Department Press Briefing – July 25, 2024
July 25, 2024
1:07 p.m. EDT
MR MILLER: All right. Happy Thursday. I don’t have anything to start, so why don’t we start the questions? Daphne.
QUESTION: Thank you. So Biden and Netanyahu are due to meet. What’s the main message that the U.S. is going to convey in this meeting, and what more does Israel need to do to bring this ceasefire to a reality?
MR MILLER: So I actually think they’re meeting right now, or at least were scheduled to – for a meeting that’s starting right now. The Secretary is there attending that meeting. And I would expect that the primary focus of this will be on the ongoing negotiations to reach a ceasefire deal that would bring home the hostages, including the American hostages who remain held inside Gaza; that would alleviate the suffering of the Palestinian people; that we think would set the conditions for lasting peace and lasting regional stability.
And so I think the message from the American side in that meeting will be that we need to get this deal over the line, that we have been working on this for some time. It’s been a tough negotiation. We’ve made progress; we’ve gotten a framework agreement. And we now need to bridge the final differences and get a deal and get a deal in place so we can all move forward.
QUESTION: And what more do you need to see from Israel, and what more do you need to see from Hamas to get this over the finish line?
MR MILLER: So I don’t want to negotiate in public. But we did get a – I think it was a significant breakthrough that we got an agreement on the framework that the President laid out. Obviously, there were pieces of that framework that we had been negotiating for months and that we had been pushing for agreement on for months. But there are still some remaining issues. Some of those – we haven’t ever talked about them publicly, I don’t believe, but some of those have been reported publicly – that have remained sticking points. But we do believe there are practical solutions that we have put on the table, that the other mediators have put on the table, that would bridge the divide between the two parties.
And so what we need to see is for an agreement to be reached. And that means both sides coming to the table in good faith and being willing to reach an agreement. And we think we can get there, but there’s more work to do.
QUESTION: And what was your take on Netanyahu’s speech to Congress yesterday? Did it leave you with any concerns about his willingness to reach a deal?
MR MILLER: I don’t have any overall take on his speech. Obviously, we’d heard – many of the things that he said publicly yesterday, we’ve heard him say before in press conferences. And having been to the region with the Secretary eight times, I have heard – many of the things that he said publicly, I’ve heard him say privately in meetings that we have held with him.
But no, there was nothing in the speech that made us any more or less concerned about our chances to reach a ceasefire deal. Israel has continued to commit to us that they want to reach a ceasefire, and they have continued to join negotiations with the U.S., with Egypt, with Qatar to try to reach an agreement. And as always, we’re going to judge them by the actions that they take, not necessarily what they say in public.
QUESTION: Okay. And then the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff today said he has still not been able to see much from Israel about its day-after planning once the war with Hamas ends, saying there’s not a lot of detail he’s been able to see from a plan from them. What’s the latest on this, and are you satisfied with the pace at which the Israelis are putting this plan together?
MR MILLER: So that’s accurate. They have not put forward a great deal of detail about plans for the day after. But we have been having conversations with them about this, and they are in a different place than they were several months ago when they hadn’t really thought about a day after at all. And you heard the Secretary talk about the dangers of Israel not planning for a day after and what it would mean for the future of Gaza, and what a security threat it would pose to the state of Israel and the people of Israel.
Since then, we have been engaged in conversations with them, as well as with our Arab partners. There are ideas that we have put forward. There are ideas that our Arab partners have put forward. And there have been some ideas that Israel has put forward – not fully developed yet, not fully to the place where I think you could call them a proposal, but we are at the point where we’re talking with them and they’re putting forward some ideas. And it is important that they take the matter seriously, just as it’s important everyone take the matter seriously.
Because as you have heard the Secretary say, in the absence of realistic plans for the day after the conflict, you will either have Israel occupying Gaza, which we reject, they have said they don’t want to do; you will have Hamas in charge, which obviously is not in the interest of Israel and clearly is also not in the interest of the region; or you’ll have chaos and anarchy, which is a breeding ground for terrorism, will hurt the interests of the Palestinian people in Gaza, make it harder for them to get food and water and civilian assistance, and really is not in anyone’s interest.
So we’re going to continue to push them to engage seriously on these plans, because they’re critical not just to the future of the Palestinian people, but to the future of Israel as well.
QUESTION: Okay. A last one – sorry. What should we expect in terms of meetings over the next week to try and reach the ceasefire deal?
MR MILLER: So I don’t want to preview any specific meetings. Obviously, the one happening today is important. It’s important that the leaders of our two countries engage on it. It’s always important when negotiators get in a room too, but it takes political consensus as well. And so oftentimes when you see the Secretary in the region pushing for a ceasefire deal, there’s work that’s going on at a working level to try and hammer out through the details. But the Secretary is there pushing for political will and political agreement and political courage to move forward by parties to a deal. And I think that’s the same thing you will see the President doing in the meeting today.
QUESTION: Thank you.
MR MILLER: Yeah.
QUESTION: Thanks, Matt. Just to understand a little bit more in terms of this meeting today, this is not an opportunity for the Israeli prime minister to push any new demands? Is that correct?
MR MILLER: Oh, so I’m not going to speak for the prime minister. Obviously, I have made clear what we think will be the primary subject of the meeting. It won’t be the only subject, obviously. I’m sure that they will cover humanitarian assistance; they will cover the threat from Iran; they will cover stability in the region. There are any number of things that they will discuss. But that’s the primary objective from our standpoint, but both sides get to talk in a meeting, so I’m sure that the prime minister will have his own points of view to make clear as well.
QUESTION: Okay. Well, just asking that in the context of these Israeli negotiators pushing back their trip to do in-person talks, and whether that was related to the timing of Netanyahu’s meeting with Biden.
But on the – just pivoting to his address to Congress, I mean, you mentioned that he didn’t say anything that would affect hostage ceasefire talks, but he did say some pretty derogatory things about U.S. protesters. Having mentioned that this is a citadel of democracy, the United States, and then to call American protesters “Tehran’s useful idiots,” and also to cite U.S. intelligence saying that Iran had financed protesters – that is something that has been said, but we don’t know the full extent of that. Do you have anything to say in response to the Israeli prime minister labeling American protesters in that way, given that this is a substantial part of the voting population in this country?
MR MILLER: Yeah. Let me just speak about protests in general, including the protests that we saw in Washington yesterday, including the statement that the Director of National Intelligence released I think it was two weeks ago now.
So first of all, with respect to her statement, she made very clear in releasing it that the United States, this administration, strongly support the right to protest the actions that our government takes, and that we have seen Iranian support for protests, but that we understand that the vast majority of protesters in America are not taking their orders from Iran and that most of the people who might have received support from Iran wouldn’t even know that that’s where it was coming from. So I think we ought to just be very clear about the facts that the Director of National Intelligence made public in that statement she released.
On the overall issue of protests, so look, as I said, this administration – the United States and this administration in particular – strongly supports the right of any American to protest. People questioning our government, speaking up, speaking out about the policy choices that we have made – it’s part of the healthy democratic process. It actually strengthens the fabric of this nation.
But at the same time, something is seriously wrong when you see people marching through the streets of Washington carrying Hamas banners, literal Hamas banners, carrying the Hamas flag down the streets of Washington, D.C. When you see people spray-painting on fountains in Washington that Hamas is coming; when you see them displaying signs calling for the death of Jews; when you see them burning American flags – it’s despicable. It’s hateful. It runs contrary to the values of this country, I think especially when you consider what that flag that we saw being burned yesterday stands for. And one of the things that it stands for is the right to protest, the right to make your views known, make them known peacefully. It’s one of the things that makes this country what it is and what it has been for almost 250 years.
So anyone – I would say to anyone that is burning an American flag while spray-painting pro-Hamas graffiti in Washington to stop and think for a moment about what would happen if they were protesting Hamas’s rule in Gaza. And it’s not a question that you have to look very hard for an answer, because we know. Because we’ve seen in the past when people have protested in Hamas’s rule in Gaza, we’ve seen how Hamas has responded. They responded with brutal crackdowns, with arrests, with violent repression.
Fortunately, that is not who we are in this country. That is not who we are going to be in this country. We stand by, as I said, the right to protest, the right to dissent, and I know that the vast majority of people who were on the streets of Washington yesterday were patriotic Americans who were making their views known, even if they disagree with the choices that their elected officials make and the choices that we make, and we support their right to do so. But for those who were out yesterday showing support for Hamas, I would ask them to just think very hard about the choices they are making and who they are really supporting. Because it is not peace, it’s not democracy, and it is certainly not the values that we share as Americans.
QUESTION: Okay. And just one more – sorry.
MR MILLER: Yeah. Go ahead.
QUESTION: Can I – just on his address as well, he had mentioned that Israel has gone to extraordinary efforts to drop leaflets, to make phone calls in Gaza, and also he cited a West Point expert saying that this is – he said in the entire history of wars that Israel has done more to make sure that they don’t hurt civilians. And do you have any comment on some of the things that he said when you look at the conclusions of the NSM report, which did question whether Israel is – has been able to be compliant with international law, that there is still concern that it hasn’t, and that when it comes to things like leafletting, that perhaps more could have been done?
MR MILLER: Yeah.
QUESTION: I mean, you stand by the conclusions of that —
MR MILLER: We do. So look —
QUESTION: Or the response to his remarks?
MR MILLER: Yeah. So we do stand by the conclusions of that report. It is certainly accurate that Israel has taken steps to minimize civilian harm. The prime minister went through them yesterday. There have been others that he didn’t detail but that we’ve heard them speak to in the past and that they’ve briefed us on in the past. But it is also true that thousands upon thousands of innocent civilians have died as a result of this military campaign.
Obviously, we all recognize – we’ve talked about it in this briefing room a number of times – about the really difficult task that Israel faces when you have Hamas hiding behind civilians, making them human shields. But at the same time, we still believe that Israel needs to do more to minimize civilian causalities. That includes in Rafah. That includes in the campaigns that they are conducting now in Khan Younis. There are innocent civilians who are in harm’s way, who had nothing to do with the decision by Hamas to start this war, and probably want to see it end immediately. And Israel needs to take great care to minimize harm to those innocent civilians, because they are in a conflict that they did not start, they did not make, and I suspect in many cases want to end.
QUESTION: Day after?
MR MILLER: Said, go ahead.
QUESTION: Thank you. Thank you, Matt. Just taking your response to Camilla on the protests and so on – I mean, as despicable as the burning of the flag, the American flag, is – and it is a despicable act – but it has – it was done during the anti-war movement against Vietnam, it was done to protest the war on Iraq and so on, and many other times. But what you said – you said this – they have the right to do that.
MR MILLER: Correct.
QUESTION: And that’s really what makes this country different than any other place.
MR MILLER: Correct.
QUESTION: So – and you talked about the patriotism of those people who are protesting. And here’s my question: Is it appropriate for a foreign leader to come and speak from the Congress, to the raucous applause of those present, about calling those Americans “useful idiots” of an animus foreign power and basically questioning their patriotism and so on? Is it appropriate of him to do that?
MR MILLER: So I am not going to make assessments about what the prime minister said or what he believes.
QUESTION: Right.
MR MILLER: I will speak on behalf of the United States, and I just gave you our views about protests and how we see the connection between protests and the attempts by the Iranian Government to influence those protests. And I will let the prime minister speak for himself.
QUESTION: Well, do we have any information that Iran has actually financed these protests in any way, shape, or form?
MR MILLER: We do. We do. We made that – we made that public and the statement that they had supported – but now, again, when I say these protests, I’m not speaking to any one specific protest. And as the director of national intelligence made clear, the vast majority of protesters have nothing – nothing – to do with Iranian influence. That is an important factual thing. But yes, we do have evidence that Iran is supporting the protests.
QUESTION: And that they actually financed some of these protests?
MR MILLER: Correct. Correct.
QUESTION: Okay. All right, let me just move on then. I have a couple of other things to ask about. Now, I know you mentioned the – about the loss of life in Gaza and so on. But a new report that’s really – it’s just staggering – by Airwars, and it talks about how accurate the figures that are being announced by the ministry of health in Gaza. And these are horrific figures. I mean, everybody talks about the day after, but really the day now, I mean, the present day, is a horrific day. I mean, we’re talking about a place that is being subjected to war where 80 percent of that space has been destroyed, where a huge number of people have been killed and so on. I mean, you look at it in those kind of percentages and so on, it really is staggering. And I – I mean, how can we go forward looking at this carnage and this – going day in and day out without feeling a sense of urgency to basically say this is the time to end it?
MR MILLER: So a few things. One, with respect to the numbers themselves, you’ve heard us speak to these before, that I think the term I used – I think they’re probably directionally accurate, which is not to say they’re accurate down to the precise number or what percentage they’re off by. And that is due to a number of things.
Number one, the way in which the numbers are being assessed has changed over time, where they’re no longer releasing the names, which they were, I think, in the first month or two or three, of those who were killed. Second thing is that some percentage of that number – and I think that’s unknowable – some percentage of the number that’s released are not civilians, are militants, right? And we don’t know the exact number. But then it’s also true that there are probably, almost certainly, a number of innocent civilians who are buried under rubble who remain unaccounted for who aren’t included in that number. So what the actual number is, I think we don’t know, but it is far, far too high.
So when you ask the – there’s something you said in the lead-up to the question is how do we – where do we go from here? And I think the – what we would say – one of the difficult things that this region has faced for so long is there has been such tremendous loss on both sides of this conflict – obviously thousands of Palestinians killed in the war in Gaza; 1,200 Israelis who were killed on October 7th. And I would say the question that we would put to both the state of Israel and to leaders in the Palestinian community is: Where we go from here ought to be something different, and how do we get there? And the way to get there is to stop the dehumanization on both sides of people who don’t look like them, don’t believe the same thing as them, don’t have the same views, and try to see each other as humans, and try to reach political solutions that will break this conflict of violence.
And so what we’re trying to do as an immediate step to get to do that – and when I say try to do I mean literally right now in a meeting between the president and the prime minister – is to get a ceasefire agreement that would start to build a foundation to get us out of this mess.
QUESTION: Now, my last question regarding the number of UN workers that have been killed – about 366 – and my question pertains to the day after in terms of aid and so on and aid workers and organizations and so on. Would you – do you think this is discouraging for organizations to go in in Gaza and do their work in the future?
MR MILLER: Yeah, of course it is. Of course every person who’s thinking about signing up to be an aid worker, signing up to deliver humanitarian assistance, signing up to – if you’re a doctor or a nurse to provide medical assistance inside Gaza, of course they can’t help, I’m sure, but think about the personal risk that they put themselves under. It’s why it’s so remarkable that so many people, despite those risks, continue to go do it every day. And it speaks to the enormous courage that they show in putting their lives potentially on the line to help other people.
You’ve heard the Secretary say that the remarkable thing about humanitarian workers is that not just in this conflict, but all around the world, they run to the conflict. When times when other people are, for very good reason, running away, they run to it and they try to help other people. And it just highlights the need to, while the conflict’s ongoing, do everything we can to protect humanitarian workers, and we work on that every day, but then ultimately, as I’ve said, to get a ceasefire.
QUESTION: On day after topic?
MR MILLER: Yeah, go ahead.
QUESTION: Yeah. So on Tuesday you were asked about the Beijing declaration. Has the U.S. get a chance to review the text, and has the United States spoken to Abbas directly regarding the declaration? And the declaration mentioned unity under the framework of PLO. What is the U.S. perspective to bring Hamas under the umbrella of PLO? Thank you.
MR MILLER: So a few things. We have of course seen the declaration now, which we hadn’t when I spoke to this Monday or Tuesday, whenever it was. I would say a few things about it. Just in terms of the context, it’s important to remember that Fatah and Hamas have signed a number of previous declarations similar to this that ultimately have gone nowhere, so we’ll wait to see what this ultimately means. But I think that’s important context for everyone to remember.
But when it comes to the question about the PLO, I think the important thing is that nowhere in this declaration did Hamas agree to the principles of the PLO. Nowhere either this in declaration or anywhere else have they renounced violence, have they renounced the destruction of the state of Israel, have they renounced terrorism, and have they committed to nonviolent political means to try to achieve the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people.
So I think that tells you a lot about their continued motives, as does the fact that they continue to launch terrorist attacks against the state of Israel as recently as the last few weeks. Launching rockets tells you about their true political motives.
QUESTION: Is this agreement reached in the – in China similar to – any similarity to the 2022 Algeria-brokered deal?
MR MILLER: So I am not going to look at the – I can’t tell you the exact text is the same as the exact text of that agreement, but there have been a number of agreements signed, not just that one but going back all the way to 2010, 2011, where you’ve seen Hamas and Fatah sign similar so-called reconciliation agreements that ultimately have proven not to be worth the paper that they are written on. The paper on which they’re written. I hate when people finish a sentence in a preposition, and I just did it.
Go ahead, Guita.
QUESTION: Thanks, Matt. The Islamic Republic of Iran has gone on another execution spree and in the past month has executed a number of people. Isn’t the State Department in default of the MAHSA Act, based on which you were supposed to designate some senior leadership of the Islamic Republic for violation of human rights?
MR MILLER: So we are actively implementing the law as passed Congress and signed by the President. We do continue to enforce all of our sanctions on Israel – or sorry, on Iran, a number of which we have imposed for violations of human rights. And in terms of that specific law and the report that it calls for, we are actively working on the report and will submit it to Congress as soon as it’s done. I would just note kind of as a side note that Congress does mandate a lot of reports for us to prepare, and never when they mandate those reports do they provide us additional appropriations to fund the writing of said reports. But we are working on it and we will have it up to them as soon as we have it completed.
QUESTION: Well, for this purpose you don’t have to look very far. The individuals are out there. You don’t have to dig too deep.
MR MILLER: So all I will say is that we continue to work on implementing the law and providing that report.
QUESTION: And another one also relating to sanctions, since you also mentioned it. According to the head of Iran’s atomic energy agency, they have been exporting or selling heavy water and radiopharmaceuticals on the global market for a while now, nuclear services and goods. Isn’t that in violation of sanctions?
MR MILLER: So I will have to take that back. I just don’t want to – I don’t want to make a legal sanctions violation judgment from here about what does and doesn’t violate the sanctions. Obviously, you’ve heard us say before we have imposed over 600 sanctions and export controls. But with respect to any specific violation, let me take that back and look at it and get you an answer.
QUESTION: Okay, thanks.
MR MILLER: Yeah, Shannon.
QUESTION: Thank you. Can I ask about the Russian and Chinese war planes that were intercepted off the coast of Alaska? From your perspective, the diplomatic perspective, is it concerning to see this kind of cooperation, and has there been any kind of communication with your Russian or Chinese counterparts?
MR MILLER: So a few things about that. Number one, with respect to military cooperation between China and Russia, we have said for some time that we’re concerned about the relationship between the two countries. We’re concerned about the way that China continues to fuel Russia’s war against Ukraine by Chinese companies taking steps to rebuild their defense industrial base.
When it comes to this specific action, I believe off the coast of Alaska, I will defer to the Pentagon to comment on the details of it, but we did not assess that in any way it’s a threat to the security of the United States.
QUESTION: And I know you can’t preview any actions, but especially with China supporting Russia’s war in Ukraine, the Secretary of Defense said – replied that they’re just going to watch and see what happens between those two countries. But is there any kind of consideration at the State Department for further actions?
MR MILLER: There are a number of things that are under consideration. I will note that we have already imposed over 300 sanctions and export controls on Chinese entities for their support to Russia for the war against Ukraine. We will not hesitate to impose additional measures as necessary. And it’s important to remember that this is not just an issue that concerns the United States and it’s certainly not an issue that just impacts the United States. It’s a threat to European security, and so we have also been in conversations with our European partners about what actions they might take. And of course, they can speak to those.
Go ahead.
QUESTION: Thank you. Back to Netanyahu’s speech yesterday, following up on Said’s question on a foreign leader of a country who was speaking in front of American Congress criticizing American protesters who are mostly using their freedom of assembly. Do you consider this as an interference in U.S. domestic affairs?
MR MILLER: No, it’s not an – it’s certainly not – I wouldn’t call it interference in domestic affairs. The prime minister has the – look, he was invited by Congress. He has the right to come and speak his mind, say what he thinks. But by the same token, we have the right to speak ours, and we’ll do that.
QUESTION: But what was your reaction when you heard when he said this at the American Congress?
MR MILLER: So I am going to – as I’ve always kind of made a rule not to just reply to specific things that the prime minister says, ultimately, when we have concerns with him, we often take it up with him privately. But as I said, he is free to say what he wants about protests, and we will say what we believe. And I made clear what the United States believes about protests, which is that every American has the right to peacefully exercise their First Amendment rights. We think it makes our country stronger. At the same time, we do condemn acts of hatred, acts of antisemitism, some of which we saw yesterday.
QUESTION: Just a quick one more on that. On the international side of things, many people around the world were outraged by what we have seen yesterday: Netanyahu, who is accused of war crimes and genocide by international corps, spoke before the U.S. Congress and received more than 70 applause from U.S. congressmembers. Are you aware of this and have any countries expressed concern about this?
MR MILLER: So I would say that most, if not all, of the countries that we deal with are quite familiar with the separation of powers in the United States, understand that Congress is an independent branch and that this invitation was issued by Congress, not by the President or the Executive Branch.
Yeah. Go ahead, Michel.
QUESTION: Two questions. First, personally, do you expect a ceasefire agreement soon?
MR MILLER: I don’t want to put any kind of timetable on it, as I’ve been reluctant to do really since the outset of these discussions.
QUESTION: Second, UAE is more open now on discussing sending troops to Gaza. Do you have an agreement with them and other Arab states to send troops?
MR MILLER: So the question of how we ensure security in Gaza at the end of a conflict is something that we have been actively discussing with our Arab partners. The Secretary has made this clear during his travels in the region. It has been one of the leading topics of discussion when we’ve traveled around, and it’s been one of the leading topics of discussion especially with this core Quint group that the Secretary assembled: Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar.
We don’t have any specific agreements yet on how security would be established, but we have been putting proposals forward; our Arab partners have been putting proposals forward. We’ve been talking through what various countries might or might not be willing to do, what they would need from other parties to secure their agreement to participate, and those are ongoing conversations.
QUESTION: And who are the other countries who are ready to send troops other than —
MR MILLER: So I didn’t stipulate that any one country was ready to send troops. That was a stipulation of your question, not something I said from here. And I’m certainly not going to speak for any country at all in the region. (Laughter.)
QUESTION: Thank you.
MR MILLER: Yeah.
QUESTION: So, thank you. Going back to Netanyahu’s speech to Congress actually, so prime minister said specifically with regards to Rafah, and I quote, “practically” no civilians killed in Rafah, and it got actually a standing ovation from U.S. Congress. And you here – I know it’s different branches, State Department and Congress – and you here acknowledging thousands of civilians, innocent civilians were killed by this – as a result of this military campaign.
So I’m wondering, do you think your statements here and that Congress’s reaction to Netanyahu’s remarks – and it was a false claim, verifiable by various respectable news organizations, including ones in the United States – sending maybe conflicting messages to the rest of the world with regards to what U.S. really wants —
MR MILLER: So —
QUESTION: — and how it approaches to this conflict?
MR MILLER: So again, we don’t speak for Congress —
QUESTION: Yeah.
MR MILLER: — and Congress doesn’t speak for us. And I hope most people around the world would understand that and understand that we are a big democracy with people with a host of different views, from all sides of the political spectrum. There are people inside the Congress, including people who were at the speech today, who strenuously support everything that Israel has done. And there are other members of Congress, including some who were making their views known in the chamber, who strenuously oppose things that Israel does. That’s what part – that’s part of what being in a democracy does.
I speak on behalf of the Executive Branch, and I’ll continue to make our views known on policy matters. I’ll continue to make our views known about the facts of what has happened in Gaza and where we ought to go from here.
When it comes to civilian casualties in Rafah, of course there have been civilian casualties in Rafah. We have all seen verified reports of civilian casualties during the conflict there. Now, one thing that is true: The number of civilian casualties in the Rafah campaign is significantly lower than the number of human casualties in the campaign in Gaza City and in the campaign in Khan Younis. We think that’s for a number of reasons. One of the reasons is that a number of people in Rafah evacuated sooner, or early in the campaign, before the campaign really began in earnest. Another of the reasons we think is that we were pushing Israel to execute a more limited campaign than what they did in Gaza City and what they did in Khan Younis, and they ultimately did that. But of course there were still civilians that died in Rafah, and every civilian death is a tragedy.
QUESTION: And I understand you are speaking on behalf of the United States, so should I –then you are saying you are a big democracy and different branches. So Congress’s reaction to Netanyahu’s speech, doesn’t that represent what United States want with regards to what Israel wants in that conflict?
MR MILLER: So there are 535 members of Congress. They don’t all have the same view. And each one of them has a vote and has a voice in what Congress does, and some of them share the views of the administration, some of them don’t, to put matters lightly. And they come – they have all sorts of different views. So people, I think, when making assessments about what the United States believes, they’ve got to look at – when you make – you want to make an assessment about what the Executive Branch believes, you can look at what the President says, the Secretary says, and what I say. You want to look to what Congress believes, you have to look at what they say, but ultimately how they vote.
QUESTION: Thank you, because I wanted to ask because Turkish foreign minister just harshly criticized the U.S. Congress’s reaction to Netanyahu. I wonder – since the ceasefire talks are ongoing, I wonder whether do you find those maybe false claims made by Netanyahu towards Congress somehow troubling with regards to ceasefire talks?
MR MILLER: I don’t assess that anything the prime minister said yesterday is going to have an impact on the ceasefire talks one way or the other.
QUESTION: Thank you.
MR MILLER: Alex, go ahead.
QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. Several topics, but before that, let me follow up on the MAHSA Act which you just said, which is about sanctioning Iranian leadership for gross human rights violations. The other day, in response to Michel’s question, in fact – different occasion – you said that you believe Iranian supreme leader is in charge of decision-making process. Do you have any doubt in your mind that Iranian leaders are not – are responsible for the killing of Mahsa and others?
MR MILLER: So obviously the Government of Iran is responsible for all the actions that the regime takes.
QUESTION: Then why is the U.S. Government – is so reluctant to impose human rights sanctions on Iranian supreme leader?
MR MILLER: (Laughter.) Alex, I love the – we have often – you and I have often tangled over this question when – we’ve talked about it in the context of Russia, where you will often seize on one particular action that you wish that the United States would take and ignore the vast sea of other actions that we have taken.
When it comes to Iran, we have imposed over 600 sanctions and export controls for Iran’s behavior across a wide range of areas, including their support for terrorism, including their hostile actions to their neighbors, and of course including for their brutal crackdown on human rights at home. And I think you can expect to see us continue to take those actions, but as you’ve also heard me say before, I’m never going to engage with you on one specific proposed sanction, because we don’t preview those in advance for I think very good reasons.
QUESTION: I mean, it’s not me, it’s the law of the land. The U.S. Congress is asking the U.S. Government to take this action.
Moving to Russia and Ukraine, so Romania has confirmed that more Russian drones showed up in its airspace – three Shaheds only from last night. Does this require decisive action or response from NATO?
MR MILLER: So I’m not going to speak to that matter, only because there is still an ongoing investigation into what exactly happened and how it might happen – how it might have happened, and I think it’s not appropriate for me to comment on it in advance. But obviously we fully support all of our NATO Allies. The President has made that clear from the outset of this conflict and from the outset of the administration.
QUESTION: Is there any discussion going behind the scene between allies —
MR MILLER: I’m never going to talk about private diplomatic discussions.
QUESTION: So Armenia-Azerbaijan —
MR MILLER: One – Alex, I’m going to move on, only because I’ve got to leave in nine —
QUESTION: One last topic.
MR MILLER: I have to leave in nine minutes. I see a number of people that have their hands up. Go ahead.
QUESTION: Thank you so much. On student visas and Iranian – schools are opening very soon, and there are so many Iranian students still waiting for their visas and clearances. Do you have any plans, any initiatives to expedite the process for these students?
MR MILLER: So let me just say that every year we welcome thousands of Iranian students to college campuses and universities. We have very strong disagreements with the leadership in Tehran, but we have no quarrel with the Iranian people, who are the victims of repression and victims of brutal tactics by the Iranian regime.
Let me just say there were – just as a factual matter, there were 10,000 Iranian students who studied in the United States during the last academic year, up 16 percent from the year before, all of whom we granted visas to to come and study in the United States. We do expect those numbers to increase over time, but as I’ve said before when I’m asked about similar matters – I think from Guita, actually – I can’t speak to the specifics of any one visa case or really any category of visa cases other than to say that every visa decision we make is a national security decision. Every prospective traveler has to go through —
(Cell phone interruption.)
MR MILLER: It wasn’t Said this time. Somebody’s just playing their Google directions to get the hell out of here. (Laughter.) I don’t know who that is.
Every visa applicant has to undergo extensive security screening. We take that incredibly seriously. We go through a thorough process before granting visas to individual, but we think it’s important to grant those visas as expeditiously as possible. And I think that’s been shown by the fact that we have granted so many visas to Iranian students, a number that has increased, as I said, from the – two years ago to the previous year and we expect to continue to increase.
QUESTION: But the State Department is precisely in charge of this. You don’t have any plans specifically for Iranian students so that they won’t miss the deadlines?
MR MILLER: So as I just said, we have already seen the – let me say it a different way. The proof ultimately – I know you all – we always get anecdotal cases that are put forward to us often in this briefing room, but the proof ultimately of how we’re doing when it comes to looking at any matter can be in the data, and when you look at the data here it shows that the number of students who have received visas from Iran has increased, and we expect it to continue to increase.
Now, of course, that doesn’t mean that every visa gets approved, and it certainly doesn’t mean that every visa gets approved quickly, because sometimes there are just harder questions that we have to answer in doing our screening. But we do try to go through it as quickly as possible so we can get those visas approved.
Yeah. Yeah.
QUESTION: Moving along, separate topic on journalist Alsu Kuramsheva. Has her conviction – conviction brought the State Department closer to designating her as wrongly detained? And do you think that designation would have made her conviction less likely?
MR MILLER: So first of all, it just has not been our experience in watching what Russia does that a wrongful determination – I’m sorry, a wrongful detention determination has any impact on the decisions that they make to charge and ultimately convict people. That’s to answer the second part of the question.
With respect to the determination itself, all I can say is that’s a decision that – or it’s a determination that remains ongoing inside the State Department, but that this is a case that we take incredibly seriously. The Secretary himself is engaged on this case and takes it incredibly seriously, and we want to see her released.
QUESTION: And the second question, quickly: With President Biden saying that he’s not seeking re-election and with the two campaigns to replace him that seem to have different worldviews, how much should the United States be worried that its international adversaries are taking advantage of the perceived weakness between now and January?
MR MILLER: So I would certainly, just as a message to any of those adversaries, that if they at all are trying – thinking of taking advantage of the upcoming political transition in the United States, which is still six months away, they should think again and they should think – they should be disabused of the notion that we are anything but focused on the national security challenges that the country faces, and that includes responding to our adversaries when appropriate.
The President has made incredibly clear to the Secretary and the rest of the national security team that he expects them to be focused for this next six months, that he expects them to advance the foreign policy objectives that he laid out from the outset of the administration and that we have put into place over the course of the last three and a half years. He wants them to continue to try to advance those objectives over the next six months, and that he doesn’t want anyone to take their eye off the ball at all. And I can guarantee you that we will not.
Yeah.
QUESTION: On Sudan, the RSF has said that they’ll participate in the talks in Switzerland in August. Have you gotten any response from the SAF?
MR MILLER: I do not have any update. As far as I’m aware, we have not yet gotten a response from the SAF.
Go ahead.
QUESTION: Thank you very much. One on Ukraine and one on Russia. The Ukrainian parliament is preparing to consider a bill prohibiting the Ukrainian Orthodox Church in August. Are you aware of the bill and do you have any comments?
MR MILLER: I don’t have any comment on the bill, no.
QUESTION: And my second question is about the Arctic – the new Arctic Strategy unveiled on Monday by the Pentagon. Deputy Secretary of Defense Kathleen Hicks said that Russia asserts excessive claims in the Arctic. Do you agree with this assessment and can you explain maybe why is – are they excessive?
MR MILLER: So I would – when it comes to an assessment made by the Pentagon, for any kind of detailed questions about that assessment, I would defer you to the Pentagon, who also holds a daily press briefing, or a press briefing several times a week, to question in detail. But of course we agree with the assessment made by the Pentagon.
With that, I’m going to wrap for questions because I do have a plane to catch. But before I go, I just wanted to note that next week is the last week of our director of Press Operations, Jennifer Williams . I’m not going to be here next week to note it because I’m going to be traveling with the Secretary, but I know all of you in the room have gotten to know her and seen what a great service she provides to the department and to her country. (Applause.) Agreed. Truly one of the best public servants I have worked with in my time in government, a real credit to her profession and a real credit to the department, and I’m going to miss working with you very much, but I certainly wish you well in your next assignment. I know you will continue to make us all proud. So thank you.
QUESTION: Hear, hear.
MR MILLER: With that, thanks, everyone. (Applause.)
(The briefing was concluded at 1:49 p.m.)
No comments:
Post a Comment