U.S. Department Press Briefing – September 4, 2024 September 4, 2024 2:06 p.m. EDT

 Department Press Briefing – September 4, 2024

September 4, 2024

2:06 p.m. EDT

MR MILLER: Good afternoon, everyone, and sorry to be late. I’ll just start with a couple of announcements before we take questions.

The United States has long known that Moscow utilizes a vast collection of tools, including malign influence campaigns and cyber activities, to undermine the interests of the United States, our democratic institutions, and those of our allies.

We’ve seen them do that over many years both here and abroad.

And today, in concert with the Department of Justice and the Department of Justice and the Department of Treasury, we are revealing the latest actions by the Kremlin to attempt to undermine our democratic institutions.

According to information made public today by the Department of Justice, we now know that RT, formerly known as Russia Today, has moved beyond being simply a media organization. We know that RT has contracted with a private company to pay unwitting Americans millions of dollars to carry the Kremlin’s message to influence the U.S. elections and undermine democracy. RT’s leadership has created and directed this enterprise.

Because of this development, the Department of State is taking three concrete actions today to protect the integrity of our democratic institutions.

First, we are announcing a new policy to restrict visa issuance to certain individuals who, acting on behalf of Kremlin-supported media organizations, use those organizations as cover for covert activities, and are responsible for or complicit in these malign efforts. Consistent with U.S. law, visa information is confidential, and the department is not at liberty to name these specific individuals.

Second, the department has designated the operational presence of Rossiya Segodnya and its subsidiaries – RIA Novosti, TV-Novosti, Ruptly, and Sputnik – as foreign missions, as they are effectively controlled by the Government of the Russian Federation. As Foreign Missions Act-designated entities, they will be required to notify the department of all personnel working in the United States and disclose all real property they hold.

Finally, the department is announcing a Rewards for Justice offer to seek information on potential foreign efforts to interfere in U.S. elections, including by organizations such as RaHDit – also known as Russian Angry Hackers Did It – which has previously engaged in covert election interference, influence abroad, and poses a threat to the 2024 U.S. elections.

These actions are in addition to law enforcement actions announced today by the Department of Justice and new sanctions imposed by the Department of Treasury.

As Secretary Blinken said in a statement released just moments ago, foreign governments should know that we will not tolerate foreign malign actors intentionally interfering and undermining free and fair elections. The United States will continue to both expose these state-sponsored actors who attempt to undermine our democratic institutions and hold them accountable for those actions.

Turning to travel, Secretary of State Blinken will travel to Haiti and the Dominican Republic tomorrow and Friday. In Haiti, the Secretary will meet with Transitional Presidential Council Coordinator Edgard Leblanc Fils and Prime Minister Garry Conille to discuss forthcoming steps in Haiti’s democratic transition and U.S. support to the Haitian people through humanitarian assistance and Haitian-led stabilization efforts.

He will also meet with the leadership of the Multinational Security Support mission, emphasizing U.S. support to reestablish security in Haiti, while also underscoring the significance of promoting respect for human rights.

From Haiti, Secretary Blinken will travel to the Dominican Republic to meet with President Luis Abinader. In Santo Domingo, the Secretary and President Abinader will reinforce our close and longstanding partnership, and discuss collaboration to advance inclusive economic growth, champion human rights, and promote good governance, security, and climate resilience in the region, including through the U.S.-Caribbean Partnership to Address the Climate Crisis and Caribbean Basin Security Initiative.

With that, Matt.

QUESTION: Right. Let’s – I’ve got a bunch of different things, none of which will take a lot of time, I don’t think. But I’ll start with the Russia stuff. What was the name of this – Russian Angry Hackers Did It?

MR MILLER: Yeah, RaHDit, I believe is the acronym. It’s a group of hackers who have attempted to undermine democratic governance both here and abroad, and so we have a Rewards for Justice —

QUESTION: Well, they weren’t very tricky —

MR MILLER: — offer seeking more —

QUESTION: — about concealing their identity, were they?

MR MILLER: It’s not – it’s not the most covert name, correct. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: I mean, doesn’t that give you some pause? I mean, I’m not suggesting that the group doesn’t exist or that they stupidly —

MR MILLER: They —

QUESTION: — identified themselves —

MR MILLER: They very – they very much exist, but identified – the point of our – the Rewards for Justice offer is identifying the name of the group and identifying those individuals who are involved in it and actions they might take are a different thing. And so we are offering this reward for anyone who can bring forth information —

QUESTION: All right.

MR MILLER: — and I should make clear – either about their activities or the activities of other similarly situated organizations attempting to undermine our democratic institutions.

QUESTION: All right. Then – and then I realize that visa information is confidential, but I mean, can you give us some idea of how many people?

MR MILLER: I can’t —

QUESTION: Is this —

MR MILLER: — unfortunately. They are confidential and I can’t give you a number.

QUESTION: Right. Yeah. Well, what’s not confidential in the visa is the number of people —

MR MILLER: Number – and I don’t have a number to announce today.

QUESTION: Well, is it dozens? Is it a handful?

MR MILLER: I just – I —

QUESTION: Is it one? Is it more than one?

MR MILLER: I just don’t have a number to announce. But I would note – I do want to note with respect to the visa action that we have taken today, that it is one step the State Department has taken, but all of this should be looked at as one of a number of steps the Untied States Government has taken. So the visa actions are taken in concert with the sanctions imposed by Department of Treasury, and of course, the law enforcement —

QUESTION: Right.

MR MILLER: — announcement the Attorney General made just a half hour or so ago.

QUESTION: But in terms of the visa restrictions that you’ve announced, you do realize it’s really impossible for us to know what the scope and scale of this is if you can’t give us even a general idea of —

MR MILLER: I do, and unfortunately I’m just not able to, but they are carefully targeted to those individuals, as I said in my opening statement, who we believe are involved in this activity. And as we’ve made clear before —

QUESTION: Right, well is it more than one?

MR MILLER: — these are the types of things that we —

QUESTION: Is it plural?

MR MILLER: It is plural. And beyond that, I don’t have any further information.

QUESTION: Okay. If anyone else has something on this —

MR MILLER: Yeah, Simon.

QUESTION: Yeah, slightly separate issue, but the governor of New York, Kathy Hochul, has said that she requested the expulsion of China’s consul general in New York and had spoken to the Secretary of State about that. Can you confirm that that’s happened?

MR MILLER: So I saw the governor’s statement. She actually spoke to the Deputy Secretary of State earlier today. The – so first of all, the consul general was not expelled. Our understanding is that the consul general reached the end of a regular, scheduled rotation in August, and so rotated out of the position – but was not expelled. But of course when it comes to the status of particular employees of a foreign mission, I would refer you to the foreign country, but there was – to speak to it, but there was no expulsion action.

QUESTION: Okay, and I – presuming this is related to someone in her office who was working for the Chinese Government, there’s been law enforcement action on that. But is that – you say he – the consul wasn’t expelled, but was there – is there a sort of grounds for expulsion or is that something that the department has considered?

MR MILLER: So, I’m not going to speak to anything that we might have considered or – especially when it comes to an action that wasn’t taken. In this case, this particular individual was not expelled, just reached the end of a regular, scheduled rotation. That said, foreign interference, including attempts to influence by – through covert activities that should be registered under the Foreign Agents Registration Act and are not registered – are things that we take very seriously, as you saw by the action the Department of Justice took yesterday.

QUESTION: Do you know when that happened, when he left?

MR MILLER: It was the end of August, is my understanding.

QUESTION: Okay, and is there a new consul general who’s – who you guys —

MR MILLER: I would defer – I would defer to the foreign mission to speak to their employees. I assume that there’s a new consul general rotating in. That’s the general course of action. But whether one has arrived already, I just don’t know.

QUESTION: Okay.

QUESTION: So, which deputy secretary did she speak to?

MR MILLER: To Kurt Campbell.

QUESTION: Because you know there’s more than one.

MR MILLER: I’m aware of that.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR MILLER: Janne.

QUESTION: Thank you. Thank you, Matt. The U.S. and South Korea extended deterrence strategy consultative group meeting was held at the State Department today. What specific discussions took place at —

MR MILLER: Let me take that back and get you a readout of that particular meeting.

QUESTION: Okay, and also U.S. extended deterrence for South Korea is very important, but 65 percent of South Koreans support South Korea arming itself with nuclear weapons to counter North Korea’s nuclear weapons. Will the United States authorize tactical nuclear weapons in the South Korea in the near future?

MR MILLER: So, I’m not going to speak to a poll, obviously, but our commitment to full denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula has not changed.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR MILLER: Yeah – Simon.

QUESTION: Can we come back to Haiti?

MR MILLER: Leon, excuse me.

QUESTION: So the Secretary is going tomorrow there. This – in in support for this multinational force, which is slow in being deployed – there’s, I think, 400 Kenyan police so far out of potentially 2,500 policemen from various countries. There’s also issues on the – financing the force and the equipment and what have you. There’s talk about changing the mandate of this force into a UN peacekeeping force, which is something that the U.S. and many other countries were always opposed to because of the UN side of it. Has that changed? Is the U.S .willing to change the mandate of this force?

MR MILLER: Let me take a couple of the premises of the question before I get to the question itself. So first of all, when it comes to the deployment of troops and the funding of the mission, we have always anticipated that the deployment of troops would roll out step by step, that there would be initial deployment of Kenyan forces that would be followed by supplementary forces over time – that is still on track – and then forces from other governments as well, which are still on track to deploy at a later date. That is – that has not changed, and those are all still deploying in the schedule that we expect them to follow.

When it comes to funding, so I’ll speak just on behalf of the United States funding. So we committed $309 million to support the Multinational Security Support mission – $200 million of that was in-kind support from the Department of Defense. That support has already been delivered. And then of the remaining 109 million, which is State Department funding for things like radios, night vision goggles, police gear, a very large tranche of that – tens of millions of dollars – has already been deployed, has arrived in Haiti – arrived in Haiti, and more will continue to deploy over the course of the coming weeks and months. So we are well on track with both the funding and the deployment of personnel.

When it comes to the mandate and the oversight structure, so we have always been willing to consider whatever options were appropriate to ensure that this mission had the appropriate oversight structure to ensure that it could fulfill and maintain security for the Haitian people. That hasn’t changed. We’ll always look at all the available options. But I don’t have any announcements to make today.

QUESTION: On Haiti?

QUESTION: Oh, I was going to switch regions.

MR MILLER: Yeah, go ahead, and then – yeah.

QUESTION: Sorry, Matt. Can you talk a little bit more about the timing of this trip? Is there a specific policy announcement or deliverable we should be looking for, or is it just that the security situation has gotten to a point where it’s finally feasible?

And second, Brian said this morning that significant progress has been made, and you want to acknowledge that. But can you talk a little bit about what progress hasn’t been made and what steps you need to see in Haiti before you think they can hold a successful election?

MR MILLER: So I would say that is one of the things we are going there to assess, one of the things the Secretary is going to do, which is to talk directly to political leaders in Haiti about the progress they have made towards a democratic transition and what other steps need to get to – get to an election; and what we, the United States, and what other partners in the region can do to support Haitian – Haiti and Haitians on this path; that he’s going to ask questions and find out those kind of answers.

When it comes to the timing of the mission, look, I would say you’ve already seen other officials from the State Department travel to Haiti. Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield traveled there; it was either early in August or late in July. And so with the timing of this – of this trip, the Secretary just thought it was important to go check in both, as I said, on democratic progress and governance and also on the Multinational Security Support mission, and see how it’s actually working and what more we can do – both on the funding side and on the oversight side.

QUESTION: Thanks.

QUESTION: Can I go?

MR MILLER: Go ahead.

QUESTION: Can I switch to the Middle East?

MR MILLER: Yeah, you can switch.

QUESTION: Netanyahu again doubled down today, saying they would not leave the Philadelphi Corridor. How do you expect to bridge the gap on this, given his continued insistence that Israeli forces are staying there?

MR MILLER: So, what I’m not going to do is negotiate in public on this question. I will just reiterate what we have said before, which is the Government of Israel, from the prime minister on down, have accepted the proposal put forward by the President and the bridging proposal, which included the withdrawal of Israeli forces from densely populated areas throughout Gaza – the Gaza Strip. And what we are working on every hour of the day is trying to figure out how we can bridge these remaining divides, and find a way to get a ceasefire agreement over the line.

But as you heard me say yesterday, that is going to require flexibility from the Government of Israel, just as it’s going to require Hamas to finally find a reason – a way to get to yes. And so we’re going to continue to engage with the Government of Israel on this question. We recognize the very real security needs that Israel has to ensuring that there can’t be smuggling across the Philadelphi Corridor. We think that there are ways to address it that, and it’s also important that we recognize the very real security imperatives to Israel in reaching a ceasefire that allows us to hopefully reach a diplomatic resolution to the situation on the Israeli-Lebanon border and hopefully helps us calm broader regional tensions, all of which are a threat to Israel’s security.

And so I bring all that up just because oftentimes this discussion gets focused on this one particular threat to Israel’s security, which is the potential for smuggling across the Philadelphi Corridor, which we think is important to address. But it shouldn’t be discussed in absence of all the other improvements to Israel’s security that we believe a ceasefire agreement would bring about.

QUESTION: What makes you think they’ll show any flexibility, though, given that Netanyahu again and again and again insists that there will be a presence in the Philadelphi Corridor?

MR MILLER: Well, that is the point of negotiations, and that is the – that is why we are engaged in these negotiations with Israel and with our fellow mediating countries, Egypt and Qatar. Not going to try to hammer through that in public, but we’re going to continue to have these negotiations because we believe getting a ceasefire and finding a way to bridge these divides is in the interests of Israel, just as we believe it’s manifestly in the interests of the Palestinian people and the broader region.

QUESTION: And when do you expect higher-level negotiations or in-person negotiations to get underway again?

MR MILLER: I don’t want to put a timetable on it. We want to get this proposal developed as soon as possible and get it over to Israel and Hamas, and try to get a final agreement.

QUESTION: Netanyahu also said he would not change his policies to minimize civilian casualties. This flies directly in the face of your continued calls for him to stem those civilian casualties. So how do you intend to hold him accountable to actually stop the civilian casualties in Palestine?

MR MILLER: So, I want to see that direct quote and see exactly the context that it was in before I respond specifically to it. But I will say we think it is absolutely imperative. It is a moral imperative and it is a security imperative to Israel that they minimize civilian casualties. And we have, at a number of times through the course of this campaign, gone to them with specific recommendations of things that they can do to minimize civilian casualties, and we have seen them implement some of those recommendations to bring down civilian casualties.

So, there have been times in the past where they have implemented specific recommendations that we have made. That said, the number of civilian casualties in Gaza remains far too high despite these improved measures, which is why we continue to push for a ceasefire.

QUESTION: Matt?

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: The U.S. keeps saying that the Israeli Government accepted the U.S. proposal. I mean, you present a proposal and make that the first, and whatever version comes after that. But what we hear from Netanyahu today or what is reported by Israeli sources that Netanyahu keeps adding more conditions, keep changing his position all the time. What is the – what is the version here? Is it – is he accepting it or he is changing his mind all the time?

MR MILLER: So I am, as I said in response to Jennifer’s question, not going to negotiate in public. And I know that’s not what you asked me to do, but it does require me to get into some underlying details which I’m just, unfortunately, not able to do here. But what I will say is – I said this – I know you weren’t here yesterday, but I did say this in the briefing yesterday – the Secretary made clear when he was in the region, just as the President made clear when he outlined the proposal on May 31st, that neither one of those were the end of the process, that there were very important steps that still remained to be litigated and discussed among the parties and that – on which we needed to reach agreement. The Secretary made that clear that when the prime minister accepted the bridging proposal, there were still a number of implementing agreements that we were going to need to reach – to outline how that bridging proposal would actually be implemented in practice, and those discussions are ongoing.

So, all I can tell you is what the United States is going to continue to impress upon the parties, and that is that a ceasefire is in all of their interests; that a ceasefire is, of course, in the interests of the Palestinian people, but it is very much in the interests of the Israeli people, too. But ultimately, the Government of Israel is going to have to make decisions about what it signs up to, and we’re going to impress upon them what we think is in their interest; but those are decisions that the prime minister, in consultation with other leaders in the Government of Israel, is going to have to make.

QUESTION: And I want to go back to the Philadelphi Corridor. I mean, Netanyahu today, as Jenny noticed, he doubled down that Israel needs to control this area, and this is complicating the negotiation process and also the Egyptian role as a mediator because Egyptian is – that Egypt is rejecting that. Are you trying to give proposals, for example, as from the U.S., a solution for this impasse?

MR MILLER: We are and we have. We have presented a number of possible solutions to the various parties to how – for how to ensure the – or ensure security in the Philadelphi Corridor and to prevent smuggling along that corridor. And I would add, without getting too much into the details, that a number of those solutions do not require the ongoing presence of Israeli forces. And we have made clear that we are opposed to the – to the long-term presence of Israeli forces inside Gaza. It’s one of the principles the Secretary outlined back in November just a month into this war.

So, if you look at the way that the proposal is set up, it recalls – it calls for, in phase one, the withdrawal of Israeli forces from densely populated areas, and in phase two, the withdrawal of Israeli forces from other areas of the Gaza Strip. There’s a negotiation from phase one to phase two. Obviously, that’s not going to be an easy negotiation, just as getting to phase one has not been an easy negotiation. But we are going to continue to push for a resolution, because – as I said in response to your earlier question, it is, we believe, self-evidently in the interests of Israel as well as, of course, the Palestinians and others in the region.

QUESTION: Very last question. Just I want to go to the West Bank. There is an ongoing Israeli security operation there. I mean, (inaudible) down, but it was for the last four days in Jenin and Tulkarm and other areas. But at the same time, there was also a settlers’ movement that seized thousands of dunams – I don’t know what is that square meters or kilometers – in the area. And as we know from previous – previous attempts, once they seize it they don’t – they don’t leave it, they don’t get away with it. I know that the U.S. policy is against it. You always raise this here on this podium or somewhere else. But you don’t do anything about it. So what are you going to do to stop this settlers’ movement inside the West Bank?

MR MILLER: So a number of things. One, I think it’s important to restate the principle, which is we believe that the Government of Israel’s settlement program is inconsistent with international law. It’s a point that we’ve raised publicly and also made clear is the conclusion of the United States directly in meetings with the seniormost leaders of Israel. We have also made clear that Israel needs to do more to crack down on extremist settler violence, and you have heard us say from this podium, and you’ve heard other leaders in the United States Government say, that if Israel doesn’t need – doesn’t take additional steps to stop settler violence, we will. And you have seen us impose sanctions on extremist settlers who have engaged in violent activities. You have seen us sanction organizations involved in violent settler activities. And we will continue to take those steps.

And I can tell you the Government of Israel – you’ve seen some of their public complaints about those steps – have made quite clear to us that they strenuously object to those measures that we have taken; and we have made quite clear in return that we need to see more action from them to stop settler violence and hold settlers accountable – extremist settlers accountable. And if they don’t take those actions, we will take the actions available to us.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR MILLER: Yeah, Simon.

QUESTION: Just to follow up on some of the corridor talk that we’ve had, you – and you talked about this yesterday a little bit. But in – so in the bridging proposal, the first phase, there is a – the language is that the IDF would be removed from densely populated areas. And you said that includes the Philadelphi Corridor. In your view, is it possible to evacuate soldiers from all densely populated areas but still have a military presence all along the border between Gaza and Egypt?

MR MILLER: So I don’t think I should get into a public discussion of matters that very much remain a subject of ongoing negotiations.

QUESTION: But it’s a factual question that you’re saying —

MR MILLER: I understand, and I hope – I very much understand it’s a factual question, but I think you can understand that that is very much the underlying – the underlying nature of that question is something that remains a very important part of the ongoing negotiations, and I think we ought to keep the details of that private despite some of the public statements made by other parties.

QUESTION: And then I’m just going to push on that again, but the – have the Egyptians expressed a willingness to go along with a solution that leaves Israeli troops along that crossing, that border?

MR MILLER: I think I will let the Egyptians speak for themselves as to what they may or may not support.

Yeah, Guita.

QUESTION: Change of subject?

MR MILLER: Mm-hmm.

QUESTION: The Pentagon has confirmed that a member of the U.S. Navy was arrested in Venezuela – he was on personal leave – and that the Pentagon is working with the State Department. I was wondering if you can tell us anything on the subject.

MR MILLER: Yeah, we are tracking closely the detention of a U.S. military member in Venezuela. We are closely monitoring the situation, seeking additional information, and I don’t have further comment at this time. As you know, oftentimes when it comes to individuals who are detained overseas, due to privacy considerations, there’s not much I can say from this podium. But it is a matter we are aware of and seeking more information about.

QUESTION: You can’t even – do you even know why or can you say why he was arrested?

MR MILLER: It’s not something I can speak to publicly, unfortunately.

Yeah.

QUESTION: Thank you very much, Matt —

QUESTION: Could I – how exactly are you monitoring this, considering the embassy is closed? You don’t have a diplomatic or at least an overt diplomatic presence in —

MR MILLER: We do have the ability to – just speaking generally, we do have the ability to – or through partners of ours who operate in Venezuela to still gather information inside the country.

QUESTION: And you’ve gotten none so far?

MR MILLER: Because of privacy considerations I’m not – there’s nothing I’m allowed to publicly say about this case. But it’s one that we’re –

QUESTION: You can’t say that – even if you have gotten any information about this arrest?

MR MILLER: We have —

QUESTION: Not what it is, but whether you did or not.

MR MILLER: There are things that we know about this arrest that I am not at liberty to say. I think you know the privacy rules when we haven’t obtained a privacy waiver, and we’re limited in talking about cases.

QUESTION: I do, but I – but so in other words – I get that, but you don’t have anyone on the ground to actually go to him and ask him to sign a PAW, right?

MR MILLER: Correct. But —

QUESTION: So, the line about the Privacy Act waiver just is completely irrelevant.

MR MILLER: It doesn’t change the law.

QUESTION: However —

MR MILLER: Wait, hold on, it doesn’t change the law we have to abide by. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: No, no, no, I know it doesn’t change the law. I’ve been – I’ve been complaining about this law for decades now. But —

MR MILLER: I’m only aware of the last year and a half, but I’m fully tracking the complaints for that time period. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: All I’m asking is whether you have gotten any information about this arrest from your partners or from the Venezuelans directly, considering you don’t have any presence on the ground.

MR MILLER: There is information that we have about this case. I just don’t think I should get —

QUESTION: From whom?

MR MILLER: I just don’t think I should get into how we obtained the information. But it’s something we continue to gather information on.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: All right.

QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. My first question is about this very senior parliamentarian whose father was also chief minister – Mr. Akhtar Mengal resigned from the Pakistan parliament yesterday, citing that this country is not being run on democratic rules and norms. And he’s worried about the future of the country. Do you have anything about his —

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

QUESTION: Okay. Second one is that a couple of weeks ago the Pakistani three-star general was arrested on charges of corruption. And Pakistani people and journalists always complain that the U.S. has – many of Pakistani former generals has properties here and assets here. So while you are doing this thing on the Russian journalists and their properties, can you put in the Pakistani general’s name as well to make at least we found – find out about their properties here in the U.S.?

MR MILLER: So I don’t have any comment on that all. Obviously, we take – the Department of Justice takes law enforcement actions when it has sufficient grounds to bring those law enforcement actions, and we do the same thing with respect to the actions that we take here.

Ryan, go ahead.

QUESTION: Just really fast one last one?

MR MILLER: Let me go to Ryan.

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: A follow-up on the Philadelphi Corridor. So Netanyahu’s been saying publicly and privately in cabinet meetings that he – the reason he doesn’t want to back down on the corridor is that the U.S. supports him on that position. So can you speak to whether or not what he’s saying is correct? Like does he have U.S. support to not back down on the Philadelphi Corridor?

MR MILLER: Well, I will make clear what we have said publicly for a long time, which is we oppose a long-term military presence by the IDF inside Gaza. It’s been one of our core principles, since the beginning of this conflict. It has not changed.

QUESTION: Is – you talked about a settlement being in everybody’s interests. What you often hear from commentators is that it might not necessarily be in Netanyahu’s interest because of his own personal political situation. What – do you have any assessment from the State Department about whether the prosecutions that he may face, or other political repercussions, how that is playing into his intransigence on this question?

MR MILLER: I don’t think I should speak to the personal considerations or the personal motivations of the prime minister any more than I would speak to the personal considerations or motivations of any foreign leader. I will say it is our conclusion that it is in the national security interests of the state of Israel to reach a ceasefire agreement, and that’s why we’ll continue to push for it.

QUESTION: Can I have a follow-up?

MR MILLER: Yeah, go ahead.

QUESTION: I don’t know if you saw Thomas Friedman latest article about – that Benjamin Netanyahu is playing a U.S. game —

MR MILLER: I did.

QUESTION: — and he’s pushing that to help Trump. Do you have any comment on that?

MR MILLER: Look, I am – so I obviously read everything that Tom Friedman – I shouldn’t say “obviously,” but I do read everything Tom Friedman writes. He’s a – I respect his judgment about matters in the Middle East and his long experience there, but I think I should probably refrain from commenting on anything in any way that touches on the U.S. election.

Yeah.

QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. Moving back to the West Bank, there was a footage two days ago showing Israeli bulldozers targeting a group of journalists, including journalists working for TRT Anadolu while they were covering Israel raid in Jenin. Do you have any comment on that? And generally – and do you have anything to say on the Israeli offensive in the West Bank recently, which is the largest assault over almost two decades?

MR MILLER: So first of all, we absolutely oppose any targeting of journalists, which I’m not saying is something that happened here. It’s not a conclusion we have reached, but we would oppose any targeting of journalists anywhere in the world by any forces. We think the work that journalists do is absolutely essential to gathering information to show the world what’s happening, especially in conflict zones; to show the United States Government what’s happening in conflict zones. We have our own means of gathering information, but we very much rely on the work as well of respected journalists operating in very difficult places. And so, we want them to be able to continue to do those jobs free from harassment of any kind.

With respect to Israel’s operations in the West Bank, look, Israel obviously has the right to conduct legitimate counterterrorism operations that target militants that are attempting to or about to carry out attacks against the state of Israel, against civilians, targeting civilians. But they need to do that in a way that respects human rights, that respects the rule of law, and is appropriately calibrated.

And I would also say – even separate – that’s a matter as – that’s a question of principle. When it comes to a strategic matter, it very much is in Israel’s interests not to see further instability in the West Bank and to not take actions that would increase instability in the West Bank. When you look at the situation that Israel faces, where they’re facing an ongoing war in Gaza, where they’re facing firing across the border with Lebanon – exchange of fire with Hizballah that has risked spiraling into a full-blown conflict at various times – adding further instability in the West Bank is not in any way in Israel’s security interests.

QUESTION: Thank you. Just – I – just one follow-up. So you said Israel has the right to conduct counterterrorism operations, but some human rights groups accuse Israel, actually, of collective punishment in the West Bank. And according to the UN, today thousands of people in the Nur Shams refugee camp have experienced water cutoffs, and they attribute it to damage caused to the water networks. And we have seen many homes and roads have been destroyed by Israeli forces. So – the aerial footage showing that. So do you believe that Israel is engaged in collective punishments (inaudible) —

MR MILLER: Look, we believe that they need – I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to cut you off. We believe that they need to conduct their counterterrorism operations in a way that are targeted against individuals engaged in terrorism, against individuals who pose a threat to civilians, not in any way against the broader Palestinian population. And we have made that clear to them over any number of engagements, and we make that clear to them in an ongoing basis. And as I said, any – when it comes to stability in the West Bank, operations that inflame local tensions, that cause an increase in instability, can have a very deleterious effect on Israel’s own security. So it’s not just that they have a moral imperative to conduct counterterrorism operations in a way that complies with the law. They also have a very serious security imperative to do so.

QUESTION: Yeah. Thank you, Matt. You spoke about the Russian attempt to interfere the U.S. election. Do you see the same intent – the same attempts by Iran to interfere the U.S. election, as today New York Times suggested that Iran is the top – emerging as a top disinformation threat in the U.S. election?

MR MILLER: We have seen attempts by Iran to interfere in the U.S. election. The Intelligence Community released a statement several weeks ago about attempts by Iran to hack into one of the presidential candidate’s campaigns, so yes, we do.

QUESTION: So are you going to take the same measures as you took against Russia?

MR MILLER: We take it very seriously. I’m not going to preview any measures that we will take, but as I said in my opening statement, there are two things that we look to do in these situations. One is to expose people who attempt to interfere in our elections; and two, to hold them accountable, and that’s what we’ll continue to do.

QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. In light of Hamas recently murdering Israel six – those hostages – and the pressure being put on Israel to give up control of the Philadelphia Corridor, I wanted to ask you why is Israel being expected to make concessions if that will only encourage Hamas to perpetuate further atrocities by rewarding them for bad behavior. And I have a follow-up.

MR MILLER: So I obviously would very much reject the premise of that question. We are making clear to Israel that we think a deal is in their security interests, as you’ve heard me say in response to previous questions. We absolutely support bringing members of Hamas to justice. You saw the Justice Department – our own Justice Department – unseal indictments for the leaders of Hamas yesterday. We’ve made very clear that we want to see the leaders of Hamas brought to justice, but we also believe that it is in Israel’s security interests to reach a ceasefire that brings the hostages home, that brings them home safely and securely, and that – that furthers Israel’s long-term security interests. And one of the things you’ve heard the Secretary say recently is that every day that goes by without a ceasefire risks other events happening. One of those events, of course, is further escalation in the region. But one of the very real tragic events is the death, the murder of hostages, and we don’t want to see that happen.

QUESTION: And additionally, what pressure has the U.S. applied to Qatar to get Hamas to release hostages?

MR MILLER: So we have been in constant dialogue with Qatar, since the hours after the October 7th attack about their communications with Hamas and their relationship with Hamas. And what we have seen over and again is Qatar using its relationship with Hamas to try to get to a ceasefire that would bring the hostages home, that would advance the broader security interests of the region. And we very much appreciate the work that Qatar has done in this respect, in the same way we appreciate the work that Egypt has done in this respect to try to get a ceasefire that would bring the hostages home.

Go ahead. Guita, back —

QUESTION: You just said – you referenced the indictment against Hamas. Clearly, the State Department, the White House must have been aware that the DOJ was going to unseal this indictment. Weren’t you worried that it may affect the negotiations, the ceasefire negotiations?

MR MILLER: So no, we’re not in any way worried that these would affect the ceasefire negotiations. I’m not going to speak to interagency coordination. Obviously, the Department of Justice makes its own determinations when it comes to law enforcement matters. They are in certain national security matters able to communicate with others in the United States Government, but I won’t speak to those. But no, I don’t in any way believe that these indictments would jeopardize the ceasefire negotiations. And I dare say that if the government believed that they would in any way jeopardize the ceasefire negotiations, you wouldn’t have seen the Justice Department unseal them at this time.

QUESTION: I mean, Sinwar was the main – is the main remaining person, and your – he’s also – in the indictment, and he’s also the other side of the negotiations table.

MR MILLER: Look, it’s very important for us to be able to do two things: one, make clear that we will hold Hamas responsible for their crimes, for their terrorism, for their murders of American citizens; and two, try and get a deal that would bring the remaining hostages home. And we have to be willing to do both. And I recognize the tension at times in trying to do both, but it – we believe it’s very much in our interests to try and do that. And we don’t believe in any way the unsealing of this indictment is something that’s going to enter into the calculations that Hamas may be making about whether to accept a ceasefire or not. It’s just not something that we find to be likely.

QUESTION: Matt, can you just —

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: — clarify something technically on the timing of it though. Because it – obviously, this came after the news about the hostages on the weekend, but also the DOJ had said on background that it was no longer necessary to seal the indictment and that three of the Hamas leaders are deceased. And given, quote, various things that have happened in the region, can you just clarify why now, why this happened now? You’ve had over 40 Americans who were killed on October 7th, so why —

MR MILLER: So a number of years ago when I was the spokesperson for the Department of Justice, I might have been able to clarify that. But I no longer am, so I would refer you to the Department of Justice to talk about the timing of the indictment.

Yeah.

QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. I have my own topic, but want to go back to your opening statement. Please bear with me. The line of —

MR MILLER: Alex, we’ve done this before. Sometimes you ask a few questions and then you don’t get to your own topic, so just —

QUESTION: Just – just to clarify some stuff.

MR MILLER: You do it – you do it at your own risk that you might not get your topic called on. So go ahead.

QUESTION: Just to clarify a few stuff, your line of question with Matt.

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: We understand you can’t talk about a number, but you did mention that they should disclose their property. Are we talking about the U.S. persons, Russian individuals, or both?

MR MILLER: The – it was with respect to the parent company of RT and the other entities we named are now required to register as foreign – Foreign Missions Act – of there – as foreign mission designees. And so the requirements under that law are that they have to disclose all of their employees and all of their real property, which when you look at one of our main objectives, which is be able to identify activities that foreign missions are engaged in, it’s obviously very helpful to us to know all of the various individuals working in their employment as well as the property that they own.

QUESTION: To unpack it a little bit, RT, Sputnik, and others – if I understood correctly, you’re not banning them from operating in the U.S. So how many of them are holding FPC – State Department’s, Foreign Press Center’s credentials?

MR MILLER: Are holding what? I’m sorry. I didn’t understand.

QUESTION: Foreign Press Center’s credentials.

MR MILLER: I would refer you to the Foreign Press Center. I have no idea.

QUESTION: And the scope of the operation, is it a purely U.S.-focused operation or they also are targeting the allies? And if so, why are you acting alone?

MR MILLER: So we have seen a number of actions by the Russian Government to target our allies’ democratic institutions and to undermine the exercises of democracy in our allies. The specific action that we are announcing today is with respect to actions inside the United States, but of course, we have long seen Russia attempt to interfere in other countries’ elections as well.

QUESTION: Thank you. I have two more.

MR MILLER: All right. One more.

QUESTION: Ukraine.

MR MILLER: One more, Alex, and then I got to go because it’s – I got to wrap.

QUESTION: Very quickly on Ukraine – it’s very important about the government shakeup in Ukraine, its potential implications, if any. So what is your reaction on what’s going on?

MR MILLER: So I don’t have any assessment about what it means for the policy of the Government of Ukraine. I would of course refer to the Government of Ukraine to speak to that. It wouldn’t be appropriate for me to do in any event. I will say that the Secretary spoke to Foreign Minister Kuleba just in – about an hour and a half ago to express how much he’s enjoyed working with him over these last several years. Foreign Minister Kuleba has been an extraordinary partner of the United States in our work to support Ukraine, in repelling Russia’s aggression and fighting back against Russia’s aggression, as well as the work that we have done to marshal diplomatic support. In some ways, Foreign Minister Kuleba has been our foremost partner in going around the world, trying to get diplomatic support both for supporting Ukraine and for holding Russia accountable.

I think you’ve heard the – both the Secretary and the foreign minister talk about how sometimes they get in these meetings and the first thing they talk about is – one of them will say, “So I know that this country has an air defense system that they might be able to make available if this other country can backfill them with something else,” and they’re really horse trading trying to figure out how to solve very specific problems that Ukraine has. And so the Secretary expressed his great appreciation and friendship to Foreign Minister Kuleba, and of course that he looks forward to working with his successor.

QUESTION: Thank you. And final one before I yield on Azerbaijan. They had a parliamentary election —

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: — September 1st, widely criticized by international observers; opposition boycotted that. Do you have any position?

MR MILLER: So we share the observation and concerns of the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights monitoring mission regarding the Azerbaijani September 1st parliamentary election. And we urge Azerbaijan to implement the OSCE’s previous recommendations as well as ones that we understand to be forthcoming, and enable the exercise of fundamental freedoms by its people consistent with its constitution and international commitments.

Yeah.

QUESTION: Thank you. Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov said today that the United States needs to think about possible consequences when thinking about supplying Ukraine with long-range missiles, including JASSM. There are reports that the United States is planning to supply Ukraine with long-range weapons soon. Do you have any comment, sir?

MR MILLER: Yeah, the – our support for Ukraine has been because of the illegal war that Russia has launched against Ukraine. And so if Russia wants to see an end to actions targeting Russian soldiers, the best way can do that is to end its war and withdraw from Ukraine. It’s as simple as that.

QUESTION: And second question, just clarification about visa restrictions, what you said. Does that mean that Russian journalists will be expelled from the U.S. or does it mean that they will not be able to get a new visa?

MR MILLER: The actions that we announced today were not with respect to Russian journalists. They were with respect to employees of these organizations who were engaged in the illegal activities that were identified by the Justice Department.

QUESTION: Yeah, I just wanted to follow up on that as well and ask about kind of – in terms of calibrating the response over Russian state media, was there discussion of a full ban of groups like RT or Rossiya Segodnya?

MR MILLER: So I’m never going to talk about internal discussions inside the United States Government, but we – whenever we are identifying a particular problem or a particular violation by any country or any entity, we look to tailor the policy response appropriately, and that’s why you’ve seen today actions from three departments inside the United States Government to respond to this particular action by Russia.

Yeah.

QUESTION: And just to ask also: Is there expectations of kind of retaliation from the Russian side? Was that taken into account at all?

MR MILLER: I don’t – as always, do not know what Russia will do.

One more and then we’ll end.

QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. On Iraq, the Iraqi parliament is working on to amend the Personal Status Law. So since the bill initiated, it has sparked concerns and outrage among the Iraqi public. So how does the State Department see the efforts if that – the bill is passed in the Iraqi parliament?

MR MILLER: Let me take that back and get you a comment on it.

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

QUESTION: Thank you.

(The briefing was concluded at 2:53 p.m.)

# # #