Department Press Briefing – December 6, 2023

1:39 p.m. EST

MR MILLER: Good afternoon, everyone. I will start with a few brief comments before moving to questions.

Today, the Secretary determined that members of the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces have committed war crimes in Sudan. The Secretary also determined that members of the RSF and its allied militias have committed crimes against humanity as part of a widespread and systematic attack directed against Darfur’s civilian population. Members of the RSF and allied militias have also committed ethnic cleansing.

The SAF and the RSF must end this brutal conflict. The warring parties must comply with their obligations under international humanitarian law, international human rights law, and we call on them to protect civilians, hold accountable those responsible for atrocities and other abuses, allow unhindered humanitarian access, and negotiate an end to this conflict.

For too long, the belligerents have killed, raped, and attacked civilians with impunity in Sudan. The international community must work towards meaningful justice for victims and the affected communities and bring an end to this era of impunity. As we work with our African partners, the United States calls on all countries to support efforts to protect civilians in Sudan, prevent future atrocities, and promote accountability for those responsible for these horrific acts.

As we have repeatedly said since the outbreak of this conflict, the United States stands with the Sudanese people, who did not ask for this war, in support of their rightful demands for a transition to democracy and freedom, peace, and justice. We will use all the tools at our disposal to support these aims.

With that, Matt.

QUESTION: Okay. Just to clarify, though, this determination does not come with additional sanctions?

MR MILLER: Not today. As you are aware, we have imposed sanctions already on members of the RSF and entities owned by both of the factions, but no additional sanctions imposed today.

QUESTION: So – so what’s the impact of it?

MR MILLER: So I think two things. One, it is important to send a signal to the international community what in fact has happened here. We have documented repeated atrocities. We have documented members of the factions going in and just executing civilians in villages at point blank ranges. We’ve seen accounts of them going into schools and demanding to know where are the boys, where are the men, so they could execute them. We’ve seen systematic accounts of rapes. We think it’s important to point that out and call it what it is.

And then the second thing I would say is we have taken sanctions in the past and we are ready to impose additional measures if and when we have developed appropriate facts to support them.

QUESTION: Based on this determination today?

MR MILLER: I mean in general, we have imposed sanctions unrelated to this determination to – because we’ve seen —

QUESTION: No, no, I understand that, but —

MR MILLER: But no, not just based on this determination, but based on our work to hold accountable for their actions in this conflict.

QUESTION: All right. Okay. Other people might have more on this, but I want to go to the Middle East real quick. And I have one question, but it’s about three separate things. One is that the Israelis are continuing to talk about this idea of a buffer zone that they would like to create either in or potentially near Gaza. What is – can you clarify what the U.S. position is on that? Can you clarify what the U.S. position is on the idea of there being a quote/unquote “transition period,” during which Israel would retain or would keep security control of Gaza after the conflict is over, if the conflict ever is over? And then lastly, what is the U.S. position on the idea of a international security or peacekeeping force that might be deployed, that some have called for to be deployed?

MR MILLER: Yeah, let me take them in order. So with respect to the first one, the Secretary made very clear in a speech he gave several weeks ago in Tokyo, where he laid out the principles that the United States supports when it comes to the end of this conflict in Gaza. One of those principles was that there must be no reduction in the size of Gaza, and that remains our position and it will remain our position. So if any proposed buffer zone was inside Gaza, that would be a violation of that principle, and it’s something that we oppose. With – if it’s with respect to something in Israeli territory, I won’t speak to that. That’s a decision for the Israelis to make, but we are very clear that when it comes to reduction in the size of Gaza, that is not something the United States supports.

With respect to the second – I remember the third. What’s – what was the – remind me what the second —

QUESTION: The second one was the transition.

MR MILLER: The second one was transition. With respect to a transition period, look, we understand that there will have to be some kind of transition period after the end of major combat operations. I don’t think it would be in anyone’s interests – not Israel’s interest, it wouldn’t be in the Palestinian people’s interest – for at the end of major combat operations for Israel to just leave and leave a security vacuum in place where there could be rampant lawlessness inside Gaza and innocent civilians exploited. So we understand there will need to be some transition period at the end of combat operations. I – I am not at this point able to define while the conflict’s ongoing how long that would take or when it would end. I think it’s too early to prescribe any parameters for that.

And then with respect to —

QUESTION: But, but, but, but wait – but it would have to be temporary for you to be okay with it?

MR MILLER: Yes. Yes, because one of the positions we have also made clear is that there can no – be no reoccupation of Gaza.

QUESTION: And then the last —

MR MILLER: And then with respect to the third, the international security force, these are the types of conversations we are engaging in with our allies and with our partners in the region. I think it is too early to definitively prescribe any solution, but we are focused on what the post-conflict environment needs to look at in Gaza, and that obviously includes security for the Palestinian people of Gaza.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR MILLER: Yeah. Said.

QUESTION: On this issue, can – I mean, there is a great many rumors and so on that talks about incentivizing Egypt to take, like, hundreds of thousands and so on. So you repudiate that completely? That is not – that is not something that has been discussed? As it was allegedly discussed on Capitol Hill.

MR MILLER: So I am not going to respond to rumors, and I don’t know – I don’t know what you’re referring to with respect to Capitol Hill. But it doesn’t actually really matter, but I will reiterate the principles that the Secretary outlined, and one of them is no forced displacement of the Palestinian people from Gaza.

QUESTION: Okay. A couple of other issues. There was a report that Israel’s assault forced a nurse to leave babies behind; they were found decomposing. Are you aware of this story?

MR MILLER: I am aware of that report, Said.

QUESTION: Okay. And do you take it as it happened, or if it did happen, is that a war crime?

MR MILLER: Said, I would say that is a tragedy.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR MILLER: It’s a tragedy for those babies.

QUESTION: Right.

MR MILLER: It’s a tragedy for their family members. It’s a tragedy for the Palestinian people, and it is a tragedy for the world.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR MILLER: And it is why we have made clear that far too many Palestinians have been killed in this conflict, and that of course includes far too many Palestinian children, and of course Palestinian babies. And it is why we have taken every measure we could to speak loudly and clearly to the Government of Israel that it needs to do everything it can to minimize civilian harm, and it’s why we have worked to try and move humanitarian assistance in. And it is also why, I will say, we have said that Hamas should stop hiding its fighters in hospitals. So —

QUESTION: I understand. I’m speaking about this particular incident. If it happened –

MR MILLER: No, I just – I – it gets to the very difficult nature of this war and the immense human tragedy that has been inflicted on far too many people.

QUESTION: Right. But if it happened, it’s not a war crime, or is it a war crime?

MR MILLER: Said, I am never going to be able to make an assessment here. You saw us today make a conclusion about war crimes after a very deliberate fact-finding process where we then apply the fact to the law. It’s not something I can do responding to a report from —

QUESTION: So will the U.S. do a fact-finding —

MR MILLER: Said, just – just please let me finish my answers before you interrupt. I will take all of your questions.

QUESTION: Sure.

MR MILLER: It is not something I can do responding to a report from the podium.

QUESTION: Okay, I understand. But would the U.S. consider sending a fact-finding mission, like that you did?

MR MILLER: We are in the middle of a conflict right now, an ongoing conflict. We monitor all of these reports. But it’s – I’m not going to speak to what actions we might take when we’re still in the middle of major combat operations.

QUESTION: And lastly, last – and my last question: On Monday, when I asked you about where should the Palestinians go, and you said there are designated UN centers to go to. Well, apparently the spokesperson for the United Nations, Stephane Dujarric, whom you know, repudiated that yesterday, or refuted that. He said, “Let’s be clear. There are no UN-designated safe zones in Gaza. I think all my senior colleagues have been very clear, including the secretary-general, saying there are no safe places in Gaza. There are shelters that fly the UN flag that are sheltering thousands and thousands and thousands of people – men, women, and children who are trying to stay alive and get some food, get some water. We have seen since the beginning of this conflict that those places that fly the UN flag” have been – “[have not been] safe either.” Your comment on that?

MR MILLER: So I will say first of all, I did not say that there were safe zones. That is a very different concept.

QUESTION: But you said there were safe —

MR MILLER: Said, Said, again, can we just establish a ground rule that –

QUESTION: Absolutely.

MR MILLER: — I won’t interrupt you, and you won’t interrupt me.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR MILLER: I did not say that there were safe zones. That is a different concept. We have seen earlier in this conflict the idea of safe zones, and what instead we have moved to and what we have supported are areas that are deconfliction sites, and there are sites that are UN-flagged facilities that Israel is aware where those sites are, Israel has placed them on deconfliction lists, and Israel is not supposed to target those sites. That is what I was referring to. We continue to support people moving to those sites where they can be safe from harm. But again, we recognize the very difficult situation on the ground and the very difficult choices that many Palestinian civilians are having to make every day.

QUESTION: Just to follow up on that.

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: You’re making a distinction between a safe zone and an area – a deconfliction —

MR MILLER: So just to be very clear, so there has been ideas at one point of safe zones, entire areas – there’s this area over near the beach – an entire area that looks more like a refugee camp that people could – people could —

QUESTION: So you’re talking basically size, then.

MR MILLER: I’m talking about – it’s not just size or – instead of, like, designated – it’s neighborhoods where the – Israel is not conducting operations, right. You have seen them flag areas where they intend to conduct major combat operations, told people to leave those areas, go to other areas where they are not currently conducting operations. In addition to that, there are facilities – schools and other places, UN sites, UNRWA sites – where people are taking shelter. And those sites are on deconfliction lists and are not supposed to be struck by the Israeli army. That’s what I was referring to.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Matt, the UN secretary-general made a really rare move today to formally warn the Security Council of the global threat from the Gaza war, invoking this Article 99. He himself has done it for the first time. I’m wondering if the United States agreed with his warning that this is a threat for the entire, like, global system.

MR MILLER: So we just saw the letter; it just – the letter came just a little while before I came out here. I won’t have any – I don’t have any specific reaction to the letter yet. We will continue to consult with the Secretary-General and other members of the UN Security Council on this matter, as we have in the past. But I will say of course there are threats to regional security and threats to global security that are presented by this conflict. We said that in the very aftermath of October 7th when we made quite clear that one of the things we are trying to do is prevent this conflict from spreading. That continues to be one of our top priorities and continues to be something the Secretary and the President and other members of the administration are focused on.

QUESTION: And we understand that our states basically seek to leverage that to renew a push for the council to call for a ceasefire. We do know U.S. position on the ceasefire, but I just want to ask you again whether there is any change on that if they go for a resolution calling for that.

MR MILLER: So I will not speak to any resolution that hasn’t yet been introduced because we’d obviously want to look at the text of that and engage in consultations before we made a decision about how we might exercise our vote in the Security Council. I will say with regard to a ceasefire, we have made clear that we do not support actions that would leave Hamas in a place where it could continue to carry out terrorist attacks against Israel.

We’ve also been clear that we support humanitarian pauses, especially if those humanitarian pauses can allow hostages to come out. The seven-day pause was incredibly successful with getting hostages out, with getting increased levels of aid in. And most importantly – or I shouldn’t say most importantly, but equally importantly, allowing civilians in Gaza to move out of harm’s way and move from one area to another. And we think those – we think pauses are important and pauses should continue, and we would support further pauses.

QUESTION: Right. A couple of more. So you said yesterday you guys have been in touch with the Israeli Government to allow more aid in, to allow more fuel. But I mean, when we look at what’s happening today, it looks like the public order is completely breaking down. There is like full chaos and UN is warning that its operation is in no shape to be able to deliver this aid to the people. So do you guys have like a solution for that, or how are you trying to overcome that? Is that something that you’re discussing with the Israeli Government?

MR MILLER: We are discussing it with the United Nations agencies on the ground. We’re discussing it with the Government of Israel. It is the focus of Ambassador Satterfield’s work. I can tell you we’ve – I talk to him all the time and hear the incredible amount of focus he’s put on trying to improve the situation on the ground, and that it’s the same thing that you see the Secretary and other members of the administration engaging in.

So it is something we’re focused on, and it – and I will say, when I say focused on, it’s not just on getting the – increasing the amount of aid that comes in, but improving the ability of aid workers inside Gaza to then deliver that aid to the people who need it most.

QUESTION: Just one more, sorry.

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: I saw that there’s reporting about Kerem Shalom opening. Just want to give you an opportunity to clarify that. Is the United States pushing Israel to get Kerem Shalom opening for the trucks or for inspections? Like can you give us the latest on it?

MR MILLER: So we continue to think that Kerem Shalom would be a good facility to use for increased inspections of trucks. I’ve said in the past that Israel has had security concerns about that. We’ve been trying to work through those security concerns with Israel. I don’t want to get too much into the specifics of those conversations, but all of these issues you raise are things that we are talking about them with directly – or talking about with them directly.

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: Matt, Amnesty International put out an investigation saying that U.S.-made weapons were used by Israel in strikes that killed nearly four dozen civilians. Do you have a comment on this investigation?

MR MILLER: So we are reviewing that report. As the President and Secretary have said on multiple occasions, it is a tragedy any time a civilian is killed. We have made clear in our discussions with Israeli leaders that we are deeply concerns about the protection of civilians in this conflict. We expect Israel to only target legitimate targets and to adhere to the laws of armed conflict; that includes taking measures to reduce the risk of harm to civilians. I’ve talked before about the very real challenges that Israel faces because Hamas uses humans – civilians as human shields.

So I would say we will continue to engage with the Israeli Government on all those things. And of course the Israeli Government has a professional military, and so when they get these types of reports, they should do what our military should do, which is investigate them. That’s something every military should do, and we would expect them to do so as well.

QUESTION: Have they given you any commitment to investigate?

MR MILLER: I’m not aware of any conversations we’ve had. It doesn’t mean they haven’t gone on, but I’m just not aware of them.

QUESTION: And is the U.S. undertaking its own investigation or inquiry into whether U.S.-made weapons have been used in a disproportionate way?

MR MILLER: So we continue to monitor everything that happens with regard to this conflict, but again, I’m not going to speak to any internal deliberations.

QUESTION: And then can I get your assessment – I mean, we’re several days into the renewed offensive in southern Gaza, and the Secretary said last week that it cannot be prosecuted in the same way it was in the north. Do you feel that the Israelis are fulfilling this?

MR MILLER: So again, I think we are still at an early stage of this part of the conflict, this part of the conflict in southern Gaza. You heard the Secretary say that too many Palestinian civilians have been killed. That remains the case: too many Palestinian civilians have been killed, too many Palestinians have been killed – or I should say too many Palestinian civilians continue to be killed. We want to see the civilian death toll lower than it has been. We want to see the civilian death toll lower than it is today, lower than it has been the past few days.

Again, this is – a good component of this is the problem presented by Hamas embedding in civilian sites in Kha Yunis just as it did in Gaza City, but that doesn’t lesson the burden that’s on Israel to do everything it can to reduce civilian harm. So we had some very frank conversations with the Government of Israel about that when we were there last week. We continue to have very frank discussions with them about this question, and I think I’ll leave it at that.

Yeah, go ahead.

QUESTION: Yesterday, Matt, I had asked you about if State was aware of any reports or emerging evidence of Americans being sexually assaulted by Hamas on October 7th, as there are claims that multiple — many Israeli women were. You said you weren’t aware of reports. Can you say anything about – we heard from the attorney general a few minutes ago that they’re now investigating Hamas war crimes. Do you know if that will include like this – looking at potential sexual crimes as well or is State still following that?

MR MILLER: I think I should defer to the Department of Justice to speak to its investigations and what they may or may not include.

QUESTION: I know that you don’t comment on university campus-level goings on, but yesterday a group of Ivy League presidents on Capitol Hill in sworn testimony declined to condemn calls by their own students for the killing of Jews. I’m wondering if, more broadly speaking, outside of college campuses and universities if the State Department has a position on calling for the murder of Jews. Is that something that the department considers antisemitic?

MR MILLER: Yeah, absolutely. You’re right. When it comes to matters inside the United States, there are many agencies inside this government that would comment on it, but that is not the remit of the State Department. But obviously, calling for the murder of Jews is antisemitic. It’s horrific. We have a special envoy here dedicated to combatting antisemitism around the world. In addition, you’ve seen the Secretary speak about this and call it out, as I have from this podium, and we will continue to do that.

QUESTION: But you would oppose the calling of the murder of anyone, right?

MR MILLER: Absolutely.

QUESTION: Not just Jews?

MR MILLER: Yeah – yes.

QUESTION: I mean —

MR MILLER: Quite obviously. Yes.

QUESTION: One last question, if I may. Quite a few localized menorah lighting celebrations ahead of the start of Hanukkah tomorrow have been cancelled by local officials, citing threats from pro-Palestinian protestors that are scheduled for the area. Now, in California, Gavin Newsom has cancelled a – some kind of a Christmas tree lighting ceremony as well. I’m wondering if the State Department has concerns about the impact of the war in Gaza and the political fallings out on religious freedom for Americans ahead of the holidays.

MR MILLER: So let me just say that when it comes to the specific incidents you cite, I think I will defer to the Department of Homeland Security, maybe to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, for comment on those as those are obviously local matters inside the United States. But I will say that generally we have seen a rise in antisemitism around the world since October 7th. We have seen a rise in Islamophobia around the world since October 7th. And we will continue to do everything in power to call those – call that out when we see it, to make clear it is objectionable, and to align our policies to fight it wherever we can.

QUESTION: Thanks.

MR MILLER: Leon, go ahead.

QUESTION: If I may come back to Sudan, I have a hard time – you’ve taken months to determine – to make the determination that there were war crimes and even crimes against humanity regarding the FSR forces. And you come out and give the statement and all that, but you don’t announce any sanctions. And you haven’t – the sanctions that have been in place have not hit the highest level. So I have a hard time understanding how at the same time you come out, make the determination, and don’t come with something more forceful in terms of sanctions. And then aside from that, just if you know, are there any – as of now, are there any ongoing talks? There were – the general talks, but that was months ago or what have you. Is there anything ongoing in terms of U.S. involvement with the two parties?

MR MILLER: So I will say we have imposed sanctions in the past, and just because we are not announcing sanctions today does not mean we will not impose additional measures in the future. I will also say I think it’s important that the United States speak with moral clarity about what we see happening and what we can document, and that’s what we’ve done here. We think there’s real value in that, and we’ll continue to do it.

And then I’ll say with respect to the talks, the talks in Jeddah broke down because both parties, the SAF and RSF, repeatedly refused to adhere to the commitments that they made at those talks. So what we will do is continue to work with our partners in the region to make clear that there is no – there can be no military solution to this conflict, to make clear that civilians continue to suffer multiple atrocities, and to try to continue to work with our partners in the region to bring an end to the conflict. But ultimately, that takes the two parties coming to the table, and not just coming to the table, but adhering to the commitments that they make. And so far, that they have been simply unwilling to do that.

QUESTION: So right now there are no talks whatsoever?

MR MILLER: There are no talks whatsoever, but we would always support talks that would lead to an actual breakthrough, and, as I said, the parties adhering to the commitments that they make.

Michel.

QUESTION: Yeah, Israeli defense minister has said that today two mayors and heads of councils located in the border with Lebanon, that they’re communities will not be returned home until Hizballah is driven north of the Litani River. He added that the best option for Israel is to reach a diplomatic solution or arrangement. If it doesn’t succeed, Israel will act with all the means at its disposal to push Hizballah by military actions. What’s your comment, and do you support such a move?

MR MILLER: So I will say that one of the things that we have made clear from the beginning is that we don’t want to see this conflict expand, and that includes expanding to the north of Israel. We do not want to see increased military activity between Israel and Hizballah in northern Israel. There continues to be a very real problem, a security problem, faced by the Israeli people in that you have Israelis from southern Israel who live near Gaza who don’t feel safe because of ongoing rocket attacks, not – never mind the events of October 7th, but the ongoing rocket attacks into their communities. And so they have relocated to elsewhere in Israel. You have people from northern Israel who don’t feel safe to return from their – to their communities because of the attacks that have happened, that have been ongoing by Hizballah across the border.

So it is a very real security problem that the Israeli public and the Israeli Government faces. We want to see a diplomatic solution, as we have said, and we would oppose any widening of the conflict and urge Israel not to widen the conflict.

QUESTION: What’s the diplomatic solution, in your view?

MR MILLER: Again, we’ll continue to pursue diplomacy. We have, I will say, been pretty consistent – and you’ve seen the Secretary focus on this in his travels around the region in trying to keep the conflict from expanding from, as I said, in northern Israel, in the West Bank, to involve other countries. I don’t want to get into all the details, but that will continue to be the focus of our efforts.

QUESTION: And do you support change – changing rules of the UN Security Council 1701?

MR MILLER: I do not have any new announcements about new Security Council resolutions or changes to announce today.

Shannon, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. There’s a lawsuit filed in federal court alleging that the State Department has treated Israeli Americans and Palestinian Americans inequitably when it comes to evacuations from around the conflict zone. Do you have a response to that broad statement, that brought claim?

MR MILLER: I’ve seen the lawsuit, but, as always with ongoing litigation, I’m going to refer to the Department of Justice for comment.

QUESTION: And is it still the case that the State Department’s aware of more than 1,000 individuals, and including around 350 American citizens, who are still waiting to evacuate from Gaza? And is it doing anything to speed up that kind of trickling pace?

MR MILLER: So we have seen a number of American citizens and their family members and legal permanent residents coming out in the past few days. We now have gotten over 1,100 American citizens and family members out through Rafah, and we continue to work with the Government of Israel, with the Government of Egypt to try to get more Americans out. We have a number of Americans who were on the list who are cleared to leave who have not yet left. We’ll continue to try to get them out.

And with respect to the numbers that remain, it is a little under a thousand that remain, with about 350, 370 of them being American citizens. But I will note that that number fluctuates. You’ve seen times where, despite us getting more people out, the number goes – the number of remaining goes up because there are Americans who are in Gaza who identify other family members that want to come with them.

QUESTION: But any efforts to speed that up through specific talks?

MR MILLER: Yeah, we continue to work – it continues to be something that we are focused on and trying to get. There’s obviously a difficulty of people moving around Gaza right now, so you have not just the problem of getting people onto the list so they’re cleared for departure – there’s only so many people that can go out through Rafah every day – but also people actually being able to make it to Rafah to get out. And that is why we focus on the humanitarian efforts I was talking about earlier in the briefing.

QUESTION: And just finally, has the State Department confirmed any deaths of American citizens in Gaza, or is it investigating any reports of deaths at this point?

MR MILLER: We are still investigating the one report that I’ve mentioned on previous days, but we have not yet confirmed whether that death actually happened or whether the person was an American citizen.

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: Matt?

MR MILLER: Go ahead.

QUESTION: I have a question about the post-war Gaza option. Both the Secretary and yourself have mentioned a revitalized Palestinian Authority. What’s expected of the PA in that context? Could you explain what they’re supposed to —

MR MILLER: There are a number of additional measures that we think the Palestinian Authority could take in terms of cracking down on corruption, in terms of increased engagement with civil society. We had a very open discussion with this – or I should say the Secretary had a very open discussion about this with President Abbas when he was in the West Bank next^[1] week. And in addition to that, revitalizing and increasing the capability of the PA’s security forces – if you envision in the post-conflict environment, as we do, a Gaza and West Bank that are united under Palestinian Authority leadership, you would need to see an increase in the capability of the PA’s security forces. So it’s those types of reforms and increases in capabilities that we have in mind.

QUESTION: Okay. I have a question on Iran as well if there’s no other questions —

MR MILLER: Go ahead and I’ll – people can still —

QUESTION: Okay, thank you.

MR MILLER: We can come back. It’s not a – it’s not a hard turn. We don’t —

QUESTION: In response to a class action suit in Iran, with regards to the elimination of the former Quds commander, Qasem Soleimani, a court has decided that the U.S. should pay $5 billion. Any comments on that?

MR MILLER: Yeah, I – we don’t have any reason to believe these are legitimate proceedings. The Iranian judicial system is widely regarded to be lacking any independence from the Iranian regime. So I don’t have any comment on this specific verdict. We obviously don’t have any people participating in judicial proceedings inside Iran, but the United States will continue to do everything that’s necessary to protect our people and our interests.

QUESTION: Matt?

QUESTION: Staying on Iran, Matthew? Iran?

MR MILLER: Yeah, go – go ahead. I’ll come back to you, Janne. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Yeah, thank you. Do you have anything to say on the Secretary’s meeting with the members of Arab League and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation on Friday? What does the Secretary hope from – expect from the meeting, and what message he has, especially in response to their call for a ceasefire?

MR MILLER: So I don’t want to telegraph too much about that meeting two days before it happens, but obviously these are counterparts with which he has had a number of engagements since October 7th. You’ve seen him in – both in his trips to the region and at a meeting in New York engage with counterparts in the region, as well as a number of phone calls that we’ve read out the specifics of over the past two months.

So he will continue to engage with them about what we can do to get increased humanitarian assistance in. He’ll continue to engage with them about how we can get hostages out. He will, of course, want to talk about the end of the conflict and lay out the principles that he laid out in Tokyo, as he did in a meeting he had in Dubai, and continue to talk with them about how we can move forward, prevent this conflict from widening, and ultimately find a solution in the long term that leads to the establishment of an independent Palestinian state.

QUESTION: Matt?

QUESTION: Yeah, thank you. Going back to the Iran – Iranian sanctions. Russia and Iran signed a declaration to counter the Western and also the U.S. sanctions. Does that declaration concerns you? Do you believe that this would have an impact on your sanctions on both countries when we are talking about both conflicts in Gaza and Ukraine?

MR MILLER: So I will say we have long seen both Russia and Iran attempt to evade our sanctions, which is why we – you see us, with respect to both countries, at times announce both new sanctions and measures that we take to crack down on sanctions evasion.

QUESTION: And today Iranian IRGC announced that they seized two vessels with 34 foreign crew members in the Persian Gulf. Do you have any reaction and comments on that? And do you think that —

MR MILLER: That they – I’m sorry, that they what?

QUESTION: That the Iranian IRGC, Revolutionary Guard Corps, they announced today they seized two vessels with 34 —

QUESTION: Seized.

MR MILLER: Seized, got it.

QUESTION: — foreign crew members. Then do you have any comment and reaction to that? And do you think that the Iranian taking advantage of the situation in the Middle East?

MR MILLER: So we have seen them – I don’t have any specific reaction to that report, but we have seen them continue to try to take advantage of instability and try to foment additional instability, which is why we have been quite clear with the Iranian Government that they shouldn’t do anything to add to instability in the region. It’s why we’ve been quite clear with our partners in the region, anyone that can get messages to Iran, that they should deliver that message very clearly, and why you’ve seen us take steps to protect our interests in the region.

QUESTION: If I may ask the last question, going back to a very old question in this room, are you still looking to get – to go back to the JCPOA through diplomatic with Iran, or can you call the JCPOA a dead deal now?

MR MILLER: I certainly don’t see that on the table.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Matt?

MR MILLER: Janne, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. Thank you, Matt. Two questions on Russia, North Korea, and South Korea. It was reported that North Korea transshipped 10,000 containers to Russia yesterday. And why can’t United States stop North Korea’s weapons from continuing to be supplied to Russia?

MR MILLER: So we will – we have made clear that we oppose the transfer of additional weapons from North Korea to Russia and oppose the transfer of weapons from Russia to North Korea. We have imposed sanctions on both of these countries, of course. When it comes to Russia supplying North Korea – not the issue you asked about but the reverse side of this trade – we’ve made clear that it violates multiple United Nations Security Council resolutions, and we will continue to take actions to hold both of those countries accountable.

QUESTION: Follow-up, one more question. And Russian President Putin wanted to restore relations with South Korea and saying it depends entirely on South Korea. Do you think this is Putin’s strategy to create a rift in U.S. and South Korea relations or other —

MR MILLER: I don’t think I have any —

QUESTION: Do you have any —

MR MILLER: I just don’t think I have any comment on that.

Alex, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. Can you speak to the Secretary’s level of alarm following yesterday’s interactions on the Hill? There are reports that some senators left the briefing. And I’m also asking because the Secretary just noted in his statement that today’s package will – will, he mentioned – be one of the last security assistance packages we can provide to Ukraine without congressional approval. Can you unpack it, please, for us?

MR MILLER: I think the Secretary found it to be a frank and candid exchange of views on the Hill, mostly between members of the Senate, not involving the administration. But as we made clear in the statement we issued today about the drawdown package, we have nearly exhausted the available security assistance that is available to Ukraine. It is urgent that Congress act to support Ukraine; it is urgent that Congress act to support democracy. The President spoke to this today. We continue to watch the actions on Capitol Hill. We continue to watch the negotiations over things that are unrelated to support for Ukraine. You saw the President speak to this today and talk about how – the plan that he has laid out with respect to border security. It’s not an issue that the State Department deals with.

I will just say for – from our perspective, it is an urgent priority to stand with Ukraine, especially as we enter this difficult winter when we know we will see increased Russian attacks.

QUESTION: For those of us who cover this – U.S. foreign policy for foreign audience who don’t necessarily follow U.S. domestic policy, are we in this still zone of your normal sausage-making process, or things are out of control?

MR MILLER: I just don’t think I want to play pundit from this podium. That’s for other people to do.

QUESTION: And then I have some on Azerbaijan, if you don’t mind.

MR MILLER: Go ahead. Go ahead.

QUESTION: The following two days’ meetings, do you have anything for me? What’s your level of concerns about the relationship? Assistant secretary posted that he shared ideas for deepening bilateral cooperation and supporting peace, stability, prosperity in the region. I mean, that one sentence is doing a great deal of heavy lifting.

MR MILLER: I haven’t spoken to Assistant Secretary O’Brien since the conclusion of that meeting or had a detailed readout of it, so I don’t have anything to add.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: Thank you. One question about the Abraham Accord and the normalization between Saudi Arabia and Israel. Do you think or the State Department thinks that that diplomatic relationship is almost dead, there is no any possibility that Saudi Arabia normalizes its relationship with Israel? Or there is a possibility? My first question. Then if you allow me, I will ask —

MR MILLER: Go ahead and ask the second one. I’ve got to remember them both.

QUESTION: The second one is that there are some reports and concerns that since the war broke between Israel and Hamas is some terrorist groups that belong to al-Qaida and some other groups moved out to some safe place that they think it’s safe, like Afghanistan, to launch potentially some attacks against the U.S. interest in the region. So I just wanted to —

MR MILLER: So these are reports that people moved from where?

QUESTION: So from the Arab countries.

MR MILLER: Oh, from the Arab —

QUESTION: Yes.

MR MILLER: So I don’t have any specific comment on that. Obviously, we take any threats to our forces very seriously. We take any threats to our interests very seriously, and we’ll take whatever steps we need to protect our forces overseas and our interests. With respect to your first question, which I then forgot, remind me what it —

QUESTION: Yeah, it was the relationship between Saudi Arabia and —

MR MILLER: Oh yeah, Saudi —

QUESTION: Yes, yes.

MR MILLER: Yeah, of course, the normalization question. So look, we have made quite clear that we think further integration between Israel and its neighbors is in the long-term security interests of the region. It’s in the long-term economic interest of the region. It’s in the – it would further peace and stability. But it’s also no substitute for the establishment of an independent Palestinian state.

So at the end of this conflict, you are going to see the United States focus – and we’ve already started conversations about this – not just on what the post-conflict period looks like, but trying to get on a path to the establishment of an independent Palestinian state, and hopefully along with the establishment of an independent Palestinian state would come further integration between Israel and its neighbors. We think those are both very important things that would be good for countries in the region and good for the entire world.

Let me go to someone in the back. New —

QUESTION: On Saudi Arabia, Matt.

MR MILLER: Let me – I’ll come to you next. Go ahead, Michel.

QUESTION: Do you have any comment on President Putin’s visit to Saudi Arabia and the UAE?

MR MILLER: I don’t.

Go ahead, in the back.

QUESTION: Thanks a lot. I know that the strategic dialogue between United States and Belarusian democratic movement started today, so my question will be about Belarus. Yesterday, U.S. put some new sanctions on Lukashenka’s – so-called President Lukashenka’s wallet. So how do you estimate their effectiveness? And how do you think if this sanction pressure can help to release political prisoners? Because we have something around or close to 1,500 political prisoners nowadays.

MR MILLER: So first of all, we were quite – we were pleased to host the first strategic dialogue between the United States and the Belarusian democratic movement, and welcomed the Belarusian democratic movement leader Svyatlana Tsikhanouskaya to the State Department.

With respect to sanctions, the – yesterday, as you referenced, the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control imposed sanctions on 19 individuals and entities that generate revenue to support the Lukashenka regime that operate in the Belarusian military sector and facilitate Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine. This action is yet – is the most recent step in our efforts to promote accountability for the Lukashenka regime’s abuses in Belarus and around the world, and our message to Lukashenka and to those carrying out his repressions has been clear and consistent. We are willing to talk about changing our policies, easing sanctions, and improving our relations when the regime releases all of its political prisoners, stops its repression of the Belarusian people, and ends its complicity in Russia’s war against Ukraine.

Go ahead over here, and then we’re going to wrap up.

QUESTION: Thank you very much, Matt. Thank you very much, Matt. Former prime minister of Pakistan appeared in the court after many months for the first time; he interacted with the media as well. And in his court hearing, he said that during his trial, he is going to summon the U.S. official to testify as well with regard to his cipher. Will the U.S. be willing to send an official there, or no?

MR MILLER: I had a feeling this question would be about the cipher. As always, not in a position to comment on ongoing litigation. As we have consistently stated, we call for the respect of democratic principles in Pakistan and around the world. We are following the cases brought against the former prime minister, but we have no comment on the charges against him.

QUESTION: Just one more, Matt. Matt —

MR MILLER: No, let me go to Humeyra, and then we’ll wrap up.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR MILLER: Oh, sorry. I thought you had a follow-up question.

QUESTION: No, I do. I do.

MR MILLER: No, go ahead.

QUESTION: Okay. I just wanted to put a fine point to some of my previous questions and questions from my colleagues. Just looking at what the Secretary has discussed in Israel last week, and looking at the situation inside Gaza today, he had asked Israelis for specific actions, and we talked about deconfliction zones and all of that. There are a lot of people who say nowhere isn’t safe in Gaza. Does the United States believe there is anywhere safe in Gaza?

MR MILLER: There are areas in Gaza that are designated as places that are safe for Palestinian civilians. As I mentioned before, UN sites, sites where people can go —

QUESTION: Right.

MR MILLER: — that should not be struck, and we do not – we expect that the Israeli Government will respect those deconfliction zones and not strike them.

QUESTION: Okay. But that sounds a lot like difference between the intent and the results that the Secretary has mentioned, right? Like, those are the plans, but the result right now does not seem to be matching the intent. So I’m wondering if there has been any high-level intervention from this building to the Israeli Government since we left the region on these issues, and what was communicated, and whether Ambassador Satterfield or you guys have a specific plan to remedy this urgently.

MR MILLER: So we continue to engage in conversations with the Israeli Government in this building, at the White House. Those conversations did not stop when we left the region; they have continued since we left. As the Secretary made clear, too many Palestinian civilians have died in this conflict. Too many Palestinian civilians continue to die, and we will continue to have very direct conversations with the Israeli Government about steps they can and should take to further minimize civilian harm.

QUESTION: And my final one on this, because just a few minutes ago, when you were answering one of our questions, you said we’re still at an early stage of this part of the conflict. It sounds like you do know what’s the next part of the conflict.

MR MILLER: No. I was —

QUESTION: So, I mean —

MR MILLER: When it comes to stages, I was referring to the previous stage; this stage, as opposed to the stage in northern Gaza.

QUESTION: Right.

MR MILLER: Not at all predicting what the next stage of the military campaign ought to look like.

QUESTION: And you still maintain that it is early to make a final assessment or an interim assessment, like Matt asked yesterday?

MR MILLER: I do. As I said, we’re still days into this conflict. But as I said, too many Palestinian civilians continue to die.

With that, we’ll wrap for today.

QUESTION: Thank you.

(The briefing was concluded at 2:34 p.m.)

# # #

The Secretary’s meetings with President Abbas in the West Bank took place last week. ↑

Department Press Briefing – December 5, 2023

HomeDepartment Press Briefing – December 5, 2023

hide

Department Press Briefing – December 5, 2023

Matthew Miller, Department Spokesperson

December 5, 2023

Article Index

ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES/REGION

RUSSIA

ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES/REGION/DEPARTMENT

BANGLADESH

CHINA/DEPARTMENT

UKRAINE/RUSSIA/ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES/DEPARTMENT

ARMENIA/AZERBAIJAN

UKRAINE

YEMEN/REGION

ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES/REGION

INDIA/CANADA

ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES/REGION

PHILIPPINES

ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES/REGION

1:28 p.m. EST

MR MILLER: Good afternoon, everyone.

QUESTION: Good afternoon.

MR MILLER: Put this here. I’m going to start with some opening remarks.

Violence in the West Bank this year is at levels not seen since the Second Intifada, and in recent weeks, an alarming surge in violent acts has driven this unwelcome record even higher.

This includes unprecedented levels of violence by Israeli extremist settlers targeting Palestinians and their property, displacing entire communities, as well as violence by Palestinian extremist militants against Israeli civilians.

Today, as President Biden recently warned, the United States is taking action to address this escalating violence in the West Bank by implementing a new visa restriction policy under Section 212(a)(3)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.

Under this policy, the United States will pursue visa restrictions against individuals involved in or meaningfully contributing to the undermining of peace, security, or stability in the West Bank. This includes acts of violence against persons or property, as well as undue restrictions on civilians’ access to essential services and basic necessities. Immediate family members of such persons may also be subject to these restrictions.

The department is pursuing initial action against individuals pursuant to this visa restriction policy today. We will designate additional individuals pursuant to this policy in the coming days.

We unequivocally condemn attacks by violent Israeli extremists against Palestinians, and those by violent Palestinians extremists against Israelis. These acts threaten West Bank stability in the immediate term and take us further away from a future in which Palestinians and Israelis can both live in – both can live in peace and security, in two states.

As Secretary Blinken made clear to leaders of the Government of Israel last week during his visit to the region, they need to do more to stop extremist violence against Palestinians, and hold those responsible for it accountable.

We will continue to insist that both Israeli and Palestinian leaders take action to interrupt the increasing levels of violence against civilians. Both Israel and the Palestinian Authority have a responsibility to uphold stability and protect civilians in the West Bank.

Such measures are particularly critical at this juncture. Both Israelis and Palestinians deserve a horizon of hope free from the violence – free from violence, intimidation, and threats. The United States will continue to work to bring this vision closer to reality.

Matt?

QUESTION: Oh, okay. That’s it? So on that, are you saying that today, or even already now since the announcement came out in the last hour, actual bans have been imposed?

MR MILLER: We are taking steps to impose —

QUESTION: But have they been?

MR MILLER: They are happening today. Whether they happened before I came out to this podium or they’re happening this afternoon, they’re happening today, and we will have more coming in the coming days. We expect, ultimately, for this action to impact dozens of individuals and potentially their family members.

QUESTION: Okay. And then just to – just to put a fine point on this, you say it will also affect Palestinians who are implicated in violence against Israelis in the West Bank or elsewhere, I presume. But the Palestinians are not included under the Visa Waiver Program. So what’s the impact?

MR MILLER: They can still apply for visas to come under – to come to the United States, and under this —

QUESTION: No, no, no, so I’m saying —

MR MILLER: — and under this program would not – would not be eligible for one.

QUESTION: No, no. So – right. So what’s the impact on an Israeli settler who you implicate in violence in terms of them being able to come to the U.S. under the Visa Waiver Program?

MR MILLER: They will not be able to, and I’ll explain the – how it would work. So anyone who currently – any Israeli citizen who currently has a visa to enter the United States will be notified that that visa has been revoked. Anyone who —

QUESTION: Well, hold on. Not any Israeli. Any Israeli implicated and targeted in this.

MR MILLER: That’s – in this program. That’s what – in this program. Yes, in this program —

QUESTION: Right.

MR MILLER: — will be notified that their – I was speaking about this program.

QUESTION: Okay. All right. And —

MR MILLER: I thought that was evident. Yeah.

QUESTION: Yeah, yeah. Well, yeah, but who knows what goes on —

MR MILLER: Fair enough. No, fair – fair enough. Good to be precise. Will be notified that their visa is revoked. Any other Israeli citizen who is designated as a result of this program but does not currently have a visa will not be notified. If they want to travel to the United States and they apply through ESTA, which is the way that it works if you’re currently a Visa Waiver Program country, that application will be rejected. They are then able to go and apply for a visa, and if they’re – have been designated as a result of this program, that visa application will be rejected.

QUESTION: Okay. And does this have broader implications for the visa – Israel’s membership in VWP?

MR MILLER: No, this is separate from that. Okay.

QUESTION: Thanks.

MR MILLER: Gillian.

QUESTION: So the Israeli law enforcement officials are now claiming that they have more than 1,500 pieces of evidence that Hamas committed sexual abuse, sexual atrocities on October 7th. Are you aware of any evidence or claims that Hamas sexually abused any American citizens on or since that day?

MR MILLER: So I’m not going to speak to any evidence that we have about the status of people who have been held hostage. That goes back to our longstanding policy of not talking about the status of hostages and what we know about their whereabouts. We’ve never thought it’s productive to the – to our work to try to bring them home to do so. I will say I’m not aware of reports with respect to American citizens on October 7th. They may exist, but I’m not aware of them here.

But certainly, we have seen the evidence that the atrocities that Hamas committed on October 7 including – included sexual assault. If you looked at the presentation that was made at the United Nations yesterday, it was shocking, horrific. We hope that it opens the world’s eyes to what happened on October 7th, because there was incredibly compelling firsthand accounts from eyewitnesses and first responders and physicians about Hamas’s sexual violence against women and girls on that day.

QUESTION: Does the U.S. have any reason to think it possible that Hamas could have continued or at any time sexually abused hostages in its custody, whether they’re American or not?

MR MILLER: I am just not going to speak to what we know about the status of hostages inside Gaza. As I said, we’ve never thought that’s productive to our efforts to bring them home.

QUESTION: Yesterday, you told us that the Biden administration, State supports the Israeli ongoing investigation into this. Can you share any more detail or clarity about, like, does the U.S. support that effort in spirit, or are you sort of materially helping in the investigation?

MR MILLER: We support their investigation. If they asked us for any substantive support, I’m sure we would of course be willing and open and ready to assist. I don’t know that that request will come in. These are all events that happened inside Israel. So you think about how you conduct that type of a criminal investigation. It’s people who were on the ground that would conduct it, and of course Israel has full capacity to do so. But of course, if they asked for our assistance, we would be ready to assist in any way – any way that was useful.

QUESTION: Last question. The parents of Evan Gershkovich told our channel this morning that the President promised them to do whatever it takes to bring him home and they are – I can send you the (inaudible) but they are essentially disappointed at this point because it appears the administration has not done so. Can you share anything about State’s efforts?

MR MILLER: I will say I saw that interview, and what his family is going through is unimaginable. I don’t think any of us – any of us who have children, it’s hard to imagine your child being held as Evan has been for months now. Should have been released a long time ago. We have made multiple proposals for his release, as well as for the release of Paul Whelan. We are consistently, are constantly discussing this issue with our allies and our partners who can assist us. Not a week goes by without intense activity to bring Paul and Evan home.

And I will say that in recent weeks we made a new and significant proposal to secure Paul and Evan’s release. That proposal was rejected by Russia. Shouldn’t have to make these proposals; they never should have been arrested in the first place. They should both be released immediately. But we have made a number of proposals and including a substantial one in recent weeks. And we will continue to work every day to bring Evan Gershkovich and Paul Whelan home. There is no higher priority for the Secretary of State; there is no higher priority for the President.

Yeah.

QUESTION: To follow up on that, can you give us any more details on what the proposal entails?

MR MILLER: I can’t. It was a – we have made a number of proposals now to secure both of their release. We’ve been public about having done so, and we have always declined to release the details. But this was a new proposal in recent weeks, it was a significant proposal, and it was rejected by the Russians. But it does not – it will not deter us from continuing to do everything we can to try and bring both of them home.

QUESTION: At what level was that proposal?

MR MILLER: I’m just not going to get in – I’m just not going to get —

QUESTION: Is it the same channel you guys have been using this past —

MR MILLER: We have – we have pressed the importance of this case through a number of channels with the Russian Government. I’m not going to get into the details of how we communicate with them, but we have ways to communicate with them. We have ways to make offers known to them. And we will continue to do so, and we hope that we will be able to secure their release.

QUESTION: Has there been any communication between the Secretary and Lavrov since their last encounter back —

MR MILLER: There has not. There has not.

QUESTION: Just on this – hold on.

QUESTION: Just – yeah, on this.

MR MILLER: Yeah, go – I’ll come to you next.

QUESTION: This proposal, this new proposal in recent weeks, was it just for Evan or did it also include Paul Whelan?

MR MILLER: It was for both of them.

QUESTION: It was for both of them. And can you at all —

MR MILLER: Yeah, it was to bring both of them home. We have made clear all along we want – that we do not want to leave either one of them behind. We want to bring both Evan and Paul home.

QUESTION: Right. And when you say the Russians rejected that, do you mean they have rejected to engage with the United States on this, or they have taken the proposal, looked at it for a couple of days, and then came back and said this is not acceptable to them?

MR MILLER: I’m not going to get into the full details of our exchanges with the Russian Government, but they received the proposal. We know that they – let me just say they rejected it. This was not a case of them not having responded to us. They rejected the offer that was on the table.

QUESTION: Right. Were you able to engage with them on this directly, or was there a third-party intermediary?

MR MILLER: I’m just not going to get – I’m not going to get into any further details.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR MILLER: Leon, did you have a —

QUESTION: Those were exactly my questions.

MR MILLER: Okay, okay.

QUESTION: A follow-up on the proposal?

MR MILLER: Yeah, go ahead.

QUESTION: Did the proposal contain anything about Alsu Kurmasheva?

MR MILLER: I’m just not going – I’m not going to – this was a proposal that related to Paul and Evan, two American citizens who we have determined to be wrongfully detained. It was not for other detainees, and I’m not going to talk to other —

QUESTION: Some of us had a chance last week to meet with Alsu’s family. Her husband was in town. What he told us was that her captives had been telling Alsu in jail that the United States does not care about her case; they are not doing anything, in fact, on behalf of her. Can you suggest anything new, anything that we have talked in this room before, that would suggest otherwise?

MR MILLER: So first, we very much care about her case. We care about her. We care about the safety and security of every American overseas. We are following the case closely. We remain deeply concerned about the extension of her pre-trial detention. We take seriously our commitment to assist U.S. citizens who have been detained overseas, and we will continue to do so. We have not made at this point any further determinations with respect to that case.

QUESTION: Can you come back more for a different topic later?

MR MILLER: Sure.

QUESTION: Can I follow up on that?

MR MILLER: Go ahead.

QUESTION: One more thing on this. When you say proposal, Matt, you mean you have, the United States has, offered to release or commute the sentence of two people in the United States, jailed Russians, in exchange for —

MR MILLER: I appreciate the attempt. When I say a proposal, I mean that we made a proposal. And I am not going to – I’m just – I’m just not – I understand the question. I’m just not —

QUESTION: I mean, can we assume the proposal is for a hostage swap?

MR MILLER: I am just not going to get into any further details.

QUESTION: Okay.

QUESTION: Matt?

QUESTION: Can I have a follow-up very briefly on that?

MR MILLER: Yeah, yeah, go ahead.

QUESTION: I don’t know if you can tell us, but are the Gershkoviches aware that a – about this proposal before now?

MR MILLER: I am not going to – I am not going to speak to our conversations with the family members. We always keep those confidential.

QUESTION: Matt?

MR MILLER: They are certainly welcome to, but we never talk about them, other than to say that we remain in touch with Evan Gershkovich’s family, we remain in touch with Paul Whelan’s family, but we don’t talk about the details of those engagements publicly.

QUESTION: Just a quick follow-up on the Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty journalist, Alsu Kurmasheva. You were asked yesterday. So Evan was determined as wrongly detained less than two weeks after he was arrested or detained by Russia. And then Alsu was arrested or detained in October, and it’s been more than six weeks. What is the reason that she has not been determined by the State Department as wrongfully detained?

MR MILLER: So every case is different. Some, the facts and circumstances are very clear that we’re able to look at it. Remember we are not just looking at an individual case when we look at that case. We are looking at, among other things, how that individual is being treated in comparison to other individuals charged with the same crimes, for example. So we always are looking at very fact-specific determinations, and that you cannot take one case where – with one fact set and compare it to another case with a different fact set, and say that it means that you can come to the same conclusion in the same amount of time.

What we try to do is gather all the information that is available to us, to look at that information, to compare it to different cases, look at a number of pieces of information oftentimes that aren’t known to the public that are known to the United States Government, and make our determinations.

As I have said with respect to this case, and as I have said with respect to other cases, the fact that a wrongful determination – wrongful detention determination has not been made at any specific moment in time is not necessarily an indication that one will not be made in the future. We are constantly looking at these cases and making our best assessments as we can, based on the facts, based on the law.

QUESTION: Has the Secretary been getting the – got the chance to reply to the letter from the U.S. Congress?

MR MILLER: We just got it yesterday. I am sure we have not sent a response yet.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Matt, thank you. Just to go back to these sanctions, visa sanctions – there has been an uptick in violence in the West Bank, significantly so in the past few months leading up to this war. Granted, there’s been settler violence for years in the West Bank. Correct me if I’m wrong, but this is the first time the U.S. is sanctioning extremist settlers in many years.

MR MILLER: You’re not wrong.

QUESTION: Was there a determining factor as to why now? Why is this only just happening, given that there was a significant surge of violence in the months leading up to this war? Why is the U.S. only doing this now?

MR MILLER: So there was a surge in violence leading up to October 7th. There has been a significant increase from that already heightened level of violence since October 7th. And I will answer it by talking about the first thing that we have done, which is to impress upon the Government of Israel the conclusion of the United States that they need to do more to take action to stop extremist settler violence and to hold accountable extremist settlers who commit acts of violence. We have raised that in a number of conversations with the Government of Israel. The White House has made public that the President has raised that directly with Prime Minister Netanyahu in their conversations. The Secretary has raised it as recently as last Thursday when we were in Israel.

And in all those conversations we made clear that while we expected the Government of Israel to take action, the United States was ready and wiling to take our own action if we didn’t see them take actions of their own.

So we have not seen sufficient level of actions by the Government of Israel that we think hold people properly accountable. They have taken some steps. They’ve held some people. They’ve put some people in administrative detention. We have made clear we think that when the facts support it, people should be prosecuted if they have committed acts of violence. And so we’ve taken the actions that we, the United States Government, can take. That does not obviate the need for the Government of Israel to take its own actions, and we will continue to be clear with them about it.

QUESTION: And just one follow-up. And this, again, may be an old figure, but some 15 percent worth of Israeli settlers have American citizenship. I know you’ve been asked about this before. Is there going to be a way to hold American Israelis to account who may have committed violence? I have a feeling you’re going to say State doesn’t comment on this. Who do we need to ask about this? What is the process for that?

MR MILLER: Yeah, a few things. So number one, with respect to the policy that we announced today, we cannot issue visa bans to American citizens. Obviously, they don’t need visas to enter the United States. Number two, it is the Government of Israel that has the responsibility to hold extremist settlers responsible. That includes settlers of any nationality who are committing violent acts of – or against Palestinians. Number three, I’ve been asked sometimes whether we would take our own law enforcement actions. Obviously, we don’t speak to this from the State Department. It’s a question for the Department of Justice, and you shouldn’t – you shouldn’t interpret my declining to comment on that as any sign of activity other than that I would never comment on law enforcement actions from this podium.

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: Thank you. On the settlers violence, will Ben-Gvir be on this list? Do we expect, like, you will name leaders of the settlers movement?

MR MILLER: We are prohibited by law from publicly naming anyone who is designated for a visa restriction as a result of this policy.

QUESTION: Okay. I have like three quick follow-up on something that you said yesterday. You said yesterday that you assumed that Hamas does not want to release these women for fear that they are going to talk about sexual violence or rape. So if we follow this logic, that means Hamas will never release them because they never want the story to be told. Is this something we can go through?

MR MILLER: So I hope Hamas will release all the hostages they are holding, especially the women and girls that they continue to hold. So they have released some hostages. There are others that they continue to hold, including women and girls. They had made clear that as part – during the pause they would release them. They changed their mind. I hope they will change it again and let them go free.

QUESTION: Okay. And also you said yesterday that Hamas has weapons in churches. Is there some evidence you talk about, or you just – like when you talk about hospitals and schools and you lumped up churches as well?

MR MILLER: I think I said mosques, if I – if I —

QUESTION: You said churches.

MR MILLER: I meant to say mosques in speaking of Gaza.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR MILLER: So there is ample public evidence – not supplied by the U.S. Government, but ample public evidence of them having fought in —

QUESTION: Yes. I just wanted to clear the churches. Okay.

MR MILLER: — of them having concealed weapons and hid their terrorist infrastructure and launched terrorist attacks from inside mosques inside Gaza.

QUESTION: And finally, you said genocide – that you have a clear definition of what is genocide. I assume there is no politics involved; it’s just a clear-cut understanding of what is the definition according to international law. Is that true?

MR MILLER: Correct.

QUESTION: Okay. So why it took the U.S. decades to declare the Armenian genocide? Was not politics involved in here?

MR MILLER: I will not speak to determinations that happened well before my time here at the podium.

QUESTION: No, but I meant like politics can be involved in —

MR MILLER: I understand. I call tell you that we don’t take politics into our determinations that we make here.

QUESTION: Okay. So this administration doesn’t, but the previous —

MR MILLER: I did not say that. Those are your words, not mine.

QUESTION: Okay, thank you.

MR MILLER: Okay. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you so much. I am – I have two questions. One is on the counterterrorism report of 2022 on Bangladesh suggested that the government, with assistance from the U.S., they have been actively combating militants, leading to a decrease in terrorist incident in Bangladesh. However, the concern raised that the political violence tied to the general election is perceived as a potential risk for the resurgence of militant groups. What is your opinion? Can you suggest any plan to assist with the government in this point?

MR MILLER: So we have made clear that we want to see a free and fair and peaceful election in Bangladesh, and that continues to be our policy. That continues to be the focus of our engagement with the Bangladeshi Government.

QUESTION: It was not – it was about terror – the raise of terrorism and the – not about the election.

MR MILLER: I understand. We released a report yesterday or in the last few days. I don’t have any further comment than what’s contained in that report.

QUESTION: And —

MR MILLER: Go ahead. No, go – we’re trying to move around. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you, Matthew. Thank you, Matthew. A few questions. One, what’s the State Department’s view on the current outbreak that’s affecting Chinese children? Will the State Department support Republicans’ call for a travel ban on China?

MR MILLER: So we will continue to monitor the situation closely and provide important updates should the situation change. I would say for now I would refer you to the CDC for any updates on respiratory illnesses in the PRC. As – this point, the CDC has said publicly it does not have any evidence that it’s a novel pathogen.

QUESTION: And reportedly, Republican senators are struggling to reach an agreement with Democrats on funding for border security, which is a contingency for the GOP in Congress to support further funding for Ukraine. Is the department worried that funding for Ukraine won’t be allocated by the end of the year, as it is set out run out, according to OMB?

MR MILLER: So we have made very clear at every level of this administration that Congress needs to act to fund security assistance to Ukraine, to fund economic assistance to Ukraine, to fund not just security assistance to Israel but humanitarian assistance to the Palestinian people, which we have been providing and we want to provide more. We are at the bottom of the barrel when it comes to our ability to provide security assistance to Ukraine. Ukraine is about to enter what we know will be a very difficult winter, when we’ve seen Russia launch attacks on critical Ukrainian infrastructure that they use to enable people to heat their homes during the winter.

So it is our position in this administration that we need to stand by our partner at this difficult time. We need to continue to support them in their fight against Russia, and we hope that the U.S. Congress will be there as well.

QUESTION: And lastly, is there any evidence that U.S. funding of UNRWA contributed to the October 7 attacks by Hamas?

MR MILLER: No, there is not at all.

Go ahead, Alex.

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: Just quickly, Matt, the topic of Ukraine, can you please confirm reports that Secretary will appear on the Hill today to brief the members on aid to Ukraine?

MR MILLER: So the Secretary is on the Hill today. He met – or I think he’s – he’s either meeting right now or just concluded a meeting with members of the House of Representatives. After that, has a meeting with all senators. It’s the Secretary as well as other members of the cabinet who are up making the case for why this supplemental is so critical, not just for the future of Ukraine but for the United States interest as well.

As we have always made clear, it is a critical national security interest of the United States to help Ukraine defend itself against Russia’s aggression. So the Secretary’s up making that case. We will continue to make that case in the coming days. We have just a few weeks until the end of the year, and we hope that Congress will act as quickly as possible.

QUESTION: Thanks so much. Moving to Azerbaijan, if I may.

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: Following yesterday’s announcement of assistant secretary’s trip to Azerbaijan, he showed up on the Hill three weeks ago and he made a case that they will – knew this is not, let’s say, business as usual with Azerbaijan as long as they don’t, let’s say, solve the Karabakh conflict. The fact that he is headed to Azerbaijan, is this a departure from newly announced policy?

MR MILLER: No, not at all. We never said that we’re not going to continue to engage with Azerbaijan. That would be against our interests as the United States of America. We think it would be against the interests of peace and security in the region for us to just drop all of our diplomatic engagements with Azerbaijan.

We continue to engage directly with both Azerbaijan and Armenia to make clear – for example, in the case of Azerbaijan – where we have concerns. We’ve been concerned with the recent trend of detaining journalists. We continue to urge them to respect the human rights and fundamental freedoms of all, something that I’ve spoken to from this podium in the past. And we also continue to engage with them to urge them to seek a durable peace with Armenia, and that’s something that will continue to be the focus of our diplomatic engagements.

QUESTION: Will the secretary raise the case, ongoing crackdown against independent reporters, during his visit in Azerbaijan?

MR MILLER: I do not want to preview the comments. He’s there – I think he’s getting there tonight; he has meetings tomorrow. I should not preview private diplomatic conversations before they’ve happened. But I will say that human rights is always on the table for the United States of America when we have these sorts of diplomatic engagements.

QUESTION: Thanks so much.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR MILLER: Yeah, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. I wanted to ask first about Ukraine, just following up on that. Has the U.S. given any assurances to Zelenskyy that funding will continue or they can give any kind of support if the supplemental doesn’t pass?

MR MILLER: So one of the things about the Ukrainian Government is they are very sophisticated observers of the U.S. political system. Now almost two years into this war we’ve been engaging with them. They have their own engagements with Congress. I don’t think there’s any question about the Executive Branch’s support for Ukraine. We don’t think there’s any question about the Legislative Branch’s support for Ukraine. If you put funding for Ukraine in an up or down vote in front of both houses of Congress, it is our belief that it would pass.

So President Zelenskyy has engaged directly with members of the Senate and members of the House of Representatives. I think they can make their own assessments about where things stand in Congress, but I will say it is critical that Congress act. We cannot fund – we cannot continue to fund Ukraine’s security assistance without additional support from Congress. There’s just statutory limitations. We are at the end of our drawdown authority. We’ve exhausted over 97 percent of what was allocated. We only have a very small amount left and we will exhaust those packages in the coming weeks, and so we very much need Congress to act and we need them act as soon as possible.

QUESTION: And just lastly, on the vessel attacks over the weekend in the Red Sea, Jake yesterday said that they were looking at forming some kind of international task force that could help protect ships as they make their way through the Red Sea. I just wanted to know if there’s been any movement on that and which countries have been approached to help on that kind of —

MR MILLER: Well, I don’t have any new updates to announce since 24 hours ago. It’s something that we continue to engage in with our allies and partners, and I think the point that the National Security Advisor was making is that this is not – the Houthis’ attacks on international shipping is not just a concern – should not just be a concern to countries in the region. It should be a concern to every country in the world because it threatens the global economy. There are ships that come through that area that carry goods destined for the entire world, and so we will work with our allies and partners to try to develop a coordinated response to these increase in Houthi attacks.

QUESTION: Does that include Arab partners as well as Western partners?

MR MILLER: We would welcome support from anyone in this effort.

QUESTION: Okay. Thank you.

QUESTION: Thank you. I have two questions, please. U.S. Defense Secretary said that Israel will only win in Gaza if civilians are protected. In fact, the most who killed are civilians – children and women – so that mean Israel is losing? And when this war will end?

MR MILLER: I do not think I would draw that conclusion from what the Secretary of Defense said. The Secretary of Defense was making a similar but I think fairly pointed point – similar point to what others in the administration have made. You have heard the Secretary say that far too many civilians have been killed in Gaza. You have heard the Secretary say that – Secretary Blinken – that Israel needs to do more to minimize civilian harm and protect civilians from harm. That was the focus of our trip to Israel last week, and I think what the – I shouldn’t speak to what the Secretary of Defense says because there’s another spokesperson across the river who does that, but I think he was making the larger point that the way Israel conducts this war matters, and I will let his spokesperson elaborate on that further.

And with respect to the prediction, I just can’t make that prediction.

QUESTION: Today – or yesterday – today I talked with my cousins. He – in Gaza, he lives in Gaza. He’s not related to Hamas. He told me we are hungry, we don’t have food, no water for my children, for my grandchildren. He told me everything is targeting – human, unhuman, green. He told me this is – you talk about future in Gaza; they will remove Gaza from the map. What are you talking about?

MR MILLER: So —

QUESTION: So please, consider for a while or think if you are – if you put yourself on their place, what do you think? What you are going to do?

MR MILLER: So first of all, let me just say I’m sorry to hear that account. I know it’s a family member. That is extraordinarily difficult, and I’m sorry to hear it. I will say that what the United States is doing to address that very situation is, number one, making clear to Israel that we do not want to see this campaign conducted in the south the way it has been conducted in the north. We are four or five days into this campaign in the south; it’s just started again after the pause. It’s too early to make, I think, overall assessments about how it’s going, but certainly I know for civilians on the ground conditions are incredibly difficult.

We are engaging with the Government of Israel at every level to try to increase the amount of humanitarian assistance that is getting in so people do have food and people do have water. We are working with UNRWA to try to identify sites where civilians can go to be safe from harm and working with the Government of Israel to ensure that those sites are protected and are not targeted.

There is not enough being done right now. The level of assistance that’s getting in is not sufficient. It needs to go up, and we’ve made that clear to the Government of Israel. The level of fuel that is going in is not sufficient. It needs to go up, and we have made that clear to the Government of Israel. And we will continue to engage with them on every level, precisely to try and address the very real human suffering that your family member is going through and we know so many civilians in Gaza are going through.

QUESTION: And when this war will end, please? This illegitimate war —

MR MILLER: I just – there is no way that I can stand here and make that type of a – of prediction.

QUESTION: Okay, thank you.

MR MILLER: Yeah, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you very much, Matt.

MR MILLER: No, no, I was – go —

QUESTION: Please, please.

QUESTION: Can you address for us quickly some matter – staying on south of Gaza. The Wall Street Journal had a report on Israel sharing plans with the U.S. about possibly flooding the Hamas tunnels with sea water. There’s concern about the environmental impact that would have, as well as on the structure of buildings above the tunnels, which is, as you know, a vast network. Do you have any comment on that?

MR MILLER: So I’m just not going to comment on reports of actions that the Israeli Government may or may not take. I don’t think it would be appropriate for me to do so. I will just say that in all of our conversations with them, we urge them to take in account – into account humanitarian needs, humanitarian imperatives in making all of these types of decisions.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR MILLER: Yeah, go ahead.

QUESTION: Can I follow up what you just said? You said there’s not enough being done right now in terms of humanitarian aid and fuel into Gaza. You mean that Israeli Government is not doing enough?

MR MILLER: There is not enough fuel, there is not enough food, there’s not enough water getting in. The number of trucks currently getting in, around 100 a day – I think it was 100 yesterday – is lower than it was during the pause. It needs to be higher.

QUESTION: Right. I understand that.

MR MILLER: And we are engaging with the Israeli Government to encourage them to allow more trucks to get in.

QUESTION: Okay. So you’re – it’s – the onus is on the Israeli Government, right?

MR MILLER: Correct. Correct.

QUESTION: And in terms of – going back to the civilians question, Secretary Blinken was there, we were with him, and he made it very clear he doesn’t want the southern Gaza offensive to look like northern Gaza. And you’re saying it’s too early, but when do you think it won’t be too early to make an assessment? How long the U.S. is going to wait to make that assessment?

MR MILLER: I just don’t think I can speak to that with any level of specificity. I will say that we have seen them conducting the campaign in some ways in the south in a different fashion than they did in the north. I talked yesterday about how they are publishing more limited evacuation zones, where there are Hamas fighters embedded in civilian infrastructure, and they are identifying specific geographic areas inside cities rather than say: all of Khan Yunis evacuate. They’re identifying specific areas where they know there are Hamas fighters embedded, and they want to be able to take a legitimate fight to those Hamas fighters. And they are asking people, appropriately, to evacuate from those areas. That is a difference than from the north, than what happened – or it’s a difference from what happened in the north in their campaign there —

QUESTION: Right.

MR MILLER: — when they asked the entire city. But there’s – let me just finish. That said, the point that the Secretary made to them and the point he made public or that he said publicly is it’s not just intent that matters, it’s results. I very much get your question. I think four days into this campaign is a little too early to draw any definitive conclusions about results. But we will continue to monitor what’s happening, and we will continue to press them to do everything they can to minimize civilian harm. And when we have differences with how they’re conducting their campaign, we will make that known to them, as we have since the beginning of this conflict.

QUESTION: Right. But I mean, do you have any expectation that in the coming days they’re going to shift to different tactics? You have any anticipation that they’re going to use airstrikes less and more surgical ground offensives that you think in its entirety it’s going to look different, and there will be a smaller – like a reduction in the death toll?

MR MILLER: I —

QUESTION: Because I’m trying to understand why you’re – you guys are waiting.

MR MILLER: I would say I don’t think it is appropriate for me to comment on what the military campaign might look like in terms of airstrikes versus a ground operation. It’s an ongoing conflict. Those are obviously sensitive decisions that the Israeli Government has to make. I shouldn’t talk about them from here. What we will talk to them about are how they conduct those operations, and we’ll continue to do so.

QUESTION: Follow up on this?

QUESTION: Matt, can I just ask —

MR MILLER: Yeah, go ahead.

QUESTION: You said it’s too early to make a definitive decision on – but, well, what about an interim decision? I mean, surely you’ve seen enough in the last four days to come to a conclusion about whether the Israelis are following through on what they committed to you, not just on the intent but also on the result. And I’m not asking for —

MR MILLER: Yeah, fair.

QUESTION: — a final grade here, and not even maybe a midterm grade. But it’s been going on for several days.

MR MILLER: So —

QUESTION: And surely you’re in a position to be able to judge whether what you think – what you’ve seen so far you think meets their commitments.

MR MILLER: So I will – let me try to divide these into two things. With respect to airstrikes, I don’t – I’m not in a position to assess strikes and individual strikes that have happened over the last few days. We’ve talked about this before. It’s all – it’s very tough to do that from here when you don’t know the targets that were – the Hamas militants that were the targets of any individual strike. You don’t know with any individual strike the collateral damage. It’s very tough to make those determinations from here.

I will say with respect to other aspects of how they conduct the campaign, you have seen them take the steps I just outlined that are an improvement from what they did in the north.

That said, you see the reports from UNRWA and from other UN agencies that the places where civilians are going are overcrowded, they need more humanitarian assistance, they need more food and water, and in that respect we don’t think Israel is doing enough. We think they need to do more to allow humanitarian assistance in. That’s why I said we want the number of trucks to increase. A hundred a day is not enough. Seventy thousand liters of fuel going in a day is not enough for the humanitarian needs. And so we want to see improvement on both of those points.

QUESTION: Okay. So on both of those points?

MR MILLER: Humanitarian assistance – the trucks, fuel. Yeah.

QUESTION: Okay. Well, that —

MR MILLER: Trucks are inclusive of food, water, medicine. Yeah.

QUESTION: But that’s – right, but that’s one point. So – but you’re – so you’re – okay.

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: But you’re able to – you’re able to make a judgment that you don’t think that they’re doing enough on that – on that side, but when you talk about the airstrikes you say you’re not ready to make a determination, and yet the entire message that the Secretary and the Vice President gave to the Israelis over the last week and over the weekend was that we do not want to see a repeat of what happened in the north in the south. And a repeat of what happened in the north would be airstrikes.

MR MILLER: It’s – so a few things. Number one, it has never been our policy that Israel should not conduct airstrikes, full —

QUESTION: I’m not saying —

MR MILLER: Yeah, I know. I know. Just —

QUESTION: I’m not saying it has been.

MR MILLER: I’m just making that clear. There are legitimate military targets, including high-value targets that they have a right to go after because those Hamas fighters have said they will continue to launch individual attacks. I’m not able to comment on specific strikes. It’s hard to assess from here all those, but —

QUESTION: I don’t think anyone has said – nobody is asking you to comment —

MR MILLER: But no – I know, but just let me – let me finish.

QUESTION: — on specific strike on target X or target Y.

MR MILLER: I can – I know, but let me finish my answer. I can talk to you about trucks and fuel because we have very clear metrics about what the people in Gaza need. We have – we know how much fuel they need to be able to power desalinization —

QUESTION: And you – and you have —

MR MILLER: — and the amount that’s going in now is not enough. We know how much water they need – it’s not enough.

QUESTION: And you have – and you have no metrics on airstrikes —

MR MILLER: I’m telling you with —

QUESTION: — or the amount of damage from airstrikes?

MR MILLER: So there are – there are two – there are two ways to look at that question. One is assessing a specific strike, and I just got into that, why we couldn’t do it there. Two is looking at the totality of a campaign and how it’s conducted, and four days into this one, I think it’s a little premature to draw any conclusions. But as I said, or as – not as I said, as the Secretary said, we’re going to be watching this very closely and we will not hesitate —

QUESTION: Well, I mean, if you’re watching it very closely —

MR MILLER: — and we —

QUESTION: — surely you have come to a conclusion about what you think in the early days, in the first four days, or you’re —

MR MILLER: And I have just – I have just outlined some of our conclusions about it. Other things we need more time to watch. But we will be very clear about what we see with the Israeli Government and where we think they need to make improvements.

QUESTION: All right.

QUESTION: Just to follow up —

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: — on this, on these safe zones or whatever you call it. I mean, you mentioned yourself UNRWA, and they’re saying that it’s actually creating even more of a problem in terms of humanitarian assistance because they’re coming into these tiny or very narrow places. So it’s actually – in a sense you made a big deal out of this, but it’s actually in a sense making things worse and you’re displacing – well, the war is displacing again all these people which have to go – so what is your comment on that?

MR MILLER: There is a – there is a – just a very difficult problem to solve here. And it all goes back to the fact that Hamas continues to hide behind civilians in civilian neighborhoods, under apartment buildings, under schools and hospitals and mosques. And so, yes, the places where – I mean, this is just the nature of the problem in that Israel has a right to conduct military campaigns to prevent October 7th from ever happening again and to try to take out the leaders who plotted October 7th and want to do it again. They’re all hiding in – they’re all hiding behind civilians.

So the choice is: don’t displace some level of people and just attack civilian sites without asking the civilians to leave – that’s obviously unacceptable – versus trying to get them to move so you can carry out what is a legitimate military campaign. What we’ve said is we don’t want to see mass displacement on the scale that happened in the north. There has to be some level of temporary displacement or you’re going to see even higher civilian deaths. And so what we want to see is that carried out in as humane a fashion as possible, and that does mean trying to get more humanitarian assistance into those sites. But it is absolutely a terrible problem that is very difficult to solve, and we are working to try to address it the best we can, but we are in the middle of a war here with Israel facing an opponent really unlike any other. I mean, if you think about other conventional wars, the army is not typically hiding all of its troops underneath civilians.

QUESTION: Matt?

MR MILLER: Yeah, Michel.

QUESTION: Did the U.S. asked – or ask Egypt to open Rafah crossing for the Palestinian civilians who want to flee?

MR MILLER: So we are not – let me say a few – that’s a complicated question. There are a number of Palestinian civilians who have left via Rafah. Those who are wounded have been – in a number of cases, have been evacuated, so they can seek medical assistance outside of Gaza.

But the thing that we have heard from Palestinian leaders and from others in the region is that they don’t want to see the Palestinian people leave their land. They don’t want to see the Palestinian people displaced. There is obviously a well known history in this regard. And that – the policy of the United States is that the Palestinian people should not be displaced, so that’s why we’re trying to get humanitarian assistance into Gaza.

QUESTION: And second, does the administration still believe or think that Iran doesn’t want to expand the war in the Middle East?

MR MILLER: So you have not heard me make that assessment from here. What we have said is we are sending every signal we can to Iran that they should not want this conflict to be expanded. We have made very clear it is not in anyone’s interest in the region for this conflict to be expanded. The United States certainly doesn’t want it to be expanded. But at the same time, we will take the measures that are necessary to protect our personnel in the region and our interests in the region.

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: Is the U.S. aware of any Americans who are among the 16,000 who have been killed in Gaza?

MR MILLER: No. We again have this one person that we have been – we’ve had reports of a death of an American citizen for several – I think several weeks now in northern Gaza and because of the situation there have not been able to verify that report. And we’ve not – we’ve not received reports of any additional Americans other than that one that we have not yet confirmed.

QUESTION: And do you have any information on how this person was reportedly killed?

MR MILLER: We have some information, but I’m hesitant to speak to it from here given it’s unconfirmed information. The entire thing may not be accurate, so I’d like to confirm it.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you, sir. So we have seen your comments yesterday regarding India’s failed assassination attempt on Khalistani Sikh leader Gurpatwant Singh Pannun in New York, and you directed journalists to the DOJ. But what is happening at the diplomatic level? What kind of message State Department conveyed to the Indian leadership?

MR MILLER: So I also spoke to this yesterday, and I said I wouldn’t comment on the underlying substance because it is an ongoing law enforcement matter and it would be inappropriate for me to do so when DOJ is presenting a case in court. But I also made clear that we have noted at the most senior levels of this government – the Secretary of State has raised this directly with his foreign counterpart that we take this issue very seriously. They told us they would conduct an investigation. They have publicly announced an investigation. And now we’ll wait to see the results of the investigation, but it’s something we take very seriously.

QUESTION: So Indian Government is still not cooperating with the Canadian investigation into the murder of another Khalistani leader, Hardeep Singh Nijjar. So how confident and optimistic you are that Indian Government will cooperate with the DOJ?

MR MILLER: So, two things. One, we have urged them to cooperate with the Canadian investigation. And number two, with respect to their own investigations – their own investigation I was speaking to, not the DOJ investigation – with their own investigation, we – they have said that they will conduct it. We are looking forward to seeing the results of that investigation, and I’m not going to make any assessments, obviously, before the investigation itself is completed.

QUESTION: But do you think this is an attack on the U.S. sovereignty?

MR MILLER: Is attack on what?

QUESTION: U.S. sovereignty.

MR MILLER: I’m not going to speak beyond what – the information that’s contained in an indictment for I think what are – for what I think are fairly obvious reasons.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Matthew, good afternoon. The American hostages held by Hamas – does the U.S. believe that they’re all alive?

MR MILLER: Again, I’m just not able to make any – I’m not going to make any assessments about what we know or don’t know about the hostages.

QUESTION: If there’s no ceasefire, can they still be rescued?

MR MILLER: Again, we are working every day to try and return hostages. In the last pause, you saw over a hundred hostages released, including two American citizens. We had previously secured the release of two other American citizens over a month ago. And we will continue – whether there is a pause or not, we will continue to work to try and secure the release of all those American citizens.

QUESTION: And one more on the Philippines, if I may take it to the —

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: Okay. So the other day, a couple days ago, a Catholic mass – terrorists targeted a Catholic mass bombing it, killing and wounding dozens of worshippers there. The Islamic State claimed responsibility. I know the State Department forcefully condemned the attack in a statement. But I’d just like to know: What’s the State Department’s message directly to the terrorists who blew up that mass?

MR MILLER: Well, we strongly condemn that attack. We condemn any terrorist attack. We condemn any attacks at all targeting religious organizations, targeting churches, or whether it be mosques or schools. The United States always takes that position and we do so here.

All right. We’ll do —

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR MILLER: We’ll do one more and then we’ll wrap up for today. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Yeah. It’s —

MR MILLER: Go ahead.

QUESTION: It’s been reported that member of Congress reviewed a plan to facilitate the displacement of Gazans so to settle in several Mideastern country like Türkiye, Egypt, Iraq, and Jordan. Have you heard about this report, and what’s your comment?

MR MILLER: I haven’t. There are 535 members of Congress. I don’t speak for any of them. I will make clear what the position of the United States is, which the Secretary has made clear, which is that we opposed any forced displacement of the Palestinian people.

And with that, we’ll wrap for today. Thanks, everyone.

QUESTION: Thank you, Matt.

MR MILLER: Thanks.

(The briefing was concluded at 2:16 p.m.)

# # #

Department Press Briefing – December 4, 2023

HomeDepartment Press Briefing – December 4, 2023

hide

Department Press Briefing – December 4, 2023

Matthew Miller, Department Spokesperson

Washington, D.C.

December 4, 2023

12:46 p.m. EST

MR MILLER: Good afternoon, everyone.

QUESTION: Good afternoon.

MR MILLER: Does it seem dark in here?

QUESTION: Yes, it seems very dark.

MR MILLER: Yeah, it seems dark to me. Hopefully just you guys, not me.

QUESTION: What’s that? It’s just our mood.

MR MILLER: Just you. It’s just your mood? Okay. (Laughter.) Well, with that, with that auspicious opening, let me –

QUESTION: We just want to know – I mean, is it good for – is it okay for the cameras? Will they see you?

MR MILLER: We need the – I think we need the supplemental to pass ASAP. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: Well, is that somebody cutting back on the electricity?

MR MILLER: Yeah, right. Yeah, I don’t know, but it is dark in here. I can see you. I can see you, Matt. And more to the point, I can hear you, so – (laughter).

QUESTION: No, I’m more concerned about the cameras being able to see you. Can they?

QUESTION: There’s enough light on him.

MR MILLER: No, I think we’ll be –

QUESTION: Is there? Okay, all right.

MR MILLER: All right.

QUESTION: You have nothing?

MR MILLER: I’m ready to take your questions.

QUESTION: Okay, all right. Let’s start with Gaza and Middle East. Last week, several U.S. officials, including the Secretary and the Vice President, others, talked about the importance of Israel not repeating what it did in the north in the south. And I am wondering now that the operations in the south have begun, if you think that they are doing or following your advice.

MR MILLER: Let me say a few things about it. One, I think it’s too early to make a definitive assessment. The Secretary was very clear about how we want to judge this based on results, not based on intent.

I will say that in the first few days of this – of renewed military campaign against the south, we have seen some things that don’t look like the operation as it was conducted in the north. For example, in the north, at the commencement of operations, you saw them ask or order more than a million people to move. We’ve seen a much more targeted request for evacuations here where the Israeli Defense Forces have identified specific neighborhoods where they plan to conduct military operations and urged in advance of those operations the people in those neighborhoods to move, rather than telling an entire city or an entire region to vacate their homes. So that is an improvement on what’s happened before. They have instructed them to move to areas that we know are deconfliction zones. It’s one of the things we discussed with them last week. So UN-supported facilities where people can be out of harm’s way. So that is an improvement.

But what the Secretary made clear in our meetings with the prime minister and other officials of the Israeli Government on Thursday is that we do not want to see a military campaign in the south that looks like the north. And what we mean by that: We do not want to see the same level of civilian casualties; we do not want to see the same level of mass displacement. They briefed us on plans that were very detailed that they said were intended to avoid mass displacement and civilian casualties. But as the Secretary made clear, it’s not just intent that matters; it’s results. And we are watching very closely and will continue to watch very closely before we draw any definitive assessments.

QUESTION: Okay. But there are already reports that the operation in the south has taken a large civilian toll. Do you not – you don’t have a – you still think it’s too early to say?

MR MILLER: I think it’s too early to draw a definitive assessment. I will say that unfortunately we do expect to see civilian casualties as a result of this campaign. That is sadly true in all wars; it is especially going to be true in a war in a crowded urban environment where the opponent, Hamas, is using civilians as human shields and hiding themselves, hiding their fighters, hiding their infrastructure, behind civilians.

So what we have made clear to Israel is that we expect them to comply with international humanitarian law and do everything they can to minimize civilian harm so we don’t see a repeat in the south of what we saw in the north. And with respect to that, we’re at the very early stage of the operation, and I think it’s too soon to draw a definitive conclusion.

Yes.

QUESTION: The Israeli Government is conducting this investigation to look at Hamas using rape as a weapon of war against Israeli women and girls on the 7th. They say they’ve now collected more than 1,500 eyewitness accounts of sexual assault, sexual violence, including rape against women and girls that day. Is that something that the Biden administration condemns? And also, have the Israelis shared any of that evidence with U.S. officials?

MR MILLER: I’m not going to speak to what they have and have not shared with us. We have been briefed extensively on a number of their findings. We don’t, of course, have our own independent assessments to make right now. We don’t have people on the ground conducting such assessments. But we have seen Hamas commit atrocities both on October 7th and since October 7th, and we obviously condemn those atrocities and support Israel’s actions to hold Hamas accountable for them.

QUESTION: On Friday, the UN secretary-general said – I’m paraphrasing, but seemed to say that every – all this evidence should be investigated. As far as I am aware, the UN has not confirmed that they will take up a separate independent investigation. Is that something —

MR MILLER: I’m not aware whether they are, but certainly we support an investigation. The Israeli Government is conducting one, and they have our full backing in doing that.

QUESTION: Last question for you is there are these reports now about during – this is about the Hannukah celebration period we’re about to go into – Jewish organizations canceling celebrations, menorah lightings. Something like that happened in London over the weekend. It also happened in Williamsburg, Virginia. I’m wondering if the State Department has a message for American Jews ahead of the holidays about how to approach public celebration.

MR MILLER: Yeah, I would say one of the very unfortunate, tragic things we have seen since October 7th is a rise in antisemitism both here in the United States and around the world. And we condemn antisemitism in the strongest possible terms. We oppose antisemitism wherever we see it. And of course, we tell American citizens always to make decisions based on their best safety and security assessments. And this is not a specific piece of – this is not a specific recommendation here that’s specific to any one city. As you know, the State Department does provide travel advice for events around the world, and we when we have updates to provide based on circumstances on the ground, we provide that.

So, but I would just say in general it is tragic that we have seen after the – after more Jews were killed on one day than any time since the Holocaust that one of the responses has been actually an increase in antisemitism. That is extremely tragic, and I think it’s incumbent upon everyone in positions of authority to speak out against it.

QUESTION: Just to come back to the Israeli offensive, I wondered if you could sort of talk to us a little bit about what is behind this messaging the end of last week and over the weekend. Is there an assessment – for example, the Vice President calling the death toll devastating and Secretary Austin talking about driving the population into the arms of the enemy. This suggests that the administration has come to some kind of conclusion that the way that the Israelis have been conducting these operations has not protected civilians. Is that – is that like – is there a finding or has there been some kind of assessment that has come out with that?

MR MILLER: I think you can take those comments at face value, just as you can take the Secretary’s comments not just last week but the ones he made in previous weeks at face value. You heard him say several weeks ago that far too many Palestinians have been killed as a result of this conflict. You heard him say before that that Israel needs to take additional steps to protect civilians. And we’ve had very direct conversations about steps that they can take to protect civilians, including as recently as last Thursday when we were in Israel.

So I don’t think it is a secret that we think that too many Palestinians were killed in the opening weeks of this conflict. We want to see Israel take additional steps to minimize civilian harm. We talked to that about them when we were in Israel last week. They briefed us on their plans. And if you go through their plans about how they intend to minimize civilian harm, you have to step back and remember that the Israeli military is one of the most professional militaries in the world. They have legal determinations that they make when conducting strikes. They go through procedures where they weigh civilian harm when they conduct any of these strikes. They have put in place these plans I mentioned a moment ago to evacuate specific neighborhoods to keep civilians out harm’s way rather than just telling an entire population to move.

So they are going about this with a certain degree of deliberateness to try to minimize civilian harm. But again, it’s not just the intent that matters; it’s the results. So we want to be – we have been very transparent with them about what our beliefs have been. The comments that the Secretary made publicly were the same comments that he made in the meeting with them, that we want to see them take additional steps and we’re going to be watching to see how they do.

QUESTION: And it’s been noted that, yeah, you’ve had these warnings to civilians, but at some points people have been told to go to certain areas or these areas will be safe, and then those areas have then been bombarded. Is that something that you’ve witnessed and are able to —

MR MILLER: So that is – it is exactly – so let me talk about it this way. So I think that was one of the criticisms of the first – of the first few weeks of this campaign, that people were told to move to the south without giving a specific place to go, and then there were attacks on Khan Younis after people had moved to Khan Younis.

One of the differences that the Israeli Government has proposed going forward is there are UN-designated facilities in Khan Younis, in Rafah city, in central Gaza, and in the south where the Israeli Defense Forces have directed people to go. And those places are on lists of deconfliction zones that should not be the target of military campaigns. So that is an improvement that we have seen – at least an intent, at least in their plans – and we’re going to see how it’s actually executed.

QUESTION: I think kind of the nature of the offensive itself, I thought – I guess I understood that in the initial northern phase there was this massive aerial bombardment and then – and then the ground operation. I guess we’re going through that again. Is the message there should be a more surgical ground operation without the preceding aerial bombardment? Because that’s where a lot of these civilian casualties seem to be coming from.

MR MILLER: I don’t want to speak to the specific military operations and military decisions the Government of Israel will have to make and our conversations with them about those tactics that they might pursue. I think it’d be inappropriate to do that.

What we have said is they need to take additional steps to protect civilians. I just went through some of the – what some of those steps are and some of those steps that we believe they are taking. But as opposed – there go the lights. But when it comes to specific tactical steps that they might take, I think I’ll keep those conversations private.

QUESTION: May I follow up on this?

MR MILLER: Yeah, Said. Go ahead.

QUESTION: So I understand you correctly, you’re saying that the killing of 700 Palestinians over a period of 24 —

MR MILLER: Said, I always —

QUESTION: No, no. I —

MR MILLER: I always like when I use my own words, not when you try to put words in my mouth.

QUESTION: Matt, I want to understand what you said properly.

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: You said that we have seen improvement. I’m asking you directly: You’re saying that the killing of 700 people in a 24-hour period is an improvement? So I’m just asking you to say yes or no —

MR MILLER: I don’t —

QUESTION: — in accordance with what you said.

MR MILLER: So Said, I don’t think you were listening very closely to what I said.

QUESTION: I was listening very closely, every single word.

MR MILLER: Well, clearly not, because what I said —

QUESTION: Right.

MR MILLER: – is we have seen improvement in their plans for Khan Yunis, their plans for the south. We have seen them evacuate specific neighborhoods —

QUESTION: Right.

MR MILLER: – rather than entire neighborhoods, so the numbers of displaced persons will hopefully be lower in southern Gaza than it was in the north. But when it comes to results, we are going to monitor it very closely. And I think I was pretty clear about that, and I think the Secretary was pretty clear about that on Thursday.

QUESTION: So give us a figure. What would be acceptable? What would be acceptable? Because you talked about —

MR MILLER: Said, we mourn the loss of every civilian life. We don’t want to see any civilians killed in this.

QUESTION: What have you done to really minimize that? Remember, Gaza is the size of Washington, D.C. When you tell people to move like now and they have nowhere to go – nowhere to go. They’re striking in Khan Yunis. They’re saying actually we’re hitting every place in Gaza. So where should people go?

MR MILLER: People should go —

QUESTION: What should be the end —

MR MILLER: Said, let’s take it one question at a time before – you asked a question. Let me answer it.

QUESTION: Great.

MR MILLER: People should go to the UN-designated sites where – that are on Israeli lists as deconfliction zones that should not be the target of military campaigns. There are already people who are sheltering in those. As the campaign moves to the south and Israel evacuates specific neighborhoods or orders specific neighborhoods to be evacuated, that is where people should go.

QUESTION: Okay. But you know – we know that they bomb UN facilities and so on. Let me ask you a couple of other questions. You said that Hamas committed atrocities. Right? Okay. Do you call the killing of 20,000 Palestinians an atrocity? Does that befit the term atrocity?

MR MILLER: Said, I was speaking to the intentional murdering of civilians that we saw Hamas commit. I don’t think – and correct me if I’m wrong – I don’t think there’s anyone questioning that Hamas intentionally killed civilians. That is by —

QUESTION: Well, have you —

MR MILLER: Let me – that is by definition an atrocity.

QUESTION: And you don’t think that Israel intentionally kills civilians?

MR MILLER: We think far too many —

QUESTION: When you bomb neighborhoods —

MR MILLER: I have not seen evidence that they’re intentionally killing civilians. We believe that far too many civilians have been killed. But again, this goes back to the underlying problem of this entire situation, which is that Hamas has embedded itself inside civilians – inside civilian homes, inside its mosques, in schools, in churches. It is Hamas that is putting these civilians in harm’s way.

I – for all the questions, and I understand why people stand up – I stand here and people ask me questions about what Israel should do. I’m happy to take those questions. I’m surprised I don’t hear more people saying, why doesn’t Hamas lay down its arms? Why doesn’t Hamas move out of schools?

QUESTION: So you’re asking —

MR MILLER: Why doesn’t Hamas take additional steps to protect civilians?

QUESTION: So you’re – okay.

MR MILLER: Because we think they should, as we think Israel should.

QUESTION: Okay. So you are asking Hamas to surrender. Is that what you’re asking them to do right now?

MR MILLER: We would welcome Hamas laying down its arms and surrendering at any point.

QUESTION: Hamas is not an army. They don’t have air force. They don’t have a navy. They don’t have artillery. They have none of these things. They don’t really have any kind of regular kind of structure —

MR MILLER: They —

QUESTION: – that they can conduct their surrender. Right?

MR MILLER: Said, they may not have a navy. They —

QUESTION: They —

MR MILLER: Oh, no, no, no, no, no. No, no. No. Let me finish. They may not have an air force. They have sufficient firepower to have killed 1,200 people on October 7th. So don’t tell me that Hamas can’t lay down their arms and take additional steps to protect civilians, let alone moving out of all the areas that are putting Palestinian civilians in harm’s way. They absolutely can. They could do it today if they cared at all about civilian life.

QUESTION: My last question to you. The UN – a former official in the UN, Mr. Mokhiber, said that the most clear-cut case of genocide – the Israeli bombardment and the killing of 20,000 people thus far is the most clear-cut case of genocide. Do you agree with him?

MR MILLER: So the State Department has a rigorous process for evaluating when some – what constitutes genocide, ethnic cleansing, or a crime against humanity. Those are terms we only use with very explicit care.

QUESTION: Right.

MR MILLER: You’ve seen us be very —

QUESTION: So —

MR MILLER: Said, let me – you’ve seen us be very deliberate about that in the past. We are monitoring the evolving situations and are examining facts as they develop. It’s an extremely challenging space to get all the information that’s – that might be available. But we support Israel’s right to continue to take action to ensure that Hamas can never conduct terrorist attacks like it did on October 7th again. And as part of that, we urge Israel to take all possible measures to minimize civilian harm, and I’ve just gone through a number of those measures.

QUESTION: But it doesn’t qualify for genocide? No?

MR MILLER: I just answered that.

Go ahead, Tracy.

QUESTION: Thank you. Going back to your answer to the question about the reports of rape of Israeli women by Hamas and use of sexual violence as a war crime – as a weapon of war, you said we’ve seen Hamas commit atrocities. We obviously condemn atrocities. But you didn’t use the words rape or sexual violence. And I’m wondering if there’s a reason for that and not a more explicit condemnation of rape.

MR MILLER: Look, only because we haven’t made an independent assessment, our own. We’ve obviously seen the reports that Hamas has committed sexual violence. They’ve committed rape. We have no reason at all to doubt those reports. When you look at all of the atrocities that Hamas carried out on October 7th and the atrocities that they’ve carried out since, the fact that they continue to hold women hostages, the fact that they continue to hold children hostages, the fact that it seems one of the reasons they don’t want to turn women over that they’ve been holding hostage and the reason this pause fell apart is they don’t want those women to be able to talk about what happened to them during their time in custody – certainly there is very little that I would put beyond Hamas when it comes to its treatment of civilians, and particularly its treatment of women.

QUESTION: Right.

QUESTION: May I?

MR MILLER: Yeah. Go ahead.

QUESTION: On the UN-administered deconfliction zones that you’ve mentioned a few times now, are you – is it clear to the U.S. that those zones have the capacity and the resourcing that they need to absorb the presumably tens of thousands of people who will head their way?

MR MILLER: It’s something that we continue to work on. Our Special Envoy David Satterfield is, of course, still in the region. He’s been there since he was appointed and is having daily conversations with the relevant UN agencies about this question. And we have been trying to surge aid into those UN agencies. Absolutely they could use more assistance. They could use more capability, and it’s something that we’re trying to deliver in what is, of course, a very challenging environment.

QUESTION: So it’s not clear that these zones are actually a viable option for the people who need to flee to them?

MR MILLER: Look, when it comes to making a choice about being in an area that – where – that is undergoing major combat operations versus evacuating to a UN-run – either a refugee center or another UN-run facility where you can get food and water and medicine, certainly I think the choice is pretty clear. But the conditions are still pretty difficult, even in those sites, and we’re trying to increase the level of assistance that we get in to address that humanitarian issue.

I will say that one of the things that we have seen since the breakdown of the pause of last Friday, is we saw initially a diminution in the amount of aid going into Gaza through Rafah. We have been trying very hard to get that aid back up, not just to the levels that it was at during the pause, which was around 200 trucks a day, but to actually increase it and to change the nature of what’s coming in so it’s not – these are not just deliveries of humanitarian assistance from relief organizations, but also some resumption of commercial activity, so there can be commercial deliveries in. And I think we’re making progress on that. We are – have urged that Kerem Shalom be reopened, not as a crossing but for screening. I think we’re making progress on that.

So the answer – I know it’s a long – I know it’s a very long answer to your question, which is – but I think the answer is it is not a perfect situation by any stretch of the imagination. There aren’t a lot of perfect answers in this very difficult situation. But we’re trying to improve it as much as we can.

QUESTION: I do want to talk about the aid, but I just want to highlight the fact that – I mean, you highlighted that one important step the Israelis are taking is to point to these deconfliction zones. But again, it is not clear that those are going to be a viable option for many or even most of the people who need to use them.

MR MILLER: I think that certainly the deconfliction zones are a place where people can go to be safe from attack.

QUESTION: Some number of them. But maybe some will —

MR MILLER: That is – to be safe from attack. The question – but, that said, we also need to increase the level – the amount of food, water, medicine that’s getting into Gaza for those sites, as well as for people – other people – most commercial activity is suspended, and so even if you’re at home you may not have access to food, water, medicine, let alone in a refugee facility. So we’re trying to get all this increased for the benefit of everyone inside Gaza.

QUESTION: Okay. So on aid, you said you wanted to talk about it. So what is the picture right now? How many trucks are getting in? How many do you expect to get in the next several days?

MR MILLER: So we don’t have – we actually don’t have reliable data about the number of trucks that have moved in yesterday, Saturday. We know that they resumed and were going in over the weekend, but there’s been kind of spotty reporting from the ground of how – what the actual number is. So we don’t have one as of 1:10 today. Hope to have one later today or certainly tomorrow. But whatever the number is, it’s not an acceptable number. It’s not at the 200 trucks a day that was happening during the pause, let alone where we want to get it to.

We have seen fuel start to go back in. We saw that in the immediate aftermath of the pause being suspended, the Israeli Government was not, early on Friday, allowing fuel to go in. We had some very frank conversations with them about the need for fuel to come in, and we saw some fuel go in Friday. We saw additional fuel go in Saturday. But it’s at the level of fuel that we were at before the pause began. We’ve made clear we want to see it back up not just to the level of fuel that went in during the pause but actually higher numbers than that and are having ongoing discussions with the Israeli Government about how to get there.

QUESTION: Just quickly related to this, obviously there are still people waiting to come out. How many Americans are waiting to come out? And we spoke earlier about reports that one, if not more Americans, may have lost their lives waiting to come out. Have you verified those reports? Are there any more coming in?

MR MILLER: So there are more than 1,000 American citizens, legal permanent residents, and their family members who have departed Gaza. There are around 750 who are left. That includes 220 American citizens. The rest are family members or legal permanent residents. And with respect to that report of a potential American fatality, we still have not been able to confirm it, unfortunately. It’s someone – if the report is true, it’s in northern Gaza, where we have just very limited information and very limited communications abilities and very limited ability to investigate or even reach people. So it’s something that we’re still trying to confirm at this point.

QUESTION: Sorry, last one. And then I promise to cede the floor. Is – as part of that verification process, is it going to be determined whether the casualty was the result of an action taken by Hamas or an action taken by the Israeli military?

MR MILLER: We’re not even at the point where we’ve confirmed that there was a fatality yet, let alone how it happened. So certainly we would want to know how it happened, but we first have to confirm that there actually was a fatality.

QUESTION: I have others on the West Bank, but we’ll defer to colleagues for now.

MR MILLER: Go ahead. Let me stay in the region before we move on. Yeah, go ahead. I’ll come to you, Janne, but I suspect it’s not about Israel.

QUESTION: Thank you. So on Friday, an Israeli airstrike killed my colleague, Muntasir al-Sawwaf, who is a Gaza-based journalist reporting for Anadolu. This came one week after his – 44 members, 45 members of his extended family, including his parents and brothers, were killed in a previous Israeli airstrike. First of all, do you have anything to say on that specific attack as a comment? And secondly, considering that you know, nearly 70 journalists were killed since the start off the war in Gaza, do you think Israel might be deliberately targeting those journalists to control the flow of information from Gaza?

MR MILLER: Let me just say – let me first extend my condolences to you, to the entire – your entire organization, and to, of course, his family. We are always deeply saddened to learn of the death of any journalist. The Secretary has spoken to this and spoken to the fact that journalists do extraordinary work under the most dangerous conditions. That has been true in this conflict as it has been in so many conflicts before it, and it is a tragedy that we have seen so many journalists die in this conflict, just as it is a tragedy that we have seen thousands of other civilians die.

I don’t have any information to suggest that the Israeli Government is targeting journalists in this conflict. But as I said, the Secretary has made clear it’s not just intent that matters, it’s results. And that’s a conversation we’re going to continue to have with them, and we are going to continue to look at the campaign as it progresses and assess the results.

QUESTION: But the Secretary also said last week that Israel has one of the most sophisticated militaries in the world and is capable of minimizing harm to civilians. I mean, more than 15,000 Palestinians – including women, children, and journalists – were killed since October 7th. Does that mean that that killing of thousands of civilians, including journalists like my colleague, could have been prevented?

MR MILLER: Certainly we have thought that there are additional steps that Israel could take to minimize civilian harm, which is why – which is why —

QUESTION: But – but obviously they’re not taking those steps —

MR MILLER: Well, I say, which is why we’ve had these conversations and why we’ve encouraged them to take additional steps, which they have said they are going to do for the campaign in the south. But I expect that this will continue to be an ongoing conversation. And as I said, we’re going to monitor how this campaign proceeds as it does.

Yeah.

QUESTION: Yeah, thank you, Matt.

MR MILLER: Let me just – let me —

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR MILLER: Said, let me just – I will come back to you —

QUESTION: I want to clarify something you just said.

MR MILLER: Go – go ahead.

QUESTION: Okay, does the United States supports the Israeli proposal for establishing a buffer zone between Gaza and Israel? And if say so, do you have any idea what’s the nature of this buffer zone?

MR MILLER: So I will say that one of the principles that you heard the Secretary lay out quite clearly in Tokyo in a speech three weeks ago was that there should be no reduction in the size of Gaza.

QUESTION: And one more question. Yesterday there were an attack on the Iranian-backed groups in Iraq. And there’s some Iraqi sources, they suspected United States in this attack. And do you confirm that? Have – has the United States conducted? Or were there any counter-battery attacks to these Iraqi forces? And also, finally, at this, do you believe that the Iraqi Government could stop these militia groups from attacking the United States, as the Secretary Blinken spoke with Prime Minister Sudani on Friday?

MR MILLER: Yeah, so I will leave it to the Defense Department to speak to this alleged incident. But one of the things that we have made clear to the Iraqi Government – and Secretary Blinken made this clear to Prime Minister Sudani when they spoke on Friday – is that we believe the Iraqi Government has the responsibility to prevent and respond to these attacks against American personnel who are in Iraq, again, at the invitation of the Iraqi Government to carry out D-ISIS activities. The Iraqi Government has said that they would take action to prevent such strikes, and we expect them to do so.

QUESTION: Have you – have you seen any actions from the Iraqi Government? Because they are saying that since the beginning of this —

MR MILLER: I don’t want to get into – I don’t want to comment on that. And I don’t want to certainly comment into the – our private conversations. But we have been made very clear to them —

QUESTION: Have you seen any results —

MR MILLER: Let me just – that we have made very clear then that we expect them to take action.

QUESTION: Have you seen any results on the ground?

MR MILLER: I’m just not going to speak to that.

QUESTION: Okay, one last question. Do you have anything to share with – about the Iranian cyber attacks on the U.S. institution? What’s the level of the damage of this cyber attack?

MR MILLER: I don’t. I know that my colleagues in other agencies have put out a statement on that, and I’ll refer to that.

Elizabeth, go ahead.

QUESTION: Is an FTO redesignation of the Houthis more likely after yesterday’s attacks in the Red Sea?

MR MILLER: It is something that we continue to consider. We have not made a determination yet. You may recall that we lifted that that designation when we found that the designation was a barrier to the delivery of humanitarian aid that would help civilians. So it’s the subject of ongoing conversations inside the administration, but I wouldn’t want to make a – put my hand on the scale one way or the other.

QUESTION: And then just to follow up on that, is the administration concerned that this escalation from the Houthis could undermine the work you’ve done on the political process in Yemen?

MR MILLER: So we continue to support a peaceful resolution to the Yemen conflict. That’s been a priority for this administration since day one. Our special envoy for Yemen is traveling to the Gulf this week to continue intensive U.S. diplomacy and regional coordination, both to safeguard maritime security in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden in the midst of these provocative and dangerous attacks by the Houthis on International shipping. Those have threatened almost two years of progress to end the war in Yemen. And we will keep trying to end that war, reach a durable solution, and work with our allies and partners to respond to these Houthi attacks which threaten global shipping, threaten the global economy, threaten countries far outside Israel, far outside the region. I think this is a matter of global concern; it’s why we’re talking about it with allies and partners around the world.

QUESTION: Matt, can I go back to something you said in response to one of the questions about sexual violence? I’m just interested because the phrasing that you used was curious to me, at least. You said you have no reason to doubt any reports that rape was used as sexual – sexual violence was used by Hamas. You said the fact that they, meaning Hamas, continue to hold women hostages – okay, that is a fact – the fact that they continue to hold children hostages – that is also a fact – but then you said “the fact that it seems” one of the reasons they don’t want to turn women over that they’ve been holding hostage – and the reason that the pause fell apart – is that they don’t want those women to be able to talk about what happened to them during their time in captivity. “The fact that it seems” – why do you – is this just conjecture on your part?

MR MILLER: I’ll —

QUESTION: Or do you know – do you have very good reason to believe, evidence to believe that Hamas is deliberately continuing to hold on to female hostages because they’re concerned that they will speak about atrocities that were – that they were subjected to?

MR MILLER: So I will accept the edit – not fact seems is a better way to say it. But let me – let me answer the – let me answer the question. The humanitarian pause, which resulted in a release of hostages, was negotiated with some very clear terms, and that was that children and women would be the first priority to be released. Near the end of that pause last Wednesday, Thursday, when we were getting towards the end, Hamas was still holding on to women that should have been the next to be released. They refused to release them.

QUESTION: Right.

MR MILLER: They broke the deal, came up with excuses why. Ultimately, I don’t think any of those excuses were credible, and I shouldn’t get into any of them here. But certainly one of the reasons that a number of people believe they refused to release them is they didn’t want people to hear what those women would have to say publicly.

QUESTION: Well, when you say —

MR MILLER: I don’t – I won’t say “fact” because I don’t know it for a fact. That’s without —

QUESTION: Okay, but when you say a number of people believe, who?

MR MILLER: I just – let me just say that —

QUESTION: People in the U.S. Government?

MR MILLER: I – let me – let me just finish my answer. We have seen Hamas commit all kinds of atrocities.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR MILLER: I don’t – no, hold on. Matt, I’m —

QUESTION: I’m a little bit concerned that you’re trying to go —

MR MILLER: I —

QUESTION: I am not suggesting that these things did not happen.

MR MILLER: Right.

QUESTION: And I am not suggesting that what you suggest —

MR MILLER: And Matt, I just – I just want to be —

QUESTION: — is their reason for not releasing the remaining female hostages is wrong. I just want to know —

MR MILLER: I just want to be very sensitive in my language, Matt.

QUESTION: — do you have any evidence to suggest that that is what it is, or is it just conjecture?

MR MILLER: I want to be very sensitive in my language when talking about people that continue to be held hostage that have families on the outside. I will – so I will – what I will say is we know Hamas has committed atrocities. We know they —

QUESTION: I —

MR MILLER: Hold on. They continue to hold women. They were going to release these women, and then suddenly at the last point reneged on the deal and were never able to provide a credible reason why. We hope that they will change their mind and release those women, but we haven’t seen —

QUESTION: Okay. So, but you don’t know, though, for certain that the – that the or a reason for them reneging on the deal and not releasing them is because they’re worried about them speaking about what they endured?

MR MILLER: So I am not able to speak with a definitive assessment that that is the case. We would like to see them release the hostages so they could talk about whatever treatment or mistreatment they had undergone.

QUESTION: Sorry, Matt, just a quick —

MR MILLER: Let me – I’ve got – Said, I have gone to you a number of —

QUESTION: On this point. Please. Please, Matt. On this point.

MR MILLER: Elizabeth, go ahead.

QUESTION: Matt, Matt.

QUESTION: Olivia.

MR MILLER: Olivia. I’m sorry – Elizabeth? (Laughter.)

QUESTION: Matt, Matt – can I follow on this point?

MR MILLER: Said, I – Said, I asked you —

QUESTION: Is it – what do you mean? That they are IDF soldiers?

MR MILLER: Said, I will come – Said, I will come to you.

QUESTION: They could be soldiers?

MR MILLER: Said, I will come – there are women who are not soldiers who continue to be held.

QUESTION: I understand. But there are women, Palestinian women, in Israeli prisons, right?

MR MILLER: No. And there are women – so I will come back to you. You’ve had a number of questions already.

QUESTION: Please.

MR MILLER: Olivia, sorry, go ahead.

QUESTION: Just specifically on that point, there is still one American woman being held that we are aware of, right? Is everything that you’re saying applicable to her situation?

MR MILLER: I don’t want to expand any further than I have in my remarks expect to say that we do want to see her released. We had hoped to see her released as a result of these negotiations last week. Hamas reneged on the deal and wouldn’t release her, but certainly we are concerned for her situation as we are concerned for the situation of all the hostages.

QUESTION: Okay. And West Bank —

MR MILLER: Yeah. Go ahead with the West Bank.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR MILLER: I will – I promise I will come to you before the briefing is over. I promise. I just want to stay in the region before – a little bit longer before we move on.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Sure. The Secretary last week said that he had made clear to his Israeli interlocutors that the U.S. had expectations for Israel addressing extremist violence in the West Bank. Has any of that moved forward from the U.S. perspective? Have the Israelis taken concrete steps and given you evidence that they have?

MR MILLER: We have seen them take some steps to respond to extremist violence against Palestinians in the West Bank. We don’t think those steps have been sufficient. We think they need to prosecute people who engage in violent activities against Palestinians. And one of the things that the Secretary made clear in his conversations with the Israeli Government is that, while this doesn’t in any way obviate the need for them to take additional actions, that we are prepared to take our own actions on behalf of the United States Government.

QUESTION: So some of those actions are said to be visa restrictions on some of the extremists at hand. Are those set to be rolled out in any near term?

MR MILLER: I don’t want to about a timetable, but the President signaled in an op-ed a couple weeks ago that those were under consideration, and as I said, we have made very clear to the Israeli Government that we will be taking additional steps to hold people responsible for violent extremism against Palestinians – to hold those people accountable.

QUESTION: And what options do you have in the case of American extremists who are perpetrating violence in the West Bank? Can you issue —

MR MILLER: So certainly you cannot – can’t issue a visa restriction against an American citizen, a blue passport holder, but I would say that for actions that take place inside Israel, the Israeli Government should hold people accountable no matter what their nationality is.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR MILLER: All right. Janne, finally, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you very much, Matt. South Korea successfully launched a solid fuel space launch vehicle yesterday. How do you see this different from North Korea’s recent military satellite launch? And I’ll follow up.

MR MILLER: Well, so South Korea is not the subject of multiple UN Security Council resolutions over its dangerous and destabilizing activities in this area.

QUESTION: And second question: The State Department designated North Korea as a State Sponsor of Terrorism. What are your predictions about the possibility of North Korea as a State Sponsor of Terrorism engaging in dialogue with the United States in the future?

MR MILLER: So we have made clear that – from the outset of this administration that we would welcome dialogue with the DPRK. We would welcome a peaceful resolution to our concerns over its destabilizing activities. We have made clear that we do not seek conflict with the DPRK in any form or fashion, but as of yet, those entreaties have all been rejected, and I wouldn’t want to make any predictions about the future.

QUESTION: About terrorism?

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR MILLER: Go ahead, yeah.

QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. On plot against American – an American citizen on India, according to New York Times report, I quote, “India’s intelligence services have been” – “have long been accused of orchestrating targeted killing[s] in the country’s immediate neighbors.” As a plot against an American citizen foiled by the U.S. Government informant and exposed in federal court, do you think it should be stopped in anywhere and everywhere? And what is the Indian response as you expose these incidents?

MR MILLER: So two things. One, we have made clear that we oppose transnational oppression no matter where it occurs or who might be conducting it. That’s not a comment specific to India. That’s a comment specific to any country in the world.

Second, with respect to this specific case, there is an ongoing law enforcement matter at issue here, and we don’t talk about those from this podium. I would defer to DOJ to do that. But I would say that when these – when this alleged incident was brought to our attention, we made very clear at the most senior levels of our government to the most senior levels of the Indian Government how seriously we would treat something like this. They have opened an investigation into the matter and we look forward to seeing the results of that investigation.

QUESTION: Two more on Bangladesh. In light of the current situation in Bangladesh, where the government conducting election in an unprecedented manner by detaining 20-plus-thousands opposition party leaders and activist, custodial death keeps rising as three opposition activist died in six days, arresting family members in absence of the targeted individual, allowing newly minted King’s Party to participate to secure their win, all major political party – including the main opposition, BNP – boycotting the election; how does the U.S. Government assess the likelihood a free and fair election atmosphere in Bangladesh?

MR MILLER: Again, I’m not – and then I’m – I’m not going to – I’m going to move on after this one, because we – I’ve got limited time. I’ve got – I know there’s a lot of people that still have questions. I’m not going to speculate on the outcome of the elections. I will say what we have said a number of times before, which is we will continue to engage with the government, opposition, civil society, and other stakeholders to urge them to work together for the benefit of the Bangladeshi people to ensure free and fair elections that are conducted in a peaceful manner.

Shaun.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR MILLER: Shaun. Shaun. Guys, guys, guys, one at a time. Shaun, go ahead.

QUESTION: Sure. Could I ask you a few things really quick?

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: Cuba, Ambassador Rocha. Do you have anything to say about him?

MR MILLER: The only thing I’d say – again, an ongoing law enforcement matter here. We’ve seen an indictment unsealed today. We commend the work of law enforcement in this matter – the Department of Justice, the FBI, the Diplomatic Security Service here at the State Department – and the actions they have taken so far in this case, and we will in the coming days, weeks, months work with our partners in the Intelligence Community to assess any long-term national security implications for this matter.

QUESTION: In terms of decision making, I know he was – it’s quite some time since he was in senior positions, but is there any concern about the decisions that were made in the past about how – about the ones that were carried out in light of his —

MR MILLER: Again, it was, as you point, some time ago. I think it’s been over 20 years since he left the State Department. But with anything respect to the intelligence or national security implications of this, we’re going to work with our partners in the Intelligence Community, others in the national security community, to make exactly those sorts of assessments.

QUESTION: Sure. Could I stay in Latin America? Venezuela.

MR MILLER: Sure.

QUESTION: A couple things there, but the referendum regarding Guyana. Do you have anything to say about that? Apparently, 95 percent of the Venezuelans, authorities have announced, in favor of this. Do you have any message in terms of how Venezuela should go about after this? Do you recognize some legitimacy to the vote? How do you feel about it?

MR MILLER: I will say that we support a peaceful resolution of the border dispute between Venezuela and Guyana. The 1899 award determined the land boundary between Venezuela and Guyana should be respected unless or until the parties come to a new agreement or a competent legal body decides otherwise. So we would urge Venezuela and Guyana to continue to seek a peaceful resolution of their dispute. This is not something that will be settled by a referendum.

QUESTION: Could I stay in Venezuela?

MR MILLER: Yes.

QUESTION: The statement that you issued late Friday about the sanctions relief in Venezuela. Has there been any determination yet on whether Venezuela is actually – the Maduro government has gone through – has gone ahead with its part of the bargain on this, and whether the U.S. is going to go ahead with sanctions relief?

MR MILLER: So they have not gone through with their part of the bargain. There are two additional steps that we want to see them take. We want to see them release political prisoners, and we want to see them release wrongfully detained Americans. That was part of the framework agreement that we had agreed – that we had come to with them. They have not carried our their part of the agreement. We urge them to do so. But at the same time, we are considering the matter and will suspend some of the sanctions relief that we put in place earlier this year if we determine that adequate progress to the commitments they made to us have not been made.

QUESTION: So if. There hasn’t been a decision yet?

MR MILLER: Correct.

QUESTION: I’ll be brief, but I could take you to another part of the world as well?

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: It’s in Niger. The authorities in Niger quit over the weekend. The anti-jihadist force, the G5, and a Russian delegation’s coming today. Is there any worries about – any greater worries about the trajectory of Niger and how things are going there?

MR MILLER: I don’t think any additional worries. Obviously, this is a country that had a coup d’état earlier this year. And what we are trying to do is directly engage with the Nigerien Government as well as our partners in the region, other countries in the region, to try to urge them to get on a path back to democracy. We want to see them take quick, credible steps towards a civilian-led government. We’re not seeing those at this time, but that will be the policy outcome that we continue to try to achieve.

QUESTION: Just finally, Ambassador FitzGibbon is, according to reports in the region, about to present her credentials formally. Does that indicate any sort of recognition or at least de facto recognition of the authorities in Niger?

MR MILLER: No, it does not. Her presence there is an element in this effort I just described to try to negotiate a quick and credible democratic transition in Niger. We’ve been without an ambassador for more than a year and a half there. As we’ve said, the democratically elected government was deposed in a coup, and our goal now and the goal of ambassador – the new ambassador will be to try to move Niger back in a transition to democracy.

QUESTION: And just very finally, Henry Kissinger.

MR MILLER: You said that last time. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: I am trying to hit everything here. Henry Kissinger. I’m not going to ask you for a great assessment on his life and times, but is there anything in the department that’s being planned in light of his death?

MR MILLER: Let me get back to you on that. I’m sure there are things that probably people here are planning; I’m not aware of any. The Secretary put out a statement on this on Thursday. And if there are – if we have any events to announce, I’ll come back to you with those.

Alex, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thanks, Matt. Welcome back. A couple topics; on Ukraine first. Does the Secretary have any concern on the current state of play on the battlefield, given the White House flagging the funding issue, that this might get out of control without congressional funding? And let me also –

MR MILLER: So I will say that they’re kind of two questions linked together. Certainly with respect to the battlefield, it’s a tough situation. The Ukrainian forces are fighting against very entrenched – the very entrenched Russian military. We’ve seen them make progress. The progress has been difficult, but we have seen them continue to make progress. And when we were in Brussels last week, we spoke directly with the foreign minister of Ukraine about this matter.

With respect to the supplemental, yes, we’re absolutely concerned that the level of funding has expired. We are now relying on residual funds from the drawdown that will soon – we’re at I think over 97 percent of those having been exhausted. We’ll very shortly run out of any runway at all. So yes, we are very concerned. It’s why the Secretary joins the President and others in the administration in urging Congress to act as quickly as possible.

QUESTION: There is some reporting that Ukraine’s new long-range delivery from the U.S. was pushed back to next year. Is that the reason, or was it –

MR MILLER: I’m sorry, what was the –

QUESTION: New delivery of long-range rockets to Ukraine was pushed back.

MR MILLER: I am just not going to comment on any weapons, on any weapons decisions or weapons delivery before those decisions have been made. And with respect to the actual delivery of weapons, that’s a question for the Pentagon.

QUESTION: Thank you. Moving to Azerbaijan, if I may. Iranian naval commander just arrived in Azerbaijan. Any worries on your end about Azerbaijan potentially flirting with Iran?

MR MILLER: I’m sorry, any worries about –

QUESTION: Azerbaijan’s flirting with Iran these days?

MR MILLER: I don’t – don’t have any comment on that. Abby, go –

QUESTION: On –

MR MILLER: Let me – I’ve got to – I’ve got to go to Abby, because I’ve got to wrap.

QUESTION: Please come back to me on Azerbaijan.

MR MILLER: I’ve got to wrap shortly, and I’ve got a few people to go. Abby, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you so much. Russia. Can you provide any information on reports that a U.S. citizen was reportedly found dead in a temporary detention center (inaudible)?

MR MILLER: So we have seen those reports. We don’t – we haven’t confirmed them yet, and so because of that I don’t have any comment.

QUESTION: Can I have one quick follow-up on a previous subject?

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: There are people who are accusing the UN of slow-rolling the probe into alleged sexual violence committed by Hamas. Do you have any specific comment on that? I know you’ve dealt with a lot of the aspects.

MR MILLER: I don’t have any specific comment other than to say we would urge those reports to be fully and credibly investigated.

QUESTION: I’ll be very short.

MR MILLER: Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. I have a question about the Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty journalist, the U.S. citizen – U.S.-Russian dual citizen, Alsu Kurmasheva. Several lawmakers have written the Secretary asking to designate her as wrongfully detained. Has that designation – has a decision made – been made in her case yet or not? And if not, why?

MR MILLER: So it has not, and I will say, as I’ve said on a number of occasions about previous wrongful determined – determination cases or cases where people have called for us to determine that someone is wrongfully detained, it’s a matter that we take very seriously here. It can sometimes be a very deliberate process where we have to look at the statutory requirements. Sometimes the situation changes over time, where information that is available to us at one stage changes as we acquire new information.

So as always, no one should read anything into the lack of a wrongful detention determination at any given point. It is an ongoing active process inside the United States Government.

QUESTION: Can you tell us at what stage it is right now?

MR MILLER: I can’t. And with that, I have to wrap for today. Thanks, everyone.

(The briefing was concluded at 1:34 p.m.)

Department Press Briefing – November 21, 2023

HomeDepartment Press Briefing – November 21, 2023

hide

Department Press Briefing – November 21, 2023

Matthew Miller, Department Spokesperson

Washington, D.C.

November 21, 2023

Article Index

ISRAEL / PALESTINIAN AFFAIRS / REGION
CHINA
ISRAEL / PALESTINIAN AFFAIRS / REGION
PAKISTAN / AFGHANISTAN
BANGLADESH
NICARAGUA
ISRAEL / PALESTINIAN AFFAIRS / REGION
RUSSIA / UKRAINE
NORTH KOREA

1:27 p.m. EST

MR MILLER: Afternoon, everyone.

Matt.

QUESTION: I’m here.

MR MILLER: You’re here.

QUESTION: You even said not to be late. I assume that was directed to me, but I don’t know.

MR MILLER: I appreciate you being here. I appreciate everyone being here – a full room right before the holiday. So —

QUESTION: Oh, so that was just a tease. You didn’t have any —

MR MILLER: It was just a tease.

QUESTION: You didn’t have anything to say?

MR MILLER: I am here for your questions.

QUESTION: Okay. Well, tell us what the latest – your latest understanding is of the – this alleged deal?

MR MILLER: With respect to hostages – so what I will say is that we are very close to an agreement, but we are not there yet. As you have heard us say a number of times over the course of the past few weeks, nothing is final until everything is final. And at this point, everything is not yet final, but we are close.

The Israeli cabinet is meeting to discuss this matter right now. We are in close conversation with them, as we are with the Government of Qatar, who has been helping facilitate discussions for the – since the early days of the crisis. We are hopeful to have some good news for the hostages and their families. We are hopeful we can start bringing some of them home, but as I said at the outset, we are not quite there yet.

QUESTION: All right. Well, so when you – you made reference to the Israeli cabinet meeting right now. Is that the last thing that needs to be done?

MR MILLER: I really don’t want to get into the underlying details. Obviously, the Israeli Government discussing and coming to some sort of resolution is one part of this; there are others. I don’t want to get into the full details. I will say that, of course, the implementation and execution of an agreement – should one be reached – requires the cooperation of Hamas, a terrorist organization, so it’s why we’re always hesitant to say too much about what will happen before it has happened. But we are close to an agreement, hopeful one can be reached.

QUESTION: Okay. Thanks.

QUESTION: Is it your understanding that the first tranche of hostages to be released will include Americans?

MR MILLER: I just can’t get into any type of details of what – about what an agreement would look like, including who would be released if such an agreement was finalized.

QUESTION: And have you received any updates on their conditions, whereabouts, if they’re being held together, if they are all, in fact, being held by Hamas?

MR MILLER: Again, I can’t get into too much into the underlying details. It has always been our assessment that Hamas may not have control of all of these hostages, but beyond that I just don’t want to speak to any specific details.

Yeah, Barbara.

QUESTION: And —

MR MILLER: Oh, sorry. Sorry, sorry.

QUESTION: Sorry, can I follow up? Is it your understanding that if and when a deal is reached that would then trigger more aid being able to get into Gaza, as the Secretary had suggested would happen?

MR MILLER: Let me say a couple things about that. One, it has always been the position of the United States that we do not need a hostage deal. There shouldn’t – that to get more aid in, that more fuel, more food, more water, more medicine should not be contingent on a hostage agreement being reached. We thought that the delivery of humanitarian assistance for the Palestinian people was important in its own right and that’s why the Secretary has been pushing for it. It’s why the President has been pushing for it; it’s what our Ambassador David Satterfield – or special envoy, I should say, Ambassador David Satterfield has been working to implement on the ground.

That said, it has been clear that for some time that an agreement on hostages would release or would unlock the potential for delivery of more humanitarian assistance so we’re hopeful that that would take place. But, again, it has always been our position that the two don’t need to be linked, that humanitarian assistance should be delivered as quickly as possible for the benefit of the Palestinian people.

QUESTION: But the Israelis seemed to have linked it? It seems —

MR MILLER: It does seem – it – the way I would say it is it does appear that any kind of hostage agreement, should we reach one, would unlock more humanitarian assistance flowing in.

Barbara.

QUESTION: Actually, that was similar to my question, but on the understanding that that is what you’re hoping for, have you made extra preparations? I mean, are you poised to move quickly to get more aid in? Like what’s the activity around that?

MR MILLER: We have been working to – not just related to any hostage arrangement, but we have been working independent of that to facilitate the delivery of more humanitarian assistance in. And so you have seen U.S. aid fly more humanitarian assistance into Egypt to have it prepositioned so it could go in to Gaza. Some of that aid has started to move. We’ve been working with other international donors to facilitate the delivery of aid to Egypt to go in through Rafah, and then, of course, there’s a screening process that has been a bit of an impediment to the fast delivery of aid. And we have been working with the Government of Israel, with the Government of Egypt on all of these matters to try to increase the flow of humanitarian assistance.

You saw a breakthrough last week, an initial breakthrough, when we saw an agreement to deliver fuel in, which, of course, is important to ensure that water can be desalinated; it’s important to ensure that there’s electricity for hospitals; it’s important to ensure that the implementors – the organizations that actually deliver the humanitarian assistance inside Gaza, once it goes through Rafah into Gaza, that they can deliver it to the people who need it. So we have been pushing all those things, independent of any potential hostage arrangement, and we’ll continue to do so.

QUESTION: Just to follow up, so you mentioned the issue about the screening and trying to get more facilities or people in place to do more screening, which would then help more aid. If there is a humanitarian – long humanitarian pause in exchange for hostages – although you’re not linking aid to hostages but whatever – if there is a time period, does that mean you wouldn’t necessarily get a lot more aid in if you’re still dealing with these issues like screening and so on? Like how much of a – how much do you think it could boost aid if there was four days or whatever?

MR MILLER: I think we’re getting into the realm I’m not comfortable. I’ll talk a little bit about what we have done and what we’re trying to do, but when we start getting too far into what could happen as a potential result of a deal that has not yet been reached, I think I’m going to decline to comment in too much detail.

QUESTION: Just one last question. The Israelis beginning their southern offensive, and you’ve talked about wanting to make sure there’s better arrangements in place for protection of civilians. Have you been asking them to delay their southern offensive until that’s ready? I mean, they’ve already kind of started anyway, but where are things at with —

MR MILLER: So I won’t get into too much detail about the private conversations that happen between our two governments. But we have made clear to them, as we have made clear publicly, that we think they should not commence with further activities in the south until they have taken the proper steps to account for the humanitarian needs there. There are a number – several hundred thousand people who have moved from the north to the south. Before any military offensive begins there, we would want to ensure that those people are properly protected.

Said, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. I just want to follow up on a couple of things that Barbara raised. But before that, I want to state for the record that the poet Mosab Abu Toha, whom I raised yesterday – he was actually released today —

MR MILLER: Released.

QUESTION: — by the Israelis. And I like to think that you guys had something to do with that, and he will be on his way to Egypt, so he can come back to the United States with his family.

On the issue of the deal itself, we’re talking about —

MR MILLER: The issue of what itself?

QUESTION: The potential deal.

MR MILLER: Oh, the deal. The deal, yeah.

QUESTION: The potential deal that could or may not happen. Is it your understanding that there is a split in the Israeli cabinet to who may agree or disagree, and will that hold the going forward with a deal?

MR MILLER: I’m just not going to discuss internal Israeli political matters.

QUESTION: Right. But let’s say – I mean, if the war cabinet agrees and the larger cabinet does not agree or the supreme court and so on, then we’re back to square one. Are you urging the Israelis to go forward with a deal?

MR MILLER: I’m not going to discuss our private conversations with the Israeli Government. But we have been attempting to reach an agreement to secure the release of hostages for some time, and I’ll leave it at that.

QUESTION: All right. Let me just ask you on – something that you always state, that you want the Israelis to abide by the laws of war, you want to minimize civilian causalities among Palestinians and so on. Yesterday or the day before was children’s world day, whatever. Fifty-five hundred Palestinian children have died thus far. Do you think the Israel’s are abiding by the laws of war?

MR MILLER: So I will say that it is a tragedy how many people have died in Gaza. It’s a tragedy how many children have died especially. As the Secretary has said, it is our belief that far too many Palestinian civilians have been killed as the result of this conflict. We continue to engage with the Government of Israel about steps we believe they should take to minimize civilian casualties. It is an ongoing conversation between our two governments. And we continue to engage with them on every possible measure they can take to ensure that civilians are not in harm’s way, as they conduct legitimate military operations.

And I do want to remind everyone again that the reason why this is so difficult – difficult even than in most conflicts – is because Hamas embeds itself inside civilian targets. And so Israel faces this difficult situation, where there are legitimate military targets, terrorists who launched an attack against the Israeli public and who have said they want to continue launching terrorist attacks against the Israeli public, and in fact continue to launch rockets, even in the past few days, against the Israeli public. And Israel has a right and obligation to take military action to try to bring those terrorists to justice. But their burden is in no way lessened to minimize civilian harm. And so that is what we continue to emphasize to them in all of our conversations with them, including concrete steps about how they can do that.

QUESTION: And on that very point now, the Israelis seem to be obsessed with the Palestinian hospitals. I wonder if you have seen the interview done on CNN with the former Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak, who acknowledged that it was actually Israel that built these basements or tunnels and so on. Have you seen that?

MR MILLER: I saw a report of the interview. I haven’t seen the full interview, and I don’t have any independent assessment about that.

QUESTION: Right.

MR MILLER: I would say, regardless of where – what particular tunnel he might be speaking to or what’s – if there are Hamas – the issue of Hamas embedding itself under a hospital would be a different matter.

QUESTION: Obviously, I mean, they really showed no proof. But what he was saying – what he was suggesting, that these, whatever – caverns or whatever you want to call them – underneath the hospital, they actually were there for utilitarian purposes.

MR MILLER: So what I will say about that is, number one, we have – we’ve assess, but it’s public knowledge at this point – shown over many years that Hamas has also built its own tunnels, regardless of what – regardless of that.

Number two, whatever infrastructure exists at a hospital, under a hospital, no matter who put it there, terrorists should not be using that infrastructure to embed themselves underneath a civilian target, underneath a civilian hospital, underneath a hospital that is supposed to exist for the care of civilians, and making that – using that facility as a human shield. So it is, I think, a separate issue than who might have built whatever room it is the former prime minister was referring to.

Humeyra.

QUESTION: Matt, just to follow up on a couple of things from colleagues’ questions. So this might be a little bit down the line, but is there at all an understanding in these hostage negotiations for what comes next after this deal? And I’m asking because there are 240 people who were taken hostage by Hamas. So while Israel, Hamas, Qatar, and you were in – somehow in these conversations about this number of people, was there any understanding for what happens with the rest of the people?

MR MILLER: So I do appreciate the question, but if I am going to decline to comment on an arrangement that has not yet been finalized, not yet been reached, I certainly don’t think I can comment on what might come next after this arrangement.

QUESTION: Right, but —

MR MILLER: And I would just say, to reiterate that again, we’re close to a deal. We don’t have one yet. I can’t talk about what might be in a potential deal, let alone what might come in its aftermath.

QUESTION: But surely you’re talking for everybody —

MR MILLER: It has been our goal from the beginning to secure the release of every single hostage. The United States is focused on American citizens, of course, but we’re focused on all the hostages. We want to see all the hostages released. We don’t think any of them should be held. That has been the goal of our negotiations from the outset, but I can’t get into what any steps might look like.

QUESTION: Okay. And just to push you a little bit more on Barbara’s question about possible Israeli offensive in the south, John Finer also talked about this as well, but what is the very latest in the sense that are you getting a timeline from them on when they are planning to start this? And are you telling them specifically here are the things, here are the objectives, here are the safe zones you have to create – or whatever you think appropriate to call them – before you start this, and without these, you should not be starting it? Is it that clear-cut?

MR MILLER: So we are having fairly detailed conversations with them about steps that they could take to protect civilians and steps that they could take to increase humanitarian access, increase humanitarian protections, especially in the south. I don’t want to get into the details of those conversation. Obviously, the Israeli Government makes its own decisions about its military campaigns. The conversations we have been having with them are on steps that they can take as they look to the south to increase protections for civilians, especially considering that hundreds of thousands of civilians – after being told to move by the Israeli Government – moved from the north to the south. We think it’s important that those civilians now have a way to put themselves out of harm’s way.

QUESTION: And in terms of the protections for civilians, is it United States Government’s proposal, and does it include ICRC or UN for the creation of those safe zones? Like whose proposal is it and what does it look like?

MR MILLER: So we have been in conversation not just with the Government of Israel but with a range of humanitarian organizations, including the United Nations, about how exactly civilian protections could be implemented, how they can best be implemented, but I think it’s best that while those conversations are ongoing I keep the details of them confidential.

QUESTION: Do you have, like, a target in mind? Like we’re looking to conclude those conversations and have some sort of a rough plan by the end of the week, soon?

MR MILLER: I just – I wouldn’t – I just wouldn’t want to put a timeline on it.

QUESTION: Okay, one more.

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: There seems to be a bit of a discrepancy between U.S. and UN on the opening of Kerem Shalom. I’ve read the transcript from yesterday. You guys don’t seem to be focusing on trying to get that one open. Do you think Rafah has the capacity to process more aid? But UN – Martin Griffiths seems to disagree a little bit, and they are imploring Israel to allow humanitarian aid via Kerem Shalom. Why the discrepancy?

MR MILLER: So there may be a little bit of apples and oranges here. I think in terms of addressing your question, we don’t think that there is a problem with the ability for Rafah to handle more traffic in terms of the number of trucks that can just physically go through it carrying humanitarian – Rafah is big enough to handle that. It’s big enough to allow the delivery of a massive amount of humanitarian assistance.

There has been an issue with screening. I think Jen was alluding to it in her question earlier.

QUESTION: Yeah.

MR MILLER: And we have been in conversation with the Government of Israel about additional – ways to get additional screening for trucks that would then go in through Rafah. But let me – I’m coming – the Government of Israel has very real concerns about security at Kerem Shalom, and you can understand why. One side of that border is obviously Gaza, in areas of Gaza that are still controlled by Hamas, that are not controlled by the Government of Israel. We continue to have conversations with Israel about the best way to increase the amount of screening so trucks can get screened and then get in through Rafah, but they do have very real concerns about opening Kerem Shalom, and that’s why you’ve seen them not take that step as of yet.

QUESTION: Final thing, because Griffiths is actually giving a percentage, saying Kerem Shalom Crossing used to – was used to carry more than 60 percent of the truckloads going into Gaza before the conflict, but I understand and I am aware of the sort of screening-related backlog. The U.S. is not pursuing this actively with the Israelis is what I am understanding from you, the opening of that.

MR MILLER: The point I am making is that we think Rafah is sufficient for the delivery of humanitarian assistance.

QUESTION: Right.

MR MILLER: That is a separate question from screening. We want to try to get screening back online and open. But we think Rafah gate at this point is the appropriate way to get assistance in.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. Correspondent Farah Omar – she was colleague as well – and cameraman Rabih Maamari were killed by an Israeli attack in south of Lebanon. It was direct attack because it was carried by a drone. And drone, you have a camera, you can see who’s on the ground. They were under a tree waiting for her turn to go on – live on TV.

Well, there was a comment from the – from the manager of the Al-Mayadeen channel who happened to be their boss that Israeli Government decision this month to block access to channel’s website and this attack targeted them. Last week, almost my colleague (inaudible) could have killed as well – the missile passed by him and there was a convoy of different stations – Al Jazeera, Al Arabiya, all kind of stations, Washington Post in Beirut. They were checking some of the areas toured by the UN.

So how Israel is obeying the rule of law if it’s attacking directly journalists to punish them or silence them? And no offense, but Israel has an extension – a huge history of killing civilians directly.

MR MILLER: So again, I can never – I’m never in a position from here to speak to any particular strike or any particular military action when the entire facts are not known to me or not known to the U.S. Government, including what information the Government of Israel had, what might have gone into a decision, whether there was a mistake or not. It’s impossible for me to speak to the merits of any individual strike. That has been true not just with respect to this one but with respect to others.

I will say that we are concerned by the reports that civilians, including two journalists, were killed in Lebanon. Our thoughts are with the loved ones of those killed and all these Lebanese people. If you were here yesterday, you heard me speak to our belief in the importance that journalists play in conflict zones. Journalists are fundamental to a free society. We stand with the journalists around the world who do critical work that we rely on every day. We rely on the reports of journalists here in the United States Government. We know people all around the world do, and they do that in some of the most dangerous conditions imaginable.

I will also say that we are concerned over the escalation of violence along the Blue Line. We have made clear we don’t want to see the conflict in Gaza spread to Lebanon. That has been one of our top priorities and one of the top objectives we’ve tried to achieve since the outset of this conflict. Restoring calm along the Blue Line is of the utmost importance to us, and it should be a top priority for both Israel and Lebanon.

QUESTION: There was also an attack on a church yesterday. And I’m not sure if you know the nature of south of Lebanon – Christian villages don’t have any existence of Hizballah. Let’s – so we can say like Hamas, they were like attacking or throwing missiles next to a hospital or a mosque. In Lebanon, Christian villages don’t have any presence of Hizballah. What was the target inside that church? Who is holding accountability of – I know you’re putting so much pressure on Israeli Government.

MR MILLER: No, I understand. But when you ask me that type of question, it was not an action carried out by the United States Government. It’s not a question I can answer, and I’m not able to offer an assessment about an individual strike.

QUESTION: You are supplying Israel over $14 billion of military aid.

MR MILLER: But when it comes to a specific strike where it’s not an action that’s taken by the United States Government, and I don’t have all the available information, it’s not something I can offer an assessment on.

QUESTION: Why the – my last question.

MR MILLER: Go ahead, yeah.

QUESTION: Why the feeling in the Middle East that anything happen with – okay, everybody’s as a human, as any person will condemn any action against humans what happened October 7th. Why there’s a feeling in the Middle East in every country now that the U.S., whatever happens in Israel it’s a big deal, but the life of Palestinians or other people it’s no deal?

MR MILLER: So I think —

QUESTION: It’s not —

MR MILLER: I think —

QUESTION: I’m telling (inaudible).

MR MILLER: So let me just – let me just answer the question. I think the Secretary has been very clear about this exact question that far too many Palestinians have been killed. He’s spoken to this directly. He’s spoken to how, as a father, when he sees especially the bodies of deceased children, how it affects him. And I can tell you that’s true for everyone inside the United States Government. And it is precisely why we do engage with the Israeli Government to impress upon them the need to take all possible steps to minimize civilian harm.

So I hear this sometimes, and I can tell you these are conversations that we have at the highest levels of our government, sometimes very intense conversations about steps that we believe Israel should take, as well as the steps that we believe they should take to keep civilians out of harm’s way, to help civilians move to places where they’ll be safe from harm, so they won’t be injured from this ongoing military conflict, as well as the steps that we think are important that we have pushed for and in many cases secured to get humanitarian assistance in to the Palestinian people.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: I want to go back to Gaza and the ongoing – the reports of ongoing encirculation of the Indonesian hospital.

MR MILLER: Of?

QUESTION: Indonesian hospital in northern Gaza.

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: And there is also reports of some killed and injured during some Israeli military attack on the hospital. What is the reason of attacking this hospital, in your perspective?

MR MILLER: Again, so I would say I am not able to assess the merits, the individual facts or circumstances surrounding any individual strike. I think all of you that have covered wars in the past know about conflicting information that emerges and accounts that change over time. It’s difficult for anyone to make an assessment about what happened and the reason for it happened, and certainly we don’t have all the facts, or I don’t have all the facts here at this podium to speak to them.

I will say as a principle we do not want to see hospitals struck from the air. We want to see hospitals protected. Hospitals provide critical services to the civilian population in Gaza, and we want to see the Government of Israel take steps to minimize harm to civilians, and of course that includes at hospitals where civilians are seeking much needed medical care.

QUESTION: But I’m not talking about the merit from the Israeli point of view. I mean, for that, al-Shifa, for example, you had an assessment that al-Shifa is used by Hamas either as a headquarter or a command center. Do you have any assessment that Hamas is using the Indonesian hospital as a command center or —

MR MILLER: I’m not going to speak to intelligence assessments aside from the very limited information that we have already downgraded and made public. We do see, unfortunately, that Hamas uses not just hospitals but mosques and schools and other places of – other pieces of civilian infrastructure as places where they can embed their fighters, as places where they – that they can use to launch attacks, and places where they can use civilians as human shields.

So as I said a minute ago in answer to another question, it puts the Israeli Government in a very difficult position where they are trying to defeat legitimate military – or try to accomplish legitimate military objectives, but sometimes when the terrorists they are trying to go after have hidden themselves in hospitals, in schools, in mosques. So it is a difficult problem, but it doesn’t lessen their responsibility, which is why we continue to engage in these conversations with them about taking every possible step they can to minimize civilian harm.

I will say with respect to al-Shifa we were very clear we did not want to see al-Shifa struck from the air, we did not want to see fighting going on inside the hospital; we wanted to see civilians protected. And I think when Israel did launch the military – their military operation at al-Shifa, you saw them do it in a much more careful way where they went into the hospital in a way where they were trying to protect patients and where they were trying to evacuate patients for – they had – before they went in, they offered to help facilitate or to allow third-party relief organizations to facilitate the evacuation of that hospital. Hamas said no. Hamas wouldn’t allow it.

So there is always more that Israel can do to take steps to minimize civilian harm, and we will continue to encourage them to do that. But again, as long as Hamas continues to embed itself inside the civilian population, we are going to see this difficult challenge over and over again.

Yeah, Michel.

QUESTION: Matt, will the Secretary receive the Arab ministerial delegation that visited China? And how do you view their visit to China, first?

MR MILLER: I don’t have any scheduling announcements to make, but certainly a number of the ministers who made that trip to China are people who he’s met with repeatedly in the past few weeks and people he’s had conversations with by phone repeatedly. So we will continue to engage with a number of those individuals – whether it be here, whether it be in the region. I think you can anticipate that the Secretary is not done traveling to the region, and of course we – I will mention that we met with the foreign minister of Saudi Arabia, the foreign minister of Egypt, both of whom were part of this delegation in New York last month. So we will continue to meet with them. Whether it’s here or there, I don’t have an announcement to make at this time.

QUESTION: The Saudi crown prince has asked all the countries who providing Israel with arms to stop providing them with ammunitions and arms. Is the U.S. ready to do so?

MR MILLER: No. That is not a step we’re ready to take. In fact, we have a supplemental request pending before Congress that we hope Congress will act on expeditiously, which provides additional assistance to Israel as well as additional assistance to Ukraine.

QUESTION: And finally, do you have any update on the talks and the discussions that you are doing with partners and allies regarding the ship that the Houthis seized?

MR MILLER: No, I do not. It continues to be an ongoing matter of diplomatic discussion.

Alex, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thanks.

QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. A couple (inaudible) deal, potential deal. There’s – I understand you don’t want to get into details —

MR MILLER: About what?

QUESTION: A potential deal.

MR MILLER: Oh, yeah.

QUESTION: How confident are you that there will be well-established international mechanism to ensure that all the sides are holding promises?

MR MILLER: I’m not going to talk at all about any of the details of a potential deal, which that obviously would be, when one has not yet been reached.

QUESTION: What was your level of concern that the potential deal might be jeopardized by other actors, like Iran or —

MR MILLER: Again, let’s – let’s —

QUESTION: I’m asking because —

MR MILLER: I know, but like, any questions about a potential deal, maybe let’s wait until we actually have a deal, and then we can talk about it. But when it’s still a potential deal, I think I’ll decline to comment.

QUESTION: The White House said that it’s concerned that Wagner is potentially preparing to send military equipment to Hizballah or Iran. Firstly, your – what do you know, and what can you do to prevent this from happening? And also in terms of deal, how much do you think this might jeopardize —

MR MILLER: So it is a concern that we have. The White House spoke to this earlier today; I don’t have any kind of detail to add to that. But to the question – third time you’ve tried to ask me – I’m just not going to comment at all on a potential deal and what implication anything might have or might not have on it.

QUESTION: As for Wagner itself, as you know, this is international – the U.S. recognizes it as international criminal organization. Where do you draw the line, redline, in terms of switching from international criminal organization to recognizing it as an international terrorist organization?

MR MILLER: So this is a conversation that you and I have had many times. I don’t have a different answer for than I have —

QUESTION: It’s a new angle.

MR MILLER: — than I have had the previous – a new angle; it’s the same question. I don’t have a different answer than the previous seven or eight times I’ve answered it, which is we have taken a number of steps to hold Wagner accountable, including the designated you mentioned, including multiple sanctions for its activities in Ukraine, its activities in Africa – and we will continue to do so.

QUESTION: Please come back to me on Ukraine and Azerbaijan later.

MR MILLER: Okay. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. I just wanted to follow up on the exchange in this room yesterday about the future of Gaza. You said there may need to be some transition period in Gaza. Can you clarify what do you mean by “transition period?” And who will govern Gaza during this transition period?

MR MILLER: Again, we’re getting a little – this is a little cart before the horse, as some of the questions about hostages have been. What I meant with respect to transition – a transition period – this is something the Secretary has spoken to – first, let me back up and say that we have outlined some clear principles that we believe ought to apply to the future – to the future status of Gaza when this conflict is over. Been through those principles – no reoccupation of Gaza, no control of Gaza by Hamas, no diminution in the territorial size of Gaza, no siege of Gaza.

That said, Israel is conducting a military operation. At some point, that military operation will end. There will have to be a transition period before a – before the next status emerges, before – we’ve talked about what we want to see is a – the Palestinian Authority ultimately governing both Gaza and the West Bank. There has to be some security force in place for a transition period. You can’t just see the Israeli Government complete its security operations and then walk out and leave Gaza in a vacuum, a security and political vacuum, immediately. So there will have to be some transition period.

What that transition period looks like, I think it’s too early to say. We’re engaged in those conversations with allies and partners right now, and we’ll continue to look for the best solution possible, with one of our first principles being that the Palestinian people themselves need to be front and center in deciding the future governments – governance of Gaza and the West Bank. But I think as we are in the ongoing military campaign in Gaza, it’s a little too early to talk about what – how – what those details might look like.

QUESTION: So you stated the U.S. position, but it seems that the U.S. and Israel have different visions for a post-war Gaza. Secretary Blinken said Gaza should be unified with the West Bank under the PA, but Netanyahu made it clear during a CNN interview that he would not be handing over Gaza’s control to the PA. There are also other issues that it seems that you don’t agree on. So how will you address this gap between you and the Netanyahu government?

MR MILLER: That is what diplomacy is for. We have laid out our principles, and you will see us engaged with the Government of Israel, as well as other governments in the region, to advance our principles, as well as engage with the Palestinian Authority and the Palestinian people directly, to talk about what the future of Gaza looks like at the end of this conflict.

QUESTION: Yeah, thank you, Matt. Going back to the deal, you said that you are close to that deal. How close you are? And then do you expect —

MR MILLER: I don’t – I don’t even know how to answer that question. We’re – I think I said we’re very close. I’m not —

QUESTION: There are reports saying that —

MR MILLER: We’re getting a little into the – sorry, go ahead.

QUESTION: — yeah – that Qatari Government will announce it today. Do you expect it? Is there —

MR MILLER: I’m not going to – I’m not going to speculate at all about when an announcement may come.

QUESTION: And then, what’s the – what’s your priority when we are talking about bringing and releasing the hostages? Is it elderly, or the American people, or —

MR MILLER: Again, I don’t want to talk to the underlying details. We ultimately – our goal has been to see this – the release of all hostages. We think there’s no reason that Hamas ought to be holding hostages at all. As a reminder, I stand up here and take all these questions about what the Government of Israel has done; Hamas continues to hold hostages – elderly people, children, sick people. They all ought to be released immediately. Now, what the arrangement might look like, I’m not going to speak to any underlying details.

QUESTION: Have you tried to put an American —

MR MILLER: I’m just not – I’m just not going to – I’m going to draw the line and not – decline to comment on any further details.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR MILLER: Sorry. I do appreciate all the questions. There’s been some creative attempts, but I’m going to decline.

Yeah, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you, sir. Thank you. So change of subject (inaudible)?

MR MILLER: Sure.

QUESTION: So – U.S. Ambassador in Pakistan Donald Blome announced the aid package of $4 million for Pakistani security forces to bolster Pakistan’s counterterrorism capabilities. But a group of U.S. lawmakers, in a letter to Secretary Blinken, asked Biden administration to suspend all military assistance to Pakistan for human rights violations and for the political crisis. So would you provide any details about that aid package? And what you – how would you respond to that letter of U.S. lawmakers?

MR MILLER: So I wouldn’t want to preview how we would respond to the letter here. We obviously respond directly to those members of Congress. With respect to the announcement that the ambassador made, we’ll be pursuing four new initiatives to support the Balochistan police in their efforts to protect and serve their local communities. We’re going to provide $4 million in assistance to expand the anti-terrorist force training facility – $2 million to repair or replace 10 flood-damaged police stations; 2 million to construct 10 new police stations that incorporate the same model to improve service to women, girls, and all Pakistanis; and an additional $250,000 in equipment to protect law enforcement officers in the course of conducting their work.

These initiatives build on more than 40 years of partnership between the U.S. mission in Pakistan and the Pakistani Government on civilian security and rule of law. And from our standpoint, the partnership improves justice institutions and provides law enforcement agencies with the tools they need to protect Pakistan citizens.

QUESTION: So Pakistani media is reporting that U.S. Ambassador Donald Blome held a meeting with former Prime Minister Imran Khan in Adiala prison and discussed the political situation. Would you deny or confirm that meeting with Imran Khan?

MR MILLER: So I would – I would refer you to the embassy to – to comment on any meetings the ambassador has had. But as we have said a number of times, we do not take position – a position on candidates for political office in Pakistan or any other country.

QUESTION: So one last question, sir. Pakistan is deporting millions of Afghan refugees, but on the request of U.S. Government, Pakistan says that it would not deport 25,000 Afghan refugees who are waiting for their American visas. So how would you see this decision of Pakistani Government?

MR MILLER: So we are in close and constant communication with the Government of Pakistan on the safety of individuals in the U.S. pipeline. It is our desire to work in good faith with the Government of Pakistan to address any concerns that it may have. Our key concern is the safety of the vulnerable and at-risk individuals. We believe it is in both our countries’ interest to ensure the safe and efficient resettlement of refugees and asylum speakers – asylum seekers. And we join all of our partners in urging all countries, including Pakistan, to uphold their respective obligations in the treatment of refugees and asylum speakers – or asylum seekers, and strongly encourage all of Afghanistan’s neighbor to – neighbors to allow entry for Afghans seeking international protection, and coordinate with international humanitarian organizations to provide humanitarian assistance.

QUESTION: Can I have a follow-up, just on that?

MR MILLER: Sure, go ahead.

QUESTION: Could you give us a sense of numbers? How many Americans – Afghans we’re talking about that would be in this pipeline?

MR MILLER: I don’t have a – I don’t have a – I don’t have a number at my disposal right now. I’d be happy to follow up and see if we can get it for you. I just don’t have it at my fingertips.

QUESTION: Follow-up?

MR MILLER: Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you so much. So I’ll change subcontinent – just to make sure, do you think that the choice of violence by the nationalist party in Bangladesh is contributing to the undermining that democratic process in Bangladesh?

MR MILLER: So we want to see a free and peaceful election in Bangladesh. We want to see the elections carried out as – carried out peacefully. That has been our policy, as I have made clear a number of times from here.

QUESTION: And – thank you for that. Will you condemn – I repeat – will you condemn the political violence orchestrated by the BNP to the context of human rights that U.S. care about?

MR MILLER: I think – I think I answered that with my previous answer.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: Thank you very much.

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: I have a question on Russia and one on the U.S. There is a media report that President Biden will not be attending tomorrow’s virtual G20 summit. Who will be representing the U.S. tomorrow?

MR MILLER: So I will let the White House speak to the President’s schedule. I don’t have any update on that.

QUESTION: Okay. And I have one more question on CTBT.

MR MILLER: Mm-hmm.

QUESTION: So as you know, Russia has withdrew its ratification of the treaty, and (inaudible) that Secretary Blinken said that the U.S. remains committed to achieving the entry into force of the treaty. Can you please clarify, has the State Department done anything over the past two years to advance this goal and to work with the Senate to ratify it?

MR MILLER: Let me take that one back and get you an answer.

Go ahead. Go ahead, yeah. You —

QUESTION: Matthew —

MR MILLER: Yeah, sorry. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Good afternoon. My glasses might be foggier (inaudible). With Nicaragua pulling out of the OAS, the Organization of American States, I saw your tweet; I saw the State Department’s reaction to the letter. But how much more difficult is it now to hold the Ortega regime responsible for human rights abuses now that they’re out of the OAS?

MR MILLER: So we believe – so I will say that we will continue to call for the release of political prisoners in Nicaragua. We will continue to work with our allies and partners in the region. We do see them trying to avoid – trying to avoid accountability measures, including by departing the OAS, and it’s something we will continue to work with on our – our allies and partners with.

QUESTION: And one more question, if I may.

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: A separate topic. I should have said separate topic earlier. Sorry.

MR MILLER: That’s – there’s no rule on how you preface a question, so —

QUESTION: All right. I know we’re all around the world here, so —

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: This is sort of specific here, so bear with me here. Foreign-born religious workers in the U.S. here on temporary work visas, they’re very worried that they’re going to be sent back to their countries because of a change in how green cards are processed. They basically have to wait in a longer line to get their green card, but they’re worried in the meantime their temporary work visa will expired – will expire and they’ll be sent back to their country of origin. Bottom line is they’re worried they’re going to – their flocks are going to be left behind, their congregations are going to be left behind. Does the State Department share those concerns with those religious workers? Are you aware of that?

MR MILLER: You are right; that is a very specific question.

QUESTION: Okay. Okay, good.

MR MILLER: Let me take it back and get you an answer.

Shannon, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. Your counterpart at the NSC, John Kirby, was also very careful, but he did say that the State Department might play a role in processing any released American hostages that might want to come home, suggesting it might look like the way non-hostages coming out of Gaza are processed by consular officers. Can you say anything more?

MR MILLER: All I would say is that with respect to any released hostage, it would be the same as with respect to any American in the world who needs assistance. We would provide them whatever consular assistance we can, and that obviously is true for any released hostages.

QUESTION: And on the Americans in Gaza, do you have an updated number of how many are seeking to leave the enclave?

MR MILLER: It is still – so we have gotten around 800 American citizens, legal permanent residents, and their family members out. I don’t have any update in terms of the numbers who are seeking to leave from the number I gave yesterday, which was around 1,200. But again, that’s not the number of American citizens; that’s American citizens and family members and others.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR MILLER: Alex, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. Back to Ukraine, if you don’t mind.

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: Today marks 10 years since Ukraine’s Revolution of Dignity. I just want to give you a chance to speak to that. The Kremlin keeps calling it a, quote/unquote, “foreign-sponsored coup.” And separately, Russian foreign ministry officials also today were quoted as saying that the coexistence with Ukrainian current, quote/unquote, “regime” is not possible. What are some of the —

MR MILLER: That the – say that last part again. I missed it.

QUESTION: The coexistence with Ukrainian regime is not possible, they say. What is your understanding of what they are saying here, and what is your reaction?

MR MILLER: So I think what my reaction would be is that you continue to see the Russian Government make outrageous and unacceptable statements about Ukraine, and so we – it just reinforces our conviction to continue to supply Ukraine with the assistance that it needs to defend itself, to repel Russian aggression from its borders. We’ve seen Russia make – and that applies to the first part of your question as well. The amount of Russian propaganda that we hear about Ukraine didn’t just start this year or last year; it has been going on for a number of years. And it reaffirms, as I said, our commitment and, I think, heightens the need for Congress to take action to pass the supplemental request that we’ve sent up to Ukraine.

The Secretary just today had a call with his G7 counterparts to talk about additional steps that we are taking as – through the United States and we are taking in concert with our allies and partners and in cooperation with the Government of Ukraine to try to harden Ukraine’s infrastructure in advance of the winter. Last winter we saw Russia striking energy sites, trying to take them down in Ukraine, and so we are working with Ukraine to try to harden its infrastructure in advance of this winter.

Okay.

QUESTION: And if you can offer in particular about Maidan – Maidan’s anniversary?

MR MILLER: I just – just what I already said.

Go ahead. Let me go – yeah, Alex, I’m going to – yeah, that’s a few. That’s about —

QUESTION: Different topic?

MR MILLER: Go ahead, and then we’re going to – we’re going to wrap here. Go ahead.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

QUESTION: Thank you, Matt.

MR MILLER: Go – go ahead, and then we’re going to have to wrap up.

QUESTION: After this morning’s North Korea missile launch, I understand NSC put out a statement saying you guys are still making assessments, but according to Yonhap, North Korea is claiming that it successfully put a spy satellite in orbit. So are you able to confirm whether or not the launch was successful, and if so, how does this change the security situation in the region and for the U.S.?

MR MILLER: So I cannot confirm that assessment. It is still something that’s ongoing inside the United States Government. I can say that we condemn the DPRK’s unlawful launch of a military reconnaissance satellite on – today. This launch utilized ballistic missile technology, which includes space launch vehicles. It violates multiple United Nations Security Council resolutions, and we will continue to work with the international community to send a strong signal to the DPRK that its actions will only intensify its isolation as it undermines stability and prosperity on the Korean Peninsula.

QUESTION: But can you say how concerning it would be if North Korea had a spy satellite?

MR MILLER: I’m just not going to speak to that before we’ve made a formal assessment. And with that, we’ll wrap for today. I hope everyone has a safe and restful and peaceful Thanksgiving. Thank you all.

(The briefing was concluded at 2:11 p.m.)

Department Press Briefing – November 20, 2023

(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)

2:35 p.m. EST

MR MILLER: Afternoon, everyone. Sorry to be going a little later today. I will – I don’t have any opening comments, so – what’s that?

QUESTION: Why?

MR MILLER: I had a meeting to go to, so sorry to delay you. But you’re up.

QUESTION: Well, no. You’re not delaying me. It’s just that if you’re going to keep letting Kirby in the White House take all the foreign policy questions of the day, then I’m not sure why we’re having this briefing.

MR MILLER: I’m happy to – if people don’t have questions, I’m happy to go back to my office and relax the rest of the afternoon.

QUESTION: Okay. All right.

MR MILLER: (Laughing.) But —

QUESTION: I’ll leave, then.

MR MILLER: Okay. Daphne?

QUESTION: Thank you. So on the hostage deal, saying it’s closer now than it has been, can you explain a little bit, like without getting into details because I know you can’t, why this shift in messaging, why you feel that you’re closer now than you have been?

MR MILLER: I really can’t get into details. As we’ve said publicly for some time, really since October 7th and since we found out that there were hostages, including American citizens who were taken, unfortunately, we are doing everything in our power to secure the release of those hostages and see their safe return home. But it’s just not productive to talk about the details. We have been engaged in intense negotiations over this matter. The Secretary’s been involved; the President has been involved; other members of the administration have. And we have made progress in trying to secure a deal in conversation with our Qatari partners, and of course in conversation with the Government of Israel. But I can’t speak to the underlying details of those negotiations.

QUESTION: Do you have any sense of whether Americans will be included in any release?

MR MILLER: Again, I just – that is our priority. We obviously want to see those American citizens who we know have been taken hostage returned home. But I just don’t want to speak to any of the details of the negotiations.

QUESTION: And then where do talks on a pause stand with Israel?

MR MILLER: We continue to have negotiations about and discussions with the Government of Israel about a full range of humanitarian issues. As the President has said, as the Secretary has said, we want to see longer pauses. We want to see more humanitarian assistance go in. You saw the Government of Israel announce on Friday an agreement to allow more fuel, to allow fuel to come in through Rafah gate, really for the first time, up to 140,000 liters every 48 hours to power telecoms in Gaza so people can communicate with each other, so they can call emergency services, so we can communicate with the American citizens who are there; to power the delivery of humanitarian assistance that’s been coming in; and of course to power desalinization and hospitals and other electric needs. And we continue to push for all those things. It’s a top priority for the United States.

QUESTION: And if I could just ask one more on the Kerem Shalom border crossing. Martin Griffiths has called for that to be opened, and can you let us know where that stands on talks with Israelis with that? Is that something you’re trying to get open?

MR MILLER: So we want to see more humanitarian assistance come in through – into Gaza. There are a number of ways in which it could – in which more assistance could come in. It’s not just a question of opening another gate; it could be getting more assistance in through Rafah gate. The Israelis have very real security concerns about the ability to open Kerem Shalom, but we think if – actually if you could increase the screening so you could get more trucks and more assistance in through Rafah, that would be another way to do it. So we continue to have those conversations with Israel about what the best way is. But ultimately, our goal is to increase the number of trucks that are coming in so more food, more water, more medicine is getting to the Palestinian people who need it.

QUESTION: Can I follow up on that? What is the holdup on that, Matt? Because Blinken announced on our trip that he was expecting movement on that in coming days, and it’s been weeks now. Is it an Israeli political decision that’s holding this up?

MR MILLER: It is not just a political decision. There are real operational concerns about how you get screening turned on to get more humanitarian assistance in. There are operational details that we have to work through. There are agreements we have to reach with the Government of Israel. We are involved in those conversations. David Satterfield has been on the ground since he was appointed, working on these matters, continues to attempt to make progress. But there are just some really very difficult logistical problems that we have to work through and unlock to get aid screened and get it in through Rafah quickly.

And of course I would say the – we ran into a problem last week where we had aid that was going in through Rafah and then filling up warehouses. And because there was no fuel going in to Rafah and fuel – or going through Rafah and fuel inside Gaza had been depleted, there was assistance sitting in Gaza that couldn’t be distributed to the people who needed it. An agreement that the Secretary pushed for last week with members of the Israeli war cabinet that they announced on Friday to allow fuel to go into Rafah for the first time will allow that humanitarian assistance to be delivered, now that it’s made it inside. But there is much more that needs to be done that we continue to push on.

QUESTION: What about this idea of safe corridors that Ambassador Satterfield discussed, I mean, the fact that implementers aren’t going to feel safe distributing aid further within southern Gaza if they feel that they – their lives could be at risk? Have you gotten any guarantees from the Israeli Government that these implementers would be safe?

MR MILLER: This is another matter that continues to be a focus of discussion between our government and the Government of Israel, not just with respect to the implementers, who need to feel safe when they’re delivering humanitarian assistance, but also with respect to all the civilians in Gaza, and especially the civilians who the Israeli Government asked to move from the north to the south. They moved to the south and are now worried that they may be a subject of the next stage of the military campaign.

So you saw Jon Finer, the deputy national security advisor, say yesterday that we think if Israel is going to turn to military operations in the south, before it does so it needed – needs to address those very real humanitarian questions and have answers for where civilians in southern Gaza can be safe, especially those who have fled their homes in the north.

QUESTION: Have they given you any answers on that front —

MR MILLER: We —

QUESTION: – particularly when it comes to Khan Yunis, where a number of civilians who are waiting to get out of Rafah are sheltering?

MR MILLER: It is an ongoing conversation we’re having with them. We’re also having this conversation with UNRWA and other humanitarian organizations, about the best way to implement these civilian protections, what the best method might be.

QUESTION: Yeah. Can I follow up on that? Thanks. Some of the UN agencies and other humanitarian agencies have said that Israel’s idea of moving these people to Mawasi on the southwest coast isn’t going to work. And so what do you think is the best option? Since the UN may or may not be participating, what do you think is the best option in terms of keeping civilians safe as the conflict moves south?

MR MILLER: So I don’t want to prescribe that here, given that it is the subject of ongoing conversations between the United States, the United Nations, humanitarian organizations, and the Government of Israel to try to work out what the best solution is. We do have concerns that concentrating all civilians in one area does leave them vulnerable to harm. We are trying to work through with the Government of Israel what other solutions might be, and it’s a subject of ongoing conversation.

QUESTION: Is this something where you have like neighborhoods or areas that are considered safe for civilians? Or is this something where you have individual outposts, like hospitals, schools, or other things that would be – have some sort of protection?

MR MILLER: Well, I’d say with respect to hospitals and schools, we do want to see it – them protected. We don’t want to see them struck from the air. We’ve made that clear. That was true with respect to northern Gaza. Obviously, there is a situation where you have Hamas using hospitals as places for – where they’re embedding their fighters, they’re using as command centers. That’s a difficult situation that Israel has to address, and we want them to do it in compliance with humanitarian law.

But with respect to the first part of your question, it’s the subject of ongoing conversation right now, and I wouldn’t want to prescribe what the solution would be before those conversations are finished.

QUESTION: May I follow up?

MR MILLER: Shaun, go ahead. I’ll come to you.

QUESTION: Sure. Could I turn to something – to extremist settlers —

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: — in the West Bank. There have been a couple of strong statements from the administration, including by the Secretary last week, about extremist violence by settlers. What is the administration planning to do? I think John mentioned this as well on the – on one of the talk shows yesterday. Travel bans – is that on the cards? Is there a timeline for when these things could happen?

MR MILLER: Visa restrictions are very much on the table as one possible measure that we might implement. There could be others. We have made very clear, from the President on down, that the level of extremist violence against innocent Palestinian civilians in the West Bank right now is unacceptable. The Secretary has raised that repeatedly with the Government of Israel in his travels there, that the violence needs to stop. The perpetrators need to be held accountable. We want to see people prosecuted when they have violated the law. And in addition to the Government of Israel taking steps to promote accountability, there are steps that we can take as well, and we have a number of those steps under consideration. But I wouldn’t want to preview those publicly before we might take them.

QUESTION: When you say it’s on the table, that means it could happen, it could not happen, or is that something that’s actually —

MR MILLER: It’s something that’s under consideration. But as you know, a longtime attendee of this briefing, we don’t like to announce sanctions that we’re going to make before we’ve implemented them.

QUESTION: Sure, sure. But in the sense that it’s – like basically if things improve, then the action may not be taken?

MR MILLER: Look, if we saw a significant diminution in violence against Palestinians in the West Bank, and if we saw the Government of Israel taking steps to hold those responsible for violence accountable, that’s certainly something we would welcome, something we would consider in taking into account what kind of actions we might take. But we want to see those steps happen as soon as possible.

QUESTION: Sure. Can I just ask you – a couple of the diplomatic aspects of the situation in Gaza, one being China. China has had the foreign ministers of the —

MR MILLER: Side conversation going on over here. Go ahead. Go ahead, sorry.

QUESTION: I’m fully focusing on the —

MR MILLER: Yeah. I’m fully focused as well.

QUESTION: — the Palestinian Authority and a number of Arab countries, the foreign ministers have gone to China, had some talks. How does the United States see this? I assume the narrative is that China’s trying to steal – but maybe that’s not the right metaphor – but trying to take the role of the United States in some ways of – in the Middle East. Does the United States see this as productive, potentially? Does it see it as a threat diplomatically? What does the United States see it as?

MR MILLER: I’ll say two things about that. One, we would welcome China playing a constructive role in the Middle East. The Secretary has made this clear personally in his conversations with Wang Yi. He called Wang Yi on our first trip to the Middle East and said if there’s anything they can do to prevent the conflict from widening, in terms of using the lines of communications that they have available to countries in the Middle East, we would welcome that. He followed up on that conversation when Wang Yi was here and had a very productive conversation about it.

The — to the larger question though, I would say one of the things that we heard repeatedly from every party with which we engaged on our last trip is the indispensability of the United States in every aspect of this conflict. Whether it comes from getting humanitarian assistance in, whether it comes to preventing the conflict from widening, as I’ve said from this podium before, it is the United States – not any other country – that was able to negotiate an agreement to begin delivering humanitarian assistance in. It was the United States that was able to push for and achieve humanitarian pauses so civilians could move around Gaza more safely than they could before. It is the United States that’s the largest humanitarian donor to the Palestinian people.

So we always welcome any other countries that can play productive, diplomatic roles. But the thing we hear from partners over and over again in the region is there are no – there is no substitute for U.S. leadership, and it’s why the Secretary and the President and other members of the administration continue to stay engaged on this and will continue to stay engaged on it.

QUESTION: Sure. Just to play devil’s advocate, obviously some of these countries have argued that the U.S. is, I mean, clearly supporting Israel. Is there any sense that – is there any concern that perhaps another country could – such as China – could step into the U.S. role, just because the United States is seen as – their perception; I’m not saying that but it’s —

MR MILLER: No, I think there is – there are productive roles for a number of countries to play, and we would welcome them. There are unproductive roles that countries can play as well. But we are confident in the diplomatic efforts that we have launched. We are complement – confident in the conversations that we continue to have.

This is a difficult problem that the region is grappling with. It is obviously, first and foremost, a problem that Israel is grappling with when it comes to trying to defeat Hamas. But the broader issue of preventing the conflict from spreading and ultimately achieving what the United States – what the United States supports, what other countries in the region and what other countries across the world support, which is, at the end of this, the establishment of an independent Palestinian state.

That’s something that’s going to take engagement from a number of countries. The United States expects to play a leadership role. We expect to be engaged. You’ve already seen the Secretary lay out principles that we think are important for the path forward at the end of this conflict, and we would expect other countries to play productive roles as well.

QUESTION: Sure. Just one more, if you don’t mind, on the diplomatic side.

MR MILLER: You’re making Said get a little impatient here. He’s getting antsy for his question. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Let’s see, Israel-South Africa. Just a few moments ago, I believe the Israelis said they’re withdrawing their ambassador from South Africa. This, of course, is after South Africa said that it was – it hoped to refer to the ICC some of the issues that were – some of the – some of the things that are happening right now in Gaza. Does the United States have a stance either on what’s happening between Israel and South Africa or about the ICC referral?

MR MILLER: It’s ultimately a discussion for those two countries, not for the United States.

QUESTION: But on the ICC part?

MR MILLER: I don’t have a comment on it.

Go ahead, Said.

QUESTION: Yes, thank you. I just want to follow on Shaun’s question on the sanctions that the (inaudible) – I mean that – against settlers and so on. There are many settlers, thousands of settlers, who hold U.S. passports. They are U.S. citizens. In this case, you cannot, of course, deny them a visa, but will you prosecute them if it’s proven that they have participated in criminal acts?

MR MILLER: Said, I wouldn’t want to preview any action before it’s taken. And certainly, the State Department does not prosecute anyone, and I wouldn’t want to comment on that.

QUESTION: I’m just saying —

MR MILLER: No, but as you know, the – we have strict rules inside the United States Government. Those decisions are made by the Justice Department, and we don’t comment on them or participate in them at any other agency.

QUESTION: Okay. Okay, so what kind of other sanctions you might impose?

MR MILLER: Again, Said, I don’t want to preview any steps that we might take. I will reiterate that our first priority is for the Government of Israel to take action —

QUESTION: Right.

MR MILLER: — against those extremists who are committing violence against Palestinians. But we have options at our disposal as well that we will use if appropriate.

QUESTION: Okay, a couple of questions on Gaza. But before I ask on Gaza, there – today – I don’t think you probably know about this, but there is a poet named Mosab Abu Toha, a young poet. His son is U.S. citizen, born in this country. Abu Toha is – was a scholar at Harvard. Today he was leaving after speaking with the embassy, apparently, and he was trying to leave, and he was basically taken away and his toddler given to his mom and so on. Is there anything that his family should be doing with the United States, since more than likely he was probably on his way to the United States?

MR MILLER: I just – I don’t have the details of that case, so it’s very —

QUESTION: Okay, I will send you the details.

MR MILLER: Said, hold – just let me establish the ground rule again.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR MILLER: I will not interrupt your questions; don’t interrupt my answer, please. I don’t have the details of that case, and so it wouldn’t be appropriate for me to comment on them without having the full range of – full details.

QUESTION: Sure. Okay, I’ll send you the details. Now look, I mean, we have – the figures are really gruesome. I mean, I don’t know – is this administration – and I say this with – has it become numb to the number of Palestinians killed every day? I mean, are you okay with, like, 13,000 that have been killed thus far? What is – where are we going to stop? Where are we going to stop?

MR MILLER: Said, you have – you have heard the President speak to this. You have heard the Secretary speak to this. You have heard the Secretary say that far too many Palestinians have been killed as a result of this conflict. Every innocent life that’s lost is a tragedy, and we mourn the loss of every innocent life. These are civilians whose deaths have come through no fault of their own, that are in the conflict that is not of their own making. And I can tell you – speaking for myself, speaking for everyone in this administration – that we feel those deaths every bit as we feel the loss of Israeli civilian lives.

And so that is why when we set out to develop our policies and have conversations with the Government of Israel and with others in the region, we have a number of principles that we have made very clear. Number one, as Israel conducts a legitimate operation to prevent the terrorists that attacked it on October 7th from being able to do so again, it does so in accordance with humanitarian law, and it tries to the greatest extent possible to minimize civilian harm. Number two, we want to see civilians protected; we want to see civilian infrastructure protected. And number three, we want to get humanitarian assistance to those in need.

That is what we can do at the policy level from the United States Government. It’s what we continue to do to try to minimize civilian suffering, to try to help those civilians who are in Gaza. But at the same time, we see every one of those deaths and we mourn each and every one of them.

QUESTION: The President said that he envisions a Palestinian state that will include Gaza and the West Bank and so on. So let me ask you this: Do you – or is it safe to assume that the administration has some sort of a vision how this very battle should end?

MR MILLER: I don’t want to get to how this conflict will end because, ultimately, it’s very hard to prescribe from a podium —

QUESTION: Not to —

MR MILLER: But it’s hard to prescribe from a podium thousands of miles away how a military operation, which is, of course, unpredictable by its nature – we’ve seen that multiple times throughout history – how it will end and what will be left in the aftermath. So where we are right now is laying out principles. And you’ve heard the Secretary articulate some of those principles with respect to Gaza – that there should be no diminution in the territory of Gaza, that no Palestinians should be displaced from Gaza, a number of other principles – and also heard him and the President articulate that ultimately, at the end of this, we want to see the establishment of a Palestinian state that unites the West Bank and unites Gaza so the Palestinian people can determine their own future. And that is the policy that we support; it’s the policy that we will try to achieve.

QUESTION: And lastly, there was a report in Haaretz that, on October 7th, there were actually Israeli gunships that had – may have been responsible for a lot of the deaths that occurred that day. Have you seen that report?

MR MILLER: I’ve seen the reports. I can’t —

QUESTION: And do you —

MR MILLER: I can’t comment —

QUESTION: You cannot – okay.

MR MILLER: — on what’s an internal Israeli military question.

Yeah, go ahead, Michel.

QUESTION: Yeah, Matt, do you have any comment on the Houthis seizing the ship in the Red Sea, and is the administration reconsidering its decision to take them off the terrorist list?

MR MILLER: So I don’t have any update with respect to those determinations. I will say that the Houthi seizure of the motor vessel Galaxy Leader in the Red Sea is a flagrant violation of international law. We demand the immediate release of the ship and its crew, and we will consult with our allies and UN partners, as appropriate, on next steps.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR MILLER: Go ahead, Alex.

QUESTION: Thanks – thank you, Matt. A couple questions on non-Middle East, if you don’t mind. Are you having —

MR MILLER: On – on what?

QUESTION: Non-Middle East, so —

MR MILLER: Oh, non-Middle East, okay.

QUESTION: Are you aware of any contact between the U.S. and Russian officials during the past one week, either in Washington or in San Francisco when Alexei Overchuk was representing Russian – Russian Government?

MR MILLER: I am not. You mean in – at APEC, any contact?

QUESTION: Yeah.

MR MILLER: I’m not – I can’t – as always, it’s a big conference. I can’t rule out someone said hi in the hall. But I’m not aware of any, no.

QUESTION: Last Saturday marked, as you know, one month since RFE/RL reporter Alsu’s arrest, illegal detention in Russia. Any notification you have received from Russian side?

MR MILLER: We have not received official notification of her arrest. It’s a matter we continue to monitor very closely. We have sought consular assistance; it has not yet been granted. We’ll continue to pursue it.

QUESTION: Did the fact that there was no notification from – over a month, more than a month – isn’t that enough reason to recognize or designate this case as wrongful?

MR MILLER: First of all, I’d say that the Russian Government, as a general rule when it comes to dual citizens, does not see it as its obligation to provide consular notification. And I will say as a broader issue that there are a number of factors that we consider when making that determination about whether someone has been wrongfully detained or not. It is never any one factor on its own. It is a confluence of factors that leads the department to making a determination.

QUESTION: Do you have a deadline for that?

MR MILLER: No.

QUESTION: Gershkovich, as you know, he was visited by the U.S. officials last week. Is there anything you can tell us about his situation?

MR MILLER: I can’t tell you any more about his condition or detention. I would refer you to the embassy at Moscow who conducted that visit for any more specific information. I will tell you it continues to be a top priority to bring him home, as it is to bring Paul Whelan home. It’s something that we have worked at – on at the seniormost levels in this government and that we will continue to make one of our top priorities.

QUESTION: Please, Matt, I have two more, if you don’t mind, different topics.

MR MILLER: Sure.

QUESTION: Belarus and Russia. Last – as you know, today marked – today is the World Children’s Day. I want to draw your attention to – a very compelling report came out last week – you guys also flagged it – on how Ukrainian children are being deported to Belarus. First of all, about significance of this fact, the findings, this was – and I think one simple question is: What are you guys going to do about it?

MR MILLER: So I would say that I did note that report. It identified more than 2,400 children from Ukraine between the ages of six and 17 who have been transported to facilities in Belarus. It documented close coordination between Russian and Belarusian officials to facilitate these movements. As we – you have heard us say before, Belarus is complicit in Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; it is not a disinterested third country providing safe haven for children in conflict. These operations have disproportionately targeted vulnerable children, including purported orphans, children with disabilities, children from low-income families, and children with members of Ukraine’s military.

Our information is limited. We don’t know whether the children who are deported to Russia or Belarus are being exploited further, but they remain highly vulnerable, of course, to human trafficking. So it is a matter that we continue to monitor very closely in making all of the range of assessments that you would expect us to make.

QUESTION: Is it time for an ICC arrest warrant for Lukashenka?

MR MILLER: I am not going to speak to determinations that the – that are appropriately in the context of the ICC.

QUESTION: Thank you. My final topic on Karabakh, if you don’t mind.

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: Can you just let us know on what was supposed to happen today in this building and what ended up happening? An Armenian foreign – Armenian ambassador was in the building, but Azeris claim that there was supposed to be a Karabakh summit and then they declined to attend. Is there anything you can tell us?

MR MILLER: I’m not going to speak to that. I will say that we continue to engage the leadership of both countries and offer to facilitate a dignified and durable peace where the rights of all are respected. It is important that Armenia and Azerbaijan discuss and resolve issues directly to benefit the region. We would welcome a role in facilitating those talks. We’ve seen other countries offer to facilitate those talks. We think it’s important that the two countries talk face to face to reach a durable agreement.

QUESTION: Will you still continue offering Washington as a potential —

MR MILLER: As I just said, we would be willing to facilitate those talks, as we have in the past, and we welcome other countries doing so as well.

QUESTION: Matt.

MR MILLER: Janne, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. One on North Korea and one on China. It was reported that North Korea will launch its third military or space satellite this month due to technology transfer from Russia to North Korea. How do you see the chance of successful satellite launch?

MR MILLER: So I’m not going to speak to purported events. I will say that our concerns about North Korea’s ballistic missile program and other military programs are well known. Our concerns about the transfer of technology between Russia and North Korea, whether it’s Russia providing North Korea with technology or whether it’s North Korea providing arms to Russia, are also well known. As we’ve said before, those transfers in some cases violate multiple United Nations Security Council resolutions, including resolutions that Russia itself voted for, and we will continue to monitor them closely and take whatever actions are appropriate with our allies in the region to monitor and respond to North Korea’s destabilizing behavior.

QUESTION: South Korea’s President Yoon Suk Yeol said that it would not be helpful if China went along with North Korea-Russia cooperation. Does the United States have the same position as President Yoon?

MR MILLER: I will just say that our position is very clear, which is that Russia should not supply North Korea with technology that would violate United Nations Security Council resolutions; North Korea should not supply Russia with arms that it can use to prosecute its war of aggression against Ukraine; and that is our position with respect to any country in the world.

QUESTION: Can I just follow-up briefly on —

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: The – it’s just a basic question on that. I believe the Japanese said that there has been a formal notification from North Korea about an upcoming satellite launch; it’s a notification for the sake of people – for the sake of the maritime industry. Has the United States actually been informed either directly or indirectly about a North Korean —

MR MILLER: I’ll have to take that back. I’m happy to check for you.

Yeah, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thanks.

QUESTION: Yeah, thank you, going back to Gaza. You said that Palestinian people can determine their own future, but we know that –

MR MILLER: I’m sorry, said —

QUESTION: You said that Palestinian people can determine their own future. But we know that this will not happen soon after the Israeli finish with their military operation. Then what – do you have anything to share with who should control the Gaza until the Palestinian could determine their own future?

MR MILLER: So let me say this. It goes to the principles that I started to lay out with Said earlier. Some of the other principles that Said laid out is that they are – that Hamas cannot run Gaza at the end of this conflict, and that Israel cannot occupy Gaza, cannot reoccupy Gaza at the end of this conflict. There may need to be a transition period; you can imagine where the – once hostilities cease, there will have to be some transition period where there is a transition to a new governing authority and a new security authority, and we are going to work with our partners in the region and other countries around the world to try and determine what that looks like. I certainly wouldn’t want to describe it now.

But the ultimate answer to your question is that the Palestinian people themselves need to be front and center at determining who it is that will lead the Palestinian people. These are not decisions that the United States can or should impose on the Palestinian people; these are not answers that Israel can and should impose on the Palestinian people. The Palestinian people ultimately have a right to determine their own future, just like any other people in the world, which is why our ultimate goal at the end of this is the establishment of an independent Palestinian state so, as I said, they can determine their own future.

QUESTION: The chairman suggest that the UN should – could take control of Gaza, and also there are some suggestions from the region to create an Arabic coalition to run Gaza until the people could determine their own future. Do you support the UN or the Arab countries’ coalition?

MR MILLER: Again, there are any number of proposals that have been floated – some by people in government, some by people in the region, some by people in academia and other [think] tanks. What it will ultimately look at, we are at the beginning of having conversations about that with other countries. I wouldn’t want to try to prescribe it from here. It ultimately is a – will be the matter of a great deal of discussion between our country and other countries, and ultimately, as I said, between the Palestinian – or with the Palestinian people themselves, who need to have the voice front and center of deciding what their future looks like.

QUESTION: Last question, on Iraq. Last week, the Iraqi – the Iraqi top court ends the Iraqi parliament speaker term. Following this decision, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq met with both the Iraqi supreme court president and also Mohammed Halbousi, the removed Iraqi parliament speaker by the supreme court. But the U.S. ambassador in a post in – on X, she introduced Halbousi as the speaker of the parliament. Do you see Halbousi as the speaker of the Iraqi parliament still? What’s your comment on the Iraqi —

MR MILLER: I would refer the – I would refer to the ambassador or the embassy there to expand on those remarks.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. Thank you, Matt. On the new U.S. labor rights policy, Secretary Blinken has recently mentioned that those who violate worker rights, engage in threats, or intimidate workers may face sanction if deemed necessary. And he referred the struggle of Bangladesh’s government workers leader, Kalpona Akter. Is U.S. going to take any action as five government workers have been killed in recent days in wage-increase movement in Bangladesh?

MR MILLER: So in the remarks last week that you referred to, the Secretary outlined how we engage with governments, workers, labor organizations, trade unions, civil society, and the private sector around the world to protect and promote respect for internationally recognized labor rights. We will continue to do that in Bangladesh and elsewhere in the world. I would reiterate you to his full statement for comment.

As we’ve said, we condemn the recent violence against workers in Bangladesh protesting over the minimum wage, as well as the criminalization of legitimate worker and trade union activities. We are also concerned about the ongoing repression of workers and trade unions. Our principle, as we have stated before, is that government must ensure that workers are able to exercise their rights to freedom of association and collective bargaining without fear of violence, reprisal, or intimidation. And through our work in Bangladesh, and globally, we are firmly committed to advancing these fundamental human rights.

QUESTION: One more on Bangladesh. Bangladesh ruling party moving forwards – another one-sided election and crackdown on opposition, including killings, mass arrest, and abduction of the opposition activists and their family members. Ruling party officially denied the U.S. calls for dialogue as the U.S. does not support our one political party in – or other in Bangladesh. So what steps you are taking to prevent this one-party, authoritarian rule in Bangladesh?

MR MILLER: So you’re right, we do not take a position in favor of one party or the other. We want what the Bangladeshi people themselves want: free and fair elections which are conducted in a peaceful matter – manner. And we will continue to engage with the government, opposition, civil society, other stakeholders to urge them to work together for the benefit of the Bangladeshi people to ensure that outcome: free and fair elections conducted in a peaceful manner.

QUESTION: Thank you, Matt.

MR MILLER: Go ahead.

QUESTION: I have only one question. It’s me?

MR MILLER: Yeah, you, go ahead.

QUESTION: Yeah, thank you, thank you. Thank you, Matt. Honorable Assistant Secretary Donald Lu wrote letter to – for unconditional dialogue to three major political parties in Bangladesh. Election is scheduled for 7th of January, 2024. Thirty-plus political parties declared they are participating in the election. Only the opposition BNP called for the boycott. Would the United States consider an election with the participation of the remaining 30-plus political parties as a representative or – and participatory, or does BNP decision to boycott raise concern about the inclusivity and legitimacy of the election process by U.S.?

MR MILLER: So I appreciate the urge – the repeated urge, I should say – to try and draw me into internal Bangladeshi matters, but I am going to continue to refrain from doing so and just state, as I said before, that our goal for the election in Bangladesh is what it has always been: free and fair elections conducted in a peaceful manner.

Yeah, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: Regarding to the negotiations of the future of Gaza, who will represent Gaza’s people?

MR MILLER: The Palestinian people themselves in Gaza.

QUESTION: Who? Gaza’s people – who?

MR MILLER: Look, I – that is ultimately a question for the Palestinian people to determine. I can’t lay out for you at this point, when there are active – when there’s active combat – there are active combat operations going on on the ground in Gaza, what the – what things will look like at the end of those combat operations. I can articulate our principles for you, and one of our principles is that the Palestinian people themselves, including the Palestinian people in Gaza, should have a role in determining their future leadership. As we have said before, the Palestinian Authority right now is the representative of the people – the Palestinian people, and we would fully expect them to play a role in governance of both the West Bank and Gaza.

QUESTION: But the people of Gaza – who?

MR MILLER: Again, I am not – what’s happening with the microphone here?

QUESTION: Okay.

MR MILLER: Again, I don’t think I can articulate to you the exact path that this will take at the end of what are right now ongoing conflict operations. But we have been very clear that our goal is the establishment of a Palestinian state, a united Gaza and West Bank, where the Palestinian people themselves play a role in self-determination.

QUESTION: Okay. Despite of your assurance that Gaza will rebuild and the people of Gaza, the Palestinian people, will go back, will return to their homes after rebuild Gaza, but we still hearing about transferring plans to Egypt for Palestinian in Gaza, to Egypt and other countries. Please clarify that issue.

MR MILLER: So we have been very clear that Palestinians from Gaza should not be displaced. Period. Full stop. There have been some Palestinians from Gaza who have been injured, who have been wounded, who have left to seek medical treatment in Egypt. We support that if that is their choice and that’s what they want to do. But we have – we could not be more clear – more clear – you’ve heard the Secretary say this, you’ve heard the President say this – that the Palestinian people in Gaza should not, cannot, will not be displaced from their homes.

QUESTION: This statement is not valid?

MR MILLER: What?

QUESTION: What we heard is not valid?

MR MILLER: I don’t know what statement you’re referring to. I’m articulating the United States position.

QUESTION: Okay, thank you.

MR MILLER: Yeah, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you very much. I have two questions on Middle East, if I may. First of all, regarding the future of Gaza, you were very clear. President Biden, Secretary Blinken, and you from this podium made clear multiple times that the United States opposes both forcible displacement of Palestinians and Israel’s reoccupation of Gaza. But Prime Minister Netanyahu’s statements point out that the Israeli military will remain there indefinitely. As he said, quote, Israel will retain “overall security” control in Gaza, including the capacity to go in whenever they want to. And the foreign minister of Israel said in an interview, quote, “There will be Israeli security control from the Jordan [River] to the [Mediterranean] Sea at all times.”

So it looks like the whole process is going towards a fait accompli. First of all, do you agree with that? And secondly, what does —

MR MILLER: Let me answer the first – no, let me —

QUESTION: — State Department think about these specific statements by —

MR MILLER: Let me just – so no, I do not agree with that. Secondly, every position – every country will articulate its own positions. I’ve articulated the United States position, and we will continue to articulate it. And I should add it is not just the position of the United States; it’s a position that we have heard over and over from other countries in the region.

Ultimately, we are going to have a – we have – well, I should say we have already had conversations about this with the Government of Israel and the Secretary in his travels around the region, and ultimately, at the end of this conflict, there is going to have to be a larger conversation with the Government of Israel, with the Palestinian people, and with the other countries in the region about what the path forward is.

We’re very clear about what that path cannot be. That path cannot be, on the one hand, a return to Hamas governing Gaza and having a safe haven from which to launch terrorist attacks against Israel. You’ve heard Hamas leaders even in the last week say they want to launch a series of October 7ths again and again and again. That’s unacceptable to Israel; it would be unacceptable to any country.

On the other hand, also unacceptable is Israel reoccupying Gaza. So there may need to be some transition period; we’ve been very clear about that. We understand that the Israeli military is not going to conduct military operations in Gaza and then just disappear the next day. There’s going to have to be some sort of transition period so there isn’t a vacuum of security in Gaza. We will work with partners in the region to figure out what that transition period is, and ultimately our goal is, at the end of this, to see the establishment of a Palestinian state, as I have said.

Yeah.

QUESTION: My second question is – will be about the press freedom and the press activities in the Middle East regarding the Gaza crisis there and Israel attacks on Gaza. So during Friday prayers last week in Jerusalem, an Israeli soldier hit the camera of TRT crew, the Turkish public broadcaster crew, and he broke the lens of the camera, and our colleagues continued the live broadcast while they were on the air and with the broken lens of the camera. So first of all, do you have a statement on that specific attack on a TV crew?

And according to the CGP, until now, 48 journalists have been killed during the Israeli aggression against Gaza. So what is the State Department’s comment on that?

MR MILLER: So with respect to the first, I can’t comment – as is usually the case, I can’t comment on a specific incident where I don’t have all the facts at my disposal to make some kind of determination. I would say, as a general matter, we think journalists should be free to do their job. We would hope that every country would respect the free press and allow the free press to report, as is its right to do, around the world.

With respect to journalists that have been killed, you’ve heard us speak to this before, where we do not want to see journalists put in harm’s way. We recognize the sacrifice that many journalists make by traveling into conflict zones to try to get the truth out to the world. It’s an enormous risk that journalists put themselves at, and they ultimately sometimes pay a terrible price for that. But we want to see journalists protected. We don’t want to see any journalists lose their lives in this conflict, just as we don’t want to see any civilians lose their lives.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. I have a couple of question regarding another issue, not Gaza. It’s regarding the U.S. ambassador in Algeria’s recent visit to Tindouf camps in the southern part of this country. Could you please clarify the nature of this visit and whether she met Polisario leadership while she was there?

And my second question: This visit sparked some media attentions, particularly in the region, and some of them insinuating that is – that there is a shift in U.S. policy regarding the issue. Can you clarify as well?

MR MILLER: So with respect to the first question, Ambassador Aubin and a broad range of international donors participated in a UN-organized visit to Tindouf, Algeria. The United States is the largest contributor worldwide to international humanitarian efforts, including through our support for the vital work of UN agencies in Tindouf. We deeply value the critical work that our ambassador and U.S. diplomats in Algeria are doing with the UN and international partners to reinforce the humanitarian response there. There was no bilateral engagement with the Polisario during this UN donor visit.

And more generally, with respect to your second question, we fully support the UN personal envoy of the secretary-general as he intensifies the UN-led political process on Western Sahara to advance an enduring and dignified solution without further delay. We continue to review Morocco – or to view Morocco’s autonomy plan as serious, credible, and realistic, and one potential approach to meet the aspirations of the people of Western Sahara.

Go ahead. No, I’ll come to you next. Go here first, yeah.

QUESTION: I would like to talk about the West Bank because you always emphasize that Hamas, and you said that Israel’s attacks are due to Hamas. But if you checked the number, the hundreds of people killed in West Bank, even mosque was bombed, what do you think about that? When did you contact with Abbas administration about this issue?

MR MILLER: You’re referring to attacks by settlers in the West Bank, or —

QUESTION: Settlements are a quite different problem, but many civilians killed that Israel’s bombed.

MR MILLER: So we have been – so with respect to – so two things, and I want to make sure I speak to them separately. Obviously, if Israel has – Israel has legitimate rights that it – or legitimate military operations and counterterrorism operations it can conduct in the West Bank when it comes to responding to terrorist activities in the same way that countries around the world do. With respect to settler violence, as I spoke to a minute ago, we have seen a dramatic uptick in extremist violence conducted by settlers against Palestinian civilians since October 7th, and we continue to engage with the Government of Israel to make clear to them that we expect them to take action to stop those violent activities.

QUESTION: Let me follow up. I will use the occupier instead of settlers or settlement, according to UN report. Especially you said that last week you are from Texas – we know it’s good – because I will say please imagine Mexican people or Mexican soldiers are crossing the border and you will enter to your family house in the Texas and then they will say this house is mine from now on. Because this reality is how it is in West Bank. What is the real and permanent solution in the settlement or occupied problem?

MR MILLER: The permanent solution is the establishment of an independent Palestinian state, full stop. That is the final answer to that question.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. So Finnish prime minister today basically accused Russia of organizing this movement of migrants and pushing them towards the Finnish border, just as Belarus was doing to Poland and other countries. What do you make of that? Do you share this assessment of what is going on on the Russian-Finnish border?

And unrelatedly, the new – the Argentinian president-elect said that he’s going to visit here, even before the inauguration. Do you have anything —

MR MILLER: Who? I just didn’t hear. Who’s —

QUESTION: Argentinian president-elect.

MR MILLER: So with respect to the first, let me take that back and get you an answer. With respect to the second, I don’t have any announcements of travel or meetings to read out here. I will say, as Secretary Blinken shared last night, we congratulate President-elect Milei on his victory in yesterday’s election. We applaud the robust democratic process through which the Argentine public spoke. And we will look forward to working with the president-elect and his government on shared priorities, including human rights and democracy, addressing climate change, and investing in the middle class.

QUESTION: On that —

QUESTION: Could I follow —

MR MILLER: Yeah, Shaun.

QUESTION: Could I follow up on it?

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: Just two of the things you mentioned – democracy and climate change – he has somewhat eccentric views on them, I mean, I guess you could say. I mean, he’s denied the scientific consensus on climate change. He’s given credence to election conspiracies in the U.S. and Brazil. Are those types of things impediments, do you think, with working with the president – President Milei?

MR MILLER: I’m not going to comment on the views he professed during the campaign. I will say the United States and Argentina have a long history of working together on areas of shared values and shared interests, and we look forward to finding continued ways to do that.

Jen, you want to go ahead and we’ll – and then go to Michele, in the back. Yeah.

QUESTION: Can you give us an update on how many Americans have been able to depart Gaza via the Rafah gate? How many remain? And do you have an update on the death toll both from the October 7th attacks and possible deaths in Gaza as well?

MR MILLER: Sure. So with respect to the first question, around 800 American citizens, legal permanent residents, and family members have departed through Rafah gate. There are a little over 1,200 left, which is a higher number than we had when we announced it last week. One of the things that happens is we continue to identify either additional American citizens or American citizens or permanent residents who have additional family members that they’re reporting to us that we then try to get on the list to get out of Gaza.

With respect to American citizens who have died, the number who died as a result of the attacks of October 7th is the same as it has been. There is one additional casualty in post-October 7th incidents that I can report out today. There are a total of six American citizens who have died, not from the terrorist attacks on October 7th, but in the month-plus since, five who were members of the IDF and one who was a national police border officer.

QUESTION: Did they die in Israel or in Gaza?

MR MILLER: Of those – of the IDF, I believe four of them died in Gaza; one died in northern Israel.

QUESTION: And any reports of Palestinian Americans? Have you been able to confirm deaths?

MR MILLER: There have been – you’ve heard me speak to this last week. There has been a report of the Palestinian American who died. We have not been able to confirm that report going back several days now. As you know, communications networks were down in Gaza last week, are only getting back online now after fuel was delivered, so we’re seeking to verify that information, but haven’t verified it as of yet.

Michele, and then we’ll —

QUESTION: I have a China question. Sorry.

MR MILLER: Yeah, yeah.

QUESTION: Just quickly, the Secretary has raised concern in the past about these travel bans, particularly on young children unable to leave China. I wonder if you got any assurances last week from the Chinese that they’ll resolve these cases?

MR MILLER: I don’t want to speak to those private conversations, but both with respect to Americans who have been detained and children who have been prevented from leaving China, I will just say that that is an issue the Secretary raises in every one of his conversations with his Chinese counterparts. It is an issue he raises quite fervently and quite passionately, that children shouldn’t be prevented from being reunited with their parents. And it’s an issue that he will continue to emphasize in hopes of achieving a breakthrough.

And with that, wrap for today. Thanks, everyone.

QUESTION: Thank you.

(The briefing was concluded at 3:22 p.m.)

# # #

Department Press Briefing – November 16, 2023

HomePress Briefings …Department Press Briefing – November 16, 2023

hide

Department Press Briefing – November 16, 2023

Matthew Miller, Department Spokesperson

November 16, 2023

Article Index

ISRAEL / PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES

ARMENIA / AZERBAIJAN

CHINA
GUATEMALA

CHINA

ISRAEL / PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES

BANGLADESH

AFGHANISTAN

ISRAEL / PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES

SUDAN

1:34 p.m. EST

MR MILLER: Good afternoon.

QUESTION: Good afternoon.

MR MILLER: Don’t have any – anything to start with, so Matt.

QUESTION: Really, you don’t?

MR MILLER: I see you writing out your questions. Do you need a minute?

QUESTION: Well, it’s such a quiet – no. It’s such a quiet news day.

MR MILLER: That’s why I wanted to defer to your questions, for you to ask about – for you to ask about all of it.

QUESTION: Not quiet – not quiet news day. I’m surprised you don’t have anything to start with, but that’s okay.

Let me begin with something about Gaza, and this is the letter that was signed today by the heads of a number of UN agencies, as well as NGOs, and that opposes the creation of a safe zone or safe zones in southern Gaza and also calls for an immediate ceasefire. I suppose none of that is particularly surprising, but I wanted to ask you about – there are – the fact that there are at least three American citizens, three Americans, who are signatories to this who are heads of UN agencies; who this administration nominated, supported, and lobbied for to win their positions who signed this. And so the first thing on that is —

MR MILLER: So – go ahead.

QUESTION: Well, the first thing on this is they’re no longer —

MR MILLER: I was going to say I don’t think it calls for —

QUESTION: They are not employed by the U.S. Government, so —

MR MILLER: Can I say – factually – correct me if I’m wrong, I don’t think it calls for an immediate ceasefire. Correct —

QUESTION: It calls for a ceasefire. I’ll go back and look at it.

MR MILLER: Happy to be proven wrong if – I read the letter quickly this morning, but I don’t think it calls for an immediate ceasefire. But anyway, go ahead.

QUESTION: Well, anyway.

MR MILLER: I may have that detail wrong.

QUESTION: I might have it wrong as well, and I’m sorry if I do. But at any rate, the content of the letter is not in alignment with what the administration’s policy is right now. Obviously, these three people that I’m focusing on are not employed – or employees of the U.S. Government and so they don’t take – necessarily take their direction from the administration. So one, they didn’t clear or let you know in advance that they were going to sign this?

MR MILLER: So I am not aware whether we had conversations with them in advance of this letter. I would say we of course supported all those nominees, as you point out, and support their ability and right and authority to make their independent judgments about what is the best policy.

I will say one thing about what the letter calls for with respect to safe zones. I think the letter points out that they are opposed to safe zones in which there is not agreement from all the parties not to attack those safe zones. I think the point they’re making is if you direct people to go to safe areas, they have to be sure that those areas actually will be safe and not just targets on – for the civilians who have been moved there.

QUESTION: You’re saying targets from – by Israel —

MR MILLER: Targets, the civilians won’t be targets.

QUESTION: I mean, these are Israeli-proposed safe – this is an Israeli-proposed safe area.

MR MILLER: What we will – what we are working on with the Israelis – and we have had conversations about them – about this in the last 24 hours – is about what is the best way to implement protection for civilians in southern Gaza, and we continue to work through those details. I don’t have any announcements to make about where we might land, but it’s a conversation that’s ongoing with the Israeli Government right now.

QUESTION: Okay. And then just more broadly, because we’re all aware of the foment inside the administration and inside Washington and inside the country about what the policy is, but these are three prominent people, including two of which – Cathy Russell and Amy Pope – had senior positions at the White House. Cathy Russell is still, as far as I understand, extremely close to both the President and the First Lady. And then Cindy McCain, who – everyone knows who she is. Is it problematic for you guys at all that you have these three people who are the heads of important UN agencies who are disagreeing with the administration’s policy?

MR MILLER: Again, I don’t necessarily agree that they are disagreeing with our policy. We want to see that whatever protections exist for civilians in southern Gaza, that they are areas that are protected from attacks from Israel, from Hamas, from Palestinian Islamic Jihad, from anyone else operating there. So we would agree with that notion, and it’s something we’re working with the Israeli Government to try to implement and figure out the details of now.

QUESTION: So the administration does not support the creation of a safe zone?

MR MILLER: We —

QUESTION: I thought that was one of the – I thought that was one of the main things that the Secretary was doing.

MR MILLER: No, I – no, we want to – we do want to establish areas that are safe for civilians in southern Gaza, but working out the details of that when you have an armed conflict going on is complicated, as it always is in the middle of armed conflict.

QUESTION: Okay. So you’re not particularly concerned about —

MR MILLER: No, not at all.

QUESTION: Okay.

QUESTION: Follow-on.

MR MILLER: Go ahead.

QUESTION: On – related but not totally, of course, there’s the operations in al-Shifa Hospital. There are also operations surrounding another hospital, which I think the name was Ahli Arab. There’s been strikes on the Jordanian military hospital in Gaza, all hospitals. Is it still your understanding that there would be Hamas commands in all those hospitals? And more generally, is – again, I repeat, is it a legitimate thing to hit or strike or attack or what have you a hospital?

MR MILLER: So let me say a few things about that. First, just as a matter, we never said that there were command posts in all of the hospitals. We said that it is our assessment that there are command posts in hospitals. We did make a specific assessment as it related to al-Shifa, but we did not say that there are command posts in every hospital in Gaza. But there are command posts in hospitals there and there are tunnels underneath hospitals there.

Let me speak first of all to the Jordanian medical personnel that were injured outside a field hospital in Gaza. We are deeply concerned that they were injured. The Jordanian Government has done incredible work establishing this field hospital and other medical facilities in Gaza. We think they’re essential and it must be protected. That work must be allowed to continue, and we reiterate the obligations under international humanitarian law for all parties to take feasible precautions to reduce the risk of harm to civilians and we urge all possible steps to mitigate civilian harm.

As it relates to hospitals, as we said before, we don’t want to see hospitals struck from the air. We understand that Hamas does continue to use hospitals as places where they embed their fighters. It’s places where they have tunnels running underneath. And so it can be appropriate for Israel to conduct limited military operations with respect to hospitals, but we want to see them do it in a way that minimizes civilian casualties. We do not want to see hospitals in the middle of firefights. We do not want to see patients put at risk. It’s why we’ve called for the evacuation of hospitals when appropriate and said we would support international humanitarian organizations evacuating patients so they could be put out of harm’s way.

This is – I think as I’ve said before, this is such a difficult issue because two things can be true at one time. One, we want to see hospitals protected. Two, Hamas is operating outside of hospitals and Israel has a right to try to attack Hamas and hold them accountable and keep them from launching new attacks. So how do you square those two things? The way we try to square it is to say, number one, no airstrikes on hospitals, and number two, if Israel is going to conduct limited military operations in hospital, as they’re doing – at hospitals, as they’re doing with respect to al-Shifa now, that they try to do it in a way that minimizes civilian harm and so they only are putting in jeopardy Hamas fighters and not civilians.

QUESTION: Can I follow up?

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR MILLER: Said, I – Said, as is true every day, I will – you know I always come to you, so —

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR MILLER: — go ahead.

QUESTION: Just to follow up on that one specifically —

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: — so you’re saying no airstrikes on hospitals. Well, there apparently was one on the military Jordanian hospital in Gaza. So do you – and you say you’re deeply concerned. You don’t want to see hospitals struck from the air – but you’re – do you condemn that strike?

MR MILLER: I’m going to say we are concerned about those reports, we are concerned that hospital was hit, and we do not want to see airstrikes against hospitals. We want to see hospitals protected.

QUESTION: So you don’t condemn, yeah.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

QUESTION: Will the U.S. support establishing safe zones —

MR MILLER: Said, I will – you know I’ll come to you.

QUESTION: — in northern Gaza for —

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR MILLER: I know. You can follow – and when I come to you, you can follow up on that and whatever else. You’ll get as many as you need.

QUESTION: Would the U.S. support establishing safe zones in northern Gaza for things like field hospitals? I mean, you can’t evacuate these people and put them where they aren’t going to be safe. So if you’re calling for patients to be evacuated, field hospitals would de facto be the best option, but if they’re not safe either, I mean, how is the U.S. approaching this?

MR MILLER: I don’t want to speak to specific – try to prescribe specific proposals from the podium when this is an ongoing conversation we are having with the Government of Israel and with international humanitarian organizations, who themselves are trying to figure out the best way to implement this in what is an active conflict zone. I will just reiterate the general principles, which is we do want to see places established that civilians can be safe, we want to see places established where patients can be safe and patients are protected, and that’s what we’re in conversation every day with the Government of Israel about and with the international humanitarian organizations.

And I will just repeat, as I said the other day, remember that it is Hamas that is putting all of these people in harm’s way. It is Hamas that continues to operate inside hospitals as they have done inside mosques and schools and other civilian infrastructure. It is Hamas that is at the root of all this problem, that is creating such a difficult challenge for the international community and for the Israeli military.

So I don’t have any illusions that Hamas is going to change its practices, so that puts an added burden on Israel to conduct their operations in compliance with international humanitarian law, and we expect them to meet those obligations and we have conversations where we make that clear with them all the time.

QUESTION: But would you support safe zones established in northern Gaza because you’re – to this point, you’ve only mentioned southern Gaza, so —

MR MILLER: Again, I’m not going to get ahead of the conversations that we’re having with international humanitarian organizations about what the best way is to protect civilians from harm. It is an ongoing conversation and I don’t think I should try to prescribe where those conversations will land from here.

QUESTION: And you said you’re pressing Israel to conduct their operations within the confines of international humanitarian law. Have they done that to this point? Does the U.S. assess they’ve done that?

MR MILLER: Again, we have not made any assessment that they have violated international humanitarian law, but we constantly are monitoring facts as they develop.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR MILLER: Simon, go ahead.

QUESTION: Yeah, just on that particular issue, the President yesterday did talk about indiscriminate bombing, said “this is a different story than [what] I believe was occurring before, an indiscriminate bombing.” He’s kind of talking about how the U.S. has been able to influence the way that the Israelis are conducting this campaign. So does that mean there was an assessment at some point that it was indiscriminate?

MR MILLER: So as always, I will let the White House speak to the President’s specific comments, but I think the point that he was making is that when you look at the way they have conducted their military operation around al-Shifa, it has been a targeted operation to move slowly into the hospital. They’re moving one building at a time. They have not – it’s an operation that is yet ongoing. My understanding is they have not completed operations against every building in the hospital as of yet. It’s something that’s ongoing. And he was contrasting that with the airstrikes that Israel has conducted that, even when targeted, can produce significant collateral damage and loss of civilian life.

QUESTION: So indiscriminate is not this building’s assessment?

MR MILLER: It’s not an assessment that we’ve made, and again, what I think the President was referring to was contrasting ground operations with airstrikes, which, even when targeted, can produce significant civilian casualties, as we have unfortunately seen, and lead to loss of thousands and thousands of Palestinian lives.

QUESTION: And just back to al-Shifa specifically, you had talked earlier in the week about a plan to evacuate patients. Obviously, the operation – the Israelis are now in the hospital and there hasn’t been an evacuation. So did – was that something that you were trying to hold the Israelis back from going in there so that you could get people out? And can you, I guess – what went – what happened? What went wrong?

MR MILLER: We have not tried to dictate the tempo of military operations to Israel. We’re not in any position to do that from thousands of miles away. They have to make their own decisions about how to best conduct a military campaign. We were trying – we were liaison – liaising with humanitarian organizations about conducting evacuations. There have been evacuations that have been conducted from al-Shifa and from other hospitals in the north. There weren’t any that I was aware of this week and the last few days as this military operation took place. I’m not really in a position to comment about what’s going on on the ground right now. We don’t have eyes and ears there. But no, there wasn’t any significant evacuation that took place beforehand.

QUESTION: And just finally on the – you mentioned the hope that there can be these safer areas in the south of Gaza. The Israelis have started dropping leaflets on certain places around Khan Yunis. Are you concerned that basically the area that could be in some sense safe for civilians in Gaza is just shrinking and it is basically going to be nonexistent?

MR MILLER: I will say we are in active conversations with the Government of Israel about ensuring that civilians can be safe from harm. We obviously saw the step that they took with respect to Khan Yunis. They originally told people to move from the north to the south. We have been in conversation with them to impress upon them that as they continue to look at expanded military operations or ground operations in other ways – in other parts of Gaza, they need to ensure that there are safe – that there are humanitarian corridors for civilians, there is protection for civilians, there are human^[1] pauses so civilians can get themselves out of harm’s way and that we can get humanitarian assistance into them, and that there are ultimately places that they can be safe from harm. That is an active, ongoing conversation between our government and the Government of Israel.

Let me go to Said because I did promise, Said, I would come to you.

QUESTION: Thank you. I mean, you seem and the administration, the President himself, seem to be certain that the Shifa was a headquarter for Hamas, although no evidence has been shown. You’ve talked about tunnels. The Israelis have not been able to show any tunnels, but I don’t want to get into that. So there has been absolutely not even a shred of evidence.

MR MILLER: I —

QUESTION: They showed – they showed a backpack with one rifle.

MR MILLER: I saw a – I saw a host of rifles in videos.

QUESTION: Okay. Maybe they have – maybe they have police protecting the hospital. That’s not the point.

MR MILLER: I saw – I saw a host of assault rifles.

QUESTION: Okay, fine.

MR MILLER: I’m not aware that there’s a sort of acceptable threshold level for assault rifles held in hospitals. That’s not general humanitarian practice.

QUESTION: Very well. I think there are police guards in most hospitals around the world. But let me go on with the – with what the director of the hospital said today, Hamad Abu Salamiya. He was speaking to Al Jazeera. I put the things in English. He said there are about – by the way, do you consider the hospital to be militarily occupied by Israel? Is it an occupied territory?

MR MILLER: I don’t have an assessment of that because I think there’s an ongoing –

QUESTION: Okay. And —

MR MILLER: Hold up, Said. Let me – let’s – I have – let’s just try to establish a ground rule, and then we’ll continue.

QUESTION: Right.

MR MILLER: I will let you – I am not going to interrupt your questions. Don’t interrupt my answers.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR MILLER: So to answer that question, there is an ongoing military operation, as I understand it, right now. I obviously cannot offer an assessment to the exact facts on the ground from here. We don’t have eyes and ears on the ground there.

QUESTION: All right. There are – according to the director of the hospital, there is 7,000 people at al-Shifa right now. They are under total siege. There are – they destroyed something like 45 dialysis machines. There are 36 premature babies that probably are dead by now. But there’s no food. There’s nothing.

So should the Israeli army that is currently roaming, as you’ve suggested, roaming all buildings and all rooms and all corridors of the hospital, should they be responsible for the goodwill of these people that are in the hospital?

MR MILLER: So as I said, we expect Israel to comply with international humanitarian law. And to the extent they are taking territory in Gaza, of course, we would expect them to ensure that patients are treated humanely, that patients have access to food, to water, to medical care. We absolutely would agree with that proposition.

QUESTION: But to the best of your judgement, have they been doing that?

MR MILLER: I don’t – again, I cannot – I just – I cannot speak to facts about what is a very actively evolving situation on the ground.

QUESTION: All right. They – the Israelis just destroyed this morning the last working flour mill in Gaza. That’s where they actually – the only place where sunflowers are. Is that suspected to be a Hamas headquarter?

MR MILLER: I, again, cannot speak to an individual strike where I don’t have all the facts at my disposal.

QUESTION: All right. And I have just two more questions. One, I think just to follow up on what Matt and others and so on have been saying, I mean, the American public is really opposed. I mean, they are for a ceasefire. They want a ceasefire. This is the first time that a ceasefire has become such a dirty word. So why not go along with the sentiment of the public? That would be quite democratic, wouldn’t it?

MR MILLER: So first of all, I’ve seen a number of polls about this very question, but it actually doesn’t matter. We don’t make our decisions based on polls. We make our decisions based on what we believe are the best foreign policy judgments on behalf of the American people and their national security interests. And the President and the Secretary have come to the judgment that a ceasefire at this time would only benefit Hamas, but we have been very clear that we believe there should be expanded humanitarian pauses to protect civilians, that there should be ways for civilians to get out of harm’s way, and that we should do everything we can to get humanitarian assistance in for civilians in Gaza.

The Secretary has spoken very clearly that in his judgement far too many Palestinian civilians have been killed as a result of this conflict, far too many children have been killed as a result of this conflict. There’s a tragedy that has been inflicted upon the people of Gaza that is not of their own making. It’s because Hamas launched a terrorist attack on October 7th. Israel has a right to conduct military operations to hold those terrorists accountable. We want them to do it in a way that minimizes civilian harm, and we want to do everything we can to get humanitarian assistance in to civilians. And that is the work that we are doing every day to try to effectuate.

QUESTION: And lastly, by the way, history did not begin on October 7th, but let’s not get into that. Do you have anything to say about a more mundane issue like the visa waiver?

MR MILLER: So with respect to the Visa Waiver Program – so we are aware of reports that there are American citizens in the West Bank who are unable to transit through Israel as they are allowed to do under the requirements of the Visa Waiver Program. We have expressed concerns about that to the Government of Israel. I won’t get into the full details of our private diplomatic conversations, but we expect Israel to address those concerns. We expect them to be in full compliance with the Visa Waiver Program, and there are remedial measures that we – that are available to us if they are not.

QUESTION: Okay. Let’s just – on that, like they can be suspended?

MR MILLER: There are a full range of remedial measures that can be taken before ultimate suspension. That is, of course, for any country in the Visa Waiver Program the ultimate action that we can take. There are measures you can take to try to bring a country back in compliance.

QUESTION: Like what?

MR MILLER: I can’t get into specifics from here. There are a range —

QUESTION: Can you turn assistance —

MR MILLER: Hold on. There are a range of measures. We can go into it in detail off – but – offline. But go ahead.

QUESTION: All right. And then – okay. But I mean – well, we can talk about this later. But literally, I mean, after October 7th it was going to be literally impossible for Israel to continue to meet the criteria for this. Is what you’re saying now – that you have told when you are expressing your concerns to the Israelis, are you telling them that, hey, you’re no longer in compliance with what you agreed to and fix it or something is going to happen?

MR MILLER: I am not going to get into the exact conversation that we have had, but we have expressed our concerns that American citizens in Israel – or in the West Bank traveling through – that want to travel through Israel cannot do so, cannot fully exercise their rights under the program. We expect them to be able to do so.

QUESTION: Are Israeli passport holders aware of the fact that the actions of their government may be – may eliminate them from the program so that they would have to go back and get visas?

MR MILLER: I don’t know if they were before. They probably are now.

QUESTION: All right. And then just the other thing is that, yeah, you said the letter that I mentioned earlier didn’t talk about a ceasefire?

MR MILLER: Was I wrong about that?

QUESTION: Yeah.

MR MILLER: Yeah, okay. Go ahead.

QUESTION: “We also renew our call for a humanitarian ceasefire to ease the suffering and to help facilitate humanitarian operations and the release of all hostages.”

MR MILLER: So —

QUESTION: You don’t agree with that? You think that that’s not —

MR MILLER: So that —

QUESTION: That’s – I’m quoting from the letter.

MR MILLER: So you’re right, they called it a ceasefire. We are for a humanitarian pause to allow the delivery of humanitarian assistance and —

QUESTION: But how can you say then that —

MR MILLER: And ensure the release of all hostages. So you were right —

QUESTION: They didn’t say humanitarian pause like you got in the G7 statement.

MR MILLER: Correct. We would —

QUESTION: They said humanitarian ceasefire, which is —

MR MILLER: We would – we disagree with a call for a ceasefire.

QUESTION: Okay. And so you don’t —

MR MILLER: Absolutely.

QUESTION: And so you —

MR MILLER: But the —

QUESTION: And that is still not a problem that you have three, two of whom were former senior White House officials and one of whom is well known and not just because of who her husband was but for her own work in her own right —

MR MILLER: As I said —

QUESTION: — publicly disagreeing with the administration. And this isn’t like some 23-year-old kid who’s got a – who’s working upstairs on the fourth floor or something like that. This is – these are serious people.

MR MILLER: As I said, we expect them to exercise their independent judgment, fully support their ability to do so with —

QUESTION: But you don’t care what they have to say?

MR MILLER: — with respect to a ceasefire. Oftentimes when ceasefire gets thrown around, it’s the idea of a ceasefire that will lead to a full cessation of hostilities. A humanitarian pause – I understand it’s called a ceasefire —

QUESTION: Are you suggesting that they don’t really know what they’re talking about.

MR MILLER: No, there may – I don’t want to get in the full details, but a short pause that would achieve the goals that they outlined is something that we would – we would support, of course.

QUESTION: Well —

MR MILLER: Go ahead, Olivia.

QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. Just to clarify on these conversations that are ongoing about potential evacuations of hospitals, I just want to confirm that you do have interested humanitarian organizations, third parties that would be willing to effectuate evacuations?

MR MILLER: There are third parties who have expressed an interest to do so, and we have not for a variety of reasons on the ground – you remember there are both Israel and Hamas who are parties to the conflict here – it’s been impossible to ensure that they could move safely to conduct these evacuations.

QUESTION: Right. So can you – can you offer any clarity? I mean, is it Hamas? Is it Israel? I mean, two days – you first mentioned these conversations were ongoing two days ago. Two days is a long time for critically ill patients or premature babies, all of the patients who are caught in this conflict.

MR MILLER: So Israel has said publicly that they would welcome evacuation of patients. The problem has been Hamas.

QUESTION: Can I ask you about – to provide an update on the number of Americans who have been able to leave Gaza, how many are – have been able to leave, how many are left? And then if you could separately address how much aid has gotten in.

MR MILLER: So we have nearly 700 American citizens, legal permanent residents, and family members who have gotten out of Gaza through Rafah gate. There are a little under 900 who are left. Of that number, around 300 of them or so are American citizens, and the others are legal permanent residents and their family members. We’re trying to get more out all the time and remain in contact with the American citizens and family members that are left.

In terms of the amount of aid that has gotten in, so a couple things I want to say about that. Number one, yesterday for the first time fuel moved in to Gaza through Rafah gate to allow the delivery of humanitarian assistance inside Gaza. So you have to remember there’s two issues, right? One – I know you know this, but for everyone – you have to get the trucks moving in through Rafah to the Gaza side of the border. Once there, they unload into warehouses and then you have to have humanitarian implementers that have trucks that take that and deliver the aid all around Gaza. And the implementers had run out of fuel to do that aid, and so we got fuel in yesterday to allow those delivery trucks to continue to do their work. But because – because the warehouses were full, no trucks moved in yesterday because they didn’t – they didn’t have anywhere to unload.

Fuel went in. Implementers have started emptying out the warehouses. Today, trucks have started to go back in through Gaza. As of yesterday, a total of around 1,100, a little over 1,100 trucks had gotten in. None went in yesterday, but more are going through today, and I’m sure at the end of the day we’ll have an update on how many got in.

QUESTION: Can I follow up on the —

QUESTION: Okay. Two quick follow-ups. Sorry. So of the fewer than 900 Americans and family members who are left in Gaza, have any of them been killed or wounded while waiting to get out?

MR MILLER: I don’t have confirmed reports of that at this time.

QUESTION: So there are reports. You don’t have confirmation that any of them have —

MR MILLER: We don’t have —

QUESTION: — have been somebody killed?

MR MILLER: We don’t have confirmation. Yeah.

QUESTION: And then on the question of these deliveries, I mean, early on – or earlier, I suppose, the goal was set to have at least a hundred trucks coming in a day. I mean, obviously we are falling very, very far short of that number. The Secretary earlier discussed the possibility of Kerem Shalom opening or of considering the opening of that crossing to deliver more aid. Why isn’t that a more viable route?

MR MILLER: We are continuing to – first, let me say the question is not really about the number of gates that are open to get into Israel. The question is about screening mechanisms and being able to screen the number of trucks. There’s plenty of room for Rafah to get enough trucks through to deliver humanitarian assistance. The question has been getting those trucks screened, getting a significant – an appropriate number of trucks screened and in through Rafah.

So we continue to work with the Israelis on an appropriate screening mechanism. It’s the conversations that David Satterfield has been having on the ground with them. We continue to push. We don’t have an agreement on it yet; it’s taken longer than we wanted. But it’s something we’re very focused on and trying to get accomplished.

QUESTION: On fuel, please.

MR MILLER: Go ahead, yeah.

QUESTION: Thanks, Matt. Yesterday Israel only allowed some 24,000 liters of fuel, and the UN agency UNRWA said – says it is not enough; much more is needed and it’s like – it’s the only equivalent of half a truck. And UNRWA had – Lazzarini also accused Israel of using fuel as a weapon of war. Do you agree that Israel is using fuel as a weapon of war? And can you update us on the U.S. approach to get more fuel into Gaza?

MR MILLER: So I would say we agree that more fuel needs to move into Gaza. We’ve been very clear about this publicly, we’ve been clear about it privately. We want fuel to move into Gaza – not just for the delivery of trucks, which is what the – or the delivery of humanitarian assistance, which is what the fuel that went in yesterday would support. But we also want fuel to go in to power generators for hospitals, we want it to go in to power desalination, we want it to go in to power other humanitarian purposes. So we are very supportive of the delivery of fuel. It’s something that we have actively pushed for with the Israeli Government. The Secretary had conversations with members of the Israeli Government yesterday about it. Other members of the administration have had those conversations. It’s something we are actively pushing for all the time.

QUESTION: Can I have one more, please?

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: The UN Security Council yesterday adopted a resolution calling for extended humanitarian pause in Gaza. The U.S. abstained from voting, citing the lack of condemnation of Hamas. But does the U.S. support the call for extended humanitarian pause in Gaza? And will you encourage Israel to abide by the UN Security Council resolution, which it has rejected?

MR MILLER: We do support expanded humanitarian pauses in Gaza. The President’s made this very clear. When Israel announced humanitarian pauses last week, the President said he wanted to see longer ones. And we do want to see longer ones, and we continue to push for longer ones. We did vote against the resolution^[2], as you said, because it did not condemn Hamas, which we think is important – an important step for the UN Security Council to take. But we supported a number of provisions in the resolution, and we do hope there will be longer pauses.

QUESTION: Just a quick follow-up on that. President Biden has been calling for the reform of the UN Security Council, and called on member states to refrain from the use of veto except in rare, extraordinary conditions. But since the start of the war in Gaza, the U.S. has used its veto power – I think it’s three times. How do you explain that in terms of consistency?

MR MILLER: We thought those were appropriate uses of the veto. We were trying to reach a compromise resolution, which ultimately the Security Council was able to do.

Tracy, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. On the truck inspections, you said the problem with the trucks getting in is the inspections.

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: Does that mean Israel is dragging its feet or slow-walking those inspections?

MR MILLER: It means we have had – we have had difficulty reaching an agreement on the appropriate inspection mechanism. I’ll leave it at that.

QUESTION: The – you don’t want to say what the hold – what that is?

MR MILLER: I don’t, but it’s – we’ve had a problem getting agreement on what the appropriate inspection mechanism is.

QUESTION: Okay. And on the hospital evacuations, you said the problem is Hamas. But if, as Israel claims, they’ve taken over Shifa, the – Hamas is on the run, or they’ve been killed, or driven out, how is Hamas physically an impediment to evacuations?

MR MILLER: So yeah, that’s a different question. I was referring – I’m referring to – was following up with Olivia on a comment I made the other day before Israel had gone in —

QUESTION: I see.

MR MILLER: — to al-Shifa Hospital when we were supporting evacuation of patients, and Israel said at the time that they would support evacuation of patients. They were not at – in control of parts of the hospital yet; they had the hospital surrounded, and would have to let patients come out, and said that they would. And Hamas was objecting – well, in our assessment, wanted to continue to use patients as a human shield. Different question now.

QUESTION: So now?

MR MILLER: We would continue to support; I don’t have an update on conversations about whether that’s an actual possibility. It may be that it’s overtaken by events, and you can – the hospital can get back up to running, but that’s not – I’m not able to make that assessment at all at this time.

QUESTION: Sorry, the question before Tracy’s about the UN resolution, you said that – that was in reference to the resolution to – the UN Security Council resolution that —

MR MILLER: The one that passed.

QUESTION: Yesterday?

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: Okay. You said you voted against it. It didn’t —

MR MILLER: Sorry, abstained. Abstained. Misspoke; abstained.

QUESTION: Yeah. You didn’t vote for it, but you didn’t —

MR MILLER: We abstained, sorry.

QUESTION: If you had voted against it, you would’ve vetoed.

MR MILLER: I – I am aware, I’m just –

QUESTION: All right.

MR MILLER: I’m allowed to misspeak sometimes.

QUESTION: Yeah, no, you are, but I just was a little bit confused, because I know that it passed.

MR MILLER: I think you know I – you’ve – yes. Yes, I’m aware.

QUESTION: So – all right.

MR MILLER: My grave – my grave apologies.

Alex, go ahead.

QUESTION: You don’t need to gravely…

QUESTION: Thank you so much, Matt. I wonder if the – pardon me – a question on substantial military presence versus operation at the hospitals. You did mention a number of times that it’s – Hamas operates inside the hospital. And then you also said you have seen rifles. Can you just elaborate a little bit more on what else you have seen that we may have not – may not have seen?

MR MILLER: No. We’ve seen the – (laughter) – we’ve seen – we – I will elaborate on the public evidence that we’ve all seen. But in terms of any kind of intelligence that we have, no, of course not.

QUESTION: But you have seen the presence, not operational —

MR MILLER: We – we are confident enough to make the statement we made two days ago that Hamas operates tunnels under hospitals and that they operate a command node at al-Shifa Hospital, but I’m not going to get into any other detail about intelligence matters other than that.

QUESTION: I’m asking – okay. I’m asking because your boss has been – the Secretary multiple times called on Israel not to make the same mistake that they have made – that the U.S. has made after 9/11. I’m just wondering if you aren’t helping them make the same mistake by just making those statements about “operational” if we have only seen the evidence of presence, not operation.

MR MILLER: If you’re only – I lost you in that.

QUESTION: If we are only seeing the presence of Hamas —

MR MILLER: Again, I just want to reiterate what I said a minute ago, which is I – my understanding, Israel is in the middle of this operation to take al-Shifa and they have not fully taken it yet, and I think it’s a little too early to be passing definitive judgments.

QUESTION: Can I switch to a different topic? I have Azerbaijan-related —

MR MILLER: Okay. You want to do it now, before I come to —

QUESTION: Yes, thanks so much.

MR MILLER: Yeah, go ahead.

QUESTION: Azerbaijan rejected peace talks in Washington next week. Let me get a fresh reaction, then I can follow up?

MR MILLER: Look, I will say, as we’ve said before, that we continue to support peace talks to resolve the issues between Azerbaijan and Armenia. We would encourage the two parties to engage in those talks, whether they are here, whether they are someone else – whether they are somewhere else, and that’ll be – continue to be our policy.

QUESTION: As the Secretary —

QUESTION: (Inaudible) on a different topic?

MR MILLER: Yeah, I’ll come to you – I’ll come to you next, Michelle.

QUESTION: The Secretary yesterday said that they have downgraded, canceled a number of high-level meetings with Azerbaijan. When you say “high-level,” how high do you have in mind? I’m asking because his own deputy was in Azerbaijan a couple of weeks ago.

MR MILLER: Let me take that.

QUESTION: And so the continent has never received a president, vice president —

MR MILLER: Let me – let me – let me take that.

QUESTION: — which is pretty high.

MR MILLER: Let me take that one back and get back to you.

QUESTION: And just a quick follow-up. So you had a decision to not have high-level meetings, but you guys have exemption for Karabakh talks with – because you invited the foreign ministers. Is that the case with —

MR MILLER: Again, let me just take that one back, Alex.

Michelle. Michelle, go ahead.

QUESTION: I have on very important topics.

MR MILLER: No, go ahead.

QUESTION: They’ll be quick. I’m sorry.

MR MILLER: Go ahead.

QUESTION: One is, have you lifted sanctions on China’s Institute for Forensic Science?

And the other one is on Guatemala. The Supreme Court is allowing these cases to go ahead against the president-elect. He’s calling it a slow-motion coup, and I’m wondering if you guys think it’s a legitimate case or not.

MR MILLER: Let me start with the China piece. So first of all, let me talk about the meeting yesterday and what the President was able to announce, and that is the resumption of bilateral cooperation to combat illicit drug manufacturing and trafficking, including – most significantly, from our standpoint – fentanyl; the establishment of a working group for ongoing communication and law enforcement coordination.

We saw China – or we have seen China take four important steps in this regard. Number one, they are issuing a notice to their domestic industry advising on the enforcement of laws and regulations related to the trade in precursor chemicals and pill presses, something that we think is very important. They did a similar notice in 2019 and it led to a drastic reduction in the seizure of fentanyl shipments to the United States. They have begun taking law enforcement actions against Chinese synthetic drugs and chemical precursors. As a result, there are PRC-based pharmaceutical companies that have already ceased operations, others that have had international payment accounts blocked.

At the beginning of this month, for the first time in nearly three years, the PRC started resubmitting incidents to the International Narcotics Control Board’s global database, which is used to share real-time information internationally about suspicious shipments and suspected trafficking, which is important to let global law enforcement – including U.S. law enforcement – take action against the shipment of precursor chemicals.

And then fourth, as I said, we’ve relaunched this working group so we can – our policy and technical experts can discuss law enforcement efforts and exchange information.

So we think those were incredibly important steps. And then with respect to the delisting of the PRC’s Ministry of Public Security’s Institute for Forensic Science, that is a step that we have taken. It became clear to us in conversations with the PRC dating back to the conversations that the Secretary launched in June when he traveled to Beijing that the continued listing of the IFS on the Commerce Entity List was a barrier to achieving cooperation on stopping the trafficking of precursor chemicals. It was a high – it was a top priority for the Secretary and for the President to stop the trafficking of precursor chemicals into – out of China that can be used to produce fentanyl that comes into the United States. And so when we evaluated the issue and looked at all the merits of delisting the IFS, ultimately we decided that given the steps China was willing to take to cut down on precursor – precursor trafficking, it was an appropriate step to take.

Stop there in case – let me just – in case you have any follow-ups, and then I’ll go to the —

QUESTION: That’s okay. The —

MR MILLER: I can go to the Guatemala one.

QUESTION: Guatemala would be great, yeah.

MR MILLER: Yeah. So on Guatemala, we are aware of the reports that the public ministry raided the homes of Semilla party members and others while also pursuing politically motivated arrests. We are also aware of leaked documents allegedly belonging to the public ministry indicating that their attempts – indicating their attempts to undermine the Guatemalan presidential election. We condemn these provocative attempts by the public ministry and others to interfere with the transfer of power to President-elect Arévalo. These actions show a blatant disregard for the will of the Guatemalan people as expressed on election day. And we will continue to use all available tools to promote accountability for those involved in significant corruption and those who attempt to undermine democracy or are engaged in human rights violations and abuses in Guatemala.

QUESTION: Matt, can I ask —

MR MILLER: Go ahead, yeah.

QUESTION: — on the sanctions you’re listing, so the sanction of this institute of forensic science was related to human rights violation, so by removing it from the Entity List, is the – is the United States saying that there is improvement of China’s human rights practice? And what is – how do you respond to human rights groups who is saying that this raise questions about U.S. commitment to human rights and – all abuse against Uyghurs and minority groups?

MR MILLER: So I think our record on the – on human rights in China is pretty clear. In fact, yesterday the President himself underscored the universal – universality of human rights and the responsibility of all nations to respect their international human rights obligations. He raised specific concerns about human rights practices in PRC with President Xi. We’ve taken a number of actions since the outset of this administration related to human rights practices in China, and we will continue to do so. I think our record is very clear.

But when you look at the decision we had to make, we ultimately decided that the listing of the IFS on this Commerce Entity List was a barrier to taking action that would save thousands and thousands of American lives. And so we have to make tough decisions in this administration, and the decision that we made was that when you looked at the potential of saving American lives by securing this cooperation with China on fentanyl, on fentanyl trafficking, it was an appropriate step to take.

Now, it’s not the end of the story. We’re going to watch how China complies with the commitments that they made to us. We’re going to continue to talk with them about other steps that we – they can take, and we will continue to hold them accountable for their human rights record.

QUESTION: Just one —

QUESTION: Right, this was an action taken by the Commerce Department, right?

MR MILLER: Correct.

QUESTION: So why are you talking about it?

MR MILLER: Commerce department doesn’t have a podium, I think. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: Well, they have e-mail, don’t they?

MR MILLER: They do. But no —

QUESTION: They have – they put out statements and releases.

MR MILLER: I try to – I try to be responsive here at the podium. (Laughter.)

Go ahead.

QUESTION: How much —

MR MILLER: Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. Thank you very much. I have a question about the al-Shifa Hospital. We talked about the host of weapons, but in the images that the IDF shared yesterday, we’re seeing rifles that are a number less than 10. So a couple Qurans, disks, a laptop. Did you really look at the images and say that this is a proper headquarters, or are you hoping to see more?

MR MILLER: Again, I didn’t know that there was a sort of acceptable threshold level of rifles to be held in hospitals.

QUESTION: No, I’m —

MR MILLER: I mean, I’ll just say – look, I’m from Texas. Even in Texas, we don’t keep assault rifles in hospitals. I just – it does not —

QUESTION: Is that true?

MR MILLER: It is true.

QUESTION: Do you know? Okay —

MR MILLER: It’s – I —

QUESTION: Is that true?

MR MILLER: I looked at that. That’s not – I’m surprised when I hear people saying, oh, there were only 10 rifles in this room. It’s a hospital. It’s a hospital. There shouldn’t be any assault —

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR MILLER: Hold on. There shouldn’t be any assault rifles at a hospital. The second thing I would say is Israel continues to conduct its operations to clear all of the buildings in that hospital. And number three, we stand by the assessment that we made the other day.

QUESTION: Just one thing. I’m sure you have been in the Middle East. I’ve worked in the Middle East, like – in, like, courtrooms, like – either shops, hospitals —

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: There’s weapons everywhere. So what – the intelligence was that? It’s a proper terrorist organization network headquarters. So the pictures are showing like a couple Qurans, a desk, a laptop, and like seven, eight rifles.

MR MILLER: And —

QUESTION: That’s why you’re making that assessment and not that there’s a threshold?

MR MILLER: Again, it is an ongoing operation. I think people should wait till the operation is concluded to draw —

QUESTION: So you’re hoping to see more.

MR MILLER: Hold on. No, no, just let me finish – to draw their final conclusions. But again, I am just – I am given all the – look, I expect – fully expect people to stand here and challenge the things that we say as the United States Government, challenge the things that I say from this podium. I am surprised that people do not – that – I’m surprised that people have ignored the weight of public evidence over years and years of Hamas using civilian infrastructure as human shields. You can read multiple articles – forget that the United States Government. Forget what the intelligence assessments that we make. Forget what the Israeli Government says. You can read articles by multiple respected news organizations around the world whose reporters have —

QUESTION: Like who? Like who?

MR MILLER: Whose reporters – Said —

QUESTION: Who?

MR MILLER: I will send you —

QUESTION: I’m just saying (inaudible) —

MR MILLER: I will – I have read article – I – there is an article I read —

QUESTION: I would love to see it, and I would love to see evidence (inaudible) —

MR MILLER: Said – Said, again – can we go back to the not interrupting each other rule? Because I try to behave by that. There’s an article in The New York Times about – at the end of a previous conflict when they went through a mosque in Gaza and found headquarters of — headquarters of Hamas being based in that mosque and firing on soldiers from the mosque. There are multiple well documented reports in international news organizations going back years. So again, fully respect everyone’s right to challenge us, and we will back up the claims we make with evidence. But the idea that Hamas uses civilian infrastructure as human shields is not one, I think, that is really contested.

QUESTION: Then you will not try and —

MR MILLER: Go ahead.

QUESTION: But can you back up your claim in this particular instance?

MR MILLER: What’s that?

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: You just said you would back up claims with evidence.

MR MILLER: I —

QUESTION: In this particular case, you’re not going to make —

MR MILLER: We’re going to make our – again, oftentimes it’s difficult with us with intelligence matters. But like as I said, it’s an ongoing Israeli operation.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

QUESTION: Thank you, Matt.

MR MILLER: Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. Different subject, Matt. Bangladesh Government allows the election, therefore, the parliamentary election on January 7, ignoring the protest from the opposition parties. And the U.S. calls for a political consensus. So – and obviously all political party rejected it, and the crackdown is going on. So what is your position to hold a free, fair, and credible election and make the government accountable?

MR MILLER: So we have been consistent in our message regarding the upcoming elections, and that message remains the same now that the polling day has been announced. We want what the Bangladeshi people themselves want: free and fair elections which are conducted in a peaceful manner. We do not support one political party in Bangladesh; we don’t favor one political party over the other. We urge all parties to exercise restraint, avoid violence, and work together to create the conditions for free and fair elections conducted in a peaceful manner.

QUESTION: One more. Ambassador Peter Haas continues to receive death threats from the ruling party members. From central to grassroot-level ruling party, Awami League leaders are speaking in the same tone, wanting to slaughter the ambassador. And the ambassador himself yesterday expressed his deep concern for his security and their basic personnel security. Does the secretary general taking this threat seriously, and this – the violent rhetoric?

MR MILLER: So the safety and security of our diplomats overseas is, of course, our – our top priority. We take any threats against them very seriously. Violence or threats of violence directed at our diplomatic personnel is unacceptable. We have repeatedly raised our concerns about the threatening rhetoric directed at Ambassador Haas with the Bangladeshi Government. Would remind them that they have an obligation under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations to ensure the safety and security of U.S. diplomatic missions and personnel. And we expect them to act on those obligations.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Yeah, just to follow up on the Hamas using Palestinians as a human shield, there are also articles like this article that I just found on Reuters, dated 2013, that Palestinian children are also tortured and used as shield by Israel. So it goes both ways.

So my question is: Do you have any information about reports by doctors in Gaza of the use of white phosphorus in Gaza and in Lebanon lately?

MR MILLER: I don’t. I don’t.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. Different topic. Sir, the day before yesterday, John Sopko testified at Congress. And he said clearly that the Taliban in Afghanistan are getting the U.S. aids that’s supposed to be for the Afghan people. And he said clearly that whoever have guns in Afghanistan control the aid in Afghanistan, and also he indicated clearly that it is – the way that the Taliban got access to these aids somehow support terrorism in Afghanistan. So I know you before said that there was some intervention from the Taliban in terms of the aid that the U.S. sent for Afghan people. But what John Sopko explained at Congress is way more beyond that, what you said, sir, before.

MR MILLER: So a few things. Number one, the U.S. Government has robust oversight measures in place to monitor the implementation of U.S.-funded humanitarian assistance around the world, which we provide to help save the most vulnerable of lives. In cases where the Taliban makes demands of our partners beyond routine operational costs, our partners pause or adjust their operations accordingly. We work with trusted international partners who have extensive experience working on – in the challenging environments like Afghanistan, where we have no presence. And we continually assess our activities to ensure both our assistance is reaching those for which it is intended and that our partners have appropriate mitigation measures in place to help safeguard against diversion. And if we need to take steps to change how we’re delivering our aid, we of course will always do so.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Matthew, good afternoon. Simply, what’s the latest on the efforts to get the hostages freed?

MR MILLER: We continue – it continues to be a top priority. You heard the President speak about this a little – a little bit yesterday. The Secretary has been engaged and other members of the administration at the senior most levels have been engaged in it, but it is just not a topic we find productive to talk about publicly in terms of details.

QUESTION: We’re hearing fluctuating numbers – 239, 240. Do you have a precise number?

MR MILLER: Yeah, I don’t —

QUESTION: No. All right. How confident are you right now as we speak here, as we sit here, that they’re all alive?

MR MILLER: I’m just not able to offer any assessments about the condition of the hostages. Our focus is on working to try to get them home.

QUESTION: Okay. One more, please. Catholic Relief Services has staff on the ground in Gaza helping people, and they just told us the other day that even if more humanitarian assistance comes into Gaza, it’s impossible to distribute it without a cessation of violence – in their words, a cessation of violence. What is your – what’s the State Department – do you agree with that assessment?

MR MILLER: That goes to the exact point we’ve been making, which is that there need to be expanded humanitarian pauses to allow – among other things, to allow the delivery of humanitarian assistance to the people that need it most.

QUESTION: And finally, if I may, we’ll go to Africa, Sudan.

MR MILLER: I thought you said that was the last one.

QUESTION: I’m sorry. I’m sorry. Okay, one more.

MR MILLER: It’s okay. Go ahead. Go ahead. Go ahead, one more.

QUESTION: I misspeak too sometimes. You like that? There we go.

MR MILLER: Ah, fair. Fair.

QUESTION: Just a simple one here. Pope Francis tweeted the other day, quote, “May we not forget Sudan, which suffers greatly.” Is the world forgetting Sudan?

MR MILLER: I hope not. We certainly haven’t forgotten about it here. You may know that we just recently launched renewed talks with respect to Sudan and continue to push for the parties there to refrain from hostilities. We’ve had diplomatic personnel on the ground engaged in those diplomatic efforts. It continues to be a tragedy that we – the – just because there’s not – there always – it’s a big world, lot of things going on at one time. Just because the focus, the international focus sometimes is lost on one country or the other, it’s a big State Department and there are a number of people still actively focused on trying to resolve the conflict in Sudan, which remains a very, very difficult situation.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR MILLER: Go there, and then we’ll wrap up.

QUESTION: Okay, turning to APEC, during this APEC Leaders’ Week, the IPEF partner nations had a chance to meet and conduct negotiations. They were able to make major milestones on pillars two, three, and four, but did not conclude negotiations on pillar one for fair and resilient trade. Do you have a comment on the meetings and outcomes?

MR MILLER: I don’t. It’s something that we continue to work on, and we’ll have a full readout at the conclusion of APEC. And with that, we’ll wrap for the day.

(The briefing was concluded at 2:26 p.m.)

# # #

Department Press Briefing – November 14, 2023

HomeDepartment Press Briefing – November 14, 2023

hide

Department Press Briefing – November 14, 2023

Matthew Miller, Department Spokesperson

November 14, 2023

Article Index

ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES

IRAQ/IRAN/REGION

ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES

DEPARTMENT/UKRAINE/ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES

ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES/REGION

IRAN/REGION/COUNTERTERRORISM

RUSSIA

IRAQ

ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES/REGION

APEC

ARMENIA/AZERBAIJAN

CYPRUS/TÜRKIYE

BANGLADESH

CHINA

RUSSIA

ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES/REGION/DEPARTMENT

CUBA

ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES/DEPARTMENT

JAPAN/SOUTH KOREA

1:25 p.m. EST

MR MILLER: I don’t have anything to kick us off, so Matt?

QUESTION: Yeah, I actually – I mean, I have a lot, but nothing really to kind of start off with a bang, as it were. So I’ll defer.

MR MILLER: Okay, who else wants to go?

QUESTION: Any update on hostages, movement, ongoing negotiations, anything?

MR MILLER: I don’t have an update on hostage negotiations. I think as you know, I’ve been reluctant to talk about the status of negotiations from this podium because we’ve – it has been our position that anything that we say about hostage negotiations can jeopardize our work to try to secure the release of hostages. So I don’t have anything to say other than that it continues to be a top priority for everyone in this administration. The Secretary has had a number of calls about this very matter with his foreign counterparts in the last few days. And of course, it was a subject that he worked on a great deal during his recent travel to the region, but I don’t want to discuss any details.

QUESTION: Any word on the sanctions waiver expiring today for Iran?

MR MILLER: So I don’t have a comment to give on the expiration of the waiver at this time. But I would remind you of a few things with respect to these waivers in general, and that is that, number one, there are 20 waivers that have been issued for the payment from Iraq for Iranian electricity imports. They go back to 2018; they started during the Trump administration.

All – in each of these waivers, it has been the case that none of this money goes to Iran. It is held in accounts that are restricted where they can only be used to pay for food, medicine, humanitarian purposes, and other non-sanctionable activities. And it has been consistent with several policies that we have – one, to try to reduce Iran’s leverage over Iraq, and two, to try to wean Iraq from Iranian energy independence. We’ve had a number of policies we’ve worked with to try to ensure their energy independence, but in the meantime, they continue to buy Iranian electricity. And so we have in the past, as has the Trump administration, issued waivers to allow these funds to move to restricted accounts, or as I said, that can be used for humanitarian and other non-sanctionable purposes.

QUESTION: Is there any concern about the potential optics of, I guess, extending a sanctions waiver while Iranian proxy groups are attacking U.S. assets in the Middle East?

MR MILLER: We don’t worry about optics; we worry about reality. And the reality is that these funds, as I said, can only be used for humanitarian and other non-sanctionable purposes.

And when it comes to holding Iran accountable for its destabilizing activities, I would remind you that we have imposed more than 400 sanctions on Iran since the outset of this administration. In the past few weeks, we have taken a number of actions to ensure deterrence and to – the Pentagon has conducted strikes against Iranian-backed militias. And we will continue to hold accountable – Iran accountable for its destabilizing behavior in a number of manners.

QUESTION: Sorry.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR MILLER: Yeah, go ahead.

QUESTION: You don’t worry about optics, you worry about reality? Aren’t optics reality?

MR MILLER: No. No.

QUESTION: They’re not?

MR MILLER: I mean, we’re going to get into a bit of a metaphysical debate.

QUESTION: Well —

MR MILLER: But I would say I’m not – we’re —

QUESTION: No, I want to get to a specific question about this.

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: But what you see is what you get. That’s reality, right?

MR MILLER: I would say what’s – what you see is what you get – what – the optics, in the term I mean the optics —

QUESTION: The optics are —

MR MILLER: — is people taking this and misinterpreting it and saying it’s something that it’s not, which is what’s happened in the past when it’s – when it comes to these waivers. And I’m making very clear that these waivers —

QUESTION: Okay, well what —

MR MILLER: — are something that has – that have dated back to the Trump administration.

QUESTION: But what is it – what is it that it is not? What are you saying it isn’t?

MR MILLER: I will say what it is, and I will let the – those who tend to talk about these waivers over and over again, they have – they can speak for themselves.

QUESTION: Well, okay. Are you saying that this is an absolute straight-up renewal of what has been done in the past and there are no changes to it? It doesn’t allow the Iranians to convert money from Iraqi dinars into Euros?

MR MILLER: So I am not going to speak to a new waiver; one has not been issued at this point. I’m speaking – so if we get to the point where we can talk about a new waiver, I’ll be happy to come in and talk about the specifics. But all of our waivers in the past have made very clear that the funds are held in accounts not in Iran and available only for humanitarian and non-sanctionable purposes.

QUESTION: Yeah. But — and you’re saying that should there be a waiver this afternoon, it will be exactly the same and it won’t change anything?

MR MILLER: I am not going to talk about – I’m not going to talk about things that have not happened. I will be happy to – I won’t be here tomorrow; I’ll be here Thursday – be happy to talk about – if something has happened by the next time I’m at this podium, I will happy – be happy to talk about it.

QUESTION: All right. And then what about the fungibility argument that you heard a lot with the money from South Korea for the hostages? Why is that – why is that argument wrong?

MR MILLER: So I will say we have heard this a lot; I’ve addressed it a lot. So with respect to the Iranian regime, it has always funded destabilizing activities. It has done that first and foremost; it’s one of its top priorities. It does that whether it receives – whether its people receive humanitarian benefits or not. To the extent that the Iranian people have greater access to food or medicine as a result of money covered by this waiver, that’s food or medicine that otherwise would not have been available to them.

And I would say, again, this is a policy that goes back to the previous administration. The previous administration apparently decided that it was worthwhile to have this money spent for the benefit of the Iranian people, with whom we have no quarrel. Our quarrel is with the Iranian regime and its destabilizing activities. And so our – what we see is an Iranian regime that – whether these waivers are issued or not, whether their people benefit from these monies or not – continues to fund hostile activities. That has not changed; it has not changed going back years.

QUESTION: Well, whether or not they benefit from this money, isn’t that the whole point? The whole point is that they’re supposed to. But the problem is and the argument against this is that the Iranians are going to spend the same amount of money on their people as they did before, but now they’ve got another $10 billion or so to use —

MR MILLER: So – so – I – I don’t accept that argument. I – what we believe –

QUESTION: You don’t? So you’re inside the —

MR MILLER: No.

QUESTION: You know what the Iranians are doing?

MR MILLER: No. What we believe is the Iranian regime is going to spend the same amount of money on destabilizing activities because it always has, and we will take actions to hold them accountable for those destabilizing activities —

QUESTION: How do you know they’re not going to spend more?

MR MILLER: — as we have from the beginning of this administration. What we have seen is that when these waivers have been issued, that money has been used for the benefit of the Iranian people, period.

QUESTION: Yeah. And then the money that they had inside of Iran that would have spent on this is then – is then freed up for —

MR MILLER: You are making an assumption that the Iranian Government —

QUESTION: You’re making an assumption that they’re not doing it.

MR MILLER: No, no – well, let me just – Matt, let me finish. You are making an assumption when you say that that the Iranian Government is choosing the benefit of its people over funding terrorism and funding other destabilizing actions.

QUESTION: No, I’m not making that assumption.

MR MILLER: That’s not what we’ve seen. We’ve seen them – we’ve seen —

QUESTION: You’re making that assumption. (Laughter.)

MR MILLER: No, no, I’m not. I’ve seen them as a first priority fund destabilizing activities. We think increasing the amount of money that flows for the benefit of the Iranian people is something that’s worthwhile. And again, this is money that was – that Iraq owes to Iran for electricity that Iran delivered.

QUESTION: Yeah, but I – you’re twisting it 180 degrees, the opposite of what – I’m not saying that they’re not going to spend any of this money on food and medicine and other humanitarian —

MR MILLER: That’s all this money can be spent on.

QUESTION: Yeah, but that means that they have X amount of dollars more —

MR MILLER: You – only —

QUESTION: — in their own treasury that they can spend on destabilizing activities.

MR MILLER: Only if you —

QUESTION: And you guys –

MR MILLER: Only if you assume they were going to fund food and medicine and other activities. And I’m saying that’s not a necessarily correct assumption.

QUESTION: But you – no, you said that they —

MR MILLER: They could make the choice to —

QUESTION: You said that they were, and you said also that even —

MR MILLER: No, that’s —

QUESTION: — if they are spending that money, that they are going to still fund destabilizing activities.

MR MILLER: I said their first priority is to fund destabilizing activities. That is the —

QUESTION: So then why would you – why would you give them – or not —

MR MILLER: Because this money will not —

QUESTION: — not give them money, but why would you do this —

MR MILLER: I feel like we’re arguing in circles here a little bit, not for the first time.

QUESTION: No, it’s not, and this has gone back for several administrations now, because I don’t understand your argument that you can be so sure that none of this money is going to increase the amount of cash that Iran spends to destabilize the region.

MR MILLER: Because Iran does not – when – what we see is, when making its choices for how to spend its money, Iran – the Iranian regime does not choose to feed its people first.

QUESTION: Exactly.

MR MILLER: They choose to fund destabilizing activities first. They always have; as far as we can tell, they always will. So when it – looking at this money, we see the benefit to allowing these funds to move again to restricted accounts where they can only benefit the Iranian people.

QUESTION: But they – all right.

QUESTION: Can I just (inaudible) —

MR MILLER: Go ahead, Jen —

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

QUESTION: I – I just don’t understand how you can’t see that – how you can’t see the problem with (inaudible) —

MR MILLER: And I don’t – I don’t understand how you can’t – what – well, I – we don’t understand each other, I think.

QUESTION: I guess so.

MR MILLER: Go ahead, Jen. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: Going back to the hostages —

QUESTION: But we’ll get a divorce.

MR MILLER: Oh, I don’t think we’re allowed to. (Laughter.) I think we’re stuck with each other. Go ahead.

QUESTION: I have a quick question.

MR MILLER: No, no, let me – go – I’ll come to you. Go ahead.

QUESTION: On Iran —

MR MILLER: No, no, Jen had her hand up. I’ll –

QUESTION: Going back —

MR MILLER: I will come to – I will come —

QUESTION: Okay. Going back to the hostages, though, the President gave some indication of optimism that a deal is going to be done. What is underpinning that optimism right now?

MR MILLER: Look, because we continue to work for it, we are always hopeful that we will be able to secure the release of not just the – first and foremost the American citizens, but all of the hostages that are held, certainly all the civilian hostages, the women and children who have been now prisoners for more than a month. So as long as there is a possibility to bring them home, we will work to do it. I just don’t want to talk about the underlying details that leads us to believe there is still a possibility to return them home.

QUESTION: But can you say there – if there has been any concrete movement towards that end, towards an agreement?

MR MILLER: There are ongoing discussions. I don’t want to characterize where those discussions are.

QUESTION: And can you say whether any sort of iteration of a deal would include all 10 Americans who are believed to —

MR MILLER: Again, I don’t want to talk about what the contours of a deal might be before we’ve even reached an agreement.

QUESTION: Can I follow up on this —

QUESTION: And then on —

MR MILLER: Guys, guys. I will – I will –

QUESTION: On that point —

MR MILLER: I will – let Jen finish. I will come.

QUESTION: Is it still the case that there is not a formal assessment being done by the U.S. Government into whether Israel is adhering to international humanitarian law?

MR MILLER: As I said yesterday, we monitor the use of our weapons. We monitor all the actions that Israel takes, as we monitor actions in any conflict. But I’m not going to speak to internal deliberations.

QUESTION: But there is no formal assessment?

MR MILLER: I’m just not – there’s not a formal assessment that’s been made, and I’m not going to speak to internal deliberations inside the department.

All right. Now, Said.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR MILLER: Thank you for your patience, such as it is.

QUESTION: Thank you. Yeah – oh, no, I can wait all day; no problem. A Hamas spokesman suggested that they will release 70 hostages for a five-day pause. Would that be acceptable to the United States?

MR MILLER: I think you’ll understand I’m not going to negotiate in public about such a sensitive matter.

QUESTION: But this – I mean, on principle —

MR MILLER: You can ask it a bunch of different ways. I am just not going to take a negotiation question from the podium.

QUESTION: All right. Well, I tell you what: Can you update us on the status of the pauses? We have had had a pause or two. Is that ongoing, or did that stop? What’s going on? I mean, if – what – from what we see and read and so on, there are no pauses taking place.

MR MILLER: There are pauses that are taking place. So the Secretary – this is something the Secretary pushed for when we were in Israel. He had very direct conversations with the prime minister about it. You saw him come out and talk about those conversations afterwards, and then over the week – 10 days – after we left Israel, you saw Israel begin to implement pauses, and every day they announce pauses in areas to allow the evacuation of – let me – the evacuation of civilians along humanitarian corridors. We’ve said before we think the pauses ought to be longer. We will continue to engage in conversations with that – about that with the Government of Israel.

QUESTION: And one more thing. I mean, since Sunday morning there, Saturday night here, we have not seen any figures released from Shifa Hospital because it’s completely out of service. The last count was like 11 – 80 – 11,087 or something like this. Do you have any way of keeping track of the number of Palestinians killed?

MR MILLER: We don’t. We don’t have an accurate assessment or an assessment that we know to be accurate about the number of Palestinians who have been killed, but as the Secretary said last week, we know that far too many innocent Palestinian civilians have been killed.

QUESTION: I understand, but with the hospitals out of service, is there – are we likely to know what’s going on and how many people have died?

MR MILLER: I don’t know how I could speak to that from here.

QUESTION: I want to talk about – I want to ask about the West Bank, but I can wait.

MR MILLER: Go ahead. No, go.

QUESTION: Okay, on the West Bank very quickly, there’s a rampage going on by the army, by the settlers and so on. Last night they went into Tulkarm, Jenin, and so on. They killed 12 Palestinians or 10 Palestinians; the number has exceeded 200 since the beginning – since October 7 and so on. I mean, just total – are you guys concerned? Are you doing anything to make sure that things don’t really blow out of —

MR MILLER: We are – we are very concerned about this issue. You’ve heard the Secretary speak to this. He spoke to it when we were in Israel, in fact. The Secretary has made very clear that we condemn extremist violence and harassment against Palestinians. He had a very direct conversation with the prime minister about it. What he said to the prime minister and other members of the Israeli war cabinet is that the extremist violence against settlers^[1] is unacceptable, that we think the government needs to do more to rein it in, and they need to do more to hold people accountable, and we will be watching to see what steps they take.

QUESTION: Okay, but it has accelerated since this conversation.

MR MILLER: I’m telling you we expect them to take action and we will be watching to see that they do.

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: Can we go back to Gaza, please?

MR MILLER: I told Olivia I’d come to her next.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) on Shifa Hospital, I know you and the – and others in the administration have spoken generally about information you have about hospitals and Hamas operating under them. Is the U.S. taking any steps to declassify, to share more information about what it has specifically regarding Shifa?

MR MILLER: So I don’t want to talk about what we may or may not declassify before we take any action, just as I don’t really want to talk about intelligence matters from the podium. As I said yesterday, as you heard the National Security Advisor say over the weekend, and as the Secretary has spoken to, we do know that Hamas has used hospitals as command centers and has buried its tunnels under command centers.

And I want to say something about hospitals, that number one, we want hospitals to be protected. We don’t want to see any civilians – and certainly not babies in incubators or other vulnerable populations – caught in a crossfire. We want Hamas to stop using hospitals as command posts. That would be the easiest way to solve this problem, if they would stop using the civilians that are in hospitals as humanitarian shields.

But then I would also say that we want there to be safe evacuation for patients at hospitals so they can get out of harm’s way. We would support an independent third party, a respected third party, to conduct those evacuations. We know the Government of Israel would support such a step as well. They have said that they would support such a step. The question is will Hamas allow patients to be evacuated from hospitals or will they continue to use them as human shields. We think an appropriate step would be to support those evacuations so babies and other vulnerable populations are not in harm’s way.

QUESTION: Well, on that front – so, one, has a third-party candidate been identified to effectuate those kind of evacuations? And then, on the Hamas front, has the U.S. made an appeal through the Qataris or anyone else to do exactly what you just said?

MR MILLER: So we are in a number – we are in conversations with a number of humanitarian organizations and third parties about this very topic. I don’t want to speak to those issues in detail, but it is very much something that we would support. And I will just say generally we have sent messages through the Qataris and through other counterparts in the region to Hamas that, of course, just as we’ve said they should release the hospitals, that they should allow evacuation of wounded civilians and stop them using them as human shields.

QUESTION: Specifically on the babies, just given the urgency and the fragility of the lives at stake there, I mean, conversations are one thing, but are you really pushing the gas pedal here?

MR MILLER: We could not agree more. Look, we – to state matters lightly, we do not control what Hamas does. We would like Hamas to just move out of the hospitals. As I said, that would be the easiest way to solve this issue, but absent that, if they refuse to remove their command centers from hospitals, as they seem likely to do – they’ve been burying their command centers under hospitals for years – the step that we think would be appropriate for them to take would be to allow evacuation. And yes, we would very much encourage them to. Will they do it? We have seen them – one of their prime strategies has been to use civilians as human shields, not just in hospitals but in other civilian infrastructure throughout Gaza. So we would certainly hope that they would, and if they don’t, I think it speaks to their true motivations here.

QUESTION: I have another question that’s in the region but sort of ancillary to everything that’s going on, so I can pose it or you can come back to me.

MR MILLER: We’ll come back.

QUESTION: Okay.

QUESTION: Thank you. On the hostages, I know you don’t want to talk about details, but some of the information that was leaked out that basically they will release 80 women and children in return for women and Palestinian children who are in the Israeli jails. Can you take this question if you don’t know the answer, please? No, can you please tell us if Israel – if you are aware of Israel holding Palestinian children in jail? Just take the question and you can verify it.

MR MILLER: So I am just not going to speak to hostage negotiations. With respect to that factual question, that’s a question for the Government of Israel. But as it relates to hostage negotiations, I’m not going to speak to that at all.

QUESTION: Okay. The Israeli foreign minister said that the secretary-general, Mr. Antonio Guterres, is not qualified to lead the UN or the world. Do you agree with him? And how do you differentiate between somebody who is obviously being critical of Israel and people who going to be labeled as antisemitic? How can we have this debate where there is legitimate criticism of Israel and not be put in the category that people are antisemitic?

MR MILLER: So with respect to the first one, I will let the foreign minister speak to his own comments, but I’ll say we support the work that the UN has done to get humanitarian relief into Israel. We’ll continue to work with the UN and its various agencies to try to get relief into Israel, and that includes with, of course, the secretary-general.

And with respect to the first question, of course legitimate criticism of Israel is appropriate, just as criticism of any government is appropriate. We welcome criticism of our government. I won’t speak for other governments; obviously, many governments don’t welcome such criticism around the world. But that’s a different matter than antisemitism, which we very much abhor and condemn.

QUESTION: And finally, there’s a lawsuit – I don’t know if you’re aware of it – against the Secretary of State, the President, and the Defense Secretary in New York. It was filed yesterday in a federal court, and they’re saying basically that they failed to prevent and aid in genocide in Gaza. Are you aware of this – of this —

MR MILLER: I’ve seen the – I’ve seen the litigation but we don’t – I won’t comment on litigation. I’ll refer that to the Justice Department for comment.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR MILLER: Go ahead.

QUESTION: The House looks set to vote on a budget today without any aid for Israel or Ukraine. How concerned are you about that, and when does this become critical?

MR MILLER: So we are at a critical point with respect to aid to Ukraine. The Pentagon has said publicly that they have exhausted somewhere around 95 percent of their funds to provide security assistance to Ukraine – security assistance that’s very important. We think it’s urgent that the House pass the supplemental requests that we made not just to fund security assistance to Ukraine, not just to fund security assistance to Israel, but also to fund the humanitarian assistance that we have requested for the people of Gaza, which we think is critically important both for their safety and well-being and for Israel’s long-term security interests.

Yeah.

QUESTION: Thanks, Matt. Assistant Secretary Barbara Leaf is headed back to the region. Any particular message she is carrying on behalf of the Secretary?

MR MILLER: I think you’ll see her continue the work that the Secretary launched in his two trips to the region, trying to achieve many of the same objectives: one, to ensure that Israel is able to defend itself against terrorism while respecting humanitarian law, that we are trying to secure the release of hostages, that we are trying to secure the delivery of humanitarian assistance into Rafah and facilitate the departure of American citizens from Rafah. There are now over 600 American citizens and lawful permanent residents and their family members who have departed Gaza through Rafah gate. There are somewhere – there are a little under a thousand that we know of that are left now we hope – whose departure we hope to facilitate over the coming days should they wish to depart. And of course, you – we’ll continue to work to try to prevent the conflict from spreading, which has been one of our top objectives from the outset.

QUESTION: Thank you. And back to Iran, I want to bring up, too, a quote from the Secretary this morning. He said in a statement that, “Iran’s support, primarily through [IRGC], enables Hamas and PIJ’s terrorist activities, including through the transfer of funds … and operational training.” I assume you still stand by this statement. And if that’s —

MR MILLER: Absolutely, and I think you’re referring to a statement he made imposing sanctions on Hamas to prevent it from accessing the financial system, which is the exact kind of sanctions we have imposed on Iran over 400 times in this administration to prevent them from conducting these destabilizing activities.

QUESTION: But the argument is aren’t we deluding ourselves when expecting that a regime – a terrorist regime, I should say – of that nature then gets its hands on 10 additional billion dollars will act differently?

MR MILLER: So I think you are mistaking – you are misstating several facts. They get their hands on zero additional dollars as a result of these waivers. Again, none of these funds are sent to Iran. They are held in third-party accounts outside Iran, and can be used only for not – for humanitarian and other non-sanctionable purposes for the benefits of the Iranian people.

QUESTION: But there is no concern whatsoever on your end that Iran might get emboldened by this action?

MR MILLER: You think Iran is going to get more emboldened than it is already because of this action?

QUESTION: Well, do you think —

MR MILLER: These are sanctions that have been going – these are waivers that have been issued going back to 2018. We have seen Iran continue its destabilizing activities throughout that time, just as they did before the Trump administration issued the first of these waivers in 2018, which is why we have held them accountable through strikes against their proxy militias in the region and through the sanctions I just referred to, as well as a number of other measures.

QUESTION: Okay. Please come back to me on Russia later.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) thing again (inaudible).

MR MILLER: I think you’re about to. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: Well, no, I’m not going to, but I just – I just do not understand why you – why it is that you’re so single-mindedly refusing to understand at least the argument that —

MR MILLER: I —

QUESTION: — this money – this money is going to be able to be used by Iran, and that when they do use it and they use $1 million to buy medicine from – of this money, that that frees up another million dollars that they would have spent – they would have had to spend on this – without the sanctions waiver.

MR MILLER: I – I —

QUESTION: And they can use that – they can use it to do whatever they want with it.

MR MILLER: So I understand the argument. I don’t agree with it, and here’s why. If they were sitting on that $1 million, they would use it for their destabilizing activities, to fund terrorism, and deny medicine to their people. That’s the point I’m making. And so to approve $1 million of, say, medical transactions to the benefit of the Iranian people, we believe those are benefits to the Iranian people that they would not have otherwise gotten.

QUESTION: So it’s just a lost cause, then? You’re just saying that they’re going to – they’re going to fund destabilizing activities regardless of whether you give them the waiver or not?

MR MILLER: I think that – I think they are going – they have shown that they are going to conduct destabilizing activities. They were doing it before 2018 when the Trump administration gave them their first waiver.

QUESTION: Exactly. That’s the entire point.

MR MILLER: Which is why – but which is why we have an entire set of policies to hold them accountable for their destabilizing activities. And part of our policy has always been not to penalize the Iranian people. There is no country in the world where we deny access to food and medicine and where our sanctions target food and medicine and other humanitarian goods to the people. That’s true with respect to Russia. It’s true with respect to Iran. It’s true with respect to every country in the world, and it always has been. That is the policy of the United States.

QUESTION: Matt, on this, what about the timing – the waiver’s timing? And second, did Iran help in preventing Hizballah from launching a full war against Israel? And third, did Iran receive the $6 billion that South Korea transferred to it through Qatar?

MR MILLER: So three things. Again, on the timing, a waiver hasn’t been issued at this point. I’ll be happy to talk more about a waiver if and when it has been issued. But the timing is that the waiver, the previous waiver, expires today. So that’s the – with respect to timing.

With respect to Hizballah, I will just – I won’t speak for what actions Iran has taken. I will speak for the United States, and we have sent very loud and clear messages that we think that any party hostile to Israel should not enter this conflict. We have sent public messages to that effect. You’ve seen the President speak to it. And we have sent private messages to that effect, and we hope that they will be received. And if they’re not, we will be prepared to take action.

And with respect to the third question, it’s my understanding that none of that money has yet to be spent.

QUESTION: And did you ask Iran to ask Hizballah not to launch a war, a full war, on Israel?

MR MILLER: I’m just not going to talk about messages other than to say that we have made very clear publicly and through private channels that no party should escalate this conflict.

Simon, go ahead.

QUESTION: A different subject, if it’s all right.

MR MILLER: No. No, no. We need to do more. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: Can we talk – just get an update on the Russian-American journalist for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty Alsu Kurmasheva? Her husband is calling for her to be designated as wrongfully detained. Can we expect such a designation? In the case of Evan Gershkovich, also detained in Russia, it happened within, I think, 10 or 11 days. What’s the holdup of getting a determination in this case?

MR MILLER: So I don’t have any update. We continue to request consular access for her, and it has not yet been granted. And I would just say with respect to wrongful detainees, every circumstance is different. We look at each of these and try to make a determination as quickly as we can, but we have to gather all the appropriate facts before making a determination. And I don’t think anyone should read into the amount of time it takes in one case versus the amount of time it takes in another case of what our determination is going to be or what our priority is going to be. It’s just that every circumstance is different.

QUESTION: But is it – just to confirm, there is a process underway to determine yes or no?

MR MILLER: We always – I don’t want to speak to a formal process, but we always look at these cases overseas and determine whether we should make such a – look at whether we should make such a determination or not.

QUESTION: And you haven’t had any consular access?

MR MILLER: We have not.

QUESTION: Haven’t been formally informed of her detention?

MR MILLER: As far as I’m aware. It’s possible the embassy’s had something today that I’m not aware of, but as far as I’m aware, we have not, no.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: In a similar vein, is the department offering any guidance on the situation of Elizabeth Tsurkov, the Princeton researcher? A video of her surfaced yesterday. Has the U.S. authenticated that video in any way?

MR MILLER: So we’ve seen the video. I don’t think we have any way to authenticate it, but we strongly condemn her abduction, as we have before. We know she was conducting research in Baghdad at the time of her abduction. She is affiliated with a higher education institution in the United States. And I would just say, as is always the case when you have hostage videos or videos of people that are – have been abducted, you should not take the claims made in those videos at face value, and you have to consider the source of those videos and understand that their captors may have ulterior motives, to say the least.

All right, go ahead.

QUESTION: So a big part of this war is misinformation, which is spreading widely across social media. Yesterday, the IDF posted – the IDF spokesman posted a video in the basement of Rantisi Children’s Hospital pointing to a random calendar, and he said that this is evidence of hostage keepers and terrorists’ names. And it was debunked and showed that it was like a regular calendar. More of these are being spread, like a nurse being said that she was in the hospital and it was later debunked to be like an Israeli actress.

Does this administration examine misinformation widely spread, especially from the Israeli part? Because we heard – we heard here on this podium repeatedly you saying that the number of killed was 1,400 when it was 1,200. Do you ask – do you ask and look into these information and evidence, or do you believe them blindly?

MR MILLER: So we look at a number of different claims. I don’t know if that information about the calendar has been debunked. I read in a prominent American newspaper today that, in fact, it showed on that calendar – used the name for October 7th that Hamas uses. I have no way to —

QUESTION: It’s in Arabic.

MR MILLER: Hold on, let me just —

QUESTION: It’s an Arabic date.

MR MILLER: Let me just finish. I have —

QUESTION: Like Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday.

QUESTION: It’s all —

MR MILLER: Let me – let me make my point. I have no way of either verifying or debunking that information. And it goes to the point —

QUESTION: Yeah, but now they’re —

MR MILLER: Please. I did not interrupt you when you were asking a question.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR MILLER: There’s plenty of time for people to ask questions.

It goes to the point I was making yesterday, that in the fog of war, from thousands of miles away at the podium, I have no way to independently adjudicate the various claims that are being made. I will come back to the core principles that we state, which is that we expect Israel to – that we expect Israel to operate with respect to humanitarian law. And I do want to restate the broader point with respect to hospitals that I said earlier, which is Hamas has long – has long used hospitals as command centers. I can’t speak to every individual claim, I’m not going to speak to intelligence that we have, and I can’t adjudicate the various pieces of information from here when I’m thousands of miles away.

But I think it’s fairly well known – and if not accepted, I would hope it would be – that Hamas uses civilians as – or uses civilians as human shields. And I’m a little surprised that there are people that continue to challenge that claim despite the evidence going back years from well before October 7th that Hamas has used mosques and schools and other civilian infrastructure as – as infrastructure for its own terrorist purposes.

QUESTION: Yeah, but my question is about misinformation. Like, we heard a lot of – like recordings that you can see the accent, it’s not like a proper Arabic accent. We’ve seen the calendar —

MR MILLER: I’m just —

QUESTION: — that is, like, so easy to know that it’s dates. It’s days. It’s not anything. There’s nothing on it. This is my question.

MR MILLER: I am just not able to speak to individual claims. Of course, we monitor all this and we try to reach our own factual determinations, as we do in any conflict.

QUESTION: Okay. And on Lebanon, yesterday, a group of media journalists was the target to an Israeli airstrike on the southern borders of Lebanon. A month ago – a month ago today, like, also an Israeli airstrike killed a Reuters correspondent. So do you have any comment on that?

MR MILLER: We mourn the loss of every civilian life in this conflict, whether they be Israeli, whether they be Palestinian, Lebanese, or citizens of any other country. And I’ve spoken to this before. We know that journalists put themselves in harm’s way to bring the truth to people around the world and we commend them for that activity. It’s one of the bravest acts you can ask anyone to do. And of course, when a journalist loses their life, we are deeply sorry for that – for that having occurred.

QUESTION: And just to come back to that —

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: — misinformation question, you say that you can’t adjudicate every example. This is very similar to a discussion we had about civilian losses in airstrikes as well, but just to point out that the department has the Global Engagement Center that is constantly putting out material about governments around the world doing disinformation, misinformation.

MR MILLER: Sure.

QUESTION: Is that something that you would look at in – there’s some examples there. There are other —

MR MILLER: If we —

QUESTION: There are other examples that have come out of the Israeli Government that – sure, Hamas as well, but is there something that you would —

MR MILLER: If we saw examples of disinformation, of course, it’s something we would look at and call out. But you do have to remember the fog of war, and that in the fog of war, everyone makes mistakes. I’m not saying that’s what happened here. As I said, I have no way to independently determine myself, but there is a difference between governments or individuals that make mistakes or that make claims that they then later have to update when new facts become available and intentional, deliberate misinformation over a sustained period of time.

QUESTION: I guess people might say you have these parts of the department that call out governments for misinformation, but it tends to be governments that you are – that are your adversaries, right? So I guess you could show some willingness to make those same judgments when it comes to your friends like Israel.

MR MILLER: So if we saw a sustained, deliberate misinformation campaign by Israel or any other government, of course, we would call it out. I will say it tends to be not democracies with whom we are allies and partners that conduct misinformation campaigns, but authoritarian regimes, so I think it’s natural that you will see us calling it out more in those circumstances – authoritarian regimes that don’t have a free press – to challenge the information being put out by the government. But if we see any kind of deliberate misinformation campaign, of course, we would call it out with – if it had – no matter who it was.

Okay. Alex, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thanks very much. I have two questions. Yesterday, I asked you about a Russian delegation – a particular Russian deputy prime minister who will be present at the summit – at the leaders’ summit in San Francisco. Turns out it is Aleksey Overchuk, who got sanctioned by the EU last December for Russia’s brutal actions in Ukraine.

Do you have any issue with the fact that a EU-sanctioned Russian official will be in the same room with the President and —

MR MILLER: So I will let the EU speak to their sanctions. I will say that as the host of APEC, we have a responsibility – we – or I will say we take our host obligation responsibility – and that includes hosting officials from all the members of APEC, but we do it consistent with U.S. sanctions policy and rules and regulations.

QUESTION: But you don’t consider this as a violation of EU sanctions, the invite?

MR MILLER: I’m not going to get into technical sanctions questions. I will say we have an obligation as the host. There are a lot – we go – we attend – one of the things about diplomacy is you attend a lot of meetings with people whose policies you object to, and sometimes you object to things that they’ve done, but we have a responsibility to conduct diplomacy on behalf of the United States.

QUESTION: Thank you, and my second question on Karabakh. Ahead of tomorrow’s congressional hearing, I’m just wondering if you have any preview of what you guys are going to say in terms of the future of Nagorno-Karabakh. You have Azerbaijan on one hand celebrating the victory surrounded – in a town surrounded by Russian army. You have Armenia is being bullied by Russia every single day saying that won’t go anywhere, I’m not going to go anywhere.

So is there any happy ending there, in your opinion?

MR MILLER: I will just say what I’ve said before. I don’t want to speak to the meeting that’s going to happen tomorrow, but I’ll say that we continue to believe that people who have left Nagorno-Karabakh have the right to come home if they wish to do so, and that’s a right that should be upheld.

Let me go – go ahead.

QUESTION: Okay. Matt, I asked Vedant the other day when you were in Asia, then I asked the European desk, and I want to ask you too: Do you consider the occupation of Cyprus by your allies the Turks an occupation or something else? I’m sure you know the answer they gave me. They said to me: We believe the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries should be respected and protected. But they don’t say if there is – if the occupation of Cyprus is an occupation. What is your position?

MR MILLER: So we believe that – we support Cypriot-led, UN-facilitated efforts to reunify the island as a bi-zonal, bi-communal federation with political equality to benefit all Cypriots, as outlined in relevant UN Security Council resolutions. That has been the longstanding policy of the United States going back years.

QUESTION: But – but there is an occupation, you know that?

MR MILLER: Again, this is an issue we think that needs to be resolved through UN-facilitated efforts to reunify the island.

QUESTION: Thank you so much.

MR MILLER: Yeah. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Okay. Thank you. I have two questions. 2+2 ministerial meeting in India. After that, Vinay Kwatra, Indian foreign ministry official, restated of stable Bangladesh for the Indian subcontinent and raised concern over rising extremism with third-country intervention. What will be really danger for India – yeah, as well as for U.S.A.? Will you differ from such Indian stance on Bangladesh?

MR MILLER: I just don’t have any comment on that.

QUESTION: And I have – the second one. While U.S. envoy repeatedly calling for dialogue between parties, ignoring the street violence between BNP-Jamaat-led blockade, can the U.S. guarantee the end of such – yeah, violence by BNP-Jamaat given past record of such violence by same group in Bangladesh?

MR MILLER: So we have consistently said that we believe elections in Bangladesh should take – should be free and fair and open, and they should take place free of violence.

QUESTION: Thank you so much.

MR MILLER: Go ahead.

QUESTION: Okay, I have a follow-up —

MR MILLER: No, no, no, no – go – behind you.

QUESTION: Thank you. The Biden administration has been very clear about their China strategy and the hope to stabilize relations and reopen regular lines of communication in the near term. Can you speak more to what the goal and hope of this administration is for the U.S.-China relationship in the longer term?

MR MILLER: So we have – you’re right, we have – the short-term project, which we started in June, really, when Secretary Blinken traveled to Beijing, was to re-establish the ability to have conversations, but that was not a goal in itself. It was a goal so we could, number one, manage big geostrategic issues and make sure that, when conflicts do arise, that we can talk to each other and make sure that we are both – both avoid miscalculation. But it’s – also was to make tangible progress on bilateral issues between the two countries.

You saw the Secretary when he was in Beijing – and then with his meetings with Wang Yi in Jakarta and his meetings with Wang Yi here just afterwards – press on several tangible issues. Making progress on fentanyl is one, to stop the export of precursor chemicals from China that are turned into fentanyl and have killed millions and millions of Americans. Re-establishing military-to-military ties is another. The Secretary has pressed very hard for both of those. And it is that exact type of bilateral issue that we are looking to make progress on, as well as an ability to work together to reduce tensions on larger strategic global issues.

Go ahead. No – behind – go ahead. Yeah.

QUESTION: Me?

MR MILLER: No. Behind you.

QUESTION: I have question on Russia – two questions. First, if there are any contacts planned between the U.S. delegation to APEC and the Russian delegation.

And another question: One – the recent interview by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov, who said that while Russia doesn’t intend to push relations between Washington and Moscow into a peace, it doesn’t rule out that Washington can either lower diplomatic level or break the relations. Your comment?

MR MILLER: I don’t understand. What do you mean lower the – what do you mean lower the diplomatic level or —

QUESTION: Maybe pull out ambassador or —

MR MILLER: Oh. I don’t want to speak – I don’t want to speak to that. I will say with respect to the first question, there are no – I am not aware of any meetings scheduled between us and the Russian Government at APEC.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. Speaking about preventing destabilizing activities, 45 members of Congress have sent a letter to Secretary Blinken asking him to put pressure to Türkiye about stopping facilitating Hamas. We know your position that you have expressed to the allies that you don’t want them to support Hamas.

My question is: Have you taken any action to ensure that a NATO member like Türkiye will not support the terrorist organization that at the very right moment is attacking a major ally like Israel?

MR MILLER: Let me say two things. Number one, we have made very clear our position that there can be no more business as usual with Hamas since October 7th. We have long designated Hamas as a terrorist organization. There are other countries that continue to conduct conversations with them and have relationships with them. And we have made clear the position of the United States, which is that there shouldn’t be such business as usual moving forward.

At the same time, we have recognized that Hamas continues to hold American citizens and citizens of Israel and citizens of Thailand and citizens of other countries as hostages. And it’s useful for countries that have relationships with Hamas now to use those relationships to try to get hostages released, just as it’s useful to use those relationships to try to get Rafah gate reopened, which we have done to get humanitarian assistance in, and to flowing – to get American citizens and others the ability to leave. But long term, our position is very clear that there can be no going back to the days before October 7th.

And – Jen, and then we’ll close out.

QUESTION: A very different topic. We were told there were migration talks between the U.S. and Cuba here this week. Is there anything you can share on that?

MR MILLER: I’ll have to take that back. I’m not aware.

QUESTION: Wait, Matt, before you go —

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: — two widely divergent things. One, just on the whole dissent issue, the Secretary’s department-wide note sent yesterday. Was that written or sent out of concern that things are kind of spiraling out of control? Or was it simply because it was the first workday since he got back from the trip and —

MR MILLER: It was —

QUESTION: What is the concern?

MR MILLER: It was sent because it was – it’s the second of two emails. The first one was sent after his first trip to the region when he came back and updated the workforce on the work that he was doing and what our policies are and what we were trying to achieve and what he was trying to achieve through his travel through the region. And because this is such an important piece of diplomatic work to the department that touches not just one bureau in the department but multiple bureaus, he thought it was appropriate after the first trip to send an update, and thought it was appropriate after the second trip to do the same.

And of course, he did address in that email the – all the issues underlying our policy and made clear people understood what our policy is, just as he has done in meetings he’s had with a number of employees in the department.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR MILLER: No, no, no, just —

QUESTION: So there isn’t – so there’s not a particular concern that the unity, cohesiveness of the building is being shredded?

MR MILLER: No. As I said yesterday, we think that the diversity inside the department is actually a strength, not a weakness.

QUESTION: Okay. And it’s still your understanding that there’s only one person who has resigned as a result of the – in protest over the —

MR MILLER: As far as I’m aware, the one resignation that’s been very public is the only one that I am at least aware of or that – with respect to our policy.

QUESTION: Okay. And then, on a completely different subject, today in San Francisco – and I think it might’ve already happened – the Secretary was meeting with the Japanese and the South Korean —

MR MILLER: I think it hasn’t happened. I think it’s later today.

QUESTION: Oh, okay. Well, I’m just curious as to – I mean, is that just because they’re there? Because he just met with them.

MR MILLER: This is to conduct a trilateral. But he met —

QUESTION: He met with them last week.

MR MILLER: He met with them separately last week. This is to conduct a trilateral meeting as a follow-on to the summit that the President held at Camp David in August.

QUESTION: And are you expecting anything to come from this, or is it just kind of like a signals check?

MR MILLER: I think we’ll talk about a number of issues that are important in the relationship. We may have some announcements coming out of it. Stay tuned.

QUESTION: You may have?

MR MILLER: Yeah, just stay tuned. All right, thanks, everyone.

QUESTION: Thank you.

(The briefing was concluded at 2:09 p.m.)

# # #

1. Palestinians ↑

Department Press Briefing – November 13, 2023

HomeDepartment Press Briefing – November 13, 2023

hide

Department Press Briefing – November 13, 2023

Matthew Miller, Department Spokesperson

November 13, 2023

Article Index

~ ISRAEL / PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES ~

~ ISRAEL ~

~ ISRAEL / PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES ~

~ TÜRKIYE / ISRAEL ~

~ STATE DEPARTMENT ~

~ BANGLADESH ~

~ ISRAEL / PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES ~

~ STATE DEPARTMENT ~

~ APEC ~

~ ISRAEL / PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES ~

~ UKRAINE / RUSSIA ~

~ IRAN ~

MR MILLER: Good afternoon, everyone. Mike seems a little odd today.

Humeyra, want to start us off?

QUESTION: Yeah, sure. Welcome back, Matt. I just want to ask about some of Prime Minister Netanyahu’s comments from last week – I’m aware that they’ve evolved. And has – and the Secretary has also laid out a vision on what Washington thinks about the future of Gaza. But where we are, it does look like there is a disagreement with Netanyahu and U.S. on the future of Gaza. U.S. doesn’t want to – any reoccupation, and while Netanyahu has clarified some of his comments and has made different comments, it does sound like Israel does want, like, a security force and with an indefinite period of time.

So I’m just wondering what the U.S. thinking on that is. How are you – are you negotiating with the Israelis on that, and how is that going?

MR MILLER: So, I will say that yes, as a first item, he has clarified some of his remarks. But you’re right, he has made comments that are different from the vision that Secretary Blinken laid out, both when we were in the region and then in a speech that he gave in Tokyo last week. Let me just reiterate – I know you know them, but just for the record – the principles that the Secretary laid out, which is that, number one: at the end of this conflict there can be no forcible displacement of Palestinians from Gaza. It can’t happen now while the conflict’s happening; it can’t happen at the end of the conflict.

Number two: there can be no continued use of Gaza as a platform for terrorism or other violent attacks, as we saw it used on October 7th. Number three: no reoccupation of Gaza after the conflict. And number four: no reduction in the territory of Gaza. Those are the principles that we believe in, and when we start to have conversations with people in the region about what the future of Gaza looks like, those are the principles we are going to lay out that we want to see adhered to.

And I would add to that, central in the question of what happens in Gaza must be Palestinian voices, who have a right to have a voice in their own future. So, we will keep making that clear. We’ll make that clear directly in conversations with Prime Minister Netanyahu and other leaders of the Government of Israel, as we have publicly.

QUESTION: And you just said, like, no forcible displacement, but we’re seeing people from north Gaza moving to south Gaza because of – I mean, what kind of assurance, if any, is the United States getting from Israelis that those people will be able to move back?

MR MILLER: So they have said publicly that they expect those people to be able to move back at the end of the conflict. When we say no forcible displacement, there is a difference between people moving out of harm’s way – which we fully support – we want to see people move out of harm’s way, so they avoid being harmed by Israel’s military campaign – move out of harm’s way inside Gaza and being forcibly expelled from Gaza, which we very much oppose.

So Israel has said publicly they expect people to be able to return to their homes, to return to their neighborhoods, at the end of the conflict.

QUESTION: Can I quickly go to hostages? There has been different reports about different kinds of proposals. I mean, to the extent that you can share, what is the latest? Do you have some sort of renewed optimism that there could be some progress on that this week, perhaps?

MR MILLER: So on the first question, I’m going to stick to the rule that I’ve adhered to and that Secretary Blinken has adhered to pretty rigorously, which is we’re not going to talk at all about the – either the substance or the status of negotiations to secure the release of hostages, including the American citizens who we know are – remain held hostage. It continues to be a top priority for us. Secretary Blinken had a call with his Qatari counterpart over the weekend about this. There are others in the government engaged on this, including, of course, the President himself.

So in terms of the prospects, it continues to be a top priority. But again, we are dealing with a brutal, violent terrorist organization who’s holding them hostage, and I don’t think I want to put any kind of percentage on assessing what they may or may not do.

QUESTION: Matt, can I just – when you talk about there’s no forcible displacement, is that what you’re saying?

MR MILLER: Yeah, from Gaza. From Gaza. Again, I just made the point we understand that —

QUESTION: But you mean – so you’re – so the Israelis saying, basically, leave the north and go the south, or you’re basically probably going to get killed —

MR MILLER: There is —

QUESTION: – that is no forcible displacement from Gaza.

MR MILLER: There —

QUESTION: But you’re talking about out of Gaza?

MR MILLER: I’m talking about outside of – from Gaza out to Egypt or another third party – third country, yes.

QUESTION: Okay. So you’re okay with, like, all of the hundreds of thousands of people who were in the north of Gaza all being —

MR MILLER: I would say we support —

QUESTION: – pushed down into the south.

MR MILLER: – people inside Gaza —

QUESTION: Those are —

MR MILLER: – being moved out of harm’s way, absolutely.

QUESTION: Okay. And then when this over, you say they’re going to get to return?

MR MILLER: Israel has said that publicly.

QUESTION: Yeah. To what?

MR MILLER: There —

QUESTION: You said to their homes and to their neighborhoods.

MR MILLER: One of – so I will say that one of – so —

QUESTION: Their homes and their – do those homes and neighborhoods still exist?

MR MILLER: If you saw this – and I know you did see it because you were there. You saw what the Secretary said when we were in Tokyo. He said there must be a sustained mechanism for reconstruction in Gaza. Obviously, a lot of those homes have been destroyed.

QUESTION: Well, but – so they —

MR MILLER: And there has to be a mechanism for – to rebuild Gaza —

QUESTION: Yeah, okay. But so —

MR MILLER: – including those neighborhoods and those homes —

QUESTION: Yeah, but —

MR MILLER: — that have been destroyed so people can return to where they lived.

QUESTION: Yeah, but saying, oh, well, once this is all over, you can go back home – but there isn’t anything that’s going to be left for them to go back to.

MR MILLER: Yeah – obviously, Gaza is the location of a – an intense military campaign. When it’s over, we want to see reconstruction of Gaza.

QUESTION: All right. Paid for by?

MR MILLER: We will have conversations with partners in the region about that very question.

QUESTION: Including —

MR MILLER: I think it’s a little – I think it’s a little too early to say. We’re in the middle of the conflict right now. We’re just having – just start having conversations.

QUESTION: Fair – fair enough. But I mean, it’s not – okay, but it is not just as easy as saying, oh, okay, well, you’re being told to move south for your own protection, but after – but after that threat is over, then you can go back when you have nothing to go back to – and no one is going to be stepping up to pay for the reconstruction.

MR MILLER: Matt, nothing – nothing about this process, none of the issues in this process —

QUESTION: I’m not suggesting it is.

MR MILLER: — are easy, and I did not say they were easy. All of this is difficult. Every one of these principles we laid out are – will be the subject of intense diplomacy. And none of – I think everyone that’s been paying attention to the issues we’ve been grappling with, and that Israel’s been grappling with and that countries in the region have grappled with – no one would tell you that any of these are anything but very, very difficult.

QUESTION: Okay. Last one from me. On the Shifa – the hospital, do you have any thoughts about what’s going on there?

MR MILLER: Let me say a few things. Number one, you heard Jake Sullivan on TV yesterday say that we don’t want to see hospitals be the subject of crossfire. We want to see the civilians who are sheltering in hospitals, the civilians who are being treated in hospitals, including babies in hospitals, be protected. Civilians are – hospitals are legitimate civilian infrastructure; they should be protected. At the same time, I would say Hamas continues to use hospitals as locations for its command posts. So this is – we talk about difficult issues; this is a very difficult issue.

We don’t want to see civilians caught in the crossfire. We would love to see Hamas vacate the hospitals that it’s using command posts immediately. We would love to see all the people that are calling for Israel to take steps to protect hospitals call for Hamas to vacate the hospitals, and stop using civilians as human shields. We would love to see Hamas take some of the fuel reserves it’s sitting on and use that to supply hospitals in northern Gaza. We would love to see Hamas have taken the fuel that Israel offered it yesterday – that they declined – for use at al‑Shifa Hospital. So, it’s a very difficult situation. And I would say, as a principle – I’ll just restate what I said at the top – we do not want to see civilians caught in the crossfire.

QUESTION: Okay, but – but you but you say, okay, you would love to see everyone call for Hamas to vacate the hospitals, get rid of all their fighters there. Okay, but if they don’t, you’re okay with attacks on the hospitals?

MR MILLER: I did not say that.

QUESTION: But I – I’m not saying that you did.

MR MILLER: I did not say that. I said we —

QUESTION: I’m asking you – I’m asking you.

MR MILLER: Sure. So I am, as we have done all throughout this process, going to decline to comment on specific places, always because there is a —

QUESTION: All right, let’s just talk about hospitals in general.

MR MILLER: Hospitals – hospitals in general, we do not want to see hospitals attacked.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR MILLER: We do not want – we want to see hospitals protected.

QUESTION: But if Hamas doesn’t remove their people from the hospitals where they are —

MR MILLER: Again —

QUESTION: — where you just said they are, then —

MR MILLER: Again, there are —

QUESTION: – then it’s okay for them to be attacked?

MR MILLER: There – there are – I am not going to give a general answer on this because there are so many variables. Are there still wounded? Are there still civilians in those hospitals? Have they been evacuated? There are a number of things you have to consider, when you’re going to answer that type of question, which is why we, from thousands of miles away, decline to give – pass judgment or give – pass a – give a definitive answer about something that we don’t have perfect information about what’s happening on the ground.

QUESTION: Can I follow up on this one, please? Can I follow up?

MR MILLER: Is – Matt, are you – yeah, go ahead.

QUESTION: Now, you speak with certainty that Hamas is using al-Shifa Hospital as a command post.

MR MILLER: I did not speak to al-Shifa. I said —

QUESTION: No, you spoke with certainty, and you said it’s —

MR MILLER: I said hospitals. Just to be —

QUESTION: You – okay.

MR MILLER: Just to be clear, Said.

QUESTION: Let me ask about the Shifa Hospital.

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: You speak – you know for certain – you know for certain the United States of America, the Intelligence Community, knows for certain that Hamas is using that as a command post?

MR MILLER: So I am going to use my own words, because you just misstated what I said.

QUESTION: I’m not misstating.

MR MILLER: No, no, let me just – you did. So let me just —

QUESTION: You were just asked if Hamas vacated —

MR MILLER: Let me just – let me be clear what I said. I am not going to comment on any specific hospital. To do so would require me to get into intelligence matters, which I’m not going to do from the podium. I will say, as a general matter, yes, we do know that Hamas uses hospitals.

QUESTION: Right.

MR MILLER: And there is – there is plenty of public reporting about this. You can read about in the press, using hospitals as command centers.

QUESTION: Okay. Let me rephrase my question. Do you have, does the United States have, any evidence that Hamas is using this particular hospital or the other hospital as a command post? Do you have – do you have evidence?

MR MILLER: With respect – with respect to a general matter, I will say yes, we do.

QUESTION: You have —

MR MILLER: With respect – with – with respect to a specific hospital, I’m not going to get into an intelligence matter.

QUESTION: Okay. But all the hospitals are completely out of service right now. So, let me just – if you indulge me to a few more questions on – on this particular issue.

MR MILLER: You want me — yeah.

QUESTION: Okay. On this very issue. So why don’t you rely – I mean, as – there are region doctors that served in that hospital that came out and said, foreign – European doctors – and say this is nonsense, there is no command posts, and so on. Why don’t you send them a commission or the Red Cross or ask anyone to go and see? Because that’s what they said. Come and see it. Come and see it, and see if it’s being used as a command post. Why don’t you do that?

MR MILLER: I think —

QUESTION: That would —

MR MILLER: So – so I would just say we feel fairly confident in the judgment we’ve passed. We would welcome truly independent observers going – I think that’s a little unrealistic to ask for in the middle of a conflict, Said.

QUESTION: But they are willing. The Red Cross said they are willing to do that.

MR MILLER: I – I think it’s – we have seen – we have seen Hamas at times break its agreements that it’s had with the Red Cross and other – I think it’s a little bit much to ask for somebody to go make an assessment like that.

QUESTION: Okay, now you talk about the fuel. You’re saying that that Israel offered Gaza, like – or offered the hospital something like 200, 300 liters of fuel, and they requested that it be – somebody would come in the middle of the night and pick it up at two in the morning and so on. They said, do it through the Red Cross, do it so through the agencies. Why wouldn’t they do that?

MR MILLER: So —

QUESTION: Why must they – that – why must they have Hamas people go and pick it up —

MR MILLER: So —

QUESTION: – in the middle of the night at two o’clock in the morning? Isn’t that a bit cynical?

MR MILLER: So – I don’t think so. I’m not going to – I – first of all, the idea would not be that Hamas people would come pick it up, but that people —

QUESTION: Well, whatever. I mean, officials – official —

MR MILLER: Hold on. But the people – hold on. Said, just let me finish my answers – that people from the hospital would come and pick it up. I would say that they should’ve accepted the offer. I will let Israel speak to the exact specifics of it, but if – but if they clearly – if they need fuel, which they clearly do, they should’ve taken the offer from the Government of Israel. But to the larger point, Hamas is sitting on fuel reserves in northern Gaza. Hamas is using fuel reserves to ventilate its tunnel – tunnels. If Hamas truly cared for the people in al-Shifa and in other hospitals in the north, it could take the fuel that it’s using to protect its fighters and send it to the hospitals so the hospitals could protect patients. They are not doing that.

QUESTION: Right. And so, you think that by this continued assault and so on that Israel will achieve its goal of, let’s say, providing care for those who need it, and at the same time disarm the hospital? I mean, what is the end, what is the vision as far as the hospital is concerned?

MR MILLER: So I am going to let Israel speak to —

QUESTION: Okay.

MR MILLER: I’m going to let Israel speak to its exact campaign.

QUESTION: Oh, sure. Okay, that’s fine.

MR MILLER: I will speak to U.S. principles; they can speak to their campaign.

QUESTION: Okay. There has been – since we don’t know what happened after Friday, after Saturday. Because the Shifa hospital quit counting. They don’t have the means to do it anymore. But until then, there were about 11,400 Palestinians who have died. That’s about one in 200 – doctors, lawyers, teachers, mothers, fathers, babies. We have – every 10 minutes we have a child killed in Gaza. So what is the end game? What – how do you see this thing ending? Or must the slaughter go on?

MR MILLER: So Said, let me start by just reminding you of what the Secretary said on Friday, which is that far too many Palestinian civilians have been killed as a part of this conflict. We want to see the Government of Israel take steps to minimize civilian harm. We would love to see Hamas stop using civilians as human shields, which they very cynically do. They’re the ones that continue to put civilians in harm’s way. They obviously have shown no sign of changing that longstanding, abhorrent practice of theirs. And we want to continue to get civilians out of harm’s way into places where they can be safe from harm, and we want to continue to get them humanitarian assistance. That has been – if you were paying attention to the Secretary’s trips around the region, as was true about his first trip to Israel and other countries in the region, that has been our primary focus from top to bottom. And let me – we’ll go —

QUESTION: So my last —

MR MILLER: Last question and we —

QUESTION: My last one, please allow me. When the Secretary says far too many Palestinians have died, does that mean enough is enough by now? Is that the end?

MR MILLER: It means that far – it means exactly what it says, which —

QUESTION: Far too many?

MR MILLER: — is that far – it means that far too many have died. We want to see —

QUESTION: Right. Right.

MR MILLER: — fewer civilian casualties. We want to see the Government of Israel take steps to minimize civilian casualties. And we have direct conversations with them all the time about that. And we want to do all these other things I just talked about to get civilians out of harm’s way, and get them the humanitarian assistance they need.

QUESTION: Yeah, but with – but without a ceasefire more will die.

MR MILLER: But let me – because it’s —

QUESTION: Okay.

MR MILLER: — because it’s been a few, let me go to someone else. Yeah.

QUESTION: Thanks, Matt. Just to pick up on where you have left off, is it your understanding that Israel is trying to minimize civilian casualties? Is it your assessment?

MR MILLER: It is. It’s our understanding that they do attempt to minimize civilian casualties. They’ve talked about that publicly. We think there are additional steps that they can take. The Secretary communicated that to them very clearly when he was in Israel, and we’ve had continued ongoing conversations with them about that.

QUESTION: Thank you so much. If hospitals are indeed sanctuaries for Hamas, which Israel says it is, is there any active discussion over creating field hospitals and potentially U.S. involvement in it?

MR MILLER: Not U.S. involvement inside Gaza, but yes, there have been conversations with our allies and partners about setting up additional field hospitals. There’s been conversations about setting up additional facilities where people either in southern Gaza, or people who have moved to southern Gaza from the north, can seek medical care. As you – as I think you probably know, there are wounded Palestinians from northern Gaza who have been evacuated and left through Rafah gate to seek medical care. So yes, that is something we continue to work on.

QUESTION: Thank you. Please come back; more on Ukraine and Russia later.

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: Can I just have one more on this hospital issue? Given what you just said, what Jake Sullivan has said, and what the Secretary said about far too many Palestinians killed – we’ve asked you this question in previous weeks, but in light of all of these new developments and the targeting of the hospitals, is there any intent in this department or the administration to take a look at, in a formal way, whether Israel has followed the rules of war?

MR MILLER: Again, we all – we are monitoring the situation very closely, as we always monitor conflicts. But I don’t – I am not going to provide any update on internal deliberations.

QUESTION: I should not be interpreting that the “internal deliberation” part as there is an internal deliberation on this?

MR MILLER: You should interpret it exactly the same way you should’ve interpreted it two weeks ago when I gave the same answer, which is I am not going to comment on internal deliberations.

QUESTION: So you’re saying there is a – so, okay. But you’re saying there is no change in the thinking in light of the recent developments, either?

MR MILLER: I am saying what I just said, not what you are claiming I said. What I’m saying is – (laughter) – so I will use my own words, and what I said is we’re monitoring, of course. We monitor this situation as we monitor any conflict. But in terms of our internal decision-making process, internal deliberations, I’m not going to – I’m not going to – I’m not going to speak to those.

QUESTION: But you were asking what – I mean, you understand why I am asking this, right? Because you were saying there are additional steps that they can take, but they don’t seem to be taking them right now. And all of this is unfolding with the hospital, so I’m wondering if there is any change in the administration’s thinking on this.

MR MILLER: I’m just not going to – I’m just not going to talk about internal matters.

Go ahead, Michel.

QUESTION: I have a couple of questions, Matt. First, are you on the same page with Israel regarding how to deal with Hizballah? Did you ask or did the administration ask the Israeli Government not to escalate the situation with Hizballah, and to drag the U.S. to a new war or broader war?

MR MILLER: So I’m not going to get into internal conversations with the Government of Israel. I will say that you have heard us say publicly a number of times one of our primary objectives is to keep this conflict from widening, and that means to keep it from widening both in terms of preventing an additional conflict in the north of Israel with Hizballah, and to prevent conflict widening to other countries in the region.

QUESTION: Are you aware of the reports that Israel targeted journalists in south Lebanon today, and do you have any comment on that?

MR MILLER: I am not aware of those reports today. It must – if it just came in the last bit while I was coming out here, I haven’t seen it.

QUESTION: And finally, in the supplemental package request, the OMB stated that the crisis in Gaza could result in displacement across borders and higher regional humanitarian needs, and funding may be used to meet evolving programming requirements outside of Gaza, and including Israel, West Bank, Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, and Egypt. What does the administration mean by that?

MR MILLER: So I think you should take in it that we are doing prudent planning, as we always do in these situations. It’s not a prediction about what might happen or what will happen in the future. As I – as I said a moment ago, we’ve made very clear that Palestinians should not be displaced from Gaza, but as part of our planning we’re planning for any number of scenarios. We want to keep this conflict from widening, but we have to be prudent and plan for any potential humanitarian scenarios should they emerge.

QUESTION: Matt, is it correct —

QUESTION: Follow-up?

QUESTION: Going – staying on the supplemental, is it correct that the supplemental – and this came out, I guess, while we were gone, but – removes all congressional oversight from arms transfers to Israel? Is that correct?

MR MILLER: No, that’s – that’s not —

QUESTION: Okay.

MR MILLER: — exactly correct.

QUESTION: Not exactly correct?

MR MILLER: It makes – that proposed waiver that’s in the supplemental makes zero changes to how arms sales would be notified to Congress and made public. The notification of sales, whether it’s through government-to-government foreign military sales, FMS, or licensed commercial sales, would be the same under the supplemental as they have been for decades.

What the proposed – this provision I think you’re asking about would do, would be to allow us to waive the congressional notification requirement for supplemental foreign assistance funds, not for arms sales.

QUESTION: So foreign assistance like ESF?

MR MILLER: I don’t know the exact program. I’d have to look into that and get back to you.

QUESTION: Economic support funds.

MR MILLER: Yeah, that – it may be. I’d have to look for it and get —

QUESTION: But not for FMF, not for foreign military financing or FMS, foreign military sales?

MR MILLER: Again, I – I would have to dive into it and get back to you. I think the story, from my understanding, conflated funding notifications and arms sales notification. But with – beyond any details, I’ll have to —

QUESTION: All right. And then —

MR MILLER: — engage after.

QUESTION: — my last one is: When you talked about the hospitals and Hamas using them to operate, you said that you were fairly confident of that assessment.

MR MILLER: Fairly —

QUESTION: That the – fairly confident.

MR MILLER: We are very confident of that assessment.

QUESTION: Very, not fairly?

MR MILLER: Confident – confident. I’m —

QUESTION: Well, I just want to make – I’m – I just want to know what the standard here is.

MR MILLER: We are – we are confident. I – yeah.

QUESTION: Okay. So if you’re confident that that’s the case —

MR MILLER: Yes.

QUESTION: — then you presumably, then, don’t have any issue with Israel going – if they give people ample warning to leave —

MR MILLER: It’s – that is a – it is a – it is a very complicated question. Not everyone who’s in a hospital can leave. There are questions of whether ambulances can get there —

QUESTION: I know.

MR MILLER: — and transport them out. It is what makes this difficult so – or what makes this issue so difficult and why I’m —

QUESTION: Yeah.

MR MILLER: — why I’m declining to pronounce specific factual judgments on difficult situations when I don’t —

QUESTION: Well, I —

MR MILLER: — when facts are evolving all the time.

QUESTION: Right. But I mean, if you – but then you’ve put yourself in the position, or you leave yourself open to never having a position on it at all.

MR MILLER: I think we’ve made pretty clear – we’ve made clear what our overall position is. Again, we lay out our general principles, but I’m thousands of miles away from Israel right now. We get conflicting information. You hear – we get conflicting information in press reports. You get conflicting information from people on the ground. It is difficult to pass a definitive judgment about what has happened, what should happen, so I’ll decline to do that other than going beyond what our principles are regarding civilian protections.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. Just wanted to quickly follow up on the civilian casualties, and I will have one more. You said you have been calling on Israel for quite a long time to minimize harm to civilians, but I just wanted to make sure, like, do you really think that Israel is doing everything it can to minimize harm to civilians? And what are the other steps that Israel can take?

MR MILLER: So – so we do, as I said, think there are additional steps that they can take. What those additional steps are, we’ve had very direct conversations with them about that, but I will keep those conversations private.

QUESTION: Okay. One more, please. During the Arab-Islamic summit in Saudi Arabia this weekend, Turkish President Erdogan said that the Israeli minister’s remarks about a nuclear strike on Gaza revealed the existence of Israel’s nuclear weapons, and called on an international investigation on that. What is the U.S. position on this call for an international investigation? And do you – I mean, is the U.S. aware of any potential nuclear weapons owned by Israel?

MR MILLER: I don’t have any comment on an investigation or the underlying question. I will say that the remarks by that minister were completely unacceptable, and we are glad they were immediately repudiated by the prime minister.

QUESTION: But you don’t support any investigation on that?

MR MILLER: I’m just not going to comment on that at all.

QUESTION: Thanks so much. There is a dissent – internal dissent memo that’s saying the administration’s spreading misinformation. I know you won’t comment on the actual memo.

MR MILLER: Correct. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: But you have protesters out here on Thursday yelling “shame” at employees as they walk out the building, saying “quit your job.” I mean, how is morale in this – inside this building and how is it affected by all of the kind of noise around it?

MR MILLER: So I would say that the State Department, like every organization not just in government but around the world, contains people with a diversity of views. And one of the things that we think is one of our strengths – you’ve heard me talk to this before, you’ve heard Vedant talk to this last week, I think you’ve heard the Secretary talk to this at times – one of our strengths as an organization is that we have that diversity of views and that we welcome people to make those views known. The Secretary has met with a number of people from all ranks of the department, from different bureaus in the department, to hear exactly what they think about our policy both with respect to Israel and its conflict with Hamas and with respect to other matters, including very controversial matters, and he encourages people to provide feedback. He encourages people to speak up if they disagree. It doesn’t mean that we’re going to change our policy based on their disagreements. He is going to take their recommendations and make ultimately what he thinks is the best judgment and make his recommendations to the President about what we ought to do.

So, I would just say that with – it goes to this question of morale. We see the diversity of opinions as a source of strength of this department, not as a source of weakness.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Mr. Miller, my name is Jacob Milton. I’m working for a weekly Bangladeshi and the publication called We Are the People and Nagorik TV. As you know that Bangladesh and Dhaka is another hot place like Gaza. It will become a Gaza Strip very soon if free and fair election is not going to take place. Bangladesh is a sovereign country where 90 to 95 percent of the people are in favor of democracy and free, fair, participatory, and inclusive election. Citizens of Bangladesh become very optimistic once America starts playing a role concerning human rights and the democratic process. All major political parties except Awami League are working with His Excellency Peter Haas and other diplomats from other nation. Why must the U.S. Government discuss the Bangladesh issue with India? Does it not indicate that our country has already been sold to India by the current regime of Bangladesh?

MR MILLER: All right, let me —

QUESTION: Does the U.S. believes India’s conquerors do anything in Bangladesh?

MR MILLER: Let me just say what I have said many times, which is we support free and fair elections in Bangladesh. We think the future of the Bangladeshi Government should be determined by its people, full stop.

QUESTION: I have one follow-up, please.

MR MILLER: You asked three in one there. I’m going to go – go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. Assistant Secretary Donald Lu has sent a letter with urging for dialogue between the ruling party and the opposition. But how can there be any dialogue when most of the opposition political leaders are in prison? And I’m wondering who received letter from the opposition as government is cracked down – government cracked down opposition and going on, and government’s workers been killed, at least five. So what is your comment? How can be a dialogue within this scenario?

MR MILLER: So again, I welcome the attempts by various reporters to draw me into internal Bangladeshi political matters, and I’m going to continue to refrain from doing so. The United States does not take a side in Bangladeshi elections. We do not support one political party over the other. We support free and fair elections, period.

QUESTION: One follow-up.

QUESTION: Excuse me, yes.

MR MILLER: Go – no, I’m going —

QUESTION: (Inaudible).

MR MILLER: Yeah, go ahead.

QUESTION: Okay. I wonder, sir, how can Palestinian accept the offer of fuel – Israeli offer for them? The people who leave – the patient who left the hospitals targeted and killed by Israeli soldiers, and as well, Red Cross, they said – they declared it’s very difficult to them to do their duty. And also, UNRWA, they lost 99 of their employee. So it’s difficult to accept this offer.

As well, my – my —

MR MILLER: Let me just say something first – so I think your question goes to what I was saying —

QUESTION: No, I have question —

MR MILLER: No, no, I just – I’ll – sorry, let me – the point you just made, and I will definitely come back to your question.

QUESTION: Okay, but I have —

MR MILLER: The point you just made, I think. gets to the difficulty I was speaking to a minute ago about finding definitive judgments when facts are so hard to ascertain. You mentioned reports that the Israelis were firing on people near the hospital or relief workers. There are reports that Hamas fighters are firing on Israeli soldiers from inside the hospital, so that —

QUESTION: The civilian —

MR MILLER: So, my point being that in such a difficult situation, it’s why I’m declining to pass judgment. But I would say in general if it is so important for this hospital to have fuel – which it obviously is, I would think that they – I would hope that they would take the Government of Israel up on its offer to provide fuel as well as, of course, as I said earlier, that Hamas would just start turning over some of its own. Now go ahead with your question, yeah. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Okay. My question – my question about the – Israel planning to build a buffer zone north end of Gaza, the north part of Gaza, and Gaza cities. There is – reports talk about that, that Israel planning to build a buffer zone to took and make – build buffer zone in the northern part of Gaza. So, are you sure or guarantee people, civilian people who left their homes in Gaza, northern part of Gaza and Gaza City, to – after the war is end, they will go back to their homes? Are you guarantee that?

MR MILLER: So what I can guarantee is what United States policy is, and what United States policy is, is that there should be no reduction in the territory of Gaza. And that’s a matter that we will continue to make clear to the Government of Israel, and to other partners in the region as we start to have these conversations about the future of Gaza.

QUESTION: Thanks, Matt. I know you won’t comment on the reported cable or memo or the many reported cable and memos of dissent, but is the Secretary aware of dissent, particularly on this issue? And would you say that this issue has drawn dissent like perhaps others haven’t in his tenure here?

MR MILLER: So, I’m not going to characterize this issue versus other issues. There are, of course, a number of controversial issues that we deal with. And at any time, on a big controversial issue, of course not everyone in the department agrees with the given policy that we decide to pursue at any one point. So comparing this issue to others, I don’t think I’m able to do. I will say, as I said before, that this is a difficult issue where people have very strong feelings for very good reasons.

That’s not true just at the State Department. You look at the protests that have happened around the country, the protests that are going to happen in Washington this week. You look at the very strong feelings that this issue has aroused in the United States and around the world. Of course, that extends to inside the State Department where people have very strong, strong opinions.

I’ll just reiterate that the Secretary wants to hear from those employees. He wants to hear what their opinions are. I won’t comment on any dissent memos, but he has spoken in the past about how he welcomes the dissent channel, and thinks it’s a very valuable channel, and that he likes to get feedback through it. And he hopes that people will use it. And he hopes that it continues to be protected. One of the reasons we generally don’t talk about it is we want people to feel that they can use that channel confidentially without fear that somehow it would be used – their participation in that channel would be used against them with respect to employment or promotion decisions down the road.

It’s a channel that we – that the Secretary finds very valuable, as he finds valuable his meetings with employees – as I said, at all ranks to talk about their opinions on this issue and many others.

QUESTION: But beyond the channel, has he on this issue spoken to employees or diplomats or anybody at State who have raised disagreements with how the U.S. is conducting foreign policy on this issue?

MR MILLER: Of course he has. He’s talked with people inside the building who very much support the policy – policies that we have undertaken, as well as people that disagree. And what he does in those meetings is explain how he came to the decisions that he’s come to, explains our conversations with the Government of Israel, outlines our entire policy – which is not just support for Israel’s right to continue to hold accountable the terrorists that attacked it on October 7^th – and have continued to attack it, but also all of our work to protect civilians and to get humanitarian assistance to civilians, our work calling for humanitarian pauses.

I think one of the things he makes clear anytime he has a conversation about these issues is it is the United States of America, not any other country, that was able to secure an agreement to get humanitarian assistance into Gaza. It was the United States of America that was able to secure an agreement to get humanitarian pauses so people could move through these humanitarian quarters that have now been set up to move to – from north to south. So, he will continue to make that clear in all of his conversations.

QUESTION: Has it changed his decision making at all?

MR MILLER: I’m not going to speak to impact on his decision making. But he is someone who wants to have his opinions challenged, wants to have his positions challenged, wants to engage in a good-faith back and forth, because he believes that that strengthens his ability to make good decisions on behalf of the American people.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Yes, this is a question about the APEC Summit this week. How – do you expect there could be a trilateral space to talk about fentanyl in APEC, considering that the leaders of Mexico, China, and the U.S. are in the city of San Francisco? Today, the mayor of San Francisco said she would like to hear some progress on this issue.

MR MILLER: So I won’t speak to any specific meetings that we haven’t yet announced. But I will say that curbing the trafficking of fentanyl and the devastating impact it’s had on American citizens is something that the Secretary raises in his meetings with officials from the Government of China. It’s certainly something that was on the agenda when we’ve met with officials from the Government of Mexico. You can very much expect that it will be on the agenda for a number of his meetings at APEC.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Just – you framed your response earlier that it was the U.S. who was able to bring – get humanitarian aid into Gaza, the U.S. —

MR MILLER: Broker an agreement, is what I meant, yeah.

QUESTION: Yeah, and who was able to get these three to – or four- to five-hour pauses. So how much responsibility do you take, then, for the 11,100 lives that have been lost, if you are in a position to stop that today?

MR MILLER: I would reject the premise of that. The Government of Israel conducts its military campaigns. We talk to them about how to minimize civilian casualties. We talk to them about what they can do to protect civilians and how to get them out of harm’s way. We do everything that we can to broker agreements to get humanitarian assistance in. But ultimately, this is a campaign that’s being conducted by the Government of Israel. We will continue to make our policies clear to them. We will continue to offer our best advice to them, as you’ve seen the President do, and we will continue to work to get humanitarian assistance in.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. To Ukraine-Russia, if you don’t mind. Secretary met with Ukrainian —

QUESTION: Can I just – one thing on this.

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: Are you saying that without the United States there would be no humanitarian aid going into Gaza?

MR MILLER: So it’s a – you never know what a counterfactual is. Had we not brokered that agreement, you have no idea whether someone else would have come —

QUESTION: But no one —

MR MILLER: Hold on – hold on, let me – let me —

QUESTION: There was no one else – no one else out there doing it?

MR MILLER: Let me finish. You have no idea whether someone else would have come in and brokered an agreement. What I’m saying is what did happen is that it was the United States that brokered that agreement that allowed humanitarian assistance to come in.

QUESTION: But – okay. Well, was there anyone else that you were aware of who was in a position to be able to broker an agreement?

MR MILLER: It was the United States that did it. I don’t know what you’re referring to. I’m sure you have a —

QUESTION: No, I – I just – I’m just wondering.

MR MILLER: No, I —

QUESTION: I mean, you’re taking credit for all of – it’s just like his question. I mean, if you’re taking credit for the quote/unquote “good,” that means some aid getting into Gaza, then —

MR MILLER: We take responsibility for the things that we do, correct. I am not – the —

QUESTION: (Laughter.) Okay. But if you’re – but if you’re claiming – if you’re claiming that you have influence with the Israelis, enough to get the aid in, then when —

MR MILLER: So what I —

QUESTION: Then you’re saying that you don’t have any responsibility —

MR MILLER: No.

QUESTION: — for anything else?

MR MILLER: I think – I think that you were on the last – you were on both of the last trips.

QUESTION: I was.

MR MILLER: I think it’s very clear that while we are able to make our opinions known to the Government of Israel and we are able to move them, there are issues on which we have disagreements. Started this briefing off about some of the disagreements that we have with them about – with respect to what – where Gaza will come.

QUESTION: Okay. Well, it’s just that you’re taking credit for this, but then you’re not taking responsibility for other —

MR MILLER: I’m taking – I am – no, I’m taking credits for things where we have had a direct impact, where the United States Government —

QUESTION: Or where you can point to something, quote/unquote, “positive” happening.

MR MILLER: And there are other areas that we continue to – there are other areas we continue to work on.

QUESTION: But where – right, and those have – those aren’t our fault, right?

MR MILLER: There are others we continue work on.

QUESTION: Follow-up on that?

MR MILLER: Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you so much, Matt. I was hoping you could fill us in on this morning’s meeting on Ukraine the Secretary held with the delegation. Did he assure the Ukrainian side that the topic of Ukraine will be on top of his queue despite the challenges abroad and at home this week?

MR MILLER: We in all of our conversations with the Ukrainian Government make clear that we will continue to stand by them, that we will continue to back them, and you don’t have to just look to our private conversations. You’ve heard the President of the United States speak to the American people about exactly this question when he laid out in an Oval Office address our request to Congress to provide supplemental assistance to Ukraine, so we can continue to back Ukraine.

In addition to that, the Secretary talked with Mr. Yermak this morning about steps we can take together with Ukraine to harden its infrastructure for the upcoming winter. We of course in the last winter saw Russia trying to take down energy sites in Ukraine. They may very well do that again, so we talked to them about steps that they can take to prepare for and respond to that.

QUESTION: As I understand, you also, guys, are talking to the Russians as part of APEC talks. There was a discussion between Ambassador Matt Murray and his Russian counterpart. Is Ukraine being discussed without Ukraine on the table?

MR MILLER: Ukraine is not being discussed without Ukraine on the table. I mean, if you mean the final disposition of the conflict, we have made clear that we will never make any decisions or we’re not in a place to make any decisions without Ukraine. Of course, we will talk about the Ukraine – the war in Ukraine and we will talk about how we can best defend Ukraine. We always do that with partners; the Secretary has talked a number of times about how he’s constantly in meetings with foreign counterparts looking for ways that other countries can assist Ukraine. We will certainly do that.

QUESTION: But who is the non-sanctioned Russian deputy prime minister that will represent —

MR MILLER: I’m sorry, what was the —

QUESTION: Non-sanctioned Russian deputy prime minister will represent Russia at APEC. Who is he or she?

MR MILLER: I’ll have to get back to you on that. I don’t —

QUESTION: Have you guys invited the Ukrainians as well to the summit?

MR MILLER: I’ll have to get back to you on that as well. I’m just – I’m not aware, so —

QUESTION: There are rumors that you —

MR MILLER: I just – I don’t know, Alex. I’ll have to take it back.

QUESTION: Okay. And also about Iran, if you don’t mind.

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: There are speculations on social media that U.S. is about to waive some – issue a new waiver on Iran that will allow Iran to access $10 billion. Why? When? How? Anything you can tell us?

MR MILLER: I think you certainly shouldn’t expect me to comment on speculation on social media, and I will decline to do so.

Go ahead and then we’ll wrap it up.

QUESTION: Is it true, though? Can we just —

MR MILLER: I think I just answered it or declined to answer.

QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. Can you give – please give us a sense if anything discussed in New Delhi 2+2 meeting on particularly Bangladesh upcoming election? Indian press and Bangladeshi press described that they had a good meeting on Bangladesh upcoming election, and we saw the Indian statement, as well as the Chinese statement terming as “internal affairs.” So can you please give us a sense?

MR MILLER: I’m just not going to talk to —

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR MILLER: Hold on. As I said, this’ll be the last. But I’m not going to talk to the specifics of the meeting other than what we put out in our readout and the Secretary said in his statement while we were in India.

Thanks, everyone.

QUESTION: Thank you.

(The briefing was concluded at 2:28 p.m.)

# # #

Department Press Briefing – November 9, 2023

HomeDepartment Press Briefing – November 9, 2023

hide

Department Press Briefing – November 9, 2023

Vedant Patel, Principal Deputy Spokesperson

Washington, D.C.

November 9, 2023

Article Index

ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES/EGYPT/REGION
SYRIA/IRAQ/REGION
ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES/REGION
INDIA/REGION
DPRK/RUSSIA
RUSSIA/UKRAINE
HUMAN RIGHTS
DEPARTMENT/ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES
SWEDEN/NATO
APEC
ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES/REGION
INDIA/CANADA
DEPARTMENT/ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES

1:19 p.m. EST

MR PATEL: Good afternoon, everybody. Apologies for being a little tardy. Just dealing with some random things. I don’t have anything off the top, so Simon, do you want to kick us off?

QUESTION: Yeah, sure. So we saw the announcement earlier that the Israelis have agreed to these four-hour pauses.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: Yeah, I’m wondering if there’s a few details – more details you can give. Previously, the Israelis had said that they wouldn’t agree to humanitarian pauses without release of hostages. So is there some kind of agreement from the Hamas side that has facilitated this?

MR PATEL: The Israelis can obviously provide you with additional details, but I wanted to note that this new development has been, I think, a direct result of some of the engagements, discussions, and diplomacy that the President, Secretary Blinken, National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan have all been deeply engaged on.

This has been something that has been important to us as well, is assessing avenues in which humanitarian pauses could be initiated to permit civilians to depart – specifically depart areas where there are active hostilities, increase the flow of aid, as well as enable conditions for the release of hostages, which is something that we hope will continue to take place and happen as well. And that’s something we’re going to continue to keep an eye out. So again, this is not a black and white situation. It’s something that we’re going to continue to work on with our partners and Israel about these kinds of efforts.

And just to reiterate some of the details that were announced, there will be two humanitarian corridors allowing people to flee the areas of hostilities in the northern part of Gaza. The first such corridor open between four and five hours every day for the past few days has already enabled many thousands of people to reach safer areas. The second route along the coastal road will enable many more thousands to reach safer areas in the south. And of course, we are continuing to work closely with our Israeli partners to address and remain vigilant about efforts from Hamas to discourage and prevent civilians from fleeing this area.

And simultaneously, as we talk about this movement of civilians, it’s also critical that humanitarian supplies and assistance are expanded in the areas where people are moving, in the case specifically of southern Gaza. Over the course of yesterday, we saw 106 trucks of humanitarian aid flow into Gaza through the Rafah Crossing. Rafah Crossing remains open today for the inflow of humanitarian aid as well as the safe departure of foreign nationals, so we’ll continue to work towards this and make sure that there is apt flow each day.

QUESTION: So the Rafah Crossing is open in both directions now?

MR PATEL: That is our understanding.

QUESTION: Right.

MR PATEL: That is – there – as I said from here yesterday, that it had been closed given some security circumstances. Our understanding at this point is that it is open for the influx of aid and also for foreign nationals to depart.

QUESTION: And just on the humanitarian pauses, so one of the images that people have been seeing a lot is a lot of people moving from the north of Gaza to the south. What’s the U.S. position on how these people – how – will these people have some kind of right of return to their – a lot of them are already displaced people from many years anyway, but is there some way that you – in your talks with the Israelis that you’re able to say anyone who leaves northern Gaza, Gaza City now during this operation will have the right to return to where they were living before?`

MR PATEL: So you’ve heard me say this before that, of course, a forced relocation of Palestinian civilians from Gaza is not something that we support. It’s not a policy that we are pursuing. And additionally, Palestinian civilians who may call Gaza home we believe should have the ability to return if they had needed to depart for whatever reason over the course of this conflict.

QUESTION: We’re talking about people moving in – within – inside the Gaza Strip, but moving from north to south, right?

MR PATEL: Right, right. What I’m saying – your question – for those who may have departed, I’m saying is – that it’s our belief that they should be able to return should they have exited for whatever reason.

QUESTION: Sure.

QUESTION: Can I follow up —

MR PATEL: Go ahead, Said.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: I appreciate it. So you’re telling – I mean, in your response to Simon, you’re saying that the U.S. does give an ironclad commitment or promise that these people will be able to return to homes from which they were forced to leave?

MR PATEL: Said, it’s not a border that we control, or it’s not really —

QUESTION: I understand that.

MR PATEL: — an area that we have jurisdiction, so your – the premise of your question is a little – is a little misguided.

QUESTION: Okay. Well, let me – let me rephrase it.

MR PATEL: What I am offering, Said, is what – is you’re asking me what is our policy, and I’m sharing what our policy is, which is that —

QUESTION: So I can understand it —

MR PATEL: — we don’t support the forced relocation of Palestinian civilians, and our belief is that Palestinians who may have had to depart Gaza for whatever reason should be able to return as they see fit —

QUESTION: Okay.

MR PATEL: — as they so desire.

QUESTION: That’s what I wanted to know, that they actually can return and you will help facilitate their return at some point, if you can, right?

MR PATEL: Again, I will just say it is our belief that those who may have had to depart or who chose to depart are able to return. Again, you’ve heard us be quite consistent about this from the Secretary and others, that the forced relocation of Palestinian civilians from Gaza is not something that we’re pursuing.

QUESTION: On the ceasefire – if I may, I mean, just to follow up with a couple of questions. On the ceasefire, four hours – do you believe that the four hours are sufficient to get the kind of aid that you want to get through?

MR PATEL: Said, we believe that this is an important step in the right direction. We believe that is a byproduct of the U.S. Government and this administration’s efforts in the region diplomatically, what the President and Secretary Blinken and others have been doing around the clock. Of course, we are going to continue to want to see more. We have not parsed our words about the dire humanitarian circumstances in Gaza, and it’s something that we’re going to continue to engage on with the Israelis on what other avenues are available for ensuring access to humanitarian aid and humanitarian pauses that will allow for the safe movement of civilians.

This is a welcome step in the right direction, and we, of course, are going to continue to work with our Israeli partners on what other avenues may be possible.

QUESTION: And my last issue is Israel often – and you guys from this podium and other podiums often – accuse that Hamas is using people as human shields and so on. They were saying that in Shifa Hospital there was a photograph or surveillance of a manhole, and it turned out to be just for water. Let me ask you something – do you have a definition to what is a human shield?

MR PATEL: Said, it is important here when we talk about this we don’t – this isn’t – and you’ve heard me say this before this week – this is not hyperbole; it is fact. Hamas is a designated terrorist organization. It’s been a designated terrorist organization since 1997 and has been so over the course of multiple administrations of varying political parties. And we know that there is a vast network of Hamas integrating itself through civilian infrastructure, co-locating itself with key civilian infrastructure, using Palestinian civilians as human shields by doing so, by co-locating itself in such ways.

QUESTION: Okay. I just want to remind you that this term was actually invented by Mahatma Gandhi when he was fighting the British, but I’m not going to go into the history and so on. But also, I want to remind you that in fact in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it was the Israelis who introduced the term and the activity. They would bring in the kids, tie them to their Jeeps and so on – there are plenty of pictures that I can send you and share with everybody here —to disallow or to prevent the other kids from throwing stones at them.

MR PATEL: Said —

QUESTION: They are the ones that actually introduced this in this context.

MR PATEL: Let’s not lose sight of the fact – let’s not lose sight of the fact —

QUESTION: Okay.

MR PATEL: — that Hamas has brought this war to Gaza, and they are a terrorist organization that is hijacking the political future of the Palestinian people.

QUESTION: You know, Vedant – just to my last point, the Israeli defense ministry is really located in a densely populated area. So if the situation was reversed and somebody somehow struck a rocket onto that thing and civilians were killed, would you call that a human shield? Would you call that the Israeli defense ministry is practicing human shields?

MR PATEL: Said, in any circumstance – in any circumstance, in countries around the world, we have been incredibly clear about the moral imperative to ensure that steps are taken so that civilian causalities and impacts on civilians are minimized.

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) so thank you.

MR PATEL: I’ll come – can I come to you right after, Nick? Nadia, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. Following up on this four-hour humanitarian pause, the White House said that it’s going to start today. So it’s like around 8:30, I think, in the evening now in Gaza, so do you still believe that it’s going to start today, implemented today?

MR PATEL: I have no different update. That’s our understanding.

QUESTION: Okay. Is Gaza City included in this four-hour pause as well?

MR PATEL: I will let our Israeli partners speak to the specific operations about this, Nadia. I’m not going to get into the operational details from up here.

QUESTION: Also, the Israeli defense minister just now said actually that they’re not going to stop fighting. So do we believe them or do we believe you and the White House that actually there is a four-hour humanitarian pause?

MR PATEL: This was an announcement coming from the Israeli Government, so I will let them clarify anything that needs to be clarified. We don’t speak on behalf of them. What I will just say is that the announcement of this is reflective of work that our administration, President Biden, Secretary Blinken, others, National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, have been doing around the clock because of the critical role that we’ve been playing on the importance of ensuring the flow of humanitarian aid, ensuring that humanitarian pauses are possible so that voluntary movement of civilians is able to take place, and potentially allow for the conditions to be created for hostages to be released.

QUESTION: And you said there’s going to be two corridors for people to go from north to south. So when they leave via the sea or the other route, do you think – where are they supposed to go? Because if we’re saying there is no water, no electricity, no – so they’re going to be in the open air? I’m just – like practical question to you.

MR PATEL: I totally understand your question, and again, I will leave it to our Israeli partners to speak to the specifics about this.

QUESTION: Okay, and one final thing about the hostages, which is —

MR PATEL: Okay. One final one.

QUESTION: Yeah, about the hostages, do you think that Islamic Jihad, who seems to be holding other hostages – not just Hamas – is this a other route that the U.S. is following with mediation, maybe perhaps in Lebanon or elsewhere? Is other channels, not just through Egypt and Qatar?

MR PATEL: I’m just not going to get into the ongoing and sensitive efforts we have actively been working to release all the hostages in Gaza, including those Americans. And we’ve been clear that the U.S. supports humanitarian pauses to get hostages out. But I’m not going to get into the specifics of any of that ongoing work.

Nick, go ahead. You’ve patiently had your hand up.

QUESTION: It’s somewhat related. There – thank you.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: There are also negotiations for a three-day humanitarian pause for the release of about a dozen hostages, according to sources who are involved in those negotiations. Is that in any way connected to these four-hour pauses that were announced today? If so, how? And if not, can you shed some light on the negotiation?

MR PATEL: Our hope is that conditions can continue to be created that would eventually get us to a place where some of these hostages can be released. The announcement that was today is about ensuring the flow of humanitarian aid as well as allowing the ability for civilians to move safely and depart areas where there might be hostilities taking place. But, again, we’ve not – we’ll continue to keep our eye on the ball when it comes to release of these hostages, and it’s something that we’ll continue to engage on with our Israeli partners. And should the news from today or other humanitarian pauses that potentially could be forthcoming allow for the release of hostages, that, of course, would be a step in the right direction also.

Camila, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you, Vedant.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: We’re reported that CIA Director Bill Burns is in Doha along with the head of Israel’s Mossad. Incidentally, they were there before this – the four-hour humanitarian pauses was announced. We’ve been told that he’s there to – for various discussions but also to facilitate hostage negotiations. Just wondering if you could clarify on who’s leading the charge on hostage negotiations on the U.S. side. And then I have one about fuel after that.

MR PATEL: So first and foremost, I’d defer to the Central Intelligence Agency to speak to the director’s travels. What I will say is that across the interagency, this is a – continues to be a priority for our government. It’s what I mentioned yesterday why Deputy Special Presidential Envoy for Hostage Affairs Steve Gillen remains in Israel, and this is something this department and other pieces of the U.S. Government continue to engage on extensively.

QUESTION: And just on fuel, Ambassador Satterfield briefed reporters a little earlier today. He says that there’s now fuel available to UN implementers in Gaza and that they hope – that he’s hoping that more fuel will be able to get in for other aid workers. That effort to get more fuel in, is that hope that that goes alongside the four-hour pauses that have just been announced or is that a separate effort from the pauses that have just been announced?

MR PATEL: So the mechanical and technical way in which we would ensure the access to fuel, I’m just not going to comment on that given sort of the technical and operational specifications. What I will just say is that we know very clearly that there is a dire need for fuel in Gaza. It is key to a number of lines of efforts – whether at the desalination of water, clean water treatment, other wastewater efforts, the provision of medical care – and that is exactly why Special Envoy Satterfield has been engaged on this to do everything we can in close coordination with Egyptian authorities, Israeli authorities, donors, humanitarian aid agencies to turn that – to do whatever we can to increase that.

Barbara, go ahead.

QUESTION: Similar kind of question, actually. So the IDF has been quite clear that these are tactical local pauses for movement from a specific area to the south, which sounds like from the Israeli point of view they’re completely focused on getting – or allowing Palestinians to leave northern Gaza to southern Gaza. Do you – in what way do you think or can you say anything about how this might be expanded to aid? Like, it doesn’t sound like it’s – that it has anything to do with the aid side of it. So I guess – and it’s similar to what Camila was asking about how do you see this moving towards getting aid.

MR PATEL: The hope is – Barbara, the hope is that through these pauses, through these hours and movements that are going to be taking place, that aid is able to reach those who need it, and the conditions will be created to not just allow for the additional flow of aid through the Rafah Crossing but also to those civilians who may be using that time to move; that aid is able to get to them as well. Again, I will leave it to our Israeli partners to speak specifically about the operational details of this, but we believe that this is an important step in the right direction that simultaneously will allow Israel to continue to hold Hamas accountable for these October 7th terrorist attacks.

Michel, go ahead.

QUESTION: Vedant, first, any U.S. official will participate in the Arab and Islamic summits that will be held in Saudi Arabia? And what do you expect from these summits?

MR PATEL: Michel, those summits are being held as part of our – at least to our understanding the Arab League and the Organization of Islamic States. The United States is not an observer or a member of either of those entities, so I don’t expect any participation from the United States of America, but we’ll be, of course, paying close attention. And I’m not going to get ahead of that process.

QUESTION: And one more – more attacks today on U.S. military bases in Iraq after the U.S. reaction yesterday in Syria. Any comment?

MR PATEL: So since you asked, Michel, a U.S. fighter aircraft conducted a proportionate precision self-defense airstrike in eastern Syria against one facility used by Iran’s IRGC and affiliated groups. The IRGC and affiliated groups recently directed attacks on U.S. and coalition bases in Iraq and Syria. And as I have said from this podium over the course of this week, we will continue to take decisive military action to defend U.S. personnel in the region.

Yeah, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you, Vedant. Especially after the announcement of the four-day – four-hour humanitarian pause in northern Gaza today, which will allow people to move to the south, there are some concerns about the integrity of Gaza. And Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas also today said that any move by Israel to divide Gaza into two sections is unacceptable. I was wondering, how can you address those concerns, and do you share similar concerns about the territorial integrity of Gaza?

MR PATEL: Rabia, I assume you saw the Secretary’s comments in Tokyo yesterday morning, and I think it was a very clear laydown of what we see as steps that can be taken to ensure that this crisis never happens again. And that is setting conditions for durable peace and security. And of course, part of that is considering and thinking about the future of Gaza. And I just was very clear that first no forcible displacement of Palestinians from Gaza continues to be something that we feel very strongly about. We also feel strongly that Gaza cannot be a platform for terrorism or other violent attacks. We also feel that no reoccupation of Gaza after the conflict ends is something that can happen either, as well as no attempt to blockade or besiege Gaza. We think that these are principles that will help set the conditions for a durable peace and security for the region.

QUESTION: One more, please.

MR PATEL: Sure.

QUESTION: I wanted to ask if you have any comments on Israeli war cabinet minister Benny Gantz remarks today in which, in a Tweet, he said journalists who covered the October 7 attack and did not intervene, quote/unquote, “are no different than terrorists and should be treated as such.” Do you have any reactions on that?

MR PATEL: I have not seen those comments, so I’m – I don’t have any immediate reaction to offer you for that.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR PATEL: Sam, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. You just said you’re for a durable peace and security and you want Israel to abide by international law. I’m going to pick up right where I left off yesterday: Does the U.S. recognize the Fourth Geneva Convention as applying to Gaza and the West Bank?

MR PATEL: Sam, I am not going to get into the specifics of the legal aspects of this. I would have to double-check for you. But what I will just say is that we have made clear —

QUESTION: I don’t want to take up a lot of time if we’re going to just repeat —

MR PATEL: Great, we can —

QUESTION: No, no, no, I mean I’d like to move on if we’re —

MR PATEL: Okay, wonderful.

QUESTION: — if you’re just going to repeat. The – it has been longstanding U.S. policy that the Fourth Geneva Convention does apply; indeed, if the Fourth Geneva Convention doesn’t apply, it’s not clear to me what legal constraints there are on Israel. The Hansell Memo was issued by Cyrus Vance when he was secretary of state. That was U.S. policy, that’s been U.S. policy. Pompeo seems to have said we’re not going to abide by this. Has this – has this State Department, has the Biden-Blinken State Department, effectively abrogated decades of U.S. policy and adopted the Pompeo policy on this question?

MR PATEL: I am not sure what you’re – what you’re referring to. But I —

QUESTION: Okay. But the Hansell Memo is —

MR PATEL: I understand what the Hansell Memo is, but I’m asking what you —

QUESTION: You do? Okay.

MR PATEL: Your question —

QUESTION: Does it still apply? Does this State Department still abide by the Hansell Memo?

MR PATEL: We have had no change in policy as it relates to the Hansell Memo, which is something that Matt has spoken to a number of months ago as well.

QUESTION: So —

MR PATEL: But let me just reiterate, Sam, that this – we have from the forefront of this conflict, we have talked about very clearly the need for ensuring that this military operation is conducted in accordance with international law. That’s something we can continue to talk about.

QUESTION: Which law? You won’t saw that you’ll abide – that you —

MR PATEL: We continue to abide by that today.

QUESTION: But which law? Which law? The Fourth Geneva Convention or not?

MR PATEL: Go ahead, Alex.

QUESTION: Which law? It’s a free fire zone if you’re not going to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention. Which law?

MR PATEL: Go ahead, Alex.

QUESTION: You’re creating the legal (inaudible) for a – for —

MR PATEL: Sam, we’ve taken two of your – if you’re going to interrupt your colleagues, I’m going to ask you to leave.

QUESTION: No, no; I’m interrupting you. (Laughter.)

MR PATEL: I – your – the rest of the room has questions that would like to get to. I’ve taken your —

QUESTION: I’m sure they do, but the —

MR PATEL: I’ve taken your question every day of this week.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR PATEL: Alex, please go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you, I just haven’t gotten an answer.

MR PATEL: Please go ahead, Alex.

QUESTION: Thanks, Vedant. I want to do one more push on the corridor issue.

MR PATEL: Sure.

QUESTION: We were told by the White House this morning that the first corridor has been in use, right? I mean, the – what’s new here? Is it just about the time period that is new, or – because it has been used for multiple days now.

MR PATEL: There was this announcement of this additional corridor as well as some of the specific updates that we’re sharing – which, again, our Israeli partners can talk to you in more detail about.

QUESTION: All right. We were told from the get-go that Gaza death toll cannot be trusted, assuming that a Hamas group is interested in exaggerating those numbers. And we were – today we are hearing from Assistant Secretary Barbara Leaf on the Hill, she said that those numbers apparently are higher than what they are being announced. Is that your final assessment? And if so, how do you (inaudible)?

MR PATEL: Alex, the important thing to remember here is – let me say a couple things. First, any number over zero when it comes to civilian casualties is heartbreaking. These are – they represent the losses of futures, the losses of potential, the loss of dreams. When we are talking about the Hamas-run ministry of health, what we are saying is that this is a group that has a track record of being untruthful when it comes to civilian casualties. We are in no way trying to imply that there has not been an impact on civilians and that there has not been a significant amount of civilian lives lost in Gaza because of this conflict. We have been clear-eyed about that, and we have not been naïve about the impact that this has been – this has had on civilians. What we were speaking about before, Alex, again, is just that this is a group that is run by Hamas that has a track record of being untruthful about the numbers.

But we take issue with any of these numbers being above zero. One civilian life lost is too much. One civilian life lost is going too far. And that is why we are taking steps to ensure, in close coordination with our Israeli partners, that conditions can be created to minimize civilian casualties. The humanitarian pauses announced earlier this morning are a welcome step in that direction.

QUESTION: But is it the final assessment that actual number is higher than the 10,000?

MR PATEL: I have no reason to dispute what Assistant Secretary Leaf said. I have not seen those comments. I was not participating in that – in that congressional hearing. But I’m happy to check back specifically for you.

QUESTION: Please come back to me on a different topic.

MR PATEL: Sure.

QUESTION: Thanks so much.

QUESTION: India, sir.

MR PATEL: Actually, did – I came to you already.

QUESTION: Follow-up to what he —

MR PATEL: Sure.

QUESTION: It’s a quick follow-up to – yes. So just to clarify, you said that the Hamas-run ministry of health has a track record of being untruthful. I just wonder if you could elaborate on that, because the UN has been using their numbers, and in fact, I believe the State Department has used their numbers for its reports before as well.

MR PATEL: We are —

QUESTION: So what’s the track record here?

MR PATEL: I spoke to this – I spoke to this to – at a briefing I think you were absent at.

QUESTION: Yes, I was.

MR PATEL: Yeah. So there is not a different entity conducting this – a count of this metric right now. And so it is a number the UN uses; it’s a number the State Department uses in its own internal site rep and things of that nature. That does not necessarily mean that it is a number that is wholly accurate. But again, the important —

QUESTION: There’s a difference between being wholly accurate and being untruthful, though, right?

MR PATEL: The important takeaway here, Barbara, is that any number above zero is something that we will continue to take issue with. There – but again, there is not – unless the BBC is aware of something that I’m not, there is not a separate entity conducting a count for civilian casualties in Gaza aside from the ministry of health that is run by Hamas.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR PATEL: So that is the number that we will continue to use internally.

QUESTION: Sorry, Vedant, but all in the previous wars that Hamas were accurate actually in the numbers. Why do you think this time they are not accurate?

MR PATEL: We’re just not going to get into the specific intelligence assessments, Nadia, but we have seen reporting, especially around the attack on the hospital in Gaza, where there has been misinformation and some of the casualty figures have been misreported. Again, this is not to minimize the impact that there has been on civilian casualties in Gaza.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR PATEL: Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you, Vedant.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: Just please, because it’s a little bit confusing. Today the announcement of humanitarian pauses is interpreted like a breakthrough. I mean, what’s – if you can walk us through the difference between what’s happening now, because we are seeing humanitarian aid entering to Gaza. Some civilians are able to depart, but they are not safe all the time. So is it a breakthrough, I mean, and what’s the difference between what you announced today and what we are looking or waiting for in a potential deal on hostages – three days of humanitarian pauses?

MR PATEL: We think that this is a result of our diplomacy and our engagement in the region, and this is something that the Secretary of State, President Biden, Jake Sullivan, others have been very direct about with their counterparts in the Israeli Government about the need for pauses and efforts like this. Yes, there has been humanitarian aid flowing into Gaza. Yes, there has been the ability for Palestinian civilians and foreign nationals to be able to not just move within Gaza but also those who have an intended wish to do so to depart Gaza. What this is about is our Israeli partners sharing with some more specificity about efforts that had already been underway, but also some additional efforts that they are pursuing to ensure that these things can happen. And I will let them speak to those details in more specificity.

QUESTION: One more question, if I may.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: You’ve been saying that a ceasefire is only beneficial for Hamas. Do you assess that the current situation is beneficial for Israel militarily and strategically speaking?

MR PATEL: I’m not – just I’m not going to opine or comment on the specifics of the military operation. What this is about is ensuring that Hamas is never able to repeat the attacks of October 7th again, which is what a unilateral ceasefire would allow them to do – allow them to regroup, restrengthen themselves, position themselves to carry out its stated intent of continuing to attack violently against the Israeli people.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR PATEL: Goyal, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you, sir. Two questions, please.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: One, as far as the Secretary’s visit to India is concerned, if there were issues discussed like these terrorist organizations who – they keep attacking, like, India – 26/11 or 9/11 in U.S., and now 7/10 in Israel in Israel, among other countries – and they keep changing their names. You can ban them, sanction them, anything you can do. So where do we go from here future? Then they will hold innocent hostages and then they want to trade them in.

MR PATEL: Secretary Blinken is heading to New Delhi as part of the 2+2 Security Dialogue with Secretary Austin, and so I have no doubt deepening our security cooperation will be a topic that is discussed by Secretary Blinken, Secretary Austin, and their counterparts in the ministry of external affairs and ministry of defense. I will let that trip take out – play out before we share further. But I have no doubt that cooperation, especially in the counterterrorism space, is something that will come up in areas where we can potentially deepen our partnership.

QUESTION: Second question, sir: As far as nuclear weapons of Pakistan’s are concerned, one minister in Pakistan said that we are not obligated not to sell nuclear – Ukraine nuclear weapons because we have not signed NPCT – NPT. And because of the cash flow problem in Pakistan, they – there is a discussion between Ukraine and Pakistan, because ministers were met in – they met in Pakistan. Sir, what do you have – any about these comments?

MR PATEL: I’m sorry, I didn’t catch the first part of your question.

QUESTION: Nuclear weapons Pakistan want to sell to Ukraine, and Pakistan’s minister said that we are not obligated to any international pressure because we have not signed NPT.

MR PATEL: I have not seen that report, and so I’m not – just going to hold back on commenting on it until I’ve seen —

QUESTION: In the region? Can I ask about —

MR PATEL: Sure, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you so much, about Southeast Asia.

QUESTION: Thank you, sir.

QUESTION: What I want to ask you that – before I ask you, let me tell you that with the support of U.S.A., Bangladesh Government took a zero-tolerance policy in combating terrorism and radicalism, media reporting the achievement positively contributes to the counterterrorism effort and national interest of U.S.A. How do you evaluate the achievement of the current government about this matter?

MR PATEL: So I will speak about this in broad terms that you’ve heard me say before, that last year we celebrated 50 years of diplomatic relations with Bangladesh, and of course that this is a country that we’re looking to continue to deepen our relationships and partnerships with as there continue to be a number of areas, including trade, cooperation in the climate space, cooperation in the security space, and otherwise where that potential exists.

QUESTION: Thank you so much. I have a one-line question: Do you support the unelected caretaker government in Bangladesh as opposition demanding before the general election? Thank you.

MR PATEL: I’m pretty sure I answered this question yesterday or the day before that or the day before that.

QUESTION: You – yeah, just interrupting, sorry for interrupting.

MR PATEL: So to —

QUESTION: We are getting answer every time that you – everybody wants in Bangladesh free and fair election.

MR PATEL: And that continues —

QUESTION: But the question is if you support unelected caretaker government or not, yes or no.

MR PATEL: As you’ve heard us say, we do not support a particular government or political party or candidate in any country, and that in areas where there are elections ongoing, we – our goal and intent is for these elections to take place in a free and fair way that respects the will of the people of that country.

Go ahead in the back.

QUESTION: Thank you so much.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: During a press conference in Seoul, Secretary Blinken said that the United States is seeing and witnessing Russia providing technology and support to North Korea for its military programs. So I’m wondering, can you give us more clarity on what support and what technology is being provided to North Korea?

And I have another question. It’s —

MR PATEL: Sure.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR PATEL: Oh, no, why don’t you ask your second question.

QUESTION: Second question is: When it comes to North Korea, the policy focus has always been like deterrence and sanctions enforcement, but the U.S. obviously has stressed its intent to re-engage with North Korea. But I’m wondering if there are any behind-the-scenes efforts underway to kickstart direct engagement with North Korea at this point.

MR PATEL: So this is of course something that our Special Representative Sung Kim is deeply engaged on, and you’re right, we have been clear-eyed that our intent and goal for the Korean Peninsula is complete denuclearization, and we have been up front with Pyongyang about our willingness to engage in diplomacy without preconditions. And that continues to be the case.

Specifically as it relates to the Secretary’s comments, I don’t have any additional specifics to provide, but we have seen a track record of countries like Russia continue to carry the DPRK’s water, especially in forums like the United Nations Security Council. And our belief is that any country that claims to have relationships with the DPRK or influence over the DPRK has a responsibility to make clear to them that their actions continue to be destabilizing, that they continue to violate a number of sanctions, that their activities continue to be in violation of a number of UN Security Council resolutions also.

Go ahead. We’ll come back to you, Alex.

QUESTION: Thank you so much.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: There’s a growing concern in Ukraine, today also echoed by President Zelenskyy, that the war in the Middle East between Israel and Gaza has distracted attention from Russia’s brutal actions in Ukraine. Do you share those concerns?

MR PATEL: Absolutely not. We continue to be able to keep focused on the varying challenges that exist around the planet. That of course also includes Russia’s ongoing assault on Ukraine. It was just a number of weeks ago, Alex – I think even last week or the week before – where we announced yet another tranche of security assistance for our Ukrainian partners, and this is something that we’ll continue to be focused on. In President Biden’s Oval Office address, he talked about the importance of not just, of course, ensuring that Israel has what it needs to defend its security, but also that our Ukrainian partners continue the support that they have been getting so that they can continue to defend themselves against the infringement on their territorial integrity and sovereignty.

QUESTION: Thank you. And second topic – final one, promise.

MR PATEL: Sure.

QUESTION: The President yesterday proclaimed November 9 as International – World Freedom Day, and he pledged that his administration will support human rights everywhere around the world. I’m just curious, how – how does – how does it going to look – how is it going to look like on your end at the State Department? Are you guys going to beef up your toolkit when it comes to human rights and —

MR PATEL: Who said that? Sorry.

QUESTION: The President yesterday announced November 9as World Freedom Day, and he said these —

MR PATEL: Well, Alex, one of the first things that Secretary Blinken, President Biden, Vice President Harris made clear at the beginning of this administration was the role that human rights is going to continue to play and the forefront at which we put it when it comes to our foreign policy. And that will continue to be the case. Around the world, when we have seen infringements on human rights, we have been clear about that.

From this very briefing room, Secretary Blinken regularly comes down to talk about the department’s annual Human Rights Report and the conditions of human rights in varying countries and the steps the United States can take to address those. So it’s something that we’ll continue to be focused on.

Camilla.

QUESTION: Thanks, Vedant.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: Circling back to Israel-Gaza, but on this building.

MR PATEL: Yeah. Yeah.

QUESTION: Today, CBS reported that senior State Department officials have held so-called listening sessions for diplomats in six U.S. embassies in the Middle East and North Africa to be able to address any concerns amongst diplomats about U.S. policy but also any concerns related to the background of diplomats. Can you comment on this at all, and can you give any more information about ongoing efforts in this building to deal with any concerns or dissent among State Department staff as this conflict continues?

MR PATEL: Thanks, Camilla. So out of respect to this process and out of respect to the workforce, we’ll talk about this in a little bit more broad terms than the specific engagements. But broadly, I would just say yes, it has been incredibly important for Secretary Blinken and this department’s leadership to be able to engage directly with the workforce on a variety of areas, first and foremost, ensuring that this workforce knows and has access to the various resources that exist in the federal government, should they be interested in taking advantage of some of those resources.

Additionally, we also recognize that this has been a trying time for our workforce around the country, and so, just as we would here in D.C., we have ensured that our missions around the world, particularly those that might be more heightened attention right now to what’s happening in the Middle East have access to those resources and are able to interface with department leaders about not just what’s happening in the region, but the ways that this department can continue to serve them.

Michel, go ahead.

QUESTION: Yeah. Vedant, what’s your understanding of the photojournalists who took footage for the October 7 attacks in Gaza?

MR PATEL: I’ve seen those reports, Michel, and I just don’t have any comment to offer on those right now.

Nadia, go ahead.

QUESTION: So the President apparently just told reporters now that he was asking for a longer humanitarian pause in Gaza. So do you think that with $14 billion that you give them plus the 4 billion plus all the leverage and the weapons, you cannot – the President cannot get what he wants from the Israelis, cannot even extend it beyond three days?

MR PATEL: Nadia, the announcement that was made public today is something that this administration, including the President, including the Secretary – it’s something that they wanted to, of course, see happen.

But as I said when speaking to Nick and Simon, this is not a moment in time, black and white, this happened and therefore another step can’t be taken. We will continue to work directly with our Israeli partners, as we have, about what other options are available to ensure the flow of humanitarian aid, to ensure that civilians are able to be kept out of harm’s way. That’s something that we’re going to continue to work towards.

QUESTION: Do you feel frustrated that you don’t get more than, like, four hours, three hours?

MR PATEL: Today – today’s announcement —

QUESTION: Do you want more, since the President said he wants more?

MR PATEL: Today’s announcement was a welcome step and we are – we have never taken our foot off the gas and we’ll continue to work directly with partners in the region about the seriousness we place on the flow of humanitarian aid.

Michail, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. Thank you very much, Vedant. You said many times the last two days that you are against occupation of Gaza by the Israelis. Before – but everybody forgot it, I think. You said that you are against the occupation of Ukraine by the Russians. And in my opinion, you are very right to say that. But can we say that you are also against all the occupations in the world? For example, of the occupation of Cyprus by your allies, the Turks?

MR PATEL: Michail, each circumstance is different, and it would be inappropriate for me to offer a broad-brushed comment like that on every case across the world.

QUESTION: And another question, please.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: Do you have any good news, maybe, to share with us about Sweden joining NATO, for example, or can you tell us if Hungary has removed the obstacles, if Türkiye removes the obstacles? Any news?

MR PATEL: This is something that our diplomats in Ankara and Hungary are continuing to work around the clock. The Secretary raised this with Foreign Minister Fidan on his travels. Of course, this is something – we have not held back the importance that we have placed on seeing that Sweden ascend to NATO as swiftly as possible. We have long felt that the conditions laid out under the trilateral memorandum of understanding under the Madrid Summit have been met and that Sweden is ready to be a NATO ally.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. Two questions about Russia and Latin America.

MR PATEL: Sure.

QUESTION: Two days ago the State Department alerted about a disinformation campaign happening in different media markets in Latin America, with nefarious purposes allegedly by Russia. Can you detail the specific media markets that you are worried about and the nature of these campaign?

MR PATEL: I’m happy to check with the Global Engagement Center about specifics that we can share. We can follow up with you on that.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR PATEL: Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you for taking the question. So I have some questions about the upcoming APEC Summit. So I know that you guys don’t want to get ahead of the President and the Secretary’s schedule, but I’m wondering if you can share some details about what might be the top topics or issues that can come up during the summit, especially with regard to the meeting between presidents – President Biden and the Chinese leader, Xi Jinping?

MR PATEL: Well, you’re right, I’m absolutely not going to get ahead of the President’s schedule or the Secretary’s own schedule as well. But let me just say that we are thrilled to be serving as APEC’s host this year, and the Leaders’ Week is going to mark the culmination of our efforts as it relates to APEC. And we have been focused on showcasing and highlighting our economic leadership as well as our commitment to multilateral engagement in the Asia-Pacific and the world broadly, and we believe that APEC has an opportunity to highlight the direct benefits of the international economic engagement and some of the things that the United States has been leading on. So I would say tune in next week, and we’ll have more to share over the course of the summit.

QUESTION: And secondly, so the – reportedly there – the President Xi and President Biden will – the meeting between them will result in an announcement to resume military-to-military communication between the two countries. Is that the case? Can you confirm it?

MR PATEL: Again, I think I just said I’m not going to speak to the President or the Secretary’s schedule. I will leave it to the White House to announce any plans for the President. So —

QUESTION: And if I – if I may —

MR PATEL: I’m going – you got two questions already.

QUESTION: Okay. Thank you.

MR PATEL: Go ahead – from the back.

QUESTION: Thanks. Back to Palestine-Israel, the UN high commissioner for human rights yesterday said that the – quote/unquote, “The atrocities perpetrated by Palestinian armed groups on October 7th were heinous, they were war crimes[.]” He also said the collective punishment by Israel of Palestinian civilians is also a war crime and that the unlawful forcible evacuation of civilians is as well. Does the U.S. agree with the UN assessment? (Inaudible.)

MR PATEL: I spoke about this earlier this week in the – when it relates to questions about any of these kinds of legal determinations. We have a rigorous process in place for evaluating these kinds of things and have not made that assessment in this case. But this is a situation we’re going to continue to pay attention to and remain in close partnership with Israel.

QUESTION: So it’s an ongoing evaluation as things develop day by day (inaudible)?

MR PATEL: I spoke to this earlier in the week. Again, this – we have a rigorous process in place, and it’s not an assessment that we have made thus far.

QUESTION: And a second, just quickly. Do you believe – I mean, this is the UN saying it, which is seen as a objective side by lots of folks, including this administration. Do you believe that the U.S. reputation specifically among traditional Arab partners and allies has taken a hit because of what the UN is saying are war crimes? And you said this earlier, that you guys uphold human rights and preach about human rights across the world, and many folks are saying, including the UN, that there are human rights violations being committed by the Israelis.

MR PATEL: Let me just say that the Secretary, as part of his travels, twice in the past month, has engaged deeply with our partners in the Arab world about steps that can be taken to address the current ongoing situation in Gaza, first and foremost steps that we can all collectively take to further hold Hamas accountable for those terrorist attacks on October 7th, steps that we all can collectively take to ensure the flow of humanitarian aid. And you’ve seen partner countries take actions and steps of their own when it comes to the provision of humanitarian aid. And we, of course, welcome that, and that’s something we’re going to continue to work on as well.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you, sir. Secretary Blinken is in India, and India-Canada tensions are escalating, especially after the expulsion of more than 40 Canadian diplomats. Is the U.S. still trying to mediate or asking India to cooperate with the Canadian investigation of the murder of Khalistan leader Hardeep Singh Nijjar?

MR PATEL: This is something that we’re of course continuing to engage on with our partners in India as well as our partners in Canada as well.

QUESTION: Sir, one more question, if you allow me. So don’t you think by ignoring Israeli brutalities in Gaza, the United States is sending a wrong message to the powerful militaries and powerful countries around the world that they can do anything by killing thousands of innocent people, including children, on the name of self-defense? If tomorrow any other powerful country or powerful military do the same thing, what will be your position there?

MR PATEL: From podiums across this government, you have not seen us parse our words about the moral and strategic imperative to minimize and take steps to ensure that civilian casualties aren’t taking place over the course of this conflict. And that’s something that we’re going to continue to raise directly with our Israeli partners. You’ve seen us do so. We’ve laid out steps that could potentially be taken to minimize this. We welcome the news today on the humanitarian pause, and we’ll continue to work at this.

Last question, Simon.

QUESTION: Wanted to come back to the phrase that you – you talked about the rigorous process that’s in place to assess, in different situations, crimes against humanity, genocide, those kind of things. To just clarify, it sounded like there is a rigorous process in place to make those determinations, but you haven’t initiated a process in this – in this case.

MR PATEL: That is correct. I think a colleague from your exact newsroom asked the same question a couple days ago.

QUESTION: I think it’s probably an important question, so we —

MR PATEL: I – No, I’m not – I’m not at all parsing the importance of the question. I just think I’ve spoken to it a couple times this week.

QUESTION: Yeah, but – so what —

MR PATEL: I’m not going to get into the specifics of those rigorous processes. These are internal, deliberative processes. That is par for the course when we talk about the ways in which we go about this. But there is a rigorous process in place, and we have not come to that conclusion in this specific case.

QUESTION: Who’s decision is it to initiate that rigorous process?

MR PATEL: It is a process across the interagency is my understanding, but I’m happy to see if we have any specifics we can share.

QUESTION: Is it – can you say sort of it would be a – something initiated by the Secretary of State to say we’re going to look into a case —

MR PATEL: Again, I don’t want to misspeak the specifics of the parameters, of how they work, so I’m happy to check back and get back you in a broad sense.

QUESTION: You were asked about it a couple of days ago, so I thought you might have had the chance to —

MR PATEL: Again, I’m happy to check the specifics for you.

QUESTION: Sure. Thank you.

MR PATEL: All right. Thanks, everybody.

(The briefing was concluded at 2:09 p.m.)

Department Press Briefing – November 7, 2023

HomeDepartment Press Briefing – November 7, 2023

hide

Department Press Briefing – November 7, 2023

Vedant Patel, Principal Deputy Spokesperson

Washington, D.C.

November 7, 2023

Article Index

ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES/REGION
IRAN/IRAQ/REGION
ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES
TÜRKIYE/SWEDEN/NATO
ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES/REGION
DEPARTMENT
UKRAINE/RUSSIA
GEORGIA/RUSSIA
ARMENIA/AZERBAIJAN
CHINA/REPUBLIC OF KOREA/REGION
GEORGIA
CLIMATE
RUSSIA/UKRAINE
PAKISTAN/AFGHANISTAN
ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES/REGION
LEBANON

1:04 p.m. EST

MR PATEL: Good afternoon, everybody. Happy Tuesday. I do not have anything off the top. Shaun, do you want to kick us off?

QUESTION: Sure. Could I just start with American citizens and permanent residents and others who are leaving Gaza? I know there’s a new figure that’s been given of 400 we’re at. Can you just explain a bit more about that, the timeframe? Are they still coming out? Have there been people coming out today? And how many – presuming there are some, how many are still left as far as you know?

MR PATEL: Thanks, Shaun. So yes, we have assisted more than 400 U.S. citizens, lawful permanent residents, and other individuals to be able to depart Gaza. We continue to work in partnership with the Government of Egypt and Israel towards safe passage for more U.S. citizens, their immediate family members, and U.S. lawful permanent residents. And we encourage those whose names may have appeared on previous lists that have been published by the Palestinian General Authority for Crossings and Borders to make their way to the border and attempt to exit. It’s our understanding that individuals whose names had been on previous lists published can present themselves and should be able to cross.

This, of course, is a very fluid and quickly evolving situation. There are three entities involved in controlling access to the border crossing: Israel, Egypt, and Hamas. And we’re continuing to work with Egypt and Israel to ensure that American citizens who have indicated a desire to depart are able to do so. As you’ve seen over the past number of days, the American citizens have been able to exit, and we expect this number to continue to grow.

QUESTION: Sure. If I could just pursue that —

MR PATEL: Sure.

QUESTION: You said that more – safe passage for more afterward. And the Secretary, I believe it is a week ago on the Hill, gave a figure of 1,000, including citizens, green card holders, relatives. Doing the math, is it safe to say 600 are still waiting, or is that – are the figures – have they been evolving?

MR PATEL: I mean, that is – if you were to do basic arithmetic, that is of course the number that you would get to, but I, again, just want to caveat. As we have in any circumstance that involves American citizens in any part of the world, we of course do not ask American citizens to register when they travel and so on and so forth. So I just want to – I’m hesitant to provide a pinpoint metric as, of course, this is an ongoing and fluid situation.

QUESTION: Sure. I have more but if some people want to —

QUESTION: Do you have an update on the aid trucks that have been able to go through Rafah?

MR PATEL: I do have an update on additional humanitarian. So as of November 7th, today, approximately 526 trucks carrying humanitarian supplies have entered Gaza through the Rafah crossing, as reported by the UN OCHA.

QUESTION: Okay. And then if I could ask about some comments that Netanyahu made yesterday —

MR PATEL: Sure.

QUESTION: — about who should govern Gaza when fighting is over, he said he thinks Israel for an indefinite period will have overall security responsibility. What’s your take on those comments? Have you sought any clarification from the Israeli Government about what they meant by that? Do you have any concerns?

MR PATEL: So we, of course, engage with our partners in the Israeli Government about a numerous number of things, especially currently as this situation continues to be ongoing. I would refer you to the prime minister’s office for further elaboration on that particular quote. Our viewpoint is that Palestinians must be at the forefront of these decisions, and Gaza is Palestinian land and it will remain Palestinian land. And generally speaking, we do not support reoccupation of Gaza, and neither does Israel. Secretary Blinken was fairly clear about that during his travels as well.

But it’s important to note that, at the same time, we agree with Israel that there is no returning to the October 6th status quo. Israel and the region must be secure, and Gaza should and can no longer be a base from which to launch terror attacks against the people of Israel or anyone else. And so we’re working with partners on various scenarios – on interim governance, on security parameters, on security situations in Gaza – for once this crisis recedes. But I’m not going to get ahead of that process or get into it from here.

QUESTION: Have you been in touch with his office since his comments came out?

MR PATEL: As I said, we are engaging with our partners in Israel around the clock on a number of issues. I’m just not going to get into the specifics of the day-to-day diplomacy.

Olivia, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. Can I follow up on the aid trucks, please?

MR PATEL: Sure.

QUESTION: Because last week the number of aid trucks getting into Gaza seemed to be increasing every day, and since the crossing closed for a time over the weekend, it seems like there’s been a significant curtailment both in people coming out and aid going in. The administration has voiced its frustration with the amount of aid going in as being insufficient. So can you provide us any insight into what the slowdown of the delivery of aid is attributable to?

MR PATEL: Well, on the – first, to take a step back, on the issue of basic math, the number that I’m providing today is an increase from the number that I provided yesterday that was reflective of the total [as of] November 6th.

Broadly though, there are a number of issues at play here, primarily being this is not a crossing that the United States controls. We are engaged directly in diplomacy with our partners in Israel, with our partners in Egypt, to ensure that aid can flow. We are working appropriately with the Israelis to develop inspection mechanisms that would allow trucks to move into Gaza quickly while still undergoing full inspection. The Secretary raised this during his visit. This is an area that also has been rattled with blackouts and other instances that have made both the entrance of aid and for the voluntary departure of civilians to somehow – to at some instances be slower than not just the United States but anybody would want in this circumstance.

But that is exactly why Special Envoy Satterfield is in the region engaging in diplomacy, working with the Israelis and the Egyptians on this – to ensure that humanitarian aid can get into Gaza. And simultaneously, we are working around the clock on the consular piece of this so that American citizens and their family members and legal permanent resident who choose to depart are able to do so and in an appropriate manner.

Of course, no one is trying to indicate the rate and the clip at which these have been happening have been satisfactory. We think more aid needs to be getting in; we’ve been very clear about that. We think American citizens who are interested in departing need to be able to do so swiftly, and we’re working around the clock to ensure that.

QUESTION: Okay. And acknowledging that an increase of 50 that you’re citing today, the goal had been 100 trucks, while still recognizing that number was insufficient. Is 100 trucks a day still the goal?

MR PATEL: I’m not going to put a specific metric on it. Our goal at this point is doing everything we can to ensure that Rafah opens at appropriate intervals to allow for the influx of humanitarian aid into Gaza, as well as for the safe departure of American citizens, LPRs, and eligible family members.

QUESTION: If I may, one question on hostages.

MR PATEL: Sure. Yeah.

QUESTION: So U.S. officials have said that the hostage releases that we’ve seen to date were sort of pilot cases to see if the pause-for-release system could work. Are we to take from the fact that no additional hostages since that initial release have been made to – as an indication that that system doesn’t work and won’t pave the way for the release of additional hostages?

MR PATEL: I’m not going to get into the specifics of diplomacy beyond saying that the release of hostages has, of course, been a key and evergreen goal of ours since October 7. The Secretary has been incredibly clear about that, not just with his Israeli counterparts, but also any country in the region who may have a relationship with Hamas or who may have influence over Hamas, and has been sending a very clear message that all these hostages need to be released.

It’s exactly why this administration has been clear-eyed about its call for a humanitarian pause, so conditions can be created that could potentially lead to additional hostage releases, that could potentially lead to an influx of additional humanitarian aid as well. So this is something that we’re continuing to pursue.

QUESTION: And just quickly, is there an update on the hostage negotiations that have been ongoing?

MR PATEL: I don’t have any updates to offer at this time.

QUESTION: I have one more on the reaction within this building, if you’d like to go around —

MR PATEL: Yeah, why don’t I – I can come back to you. That’s great.

Jalil, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you very much, Mr. Patel. This next question, I want to dedicate it to —

MR PATEL: Is it on the region or is it off topic?

QUESTION: Different.

MR PATEL: Okay. I will come back to you then. Michel, go ahead.

QUESTION: Okay, good.

QUESTION: Are you aware, first, of an assassination attempt on President Mahmoud Abbas in the West Bank?

MR PATEL: Thanks for your question, Michel. So I saw those public reports as soon as – right before I came out here, so I unfortunately don’t have any specifics to offer on that. I’m saying this solely on public reporting. We are continuing to pay attention, and as we have more information from the United States’s perspective, we will certainly share that. From the public reporting, it seems that President Abbas himself has not harmed, but again, as we get more information and as this situation develops and we have anything additional to share, we’ll make sure to share it.

QUESTION: And my second question is on the attacks on the U.S. forces in Syria and Iraq. There have now been 40 attacks in this region since October 17th. President Biden, Vice President Harris, Secretary Blinken, and other officials threatened Iran and its proxies not to do it. They have done it. What’s next?

MR PATEL: So Michel, I don’t think you need to look any further than how we have tackled the threat that has been Iran over the course of this entire administration. We have used a combination of deterrence, pressure, and diplomacy to counter Iran’s destabilizing activities. I will also note that we sent a very loud and direct deterrence message to Iran about our willingness to vigorously protect our personnel and our interests. Late last month, on October 26th, the U.S. military carried out strikes against two facilities in eastern Syria used by the IRGC and affiliated groups. These precision self-defense strikes were a response to a series of ongoing and largely unsuccessful attacks against U.S. personnel in Iraq and Syria, as you said.

So we’ve been very clear that, one, we will take any steps possible to protect our personnel and our interests in the region, but additionally we have been very clear to countries in the region that we are incredibly keen on ensuring that this conflict does not spread. And in the matter of Iraq, that’s something that we raised directly with Prime Minister Sudani on Secretary Blinken’s trip, and the prime minister has also called these attacks unacceptable and has committed to taking whatever possible steps they can to stop these attacks.

QUESTION: On the same topic?

MR PATEL: Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you, Vedant. Yesterday the Islamic Resistance in Iraq, they attacked Erbil airport. And some civilian flights were cancelled because of these attacks, because these attacks destroyed – they are saying they were targeting the U.S. bases in the region, but they are endangering the people in the region, the civilian people, the civilian airport, especially in Erbil, the Kurdistan region of Iraq. Today the president of the Kurdistan region said that this is extremely dangerous development in the region, and we call to some solution and to hold those groups responsible. What engagements do you have with the Iraqi and with the Kurdish government to prevent these attacks, to not put in dangers the civilians and the people who are living in the region?

MR PATEL: Well, I’m glad you raise that. The impact on civilians of course in this context, but especially in these attacks that are being carried out in Iraq, is of course of importance to us and one of the aspects that we have raised directly with the Government of Iraq. It’s something the Secretary raised directly with Prime Minister Sudani. I’m not going to get into the specifics, but we – the prime minister himself called these attacks unacceptable, and it’s something that we’re going to continue to engage on with the Iraqi Government to take whatever steps we can to hold the perpetrators accountable.

QUESTION: And one more question on the same.

MR PATEL: Sure.

QUESTION: And can you – what – where you are in your discussion with the Israeli Government on the humanitarian pause? And could you give us – speak about this humanitarian pause? What do you mean by that, and –

MR PATEL: On the what?

QUESTION: Humanitarian pause.

MR PATEL: Humanitarian pause. Again, and I touched a little bit about this yesterday, our goal, our end goal here I think is threefold – is first, we want conditions created that will allow for the entrance of additional humanitarian aid into Gaza. We want the conditions to be such that will allow potentially for additional hostages to be released by Hamas. And we also want the conditions to be such that Hamas is not able to use such a time to regroup, grow stronger, position itself in a way to further attack the people of Israel, to conduct further terrorist attacks.

So we can call it whatever we want, but that is what we are looking at, and those are the end goals that we are trying to achieve through our diplomacy, through these engagements that we’re having not just with our Israeli counterparts but with partner countries in the region as well.

(Inaudible), go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. There are some alarming reports coming out of Gaza with regards to a shortage of – fuel shortages. Many hospitals announced they won’t be operational without new fuel supplies. Do you have any updates on the U.S. efforts on getting fuel inside Gaza? Yesterday you said the U.S. continues to work on this, but do you have any updates since yesterday?

MR PATEL: I don’t have any specific updates for you. Again, we recognize that fuel is urgently needed in Gaza and the critical role that it plays in both the access to free water, clean water treatment, desalination, and things like that. We also understand the critical role that it can play in ensuring some basic needs and protecting public health, and that’s exactly why Special Envoy Satterfield is discussing ways with Israeli authorities, with Egyptian authorities, donors, and aid agencies on what mechanisms exist to enhance the flow of fuel into Gaza to benefit the civilians. But I don’t have any updates for you.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Do you have any information on Israel specifically turning away trucks that have tried to enter upon Israel’s inspection, including because they were carrying fuel, or any other reasons?

MR PATEL: I don’t have any specific reports to share. But what I can just say on the inspection mechanism – and I touched a little bit on this – is that that’s something that we’re working diligently with our Israeli partners on. It’s something that the Secretary raised during his travels as well. We’re working with them to develop additional inspection mechanisms that we hope will allow trucks and aid to enter Gaza more quickly and more efficiently, and we’re hoping we’ll be able to talk more about that in the coming days and weeks.

Alex, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thanks, Vedant. Very quickly on the Secretary’s trip – I want to get you out of the Middle East briefly. I know you will be lured back anyway.

MR PATEL: I think there’s quite another – questions on the – on the region, Alex.

QUESTION: Yeah, on the Secretary’s trip, though —

MR PATEL: So if this is not on the region, I’m going to have to come back to you.

QUESTION: Israel?

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: Yeah, just very quickly on the trip, then come back to me on Ukraine and Russia.

MR PATEL: Okay.

QUESTION: The Secretary, when he met with Turkish officials, did he get an assurance that Sweden will become a NATO member by the end of this month?

MR PATEL: That’s exactly the kind of question – that’s not on the region, Alex. I am just – I will take it because you just asked. Look, we have been very clear about our viewpoint on Sweden’s accession to NATO. We have long felt that they are ready to be a NATO Ally and we think that the agreements that were made under the Madrid Summit have been met, and so we’re going to continue to work and let this process play out. I have no doubt that it was something that was discussed, but I’m not going to get beyond the readout.

QUESTION: What is the Secretary’s understanding of why it is taking longer? Like, can you —

MR PATEL: Again, I’m just not going to get into the specifics beyond that.

QUESTION: Come back to me.

MR PATEL: Sam, you’ve had your hand up patiently. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. The group Democracy for the Arab World Now, founded by slain journalist Khashoggi, put out a recent statement charging that there’s a grotesque hoax by the Biden administration not just greenlighting but bankrolling ethnic cleansing. They specifically cite parts of the supplemental that the administration has sought that fund the proposed humanitarian aid to Palestinians who have been displaced from Gaza into neighboring countries, and they also highlight the fact that the Israeli Government appears imminently planning a permanent move of Palestinians permanently from Gaza to Egypt, and they cite a leaked Israeli intelligence ministry report along those lines.

MR PATEL: So —

QUESTION: What do you have on that?

MR PATEL: I —

QUESTION: I realize that earlier in your comments you seemed to distance yourself from this notion. You said that it was Palestinian land and that you are opposed to this, or that was the implication of your remarks. However, there – there it is; you’re asking for the money to do it.

MR PATEL: So let me just be clear about a couple things here, Sam. First, we continue to provide support to Palestinian refugees through the UN, through UNRWA, and the U.S. is going to also continue to support efforts for safe passage for civilians in Gaza seeking safety. As it relates to our foreign policy, the U.S. does not support any forced relocation of Palestinians outside of Gaza. It is not a policy we are pursuing. It is not something that is on the table.

QUESTION: So why are you asking for funding for it?

MR PATEL: I don’t – I don’t understand your question.

QUESTION: This group, Democracy for the Arab World Now, founded by Khashoggi, says that you’re asking for funding for new Palestinians – not just displaced from ’48, not just displaced from ’67, but displaced from this conflict from Gaza into Egypt and other neighboring countries. I think it’s an open secret that Israel has been attempting to —

MR PATEL: So we are – we are not engaging in any situation in which Egyptian land would be leased. I’ve not seen that letter nor am I going to get into the specifics of the funding request to Congress from up here. But forced relocation is not – is not something that we are looking at —

QUESTION: Okay.

MR PATEL: — or is on the table or a policy that we support.

QUESTION: Israel?

MR PATEL: Doc, go ahead.

QUESTION: I’m sorry, I’m asking you about your funding package.

QUESTION: Yes, Vedant? Thank you, excuse me, Vedant. Thank you. How long of a pause in the ceasefire does the State Department and President Biden have in mind for Israel? And a brief follow-up.

MR PATEL: We’re not calling for a ceasefire.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR PATEL: That’s not policy we’re pursuing.

QUESTION: Okay. Then following, why aren’t Secretary of State Blinken and President Biden asking Hamas and Hizballah for a pause – for a pause in their firing of rockets on Israeli communities?

MR PATEL: I —

QUESTION: The reasons for not —

MR PATEL: — don’t even know where to begin with that, Doc. We have – since the onset of this conflict, we have condemned Hamas for their destructive terrorist attacks on the Israeli people on October 7th. We have also been incredibly clear to Hizballah and any other malign actors that they should not use this opportunity to widen this conflict. And when we’re talking about a humanitarian pause, what we are talking about is conditions that simultaneously ensure that Hamas is not in a position in which it can regroup, restrengthen itself, position itself in a way to further conduct attacks on the Israeli people while also creating conditions that perhaps will allow for the further provision of humanitarian aid into Gaza that will perhaps allow conditions that other hostages can be released as well.

QUESTION: Well, Hamas is still firing – I’m sorry.

MR PATEL: Go ahead. I’ve taken two of your questions. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. Just to – thank you. Just to follow up on Sam.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: In March 2021, Secretary Blinken accused China of the crime of genocide for its alleged treatment of the Uyghur minority, but he didn’t accuse them of killing on any mass scale or forcible transfer. Now we see with Israel’s military assault on Gaza something like one out of every 200 people in the Gaza Strip has been eliminated, over 4,000 children killed. The ministry of intelligence, as Sam pointed out, in Israel has published a blueprint for the forced transfer of the entire Palestinian population to Egypt. We have the intent to commit genocide expressed at the highest level of the Israeli Government, including Netanyahu himself referring to the Palestinian population as Amalek, the biblical Amalek.

So I wonder, when you’re accusing one country of genocide without accusing them of mass killing, and then blocking ceasefires to enable another country’s military assault, what metric are you using to determine genocide? Or is this just political rhetoric?

MR PATEL: It’s certainly not political rhetoric. The department – and I talked a little bit about this yesterday – we have a rigorous process in place for evaluating whether something constitute as genocide or not, and that is true in any country that that situation might be being looked at.

That is not a term that we have assessed pertains to this current conflict. We are, of course, monitoring the evolving situation and are examining facts as they develop. This continues to be an incredibly challenging and fraught situation, but it’s also important to remember that Hamas bears responsibility for sparking this war, and they have brought this tragic war to Gaza.

QUESTION: Okay. Well, President Biden has accused the Russian Government of genocide for its actions in Ukraine, where in two years it has killed as many civilians as Israel has killed in one month in the Gaza Strip. So how do you account for that disparity, where you’re assisting one country and accusing the other of genocide when one – the country you’re assisting has systematically killed so many more people in one month?

MR PATEL: Those circumstances are totally and completely not the same, and to make a comparison like that, candidly, is incredibly inappropriate. We have been – please don’t interrupt me. We have been – we have raised directly with the Israeli Government about the need to distinguish between Hamas terrorists and Palestinian civilians. This is something that the Secretary has raised directly on his travels. He – we even laid out that we believe that there are commitments that can be made additionally on dealing with protecting civilian life more effectively, and we’re watching very closely to make sure that happens.

QUESTION: But you’ve referred to Palestinian civilians as human shields. Doesn’t that blur the distinction between civilians and militants?

MR PATEL: I am not – we have not referred to Palestinian civilians as human shields. We have said —

QUESTION: I have sat – I sat here and heard Matthew Miller refer to them as human shields.

MR PATEL: We have said – we have said – we have said that Hamas is using Palestinian civilians as human shields.

QUESTION: Wouldn’t that be —

MR PATEL: That is not hyperbole. That is something that we have seen Hamas do, as they continue to integrate themselves into key civilian infrastructure across Gaza.

QUESTION: Wouldn’t that be blurring the distinction between civilians and combatants if you say Hamas is using civilians as human shields? Wouldn’t that be in some ways justifying the killing of civilians because they happen to be in the way, in their homes?

MR PATEL: We are not justifying – we are – there is no one in this administration that is justifying killing of civilians. Any civilian life lost is incredibly troubling, heartbreaking to us. Any number above zero is deeply troubling to us. What we are doing is we are working with our Israeli partners to ensure that steps can be taken to minimize the impact on civilian life. And we also have – believe that there is a moral imperative, there is a strategic imperative to take steps to minimize loss of civilian life.

I’m going to work the room. I’ve answered like four of your questions.

QUESTION: Can I just follow up – sorry – on your answer to the genocide question?

MR PATEL: Yeah. Yeah.

QUESTION: You said you’re monitoring the evolving situation and examining the facts as they develop. Is – are you confirming that the U.S. is examining Israeli bombardment of Gaza to see if its actions constitute —

MR PATEL: No, that’s not – I did not say that to indicate that there is some active, ongoing process. This is par for the course as we observe conditions and circumstances around the world.

QUESTION: So there’s no active process looking at this specifically?

MR PATEL: Correct. Correct.

QUESTION: Okay.

QUESTION: Given – just to follow on that briefly, given the circumstances, is one likely?

MR PATEL: I’m just not going to get into internal deliberative processes that exist at State. I want to – is it cool I go to Shaun and then I can come back to you, before you, sir?

QUESTION: Sure, no problem.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: It’s related somewhat.

MR PATEL: Okay.

QUESTION: Another aspect of this, the killings of journalists in the conflict – there’s a Committee to Protect Journalists report, I believe out yesterday, which is saying that 37 journalists have been killed, the vast majority of them Palestinians, in this conflict – I think another one today. The secretary-general of the United Nations said that this is the deadliest conflict for journalists in quite some time. To what extent does this – is there a concern about the killing of journalists, in terms of ways to avoid this and in terms of why this is actually happening?

MR PATEL: I would say of course, Shaun, that the impact of this conflict on journalists and our concern of journalists being among that could potentially be targeted when it comes to civilian casualties, that of course continues to be tantamount and something that we are paying attention to and have raised with actors in the region about this as well.

QUESTION: And so it’s been raised actively in terms of —

MR PATEL: It’s – when we talked about – when we talk about ensuring that civilians are not placed in harm’s way, of course, journalists are part of that. And we continue to believe that civilians, including journalists – that steps need to be taken to ensure that they are not impacted within this conflict, that they are not targeted or killed in this conflict.

QUESTION: And just finally, I mean, is there any concern that there has been a deliberate targeting of some of the journalists?

MR PATEL: I’m not aware nor have I seen any reporting to indicate as such.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: About this building?

MR PATEL: Mm-hmm.

QUESTION: I just wanted to ask you because there have been multiple reports about the response and maybe in some cases the outcry within this building about the U.S. policy approach to this conflict.

So first, can you say whether you are aware of the formal submission of one or more dissent channel cables by American diplomats? And then secondly, if you could speak more broadly to how leadership here is responding to those with deep expertise in this building who believe that America’s foreign policy here may be ill-conceived?

MR PATEL: So first, I am just not going to speak to the specifics of the dissent channel out of respect to the integrity of the channel. What I will just say is that this is something that has been available to employees since the Vietnam War and we are proud that the department has an established procedure for employees to articulate policy disagreements directly to senior department principals in this building without fear of retribution.

I will also say just broadly that we understand and we expect people in our workforce to have different personal beliefs, different beliefs about what U.S. foreign policy should be. And in fact, we think that that is one of the strengths of this government and it’s one of the strengths of this department and our ability to engage with people who have different opinions. And we encourage individuals to continue to make those opinions known. It’s also important to remember that the President is who sets this policy, and we all – up here, at least – serve at his pleasure.

But we encourage everyone, even when they disagree with our policy, to make their leadership know; the dissent channel is one of those mechanisms. I will also note that we continue to take the responsibility to our workforce incredibly seriously and recognize that this is an incredibly taxing and trying time. This conflict is incredibly fraught. We have, like any workforce, ensured that the workforce knows what mental health resources are available to them in this trying time.

And I will also just add that throughout this deliberative process as it relates to UN – U.S. foreign policy, we have engaged directly, the Secretary has, with those who may have dissenting opinions or different opinions from what current U.S. foreign policy is. That’s democracy. That’s part of the process.

QUESTION: Just very quickly, because apart from the articulation of opinion or grievance, as it may be, are there people with expertise in policy whose views have been incorporated as the situation has unfolded? Have they effected a shift?

MR PATEL: I’m just not going to – I’m just not going to read out the specifics of what deliberative process or what the interagency process is like. There are – of course, the ways that decisions are made in any administration involve the inputs of a lot of people across a lot of different agencies with a lot of differing equities. Ultimately, though, it is the President who sets the policy. But simultaneously, we have a number of mechanisms at our disposal available to the workforce for them to share their dissenting viewpoints, whether it be the dissent channel cable, whether it be discussing directly with department leadership, which there have been opportunities to do so as well.

Alex, go ahead. I will come back to you.

QUESTION: Thanks so much. A couple of questions that are not Middle East-related if you don’t mind.

MR PATEL: Sure.

QUESTION: Ukraine. I’m sure you have seen multiple reports over the weekend that the U.S. is pushing Russia – or Ukraine to dialogue with Russia. There is speculation that’s been building up around it. So I want to give you a chance to clear the – clear up the air.

MR PATEL: Sure.

QUESTION: Have you guys done anything like that?

MR PATEL: So any negotiations, Alex, are up to Ukraine. And as we have said a number of times before, nothing should happen about Ukraine without Ukraine. We are not aware of any conversations with Ukraine about negotiations outside of the peace formula structure that you’ve already seen a number of engagements take place on. But it continues to be incredibly clear, Alex, that the Kremlin has no interest in negotiating or ending this war, and we are committed to supporting our Ukrainian partners.

QUESTION: Thanks so much. Moving to South Caucasus briefly.

MR PATEL: Sure.

QUESTION: Yesterday, Matt put out a tweet about what was going on in Georgia. A Georgian citizen was killed by —

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: — a Russian – I don’t want to use “occupiers” – terrorist. My question is: The country has been ruled by a party that has been promoting Russian propaganda for a long time. Are you in a position to step in and defend Georgia, should Georgia become a target for Russia?

MR PATEL: Alex, I’m not going to get ahead of anything that happens. That would be incredibly inappropriate. But I will just echo what was in the tweet yesterday, which is that we condemn that killing, and it is another example of the destruction that is ongoing that’s being caused by Russia’s occupation of Georgia’s sovereign territory and elsewhere. And it’s something that we’ll continue to monitor and call out as well.

QUESTION: Thank you. My final question, Armenia-Azerbaijan.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: We were told in September in this building by senior officials that both Azerbaijan and Armenia had agreed to send their officials to Washington for another round of meeting. Now we are – we have seen lately they are engaged in carousel of forum shopping. Is Washington still an option for the next round of the negotiation?

MR PATEL: Of course. Look, Alex, outside of everything that of course is going on in the world that often sometimes takes up a lot of the oxygen in this room, peace between those two countries continues to be a priority for us, for Secretary Blinken, and it’s something that the department will continue to engage towards.

You had your hand up. Then I’ll come back to you, Shaun. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. So two questions regarding China and South Korea, if you don’t mind.

MR PATEL: Sure.

QUESTION: South Korea is a key U.S. security ally, and the State Department has been very clear in raising concerns over China’s human rights practices as well as its economic coercion toward other countries. So the State Department has also, in three different human rights and religious freedom reports, highlighted a particular issue in which the Chinese embassy in South Korea has been using its economic leverage to pressure theaters in South Korea, has tried to block performances by an American company Shen Yun Performing Arts. So it’s an American arts company whose classical Chinese dance shows have been banned in China because they include pieces portraying human rights persecution in China.

So my question is: Does it remain a concern by the State Department that, in such incidents like this, China’s – is using its economic pressure to influence the freedom of expression in an ally country?

MR PATEL: Broadly, I would say it, of course, continues to remain of concern. The PRC has a very clear track record of using economic coercion and otherwise in a wide array of countries, not just necessarily the ROK. But this is, of course, something that we’re going to continue to address in close partnership with the ROK, with Japan, with other countries in the Indo-Pacific as well.

QUESTION: I have a follow-up —

MR PATEL: Sure.

QUESTION: — regarding Secretary Blinken’s trip later this week. So in addition to, of course, talking about countering threats from North Korea, does Secretary Blinken also plan to address countering China’s regional influence in his meeting with South Korean counterparts, and of course, like you said, meeting with other Indo-Pacific partners as well?

MR PATEL: You’ve heard me say this before, or I will say those in this room have heard me say this before – any aspect of our foreign policy, whether it be the Secretary’s current presence at the G7 or his soon-to-be presence in India with Secretary Austin, it is about our foreign policy and the foreign policy of those countries – and in the G7 case, the foreign policy of those member countries. It is not about anything other else. What we have long said, of course, is that we do not ask countries to choose between the United States and the PRC or any other country. It is about offering them a choice and continuing to show what a deepening partnership with the United States can look like.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. Two questions on Georgia.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: Do you have any update about the long-term observation mission to Georgia from the U.S. for 2024 parliamentary elections? That’s going to be the first time we’re going to have the long-term mission. Any updates on that?

MR PATEL: I’m not aware of any specific updates. Obviously, though, in any circumstances around any election, we would want to ensure that they are held freely and fairly and, of course, when applicable, in accordance with OSCE parameters. But I’m happy to check if we have anything more specific.

QUESTION: Thank you. And the second question. For a month, the ruling party of Georgia and the governing members of the Georgian Government claimed that the U.S. is providing funds for coup preparation through USAID. What is your reaction? And more generally, how do you perceive these claims coming from a government that receives millions of dollars annually from the U.S.?

MR PATEL: I think I spoke about this a number of months ago.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR PATEL: And again, the answer is this is absolutely not true. In any country around the world, again, the U.S. does not favor any one political party or the other or one particular government outcome or the other. Again, our goal in any of these circumstances, any of these contexts, is ensuring that there is freedom and fair elections held in accordance with the appropriate standards.

Shaun, you’ve had your hand raised; go ahead.

QUESTION: Can I ask a few around the world? I’ll try to be succinct.

MR PATEL: Sure.

QUESTION: Do you have any readout of the meeting – I know I asked yesterday, but the climate meeting in Sunnylands between John Kerry —

MR PATEL: I don’t – I don’t have a specific readout. I’m happy to check with the special envoy’s team to see if we have any specifics to share.

QUESTION: Sure.

MR PATEL: But I will use this opportunity to again echo – as two of the world’s largest emitters, climate is a unique area in which the United States and the PRC have an opportunity in which their – I won’t say partnership, but their ability to work together can reap benefits for the entire world. And so that’s an area that we’ve long said is an area where we can continue to engage with the PRC on.

QUESTION: Sure. Let me just switch topics, although it also relates to China. Burma/Myanmar, if – do you have any comment on the fighting that’s in the north? The Kachin rebels, China said that one of its – some of its nationals have been wounded in this. Does the U.S. have any statement about – anything to say about the nature of the conflict or whether there are concerns about this —

MR PATEL: I don’t at this moment, Shaun, but I’m happy to check and take back.

QUESTION: Sure. Sure. And finally, could I go back to Ukraine?

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: Do you have anything to say about President Zelenskyy saying this is not the right time for elections? Obviously, it’s already – because of the war there’s the martial law, but what – do you have any comment about his intentions?

MR PATEL: I think it’s important to remember that Ukraine is in this position because Russia continues to wage its full-scale illegal war against Ukraine. Ukraine and its people are fighting for survival.

It’s also important to remember in the context when we talk about elections that nearly 20 percent of Ukraine’s territory is occupied and tens of millions of its citizens are displaced because of Russia’s war, many of them outside of the country as refugees. On top of that, Russia continues to launch daily bombardments of civilian infrastructure across Ukraine. We also have made clear with our Ukrainian partners our commitment to supporting not just Ukraine in its fight but our commitment to support a careful and constitutional approach to keeping democracy strong in wartime.

QUESTION: Okay. Could I just pursue that some – I mean —

MR PATEL: Sure.

QUESTION: But in terms of the actual decision not to go ahead with it in early 2024, is that from your viewpoint – the way you described it, it’s understandable. Do you have any —

MR PATEL: My understanding is that is – this is consistent with their constitution, so we’ll just leave it to the Ukrainians to share anything further on that.

Go ahead. Yeah.

QUESTION: Thank you, Vedant. Pakistan deporting hundred of thousands of Afghan refugees, including those who are waiting for their American visas. According to U.S. Embassy Islamabad, they tried to stop the deportation of 25,000 Afghan workers, but Pakistan rejected that list. You like to say something about that?

MR PATEL: So we join partners in urging all states, including Pakistan, to uphold their respective obligations in their treatment of refugees and asylum seekers and to respect the principle of non-refoulement. We strongly encourage Afghanistan’s neighbors, including Pakistan, to allow entry for Afghans seeking international protection and to coordinate with the appropriate international humanitarian organizations.

QUESTION: Sir, we have seen the rise in violence and terrorist attacks in Pakistan, some of them claimed by TTP, some of them claimed by the newly formed group Tehreek-e-Jihad Pakistan. And in a recent attack at Pakistani air base, Pakistani security forces claimed that they recovered American-made weapons from TTP terrorist left by U.S. in Afghanistan. What kind of CT, counterterrorism, cooperation is going on with Pakistan? What do you want to say about these American-made weapons recovered from the terrorist?

MR PATEL: We are aware of the reports of multiple attacks on Pakistani security forces and facilities earlier in November and we offer our condolences to the families of the victims, but I want to be very clear about this: There was no equipment left behind by American forces during the withdrawal from Afghanistan. I will also add that while large-scale military grant assistance remains suspended, we have partnered with Pakistan for more than 40 years to support law enforcement, rule of law, counternarcotics efforts, and other areas in the security space, and will continue to value our bilateral relationship.

Jalil, if you want to close us out, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Patel. This question, I want to dedicate it to a fellow journalist, a Pashtun journalist who started an English newspaper from Peshawar 40 years ago when the university didn’t even have a journalism department, Mr. Rehmat Shah Afridi.

The Pashtuns, who both in Pakistan and Afghanistan are about 50 million people – since Cold War, then the Taliban rule, then 9/11, it is one ethnicity that has suffered the most, whether it’s their culture, language, moving within the country. State Department takes many initiatives, studies, whether it’s reports – and can the Secretary be kind enough to study how – to study how the Pashtuns’ ethnicity has suffered since last 40 years as part of their culture and everything?

MR PATEL: Well, Jalil, I think it’s important to remember here that in any context as we talk about Afghanistan, the people of Afghanistan, that we have been very clear that our commitment to the people of Afghanistan is enduring. The United States continues to be the single largest humanitarian donor to the people of Afghanistan, and of course within that there is, of course, the Pashtun people, that subgroup. But again, it’s important to keep that in mind.

Daphne, do you have your hand up?

QUESTION: Also, just one more question about —

MR PATEL: All right, then I’ll come to you.

QUESTION: Former prime minister and known corrupt politician as well, Nawaz Sharif, has come back to Pakistan. He has been convicted by supreme court, a big, staunch opponent of Imran Khan. So does the State Department welcome Mr. Nawaz Sharif’s back to Pakistan politics? Anything to say about that?

MR PATEL: As I said just earlier, in any country, we are not supportive of one particular party or government over the other. And in the context of any election, it just continues to be paramount that elections are held in a free and fair manner and reflect the will of the people residing in that country.

Daphne, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you very much.

QUESTION: Thank you. Sorry, just quick for you on Gaza.

MR PATEL: No, you’re good. Yeah.

QUESTION: This meeting in Paris on Thursday to coordinate aid for Gaza – who from the U.S. will attend?

MR PATEL: So I don’t have a full delegation list, but I can share that that delegation will be led and headed by Under Secretary Uzra Zeya from the State Department.

QUESTION: And the possible creation of a maritime corridor is expected to come up, which is an idea that’s been put forward by Cyprus. Did Blinken discuss this in his meeting with the president of Cyprus? And is this an idea that the U.S. supports?

MR PATEL: So what I will just say on the delivery of aids and the various methods, the U.S. particularly, we use a number of methods, including trucks and overland routes, as well as airplanes and helicopters. I will let this convening discuss what options that might exist for a maritime corridor as one of those channels, but I’m just not going to get ahead of that process. We certainly have broadly felt that the provision of aid and any country’s ability to do so to the Palestinian people in Gaza would be a good thing.

All right. Thanks, everybody.

QUESTION: Are you able to say anything about Amos Hochstein’s visit to Lebanon?

MR PATEL: What I can close out with, Michel, is that Senior Advisor to the President Amos Hochstein is in Lebanon today to meet with members of the Lebanese Government to demonstrate the U.S.’s continued support for the Lebanese people. In his meetings, Mr. Hochstein will continue to emphasize the U.S. is not interested in seeing this conflict spread to Lebanon.

All right. Thanks, everybody.

QUESTION: Thank you.

(The briefing was concluded at 1:50 p.m.)

Department Press Briefing – December 5, 2023

Article Index

Department Press Briefing – December 4, 2023

Article Index

Department Press Briefing – November 21, 2023

Article Index

Department Press Briefing – November 16, 2023

Article Index

Department Press Briefing – November 14, 2023

Article Index

Department Press Briefing – November 13, 2023

Article Index

Department Press Briefing – November 9, 2023

Article Index

Department Press Briefing – November 7, 2023

Article Index

U.S. Department of State

The Lessons of 1989: Freedom and Our Future