брифинг амер. минобороныThe convoy that we've been talking about is still north of Izyum about 60 kilometers or so, and we do assess that it's moving, but not at breakneck speed. No updates for -- I don't have the number of vehicles. I don't know how fast they're traveling. I don't know what's in every truck, but I still would characterize it the way I characterized it yesterday. It includes some command-and-control elements, some enablers and we think it's also intended for resupply, perhaps an effort to amend their poor performance and logistics and sustainment in the north. But again, we don't really have a whole lot more information about what's in that thing.
There is still heavy fighting around Izyum right now, and Russian forces do remain south of Izyum, again, about 20 kilometers or so, which is not a huge change from where it was before.
конвой с севера всё ещё к северу от Изюма, 60 км где-то, мы видим, что он идёт, но не быстро. Не знаю, сколько там машин и какая скорость. Не знаю, что конкретно они там везут. Но опять же предполагаем, что там command-and-control elements
(что это?? офицерня что ли? полковники?), enablers
(солдатня?), и думаем, что это идёт подкрепление, чтобы постараться в этот раз не облажаться так же, как на севере. Но вообще у нас мало информации.
Тяжёлые бои вокруг Изюма, рашисты всё ещё 20 км к югу от Изюма, без особых перемен пока.
Q: Thank you, Let's see -- on the issue of a possible -- of white phosphorus or some sort of chemical agent that has been reported the last couple of days, do you have any update on what your assessment of that is?
SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Yeah, no updates. You saw my brief statement last night. I think that statement holds today, that we're still trying to monitor that -- these reports, but we cannot confirm the use of chemical agents at this time. We're still evaluating.
- у вас есть инфо про белый фосфор или ещё какое химоружие, про которые говорят уже пару дней?
- Нет, нету. Мы пытаемся следить за этим и разбираться, но пока не можем подвердить использование химоружия.
Q: The Russian Ministry of Defense has reported that they struck I believe it was two ammunition depots in Ukraine. They've occasionally reported this. I'm wondering what the sum total is of that, not in numbers, but in effect. Have they been effective not just against ammo depots, but against weapons depots that have in any way, you know, denigrated the weapons shipments that you've -- that the West has pushed into Ukraine?
SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Yeah, I can't confirm the Russian account there, Bob. It'd be hard for me to quantify what effect they've had on ammunition and supplies for the Ukrainians. We have seen them, just in general in terms of the things they're striking from the air, we would not push back on the idea that they are trying to hit Ukrainian -- the Ukrainians' ability to sustain themselves in the fight so that they certainly have shown an interest in trying to hit logistics and sustainment for the Ukrainians, and that they have certainly tried to try to go after Ukrainian air defense, as well. The level of success or failure they've had at that is difficult for us to know right now. We just don't have great visibility in terms of their actual targeting and what the BDA is.
But as they begin to focus on the east, as they now start to reinforce their positions there, create a command-and-control organization, as well as logistics and sustainment, it follows a certain logic that they would also try to deny the Ukrainians some of those same advantages. But again, I'd be reticent to go into great specificity about their actual success in in doing that, but we have seen indications that they are attempting to try to affect the Ukrainians' ability to sustain themselves in the fight.
- если почитать рашистские сводки, они прям каждый день бомбят склады патронов в Украине. Интересно, это правда? они реально бомбят, может даже склады оружия, которое мы украинцам прислали?
- Не могу подтвердить рашистские сводки. Может быть они и пытаются реально бомбить склады, это было бы логично. Они определённо пытались разбомбить украинские самолёты. Насколько им удаётся, нам трудно судить. У нас нет, знаете ли, инфо, куда они целятся, и попали ли они куданадо.
Щас они сместились на восток, наверно по логике они должны пытаться разбомбить украинские склады оружия. Я не буду говорить, как им удаётся, но мы видим какие-то признаки, что они пытаются.
Q: Yeah, on this convoy, presumably, we believe they're heading to Izyum, is that right? And also, are the Ukrainians attacking this convoy at all, or is this kind of open ground that makes that difficult? And also, what's the Russian combat power, what percentage? I think one of the last times we talked, it was like 85 percent.
SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Yeah. So we would assess that Russian assessed available combat power -- and again, I want to remind you guys that that's of the combat power that they preassembled before their invasion. We estimate that they're just above 80 percent in terms of what's left of them.
Yes, the convoy's north of Izyum. I don't know its final destination, but I would remind that, you know, with the spring weather they have to stay on the paved roads. They're staying on highways and avenues. They're not going off-roading here. So we do assess them about 60 kilometers north of Izyum, and they are moving south. Now, whether Izyum is it, I just don't know.
No, and I have not seen -- we haven't seen indications that the Ukrainians have attempted attacks on the convoy yet.
- этот конвой на Изюм, украинцы пытаются его атаковать, или там в открытом поле это слишком сложно?
И какая у русских сейчас осталась combat power? последний раз было 85%
- от того, что они собрали до вторжения, наверно чуть больше 80% осталось.
Конвой на Изюм - мы на самом деле не знаем, куда он идёт, на Изюм или нет. Им приходится идти по дорогам, в полях они увязнут весной. Они 60 км на север от Изюма, но мы не знаем, в Изюм или куда.
Нет, мы пока не видели, чтоб украинцы пытались его атаковать.
Q: Really quick, have you seen any movement of any chemical agents in or near Ukraine by the Russians? And secondly, could you just give us an overview of Ukraine's Air Force and jets? You did a nice job a couple of weeks ago, where they stand now, what sorties, what numbers, just broadly.
SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Sorry. What -- say the second one again?
Q: Oh, oh, just Ukraine's Air Force and sort of what their firepower is, how many sorties they're doing, just broadly.
SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Yeah. I'm going to demur on that right now, Idrees. We would assess that the Ukrainians still have -- they still have the majority of their air defense available to them, but they have been clear that they want to boost their inventories for air defense capabilities. They've been clear that they want more aircraft. And again, as you know, we're talking to allies and partners about doing what we can to help them get more long-range air defense systems.
I'm not going to -- I want to be careful not to get into their order of battle, and their sortie rate now that we are in this sort of a more confined and sort of a new phase by the Russians. So I'm going to be very careful about that.
- вы видели, чтобы рашисты химоружие везли в Украине или к Украине?
И ещё оцените украинскую воздушную оборону, как там они летают, кол-во.
- начнём с воздушной обороны - у украинцев всё ещё есть большинство их самолётов в порядке, но они конечно нам чотко сказали, что они хотят ещё. И ещё мы ведём разговоры с партнёрами, чтобы дать им ракеты большой дальности.
Я не хочу распространяться, как они летают и куда стреляют, не думаю, что это разумно.
SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Yeah, I don't have anything to report with respect to the Russians bringing in chemical agents. I mean, we have nothing to confirm that.
And again, we have -- we cannot confirm the reports that were out on social media yesterday that chemical agents were used in Mariupol. We just -- we're looking at this as best we can but we're not in a position to confirm those reports.
не могу ничего сказать про рашистов и химоружие. Нечего подтвердить.
Мы видели посты в соцсетях, что какой-то газ использовали в Мариуполе. Мы ищем инфо, но пока ничего не можем подтвердить.
Q:Wanted to see if we could maybe get some explanation on the challenges that go with confirming this kind of report in Mariupol with the chemical agents in light of the security, the challenges to get soil samples, anything else, you know, outsiders might use to try and confirm something like this.
SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Yeah. I mean, well, the biggest challenge is we're not there, you know. And we don't know if anything was used.
But let's say for hypothetical purposes, and I hate doing this, but let's say it was riot control agents. So the effects are going to be felt pretty immediately, and probably not widespread, probably not going to get into the soil. And the symptoms, depending on an individual's susceptibility, could be short-felt or it could be more long-term, we just don't know. And we don't have access to the hospitals that might have treated these individuals to talk to the doctors who could give a diagnosis.
I mean, there's a host of difficulties. If it was something larger than that then, of course, you would expect to see more widespread people being hurt and being treated for it. And again, that would require you to have some dexterity in talking to medical professionals.
Or if there was, again, something even bigger you, you know, a plume for instance of a cloud or something that you could track. But those are very difficult to track when you're not there. They're certainly not something you can just track easily from, you know, from the air. So these are difficult things to prove even when you are more proximate, and we are not.
And so I think you can understand we want to be very careful here before making a proclamation.
That said, look, we know that the Russians have a history of using chemical agents. And they have shown a propensity in the past, and so we're taking it seriously.
- хотелось бы деталей, почему так трудно расследовать репорты про химоружие в Мариуполе - трудно взять пробы почвы или что? может, кто-то там возьмёт и принесёт
- главная трудность, что нас там нет. Мы даже не знаем, что что-то было.
Ну давайте
гипотетически представим, что там использовали газы против массовых беспорядков. Эффект будет сразу и возможно не очень массовый, и возможно в почве ничего не останется. Симптомы - индивидуально, могут быстро пройти, могут долго не проходить. И мы не можем прийти в больницу и осмотреть пострадавших, поговорить с докторами.
Если что-то ещё хуже, чем такие газы, то пострадавших должно быть намного больше. Но всё равно надо поговорить с докторами, которые их лечат.
Если что-то ещё хуже, я не знай, облака газа, которые можно заметить. - Всё равно их не видно, если тебя там нет, с воздуха не заметишь.
Поэтому мы осторожны с заявлениями.
Но вообще-то мы знаем, что рашисты запросто могут травить газом людей, они уже это делали, так что мы не отмахиваемся от сообщений.
Q:The statement that came out last night said the Defense Department is concerned that Russia could combine riot-control agents with chemical agents. And I'm hoping you could elaborate on how that would work. For example, CS gas with sarin?
And also it's true the U.S. is not in Ukraine, however, it was able to confirm chemical attacks in Syria. So how might the U.S. be able to determine whether chemical weapons were used in Mariupol while being outside of Ukraine?
SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Yeah, I just kind of answered that with Dan, Jeff. I don't think I can get any more than that.
It's difficult to do. And the size and scale of it and the visible evidence and the ability to have credible information from first responders that helps a lot.
And, you know, I don't have much more I can add on that. And I'm not going to get into much more of the chemistry here. It's true that we've had, in the past, we've had indications that that could be one thing that the Russians look at it is a potential mixing of agents with the idea that they could disguise a more serious attack by using the vehicle and the techniques of riot-control agents.
Again, we are not in a position now to say that that's what happened. We cannot confirm that any agent at all was used in Mariupol at this point. But we have had indications in the past that that would be -- could be one tactic that the Russians might employ, the combination of a riot control agent with something more serious to cause stronger symptoms.
Again, not in a position to confirm that that happened at this point. And I'm not enough of a chemical expert to tell you exactly what those agents would be, and how you would mix them. I would point you to my college transcripts, where I got a D in organic chemistry and was forced to change my major. So I'm not exactly the right guy to talk about that.
- вчера наше минобороны говорило, что переживает, что рашисты могут смешать газы для подавления массовых беспорядков с химоружием. Расскажите, как это работает. Слезоточивый газ и зарин?
И ещё - это правда, США не в Украине, но вот в Сирии была химатака - и США её подтвердили. Смогли же. Почему в Мариуполе нельзя?
- Ну это сложно. Масштабы, улики и достоверная информация от медиков - вот что надо.
Не могу конкретно про химию говорить. Это правда, в прошлом у нас были подозрения, что раша может смешать газы, чтобы замаскировать более серьёзную атаку, используя машину для разгона протестов.
Но мы не знаем, что вообще случилось, были ли что-то использовано в Мариуполе. Мы просто знаем, что русские могли такое придумывать и готовить, смешивать газы. Я лично вообще не могу ничего рассказать вам про газы и смешивание, у меня была двойка по химии.
Q:
Last weekend, The New York Times verified a video showing Ukraine soldiers killing a Russian soldier. And so I'm wondering if the Pentagon is aware of that video, what you could say on the matter, and if there have been conversations between the U.S. and Ukraine about treatment of prisoners of war.
Thank you.
SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Cannot verify the video. Yes, obviously we’ve seen it but we're not in a position to independently verify it.
And I would just tell you that we have been very clear both publicly and privately with the Ukrainians what our expectations are for the proper treatment of prisoners of war.
- в выходные The New York Times подтведило видео, как украинские солдаты убивают русского солдата. Пентагон знает про это видео? Вы вообще разговаривали с украинцами, как обращаться с пленными?
- Не могу подтвердить видео. Видел, но не могу подтвердить.
Конечно мы разговаривали с украинцами, какое у нас ожидание, как надо обращаться с пленными.
Q: Yes, hi, sir. Let me ask Jeff's question in a different way.
So the U.S. was able to confirm chemical weapons used in Syria without having a presence on the ground. Is there further work being put into determining whether there was a chemical weapons attack in Ukraine this time? Or is that not a particular priority right now?
SENIOR DEFENSE OFFICIAL: No -- as I said -- I thought I made this clear at the top.
We are continuing to monitor this and to look at it as best we can. But I think you guys can understand that if it was -- and again, I'm not saying that it was, but if it was something as simple as tear gas and maybe there was only a handful of people that might have been affected, it's going to more difficult for us to be able to prove that.
So yes, we were able to prove sarin gas in Syria, but it had a much more widespread devastating effect on more people. And we were able to corroborate a bunch of different intelligence streams to be able to confirm that. But we also did that cautiously and carefully back then; that wasn't something we jumped to conclusions on.
This alleged event happened just yesterday. We are not on the ground. We don't have perfect visibility. And so, we're doing the best we can to try to get to some better conclusion. We are still actively looking at this. But I'm not going to promise you that we're going to have a result by a certain date. And, frankly, I'm not going to be able to promise you that we're ever going to have a perfect resolution or a definitive position on this. We're looking at it.
- щас перефразирую вопрос Джеффа. США смогли подтвердить химоружие в Сирии, хотя сами там не находились. Вы продолжаете какую-то работу, чтобы определить, что было в Украине, или вам сейчас не до того?
- Мы продолжаем мониторить, как можем. Но поймите, если там был что-то типа слезоточивого газа - я не говорю, что это был он! гипотетически - и пострадало человек пять, так очень трудно что-то раскопать и доказать.
Да, в Сирии мы доказали, но там было очень много пострадавших, и разные источники разведки подтверждали одно и то же. И то мы осторожно подходили к этому.
А это якобы случилось только вчера. Ничего непонятно, нас там нет. Мы стараемся раскопать. Но я не обещаю результаты.
