning over the next sort of 72 hours, we're hearing late Sunday, Monday, where Iran might retaliate, Hezbollah might even retaliate before that and then a joint retaliation.
So whether the decisions have been made, wouldn't there have been a movement of US resources already in order to defend against that?
MS. SINGH: Well, Charlie, I would remind you that in the Eastern Mediterranean and in the CENTCOM AOR, we have many, many assets that are there. You have the ARG/MUE that is continuing to operate in the Eastern Mediterranean that are also destroyers there. You have the TR and the entire carrier strike group that's also continuing to operate in the CENTCOM AOR. So it's not like we don't have assets or coverage in the region.
So I think that's important. Again this is a decision that the secretary is weighing, and he committed to Minister Gallant and the president committed to Netanyahu that we will be bolstering our force protection in the region. But what specific assets will be moving, I just don't have that for you right now.
When I do, we'll certainly let you know.
Q: But presumably some of that would already have to be underway if you're talking about force posture changes.
MS. SINGH: Again, I don't have anything to announce right now. Yes.
Q: Thanks. So to what extent are you concerned about or seeing any indications that Iran may attempt to retaliate against Israel outside of the Middle East?
MS. SINGH: Well, I've seen their public comments. I don't have anything more to provide other than I can point you to the fact of publicly what they've said. In terms of what we are doing here at the department is we will stand with Israel in their self-defense, and that was something that the secretary reiterated to Minister Galant on his call this morning.
Q: And any communication between the US and Iran directly or indirectly to prevent any further escalation?
MS. SINGH: On behalf of the department, I don't have anything to read out. Yeah, Chris.
Q: Thanks, Sabrina. The Iraqi government and the spokesman for their armed forces expressed outrage that the US airstrike in Iraq a couple of days ago on the UAV site and said it violated Iraqi sovereignty. Did the US discuss that military action with the Iraqis? And what is the Pentagon's response on whether that airstrike violated Iraqi sovereignty?
MS. SINGH: You're talking about the airstrike that we took on the 30th?
Q: Yes.
MS. SINGH: So that airstrike was a defensive airstrike, and we were targeting combatants that were attempting to launch one way attack, an uncrewed attack system at our forces. So it was a defensive measure that we took. In terms of communication with the Iraqi government. I would point you to CENTCOM to speak to that.
Q: Okay.
MS. SINGH: Okay. Yes.
Q: On the same Iraqi comments, the Iraqi government says that this attack undermines all the efforts and diplomatic and technical discussion with the US government. So what's your comment on that? Has this affected your communication, your discussions with the Iraqi government when it comes to the higher military commission and also all the discussion with the Iraqi government?
MS. SINGH: We don't believe that it's impacted conversations related to the higher military commission. We have been very, very clear that we will take measures in order to ensure our forces are safe in the region and that's what you saw with that July 30th strike. We were taking measures because we saw that an attack was about to be launched on our forces.
And we've been very clear about that with the Iraqi government both publicly here from the podium, you've heard me say that a number of times, and privately. We will always take measures that we need to in order to ensure our service members' safety in the region. And so we did just that on July 30th.
If needed, we will continue to do that and we've been pretty clear about that from the beginning.
Q: Yeah. And as it comes to the Iranian response to the killing of Ismail Haniyeh. It's expected that the Iraqi militia group is backed by Iran be involved and targeting the US forces in Iraq and Syria. So have you reached the Iraqi government to prevent any such attack in Iraq?
MS. SINGH: I'm sorry, can you repeat the question?
Q: When it comes to the Iranian response to the Ismail Haniyeh killing and attacking Israel, there are some officials and also there are some reports suggesting that the Iraqi militia group may attack the US forces inside Iraq and in Syria --
MS. SINGH: OK. I'm sorry.
Q: -- in response and having reached the Iraqi government to prevent such attack.
MS. SINGH: Yeah, I'm sorry, I didn't understand your -- your question at the beginning. I've seen the public comments that were made about -- from, you know, allowing attacks on US forces. And what I will say to you is what exactly I said for your first question is that we will always take measures to ensure the safety and security of our personnel stationed anywhere around the world.
I'm not going to get into hypotheticals. I'll just leave it at that. I'm going to go to the phones and then happy to come back in the room. Dan Lamothe, Washington Post.
Q: Thanks, Sabrina. Appreciate it. Made a couple checks this week and it appears we -- we've had no US destroyers in the Red Sea for several days at a pretty dynamic time. Can you explain that decision? Is there something going on there? You know, in light of the Houthi attack that that caught me by surprise.
Thanks.
MS. SINGH: Thanks, Dan for your question. In terms of, you know, movements within the Red Sea and -- and positions of different ships, I'd really direct you to CENTCOM to speak to that. As you know, they -- they put out almost daily updates of, you know, engagements that they have done, either shooting down incoming missiles that are coming from Houthi controlled areas in Yemen or -- or other engagements.
But I would remind you that just because a US ship is not in the Red Sea does not mean that you don't have other coalition ships, part of Operation Prosperity Guardian, in the Red Sea and continuing to engage in, you know, attacks coming from Houthi controlled areas. I will take another one from the phone.
Jeff Schogol, Task & Purpose.
Q: Thank you. Have any units been placed on prepared to deploy orders in light of the situation with Israel and Iran and Hezbollah? And also, there were two non-combat deaths in Iraq. Can -- does OSD have any information about what happened?
MS. SINGH: Thanks, Jeff, for your question. So I would direct you to the Army to speak more to those non-combat deaths that you referenced. So I just don't have more for you at this time. In terms of any units placed on PTDO orders, again as -- as I mentioned, the Secretary spoke with Minister Gallant earlier today.
He is going to make the -- we are going to make a decision on ongoing and future defensive force posture changes. I'm not aware that any units have been put on PTDO orders at this time. And when we have more to provide, we certainly will. I'll come back in the room. Yeah, Janne?
Q: Thank you.
MS. SINGH: I'll come back to you [off-mic].
Q: -- couple of questions. South Korea's defense minister said recently there was a possibility that North Korea would conduct its seventh nuclear test before or after the US Presidential election. What do you think about the possibility of North Korea interfering in the US Presidential election?
MS. SINGH: Well, Janne, as we've mentioned before, you know those tests are extremely destabilizing to the region and we want to see a -- a denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. On the Secretary's trip to the Indo-Pacific, as I mentioned at the top, you know, he held a historic trilateral meeting in Tokyo with the Minister of Defense from Korea and the Japanese Foreign Minister.
And of course, something that came up was the DPRK's continued destabilizing actions. And this was a large topic of conversation throughout the week. It's something that we're going to continue to monitor. It's something that we'll always work with our ROK and Japanese allies on -- and in coordinating on, but any tests like that are incredibly destabilizing to the region and we'll continue to monitor.
Q: OK. One more real quick. Vipin Narang, Acting Assistant Secretary for Space Policy recently said that the North -- if North Korea, China, Russia, do not change their nuclear trajectories. The scale of the US nuclear posture must be changed -- I mean, adjusted. Do you think it is possible to increase nuclear assets in South Korea?
MS. SINGH: No. I mean, I would -- sorry, I shouldn't have been so direct. I haven't seen all of his comments. Certainly, what we want to see is a -- a denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. The Secretary, while in Tokyo, made a number of announcements that I'm sure you're tracking on the upgrade of US Forces Japan to a unified command.
Beyond that, I don't have any more announcements. And I'm sorry, I just haven't seen some of those comments so I don't have more to add at this time. In the back. Yeah.
Q: Yes, thank you. You noted that in his conversation with Defense Minister Gallant, Secretary Austin expressed concern about the dangers of escalation. Did he also speak to Gallant or warn Israel about the dangers of escalating the conflict should Iran retaliate prompting a large scale Israeli retaliation or strike on Iran.
Is that something that was discussed? And if so, how?
MS. SINGH: Yeah. So we'll have a readout later today of their call. I'm not really going to go beyond what I said at the top other than to emphasize that the Secretary highlighted that escalation is not inevitable and that all countries in the region would benefit from de-escalation. And I'll leave it at that.
Q: If I could just follow up.
MS. SINGH: Sure.
Q: You-- you, you noted again that the Secretary talked about the dangers of escalation. President Biden said that the assassination of -- of Haniyeh was a -- were not helpful to the cease fire negotiation process. Doesn't this bolstering of defense in -- for Israel represent a kind of reward to Israel for destabilizing that very process that both the Secretary and the president are saying they want to continue?
MS. SINGH: No, I'd respectfully push back on that. What we are doing to bolster our capabilities is in the defense of Israel and -- and by nature is defensive. So no, I wouldn't say that it escalates tension. In fact, some of the decisions that the Secretary has made since October 7th, you might remember we moved the Ford -- the USS Ford carrier strike group to the Eastern Med on October 8th, we moved the IKE [ph] soon thereafter to the CENTCOM AOR. These were all to project a message of deterrence.
We certainly do not want to see this spread out to a wider regional conflict. We don't believe it has right now. We're going to continue to urge for de-escalation, and the best way for that to happen is for this cease fire deal to come through. And so we can get American hostages out as well, but we believe that that would be the best way to -- to de-escalate and, you know, further lower tensions in the region. Luis, sorry, I thought I saw you over there.
Q: Two questions.
MS. SINGH: Sure.
Q: You noted that the commitment has been made by the president and by the Secretary, what is triggering those commitments?
MS. SINGH: I think you can point to events that have happened in the past week. Again, we don't want to see an escalation. We want to see things to de-escalate and because of that we are committing defensive capabilities to the region that -- I don't have an announcement of what those will be, but when we do, we will certainly read those out.
The second one -- you -- in this answer right here, you kind of spoke to it, but by making this public, isn't this just a deterrent as well?
MS. SINGH: Speaking from the podium?
Q: Yes -- yes, announcing that there is a commitment that the Secretary will decide on force --
MS. SINGH: Yeah.
Q: -- protection measures that have not been actually decided on yet, which is kind of atypical actually for this building to actually make an announcement like this. So therefore, I mean, is it your statement in itself a deterrent?
MS. SINGH: I mean of course we are -- when it comes to messaging, we do things publicly and privately. So public messaging, we're very clear about the defensive capabilities that we are committing to the region and that we are going to bolster them because we don't want to see tensions continue to rise.
We want to see a de-escalation. So if they are watching -- if someone is watching this briefing overseas, I think we are being very direct in our messaging that--certainly we don't want to see heightened tensions and we do believe there is an off ramp here and that is that ceasefire deal. Once that comes through and once hostages are released, that's what we really want to see here. And we've said it from the beginning, the next day following October 7th, is we don't want to see a wider regional conflict.
We don't believe we are there and that's partly because we moved assets to the region that do project power and that also, I think, send a very strong message of deterrence. I'm going to go to the phones and then happy to come back over here. Howard Altman, Warzone.
Q: Thanks, Sabrina. Can you confirm that the Air Force is going to be sending additional combat aircraft to the region in response to all this? And what kind of airframes can you tell me?
MS. SINGH: Yeah. Thanks, Howard, for the question. I cannot at this time. Sam LaGrone, USNI. Okay. Happy to come back in the room. Goyal?
Q: Thank you. I have two questions, please.
MS. SINGH: Sure.
Q: One, this was the first time that there was an interaction between us and India, but secretary met not the defense minister of India, but the foreign Minister of India, Mr. Jaishankar, and this was the first meeting after Prime Minister Modi visited Moscow.
So what was discussed between the two about this meeting the foreign minister, not the defense minister of India?
MS. SINGH: I think that question is better directed for the State Department. Secretary Blinken held that meeting. It was a quad meeting. So I direct you to the State Department to speak more to that.
Q: And second, madam, thousands of people, millions of people watched burning of US flag in Washington D.C. during that demonstration. Many were upset, including in my community that burning of US flag is a unity. US stand for unity and united. This building, many from this building, men and women, they fight every day to protect the US flag.
So what were the comments from the secretary about those demonstrations had nothing to do with the US flag, but they burned it and brought down, and they brought another flag on there, Hamas flag.
MS. SINGH: So we certainly don't support the burning of American flags and we certainly don't support the raising of a flag from Hamas. I believe even the White House put out a statement on that. It was something that we monitored from here when It came to some of those demonstrations here in Washington D.C., but that's not something that we support.
That's not something that reflects the values of this building or this administration.
Q: Thank you.
MS. SINGH: Okay. Oren and then Chris and then happy to come back. Sorry. I said Oren, but I'm looking at Chris. Go ahead.
Q: You said twice now, once in the opener and once a couple of minutes ago, ongoing and future defensive force posture changes. We get the future part, the discussions, the decisions that will be made. What's the ongoing part? Are there movements that have already happened or are happening based on orders that have already been given?
MS. SINGH: No, it's just ongoing is what the commander decides in the region. So what he decides to move and reposition where, and I don't have anything to read out right now, but that would be the ongoing part.
Q: Those have been made already or are being made?
MS. SINGH: I think ongoing means they will be made, but I'm just not going to get into a discussion on tenses from here. Okay. Chris?
Q: Thanks. A numbers clarification. On the airstrike in Iraq came in response to cases of rockets being launched towards US troops in Iraq and Syria. What is the total number of attacks against US troops in Iraq, Syria and Jordan since October?
MS. SINGH: So I mean, Chris, just one correction here, not so much a response, but we saw forces assembling to attack US forces in Iraq, or US forces in the region and so we took defensive action. So I think it's important to remember that's not necessarily in response. We do have a right to respond and protect our forces anywhere around the world.
In terms of attacks on US forces, in total, you're talking about from the very beginning?
Q: Yeah, 160, 170, what's the number?
MS. SINGH: I believe it's over 180. But again, that was from October 17th from last year. And since I think January or February, we did see a slowdown of attacks.
We saw one in April and then again, we saw a long period of pause and that's what we want to continue to see. We do not, again, and I know I've said this, and you'll probably hate me for saying it again, but I'll just do it anyways. We do not want a regional war. We do not see this spilling out into a larger regional conflict, but we will take action to protect our forces anywhere in the world.
Q: Thank you for that answer.
MS. SINGH: Okay. Great. Phil, and then last one over here.
Q: On the Iraq strike, I mean, I understand that you've explained that it was a defensive strike and that these forces were preparing to attack US troops.
MS. SINGH: Yeah.
Q: Do you think the timing of the strike was interpreted by Iran and others as part of the series of activities in the region at that time, the strike or the attack in Tehran and the other in Damascus, and then the strike in Iraq?
Do you think that they were interpreted as being a joint operation? And what would you say to people who would make that assumption?
MS. SINGH: No, I wouldn't interpret it as a joint operation at all. I would say that the action that we took is similar to the actions that we've taken from when we started getting attack on October 17th. We will always take action that ensures the safety and security of our personnel and we've done that from the very beginning.
What we saw was combatants attempting to launch a UAS system and so CENTCOM forces took action, so that our forces were not hurt or injured if that attack had been able to launch. But no, I would not read into any type of coordination. I would say that this is something that we've done time and time again and we will do if we need to at any time.
Last question. Oh, and we got Jared and then that's really last question.
Q: So in my previous question, is the Pentagon see that state partners, allies like the Saudi or the Jordans will support, still supporting in case of an attack to Israel from Yemen or Iran or the Hezbollah, because they were involved in the negotiation for the deal, like the Jordan, the Saudi, they helped in the deal with the Gaza.
Now that the leaders have been killed, are they going to be neutral, in your opinion, or they're going to support Israel in case of an attack? What the Pentagon is--
MS. SINGH: So as you can appreciate, I'm just not going to get into hypotheticals. We have great partnerships in the region, and I'll just leave it at that. Jared last question.
Q: He beat me to it, but I might try to ask it a different way.
MS. SINGH: Okay.
Q: Has the department been in contact with any allies or potentially regional partners in coordinating ahead of a potential defense of Israel?
MS. SINGH: So I don't have any calls to read out from the secretary, but I can tell you that the department at all different levels is always in touch with their counterparts all around the world. But I don't have anything more specific to read out from the secretary at this time. OK. Great. We'll leave it there.
Thanks, everyone.