Q: (Off mic.) The Senate Foreign Relations Committee has released a report saying that upwards of 15,000 U.S. forces are currently in Kuwait. The number is expected to drop slightly to about 13,5(00). Why so many troops, when it was our understanding that as recently as six months ago there were only about 4,000 or so troops permanently based in Kuwait? Is this a training mission? Is this a show of force to Iran? Is this a contingency forward-leaning force for other crises in the region?
CAPT. KIRBY: We're aware of their report. This is dated today, so I don't believe we've had a chance to peruse it with any -- in any detail. But look, without getting into specific numbers in any one country there, there's roughly 40,000 or so American troops in and around the Central Command area of responsibility.
As I said, with the Navy that number does fluctuate from time to time. You would expect it to. But it is -- it's a long-standing presence that we've -- that we've maintained there. We'll continue to maintain. The secretary has been very clear that -- while we do this shift in focus to the Asia-Pacific, that the Central Command area responsibility will still remain a high priority. It does.
And those troops perform a variety of missions throughout the region, to include training, advising, assisting, and also to help act -- I think the chairman addressed this this morning -- as a deterrent against potential enemy activity in the region.
I think we have two heavy combat brigades in Kuwait, although one may be broken up for security missions and convoy escort (including in Iraq??). Plus logistics, air defense and aircraft presumably, and troops to maintain the ability to receive reinforcements rapidly in a crisis. It would be interesting to know what we have there. But the report cited doesn't say.
The missions remain in Iraq even if we didn't try hard enough to stay in Iraq. I would have preferred that we keep 3 brigades within a 25,000 troop level, but nobody asked me.
