military will be better able to harness the skills and perspectives that talented women no exceptions was the recommendation of the sec retear -- secretary of the army, secretary of the navy, as well as the secretary of the army and the u.s. special operations command. while the marine corps asked for a partial exception in some areas such as infantry, machine gunner, fire support, reconnaissance and others, we are a joint force and i decided to make a decision which applies to the entire force. let me explain how i came to this decision. first i've been mindful of several issues in this process. mission effectiveness is most important. defending this country is our primary responsibility and cannot be compromised that means

everyone who serves in uniform, men and women alike, has to be able to meet the high standards for whatever job they're in. to be sure, fairness is also important because everyone who is able and willing to serve their country who can meet those standards should have the full and equal opportunity to do so. but the important factor in making my decision was to have access to every american who could add strength to the joint force. now more than ever we cannot afford to have barriers limiting our access to talent. the past three years of extensive studies and reviews leading up to this decision, all of which we're going to post online, by the way, have led to genuine insights and real progress. where we found that some standards previously were either outdated or didn't reflect the tasks actually required in combat, important work has been done to ensure each position now has standards that are grounded in real world operational

requirements. both physical and otherwise. so we're positioned to be better at finding not only the most qualified women but also the most qualified men for military specialties. another principle is if the careful implementation of integrating women into combat positions would be a key to success integration and also that any decision to do so or not would have to be based on rigorous analysis of factual data. and that's exactly how we've conducted this review. it's been evidence-based and iterative. i'm confident the defense department can implement this successfully because throughout our history we've consistently proven ourselves to be a learning organization. just look at the last decade and a half. we've seen this in war where we adapted to counterinsurgency and counterterrorism missions in the wake of 9/11 and in the wars in iraq and afghanistan. we've seen it technically as new capabilities like unmanned

systems and cybercapabilities have entered our inventory. and we've also seen it institutionally when we repealed don't ask, don't tell. in every case, our people have mastered change excellently. and they've been able to do so because their leaders have taken care to implement change thoughtfully, always putting the mission and our people first. we will do the same today. as we integrate women into the remaining combat positions we must keep in mind the welfare and total readiness of our entire force. as we focus on the individual contributions that each service member makes, we also have to remember that in military operations, teams matter. that's why it's important that the services chose to study both individual performance and team performance. they not only made comparisons to other elite units like nasa, long dureation flight crews and police swat teams, they also

worked with our international partners to examine how they have integrated women into ground combat roles. again, how we implement this is key. as chairman dunford has noted, simply declaring all career fields open is not successful integration. we must not only continue to implement change thoughtfully but also track and monitor our progress to ensure we're doing it right. leveraging the skills an d strengths of our entire population. all of us have a role to play. as we proceed with full integration of women into combat roles in a deliberate and methodical manner, i'm directing that seven guidelines be used to steer this implementation. first, implementation must be pursued with the clear objective of improved force effectiveness. leaders must emphasize that

objective to all service members, men and women alike. second, leaders must assign tasks and jobs throughout the force based on ability, not gender. advancement must be based on objective and validated standards. a good example of this is socom selection processes which combine objective and subjective criteria in, i quote, "a whole person concept." that includes rigorous physical standards and also strong moral character, leadership skills, mental agility, problem solving skills, selflessness, maturity and humility. the third guideline is that for a variety to have reasons, equal opportunity likely will not mean equal participation by men and women in all specialties. there must be no quotas or perception thereof. so we will work as a joint force to expertly manage the impacts

of what the studies that have , it may beay suggest smaller numbers of women in these fields, the fields previously closed. fourth, the studies conducted by the services and socomm indicate there are physical and other differences on average between men and women. while this cannot be applied to every man or woman it is real and must be taken into account in implementation. thus far, we've only seen small numbers of women qualify to meet our high physical standards in some of our most physically demanding combat occupational specialties and going forward we shouldn't be surprised if these small numbers are also reflected in areas like recruitment, voluntary assignment, retention and advancement in some of these specific specialties. fifth, we will have to address the fact that some surveys suggest that some service

members, both men and women, have a perception that integration would be pursued at the cost of combat effectiveness. survey data also suggests that women service members emphatically do not want integration to be based on any considerations other than the ability to perform and combat effectiveness. in both cases, based on these surveys, leaders have to be clear that mission effectiveness comes first. i'm confident that given the strength of our leaders throughout the ranks, other time -- over time these concerns will no longer be an issue. sixth, as i noted, both survey data and the judgment of the services leadership strongly indicate that particularly in the specialties that will be opened, the performance of small teams is important. even as individual performance is important. the seventh guideline has to do with international realities.

while we know the united states as a nation committed to using our entire population to the fullest, as are some of our closest friends and allies, we also know that not all nations share this perspective. our military has long dealt with this reality. notably over the last 15 years, in iraq and also afghanistan and we need to be prepared to do so going forward as it bears on the specialties that will be opened by this decision. with all these factors in mind, chairman dunford recommended that if we were to integrate women into combat positions, implementation should be done in a combined manner by all the services working together. i agree. and that will be my direction. accordingly, i'm directing all the military services to proceed to open all military occupational specialties to women 30 days from today.

that is, after a 30-day waiting period required by law and to provide their updated implementation plans for integrating women into these positions by that date. deputy secretary of defense bob work and general paul salva will work with the services to oversee the short-term implementation of this decision, ensure there are no unintended consequences on the joint force and periodically update me and chairman dunford. before i conclude, it's important to keep all this in perspective. implementation won't happen overnight. while at the end of the day this will make us a better and stronger force, there still will be problems to fix and challenges to overcome. we shouldn't diminish that. at the same time, we should also remember that the military has long prided itself on being a meritocracy, where those who serve are judged based on their abilities. that's why we have the finest fighting force ever known.

it's one other way we will strive to ensure that the best force will remain so long into the the future. today we take another step toward that continued excellence. thank you. now i'll take your questions. bob? >> you mentioned the marine corps asked for a partial exception. the marine corps made a vigorous and detailed case for keeping some combat positions open to men only. in what ways did you find their argument unpersuasive? secretary carter: i did review the marine corps data, surveys, studies and recommendations, the commandant of the marine corps, general dunford, now our chairman, that certain marine corps specialties remain closed

to women. i reviewed that information and i looked at it carefully. i also heard from other leaders of other services who had studied similar issues in their own force. the recommendations of the other service secretaries and service chiefs and i came to a different conclusion in respect of those specialties of the marine corps where i strongly agree with now-chairman dunford is two very important points. i noted them here. the first is that the key here is going to be implementation. and i viewed the issues that were raised by all the services, by the way, in varying degrees and obviously by the marine corps, that we need to take those seriously and address them in implementation.

i believe the issues raised including by the marine corps could be addressed successfully in implementation. second, that there was great value in having a joint or combined approach to implementation. that's why i decided to have no exceptions in any service and to have them all working together on implementation. >> just a quick followup. you said you came to a different conclusion, obviously. i was asking what about the argument you found lacking. secretary carter: i believe we could in implementation address the issues that were raised. >> since you opened up referencing san bernardino and said you're monitoring it closely, can you share with the american people your concerns, what are you monitoring, what concerns you about the incident, what's your assessment of the

potential growing issue of seeing acts of potentially terrorist inspired violence in this country? what does that raise for you? and on this issue that you're discussing here today, can you tell us why general dunford is not here with you? secretary carter: on the question of san bernardino, the law enforcement community is investigating what happened there, again, i'm not going to speculate on what happened. to your general question, protecting our people is our most important mission. but we don't know what the causes are of the san bernardino tragedy and law enforcement i'm sure will get to the bottom of that but i can't tell you what that is. >> the broader issue we have seen so many times, though. you the other day on capitol hill i believe referenced chattanooga, and you have raised this issue of concern in the

past. so i'm just wondering what your latest assessment is of how much it worries you? secretary carter: we don't know the reasons behind this particular shooting but the protection of our people, including our service people, and concern about radicalization including of american citizens living in america in the manner that we saw in chattanooga is a huge concern. yet another reason why isil needs to be fought and defeated in its heartland, syria and iraq, about which i have spoken a great deal. but it's a global campaign. including one that involves law enforcement, homeland security, intelligence, and other elements right here at home. that's the world we are in. and we need to protect our people in that world. >> and why is general dunford not here? secretary carter: i'm announcing my decision. i was the one who took this decision. i'm announcing my decision. i should say about general dunford, you'll have an

opportunity to talk to him. i've talked to him extensively about this subject. he's very knowledgeable about it. he will be with me as we proceed with implementation. i have taken parts of his, the conclusions he drew. others drew different conclusions, including myself. and that's the decision i've taken and that's the direction we're going to go. >> does this decision now lead to a greater debate about whether women need to register for selective service? secretary carter: it may do that. that's a matter of legal dispute and litigation. i don't know how that will turn out. by the way, the -- the legal -- that legal determination won't affect what i announce today, that is, our timetable for the implementation of the decisions

i've announced today. it is an issue that's out there, unfortunately it's subject to litigation. >> the three women who made it through the ranger school, will they now be welcomed into the ranger regiment? will they become a part of the regiment because they weren't until now. secretary carter: those positions will be available to women. once again, just to remind you, people have to qualify for positions, positions have to be open, and so forth. so there's a lot that goes into that. those positions will be open to them, yes. >> secondly, can we assume you found the marine corps study which concluded that mixed gender units aren't as capable as male units to be flawed? secretary carter: it's not definitive, not determinative. there are other issues, other than -- those studies are

reflective of something i spoke of, which is teams do matter. and we need to take that into account. at the same time, the individuals' capabilities, the capabilities of the individual to contribute are extremely important. on average, and i said this very directly, men and women will have different physical capabilities. the data show that clearly. that's on average. so there will be women who can meet the physical requirements of these even as there are men who cannot meet those requirements. and so averages tell you something about the need to pay attention to numbers, team dynamics and so forth. but they do not determine whether an individual is qualified to participate in a given unit.

>> the general that led this marine corps stud said in a memo to then commandant joe dunford that opening up ground combat jobs would increase the risk, meaning more casualties for marines. is that statement overblown? also i understand one of general dunford's concerns was, since women in the experimental unit suffer more injuries than men, he was concerned that you would lose some hard charging women marines. what did you think about that? secretary carter: first of all, to the first point, combat effectiveness is the critical criterion in implementation. so the issue you raise, that your first quote dealt with, is something that must be dealt with and i believe can be dealt with in implementation. it needs to be taken into account.

that's a serious issue. combat effectiveness is why you are here. i'm sorry, your second point was? >> the concern that some of the women in the experimental battalion, the fear is you would lose hard-charging women marines due to injuries. secretary carter: there are a number of studies that indicate that. that doesn't suggest to me that women shouldn't be admitted to those specialties if they're qualified but it's something that needs -- that is going to need to be taken into account in implementation. so these are real phenomena that affect gender, that are affected by gender and need to be taken into account. >> the marine corps concluded it would harm combat effectiveness, that's something secretary panetta mentioned. secretary carter: combat effectiveness is the criterion. this change will be implemented and i'm confident can be

implemented in a way that will enhance combat effectiveness, not detract from combat effectiveness. >> mr. secretary, will the women's desire to enter combat roles or missions be entirely voluntary or will there be a time where they could, like many of their male counterparts, be required to go into combat missions? secretary carter: absolutely. if you're a service member you have some choices but you don't have absolute choice. people are assigned to missions, tasks, and functions according to need as well as their capabilities and women will be subject to the same standards and rules that men will. >> are you concerned as you alluded to in your opening remarks that that could actually cause women not to want to enlist in the military, if they thought there was a possibility they would be required to go

into a combat role? secretary carter: i assume there are people, men and women who don't join the military because they don't want to live by the military' standards. but if you do decide to join you're subject to our rules an d standards, period. >> mr. secretary, back to the absence of general dunford because given that he was the only service chief that asked for an exemption of all of them and given that he's now the senior military advisor, wouldn't it be important for him to be here to send the message that the u.s. military is ready to salute smartly and carry out your orders. his absence may be sending an unintended message that he's not fully on board. secretary carter: general dunford and i have discussed this many, many times.

i met with him and the other chiefs earlier today. he will be a full part of implementation. i came to a different judgment on a part of the conclusions of the studies conducted by the marine corps when he was commandant but agreed with the great bulk of them and they will be reflected in implementation. the issues that were raise by those studies, i believe, can be addressed in implementation and will be, that's my judgment, and he understands that's my judgment and he will be at my side as we do the implementation. that's the idea. >> he's on board with your decision? secretary carter: you'll have to speak to him about that, but he understands what my decision is, and my decision is my decision an we'll implement it. >> i want to move on to she -- the shooting down of the russian jet. wonder if you can give us an assessment of how that

complicates the issue and if turkey overreached on that shooting down of the jet. secretary carter: first of all, we said repeatedly, the president said the turks are entitled to defend their own air space. we have urged both sides not to allow this to lead to further escalation. it has not had any effect on our prosecution of our own air campaign. as you know we have a memorandum of understanding with the russian military which is being adhered to and which provides procedures that guarantee the operations of our own air campaign, i mean with respect to the relations between turkey and russia, we obviously have our differences of perspective with russia about what is going on in

syria. that doesn't translate in our judgment into any desire to see conflict of any kind between russia and syria and turkey for its part is a member of our coalition. and they're working with us and we'd like them, like many other members of the coalition, to do more. in syria and iraq. >> to follow up on that, what would it take, you're pressing them to do more, particularly along a stretch of the boarder rder to help eliminate the flow of foreign fighters. what do you think it will take for turkey to kind of agree to do that and move forward? secretary carter: they have ample evidence of the threat

isil poses to their own people and their own country. we also understand the other dangers they face. they need to join in the fight against isil. i think there is more that they could do. it involves their military, it involves their intelligence services. it involve their border and homeland security forces. so we would like to see turkey do more. it's essential. >> i want to tie together the fight against isil with your decision today. the fact that socomm did not press for any exemptions, does that necessarily mean women over the next year could become part of the specialized counterterrorism commando units that you want to accelerate in the fight against isil, like the specialized targeting expeditionary task force you announced? secretary carter: yes, that is reflected in my decision and was

also reflected in the recommendation of the commander of special operations command. and i saw it the same way and therefore my decision is the same as the decision of the -- the recommendations of general votel in this case. as far as the time scale goes, remember that the -- from the time a service member joins to the time they're assigned to a special team to undergo training and so forth, people will be going through the pipeline including women who are admitted pursuant to my decision today. >> another question. in the same vein, were there any jobs that were amenable to women, did they say, we could use more here, there.

the military is at capacity, shrinking the size of the force, and the second question, on the targeting expeditionary forces, could you explain to us when those get started? or they're already started? you mentioned the goal was to capture isis leaders. when they do that, what happens to them? >> ok. two things. well, there are, kevin, specialties and i don't want to go into this too much, but that are designed specifically for women. these are women who are part of the female engagement teams and so forth in places where it is sensitive for an american male service member to interact with local females. and i was alluding to that in my statement. there are situations like that. i suppose it's also fair to say

that as a statistical thing, doesn't apply to individuals, but there are specialties in which women have historically excelled. you have to be careful about that because it's sometimes a matter of where they felt they could advance rather than anything else. but some women are represented differently across specialties that have long been open. and that's why i think that we need to focus on standards as we go into implementation. and we're going to learn a lot, we already have learned in this service studies and surveys suggests this, about standards and about how to think about standards in the course of considering this matter of gender. the expeditionary targeting force and capture, we'll deal with that on a case-by-case

basis, it's going to depend on the circumstances and that is of course just one of the purposes of the expeditionary targeting force but it is one, capture and we will be doing such operations as you know both in syria and also in iraq and just to repeat what i said the other day, when we do it in iraq, it will be with the knowledge and approval of the iraqi government and prime minister abbadi to make that once again quite clear. >> so possible that an isis fighter could be -- the full range either military -- secretary carter: full range, all the way. and other law enforcement of other nations. so the full range. it really has to be considered on a case-by-case basis. thank you all. thank you very much.

appreciate you being here. >> earlier today, the house approved a five-year $205 billion highway funding bill, some of the money comes from drawing down the federal reserve surplus. testifying on capitol hill today, the chair, janet yellen said that spending money should not come from the nation's central bank. yellen: i appreciate the opportunity to talk about the highway bill, which will take a large share of our operating surplus, which is part of federal reserve capital