October 21, 2024 On-the-Record Press Gaggle by White House National Security Communications Advisor John Kirby Via Teleconference 12:06 P.M. EDT

 October 21, 2024

On-the-Record Press Gaggle by White House National Security Communications Advisor John Kirby

Via Teleconference

12:06 P.M. EDT

MODERATOR: Hey, everyone. Thanks for joining. Kirby has a few words here at the top, and then we’ll get started.

MR. KIRBY: Hey, everybody. Hope your week is off to a good start.

Building on the President’s trip to Germany and the solid, constructive discussions he had, not only bilaterally with German leaders, the President and the Chancellor, but also with the leaders of the European Quad on Ukraine, Secretary Austin visited Ukraine today. As I’m sure you saw, he announced that the President signed a new security assistance package, which included more 155 artillery ammunition, as well as 105-millimeter ammunition, HIMARS ammunition, and additional Javelin anti-tank systems.

As the President said as recently as late last month, the United States is going to continue to surge assistance to Ukraine so that it can prevail. Today’s announcement underscores that commitment. It shows our resolve to continue getting Ukraine the support that it needs through January.

Now, yesterday, I would also add, talking about Europe, Moldova held both a presidential election and a national referendum on whether to amend its constitution to support EU membership.

The results today indicate that Moldova has voted in favor of the national referendum on EU membership, which is a historic step forward in Moldova’s European integration. As for the presidential election, President Sandu received more than 42 percent of the vote in the first round, and this will head now to a runoff on November 3rd.

As I warned about last week, Russia has been working actively to undermine Moldova’s election and their European integration. In the past several months, Moscow has dedicated millions of dollars towards these efforts. Now, Russia did not succeed. As the results demonstrate, Moldovan democracy is strong, as is the will and desire of the Moldovan people to advance toward European integration.

The U.S. remains a proud partner of Moldova, and we will continue to stand with them as they endeavor to continue to protect their democracy and, quite frankly, to reach the aspirations of the Moldovan people.

Now, lastly, tomorrow, President Biden will host Prime Minister Robe- — I’m sorry, Robert Golob of the Republic of Slovenia for a conversation in the Oval Office. This is the third Slovenian prime minister to visit the White House and the first since 2006. It comes on the heels of the historic prisoner swap that brought Americans and other human rights activists and political dissidents home from Russian prisons earlier this year.

The two leaders will discuss the full spectrum of pressing issues confronting our two countries, including, of course, ongoing support for Ukraine, energy security and cooperation, and a shared approach to the Western Balkans.

With that, we can take some questions.

MODERATOR: Thank you. Our first question will go to Aamer with the AP.

Q Hi. Thank you both. I wanted to ask about these classified documents that went out in the ether, I guess, over — or recently, and that came to light over the weekend. One, were these docs — is it understood whether they were leaked or hacked?

And then secondly on that, how concerned does the episode make the President about the security of classified info, both at the Pentagon and within the intelligence community, particularly since we’re in this moment of the Middle East conflict, the election just weeks away, and a plethora of active foreign interference?

MR. KIRBY: Thanks, Aamer. We’re not exactly sure how these documents found their way into the public domain. I know the Department of Defense is investigating this, and I’m sure that as they work through that, they’ll try to determine the manner in which they did become public. So I’m just not able to answer your question whether it was a leak or a hack at this point. We’ll let the investigation pursue its logical course there.

We’re deeply concerned, and the President remains deeply concerned, about any leakage of classified information into the public domain. That is not supposed to happen, and it’s unacceptable when it does. So he’s deeply concerned about that. And you can rest assured that he will be actively monitoring the progress of the investigative effort to figure out how this happened, and obviously he’ll be very interested in hearing any mitigation measures and recommendations that come as a result of the investigative efforts and how to prevent it from happening again.

Q Is it clear at this point — do you guys believe that — or have any reason to believe that more documents could be forthcoming showing sensitive intelligence?

MR. KIRBY: As we speak today, Aamer, the answer to that question is: No, we don’t have any indication at this point that there’s an expectation that there’ll be additional documents like this finding their way into the public domain.

But — and the “but” here is important — we’re obviously keenly focused on what happened here, learning how it happened, and preventing it from happening again. And in the course of that work, that investigative work, we’re certainly going to keep our antenna up and our eyes open for any potential future disclosures.

But let me just come back to where I started before. At this time, there’s no indication that we have a reason to suspect additional documents of this sort finding its way into the public domain.

MODERATOR: Thank you. Our next question will go to Kayla with CNN.

Q Thank you so much. Can you guys hear me?

MR. KIRBY: Yes, ma’am.

Q Okay. Thank you. Admiral, I’m wondering, just on the on the documents question, you know, if there’s been any communication between the U.S. and Israel in the wake of the release of these classified documents, and also, if there’s any expectation by the administration that their release would impact the timing or the scope of any action that Israel would end up taking.

MR. KIRBY: Well, I’ll let the Israelis speak to if, what, how, and when they decide to take additional military action in response to Iran’s October 1st attack. That’s really for them to speak to.

But on your sec- — on your first question, yes, of course, we’ve been in communication with our Israeli counterparts about this public disclosure.

Q And then, on the death of Yahya Sinwar, it’s now been several days, and both the President and Jake Sullivan said last week that that they hoped that it would be seen as an opportunity or an opening for new discussions over a diplomatic resolution. I’m wondering if you could just update us on any conversations regarding a diplomatic outcome in Gaza, and then, in parallel, what you see as the opportunity for any type of ceasefire in Lebanon.

MR. KIRBY: Yeah, those are two very different questions.

On Gaza, of course in the wake of Sinwar’s killing, we have had conversations with our Israeli counterparts about what the next steps are here. And we have certainly expressed, as the President did publicly, our strong desire to see what can be done to find a diplomatic path forward here to get the hostages home. That remains a top priority of President Biden. The Israelis understand that that remains a top priority of the President. And again, we’ve had some initial conversations in the wake of Mr. Sinwar’s killing, of course.

I cannot sit here today and tell you that negotiations are about to restart in Doha or Cairo, or anywhere else for that matter. But, yes, we have started to begin to think about it here and had some initial conversations with our Israeli counterparts, as you would expect we would, in the wake of that truly historic news.

On Lebanon, we continue to engage in intensive diplomacy to see what can be done to try to find a path to a ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah. I think you know — at least, if you don’t know, I guess I’ll tell you — Amos Hochstein is in Beirut, as we speak, to continue those conversations to see what could be in the realm of the possible in terms of trying to find a meaningful ceasefire between those two sides.

MODERATOR: Thank you. Our next question will go to Selina with ABC.

Q Hey, John. Thanks so much for doing this. I just wanted to follow up on Kayla’s question a little bit. So, Biden said last Friday that he knows how Israel plans to retaliate to the Iranian attack. So, does the U.S. foresee this disrupting the Israeli operation in any way? And does the President plan to speak with Netanyahu again about this?

MR. KIRBY: I don’t have a call with Prime Minister Netanyahu to preview for you. They’ll speak, as they have and often do, at the appropriate time.

And I’m not going to get any further — I do appreciate the follow up, and I understand it, but I’m certainly not going to get into any public speculation about what an Israeli response could look like if, in fact, they decide to conduct one. That’s truly up to them to decide, and it’s absolutely up to them to speak to it one way or the other, not coming from the United States.

MODERATOR: Thank you. Our next question will go to Aurelia with AFP.

Q Hi, and thanks both. I have a question on northern Gaza. Can you update us on the amount of aid that’s going in? Are you satisfied with the steps that the Israelis have taken? Or do you, you know, expect them to take more steps to get more aid into this territory?

MR. KIRBY: Well, the short answer to your question really is: Of course, we want more done. We need to see much more aid getting into Gaza. You mentioned the north. I would note that over the last few days to a week there’s been — more than 120 trucks have made it into northern Gaza, which is a good thing. It’s not enough, but it’s a good thing. We also noted and welcomed the air drops that the UAE conducted over the last couple of days, I think over the weekend. That also was helpful. But much more needs to be done, and we’re going to continue talking to our Israeli counterparts about that.

I mean, for instance, you know, there’s armed gangs at the Kerem Shalom crossing. You know, there’s plenty of trucks that are waiting to get in there, and they’re not able to get in there because of these armed gangs and criminal groups that are stopping it. So we all have to take a turn here and see what we can do to reduce that pressure down at Kerem Shalom so that that aid can get in. More needs to be done. But, yes, we have seen an uptick over the last few days.

MODERATOR: Thank you. Our next question will go to David Sanger with the New York Times.

Q Thanks, John, for doing this. Two quick things for you. The first: Just to follow up on the Iran answers, you’ve said several times now it’s up to the Israelis to decide when and where and how they’re going to strike. But when the President said “yes and yes” at the end of last week to the question of did he know when they were going to strike and where they were going to strike, is it reasonable for us to interpret that statement as saying that he and Prime Minister Netanyahu have come to some agreement, after the President’s quite public statements, about not hitting nuclear and energy sites?

MR. KIRBY: I think, David, I’m going to preserve the conversations that the President has with the Prime Minister and that we’ve had with our Israeli counterparts about this particular topic.

The President was referring to his knowledge of what their intentions were. And —

Q But I shouldn’t confuse that with an approval of what their intentions were?

MR. KIRBY: Israel is a sovereign state. They get to decide for themselves what they’re going to hit and how they’re going to hit it.

Q And I didn’t ask you whether they got to decide or not. I asked you whether the President is now in agreement with them.

MR. KIRBY: I’m just not going to go beyond what the President said, David.

Q Okay. And then, on the — one quick question on Russia. We’re, what, two weeks and a day or two ahead of the election. At this point in 2018 and 2020, the U.S. had issued, through various means, specific warnings to the Russians about non-interference. You may recall at one point they used a channel; it was mostly used for nuclear communications. I think that was 2018, if I remember right. Are you aware of any significant and high-level specific warnings for Russia on election interference in recent times?

MR. KIRBY: I think I would just say two things to that. Number one, we know and we’ve made public what we know about Russia’s attempts to interfere in this election. Now, the ODNI, as you know, David, puts out regular reports out there. We make it public what we’re seeing and what we know they’re trying to do. There’s an awful lot that we do to counter those operations by the Russians. Some of that we talk about, some of that we don’t.

I can tell you that we have made it perfectly clear to the Russians, in numerous ways, how unacceptable we find these activities and how strongly and staunchly we’re going to push back on them. I do not have a specific — an additional specific, as you put it, high-level warning to the Russians, except the only thing I would add is our concerns have been made perfectly clear to Mr. Putin and to the Russian government.

Q Has that been by the President himself? Or you’re only aware of the ones that (inaudible)?

MR. KIRBY: The President has had no direct communications with Vladimir Putin.

Q Great. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you. Our next question will go to Robin Wright with the New Yorker.

Q Thanks so much, John. I have a three-part question. First of all, have you seen any efforts by Iran recently, after the deaths of Nasrallah and Sinwar, to help its allies regroup, rearm, refinance? What has it been doing in the background?

Secondly, there are media reports that Naim Qassem, who is Nasrallah’s deputy, has moved to Tehran. Can you confirm that?

And third, the Iranian foreign minister met over the weekend with Hamas leaders in Istanbul. Do you have thoughts on that? Do you have a sense of what the goal was? Can you give us any insights? Thanks.

MR. KIRBY: Okay, there’s a lot there.

On your third question about the Istanbul meeting, Robin, I hope you’ll let me take that question and come back to you. I don’t have any insights to share on that. That doesn’t mean that we, at the NSC, don’t. That just means me, Kirby, don’t. So we’ll take that question and try to get you a better answer.

I don’t have anything on Nasrallah’s deputy going to Tehran. Nothing like that. Again, I’ll try to take that question back to the team and have them see if we’ve got a better answer for you than that. But I wouldn’t have any insights or perspectives to share on that at this time, except to say — and this kind of gets to your first question — it wouldn’t come as a shock to any of us to see Hezbollah leadership, at whatever level, staying in communication with Iran, and that would include travel to Tehran, given the incredible support that Hezbollah continues to get from Iran.

Now, you asked, specifically in the wake of his killing, have we seen something demonstrable and tangible. Not that I have to speak to today, except we’ve seen rhetoric out of the mullahs and out of the Supreme Leader, and we certainly have seen no diminution of Iranian desire to continue to support their proxies, whether that is Hezbollah, whether it’s Hamas, whether it’s the militia groups in Iraq and Syria, or, quite frankly, whether it’s the Houthis. There’s been no indication that Iran has changed its calculus and is somehow pulling the plug on the support to these groups.

Now, whether there’s something, again, demonstrable that we’ve seen since his killing, I’d have to go back and ask the question, but I don’t believe that we’ve seen any significant change one way or the other.

Q John, can I just follow up quickly and ask you to take that question to see if Iran is doing anything with Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis, the PMF? Is it doing anything in the background, including, you know, urging the PMF to — or Kata’ib Hezbollah to go after Americans? I’m trying to see if there’s anything that the Iranians are doing in response to what’s happened over the last few weeks.

MR. KIRBY: Yeah, no, I get the question. I’m happy to take it. I will caveat this by telling you that they’re — you know, that some of what we’re seeing — what we see may or may not be suitable for public disclosure, but I’m happy to take the question and come back to you.

MODERATOR: Thank you. Our next question will go to Anita with VOA.

Q Hello, John. Hope you’re well. Thank you for doing this. Okay, I have a Russia-Ukraine omnibus question, but before I get to it, I just want to check in: Any White House reaction to the death of Turkish cleric Gulen in the U.S.? Does this change anything between Washington and Ankara? Any communications, anything you want to say about that?

MR. KIRBY: Nothing at this time.

Q Okay. Let me move on to Russia-Ukraine. So, what response should we expect from the U.S. and allies amid these reports that Russia has North Korean soldiers working with them in Ukraine? Could this prompt either a surge in military assistance or an easing of the restrictions on Ukrainian use of long-range weapons?

And then, relatedly: As you know, Vladimir Putin is hosting the BRICS Summit this week. BRICS has not had a shortage of membership requests in recent years. What does this mean to you about whether trying to make, you know, Russia a pariah? Has that worked? Is that stance effective anymore? And what message is this sending to China that seems to think it can, you know, do whatever they want and not face any consequences?

MR. KIRBY: Who can do whatever they want and not face consequences? You cut out there.

Q Yeah. Sorry about that. I was asking what message this sends to China that it could continue to, you know, act however it wants but not face any consequences or lose any friends, more accurately.

MR. KIRBY: Yeah. Well, I mean, I think — I mean, I’ll work backward here. I don’t think the PRC has ever gotten that message. I mean, we’ve been none too shy about making our concerns known to the PRC, with respect to the fact that Chinese companies have provided components and elements to Russian weapons systems in the defense industrial base. And we’ve sanctioned them. We have had very frank conversations with Chinese leaders, including Jake with his counterpart, and the President and President Xi, about even that level of support to the Russian military. So, I think our message to the PRC has been clear and consistent and remains so.

On the BRICS, you know, I don’t think that you should look at this BRICS conference as some sort of coming-out party for Mr. Putin and for Russia. First of all, the BRICS as an organization isn’t new, and we’ve long said, you know, these countries — every country gets to make sovereign decisions about who they associate with and in what format. And, you know, we don’t view the BRICS arrangement as some sort of, you know, threat. These countries can decide for themselves who they want to associate with and especially how they want to be economically linked with one another.

Russia is increasingly isolated on the world stage. There’s no question about that. Mr. Putin is still having to take radical steps to prop up his currency and to keep his war economy going, and he continues to have to take drastic steps to try to keep an army in the field and to try to achieve even a modicum of success on the battlefield. That includes continuing to get drones and drone technology from Iran, artillery rounds from North Korea, and now these reports about North Korean soldiers deploying to Russia.

So, that’s your first question, and I’ll just — I’ll end with that. We’re obviously continuing to look into those reports, and we’re talking to our allies and partners about what they’re seeing on this as well. If it’s true that the DPRK soldiers are going there to join the war against Ukraine, it would certainly mark a dangerous and highly concerning development. I talked about that last week.

And as I said, we’re consulting allies and partners, and I think we plan to lay out in coming days what we’re seeing on this and lay out a little bit more about the consultations we’re having with partners.

But I also think — and this kind of gets to your second question — we also need to look at this for what it also is, and that is another demonstration of Putin’s growing desperation and his growing isolation that he’s got to reach out to North Korea for potential — potential — as I said, we’re looking into the reports — potential infantry support to his ground operations. There’s no question about it that his forces continue to suffer an extraordinary amount of casualties on the battlefield. As I said last week, you know, the estimate we have now is more than a thousand — actually, more than 1,200 — per day. And that is a truly historic amount of soldiers killed and wounded in this fight, all to accomplish a warped and twisted idea of his about Ukraine’s ability to exist as a sovereign state.

So I come back to what you said — your second question about, you know, what does this say about Russia’s isolation. I think all of this says and proves the point that Mr. Putin is increasingly desperate and increasingly isolated on the world stage.

Q John, I just want to thank you for keeping up with that question. That was very impressive. Thank you very much.

MR. KIRBY: This time I took notes.

MODERATOR: Thank you. Our next question will go to Laura Kelly with The Hill.

Q Hi. Thank you so much for taking my question. Speaking to Moldova’s election, you said that Russia did not succeed, although it’s not necessarily viewed as black and white. While Russia was likely pushing for a “no” vote on the referendum, the result of such a slim margin makes it harder for the Moldovan government to put resources toward EU integration, and this is likely in Russia’s favor.

So, in Russian interference efforts ahead of the runoff election are likely to continue, you know, what lessons is the U.S. learning about Russia’s power to sway elections? And is the U.S. doing anything more or different to help the Moldovan government combat Russia election interference?

MR. KIRBY: We’re in touch with the Moldovans every single day, and that includes this day, about the vibrancy, the vitality of their democratic institutions and their electoral process.

And, yes, we know there’s a runoff coming, and we have every expectation that the Russians are going to want to try to affect that runoff. So we’re going to continue to work with the Moldovans in ways, public and non-public, about how they can improve their resiliency to that kind of influence.

And I think I stand by what I said before: Russia was not successful. They did not want to see the Moldovan people strive for or get a referendum that approved EU integration. And that’s what happened. I get that it was a slim margin. I have no doubt in my mind, and none of us here do, that the Russians tried to contribute to the “no” vote. Now, to what degree, I couldn’t quantify how successful they were in terms of the overall percentage of the “no” vote, but we know they were pushing really, really hard to affect it.

Bottom line is it didn’t pass. And what did succeed was a “yes” vote on EU integration, and we think that’s an important step forward, and we think that that absolutely reflects the aspirations of the majority of the Moldovan people.

But nobody is sitting back crowing on this. Nobody is doing touchdown dances here. There’s a runoff coming, and we got to make sure we continue to work with the Moldovans to ensure that that runoff is done in a way that respects and is appropriate to the aspirations of the electorate in Moldova.

MODERATOR: Thank you. Our final question will go to Neria with Israel Channel 13.

Q Hi. Thank you so much, Sam. And thank you, Kirby, for doing that. I wanted to ask — you talked about talking to the Israelis about a possible solution for Gaza the day after Sinwar. Do you think — does the White House consider an international force controlling Gaza for a while until things would settle down?

MR. KIRBY: I’m not going to get ahead of where we are right now, except to say Secretary Blinken has been working on day-after options for months and months now. And I don’t — you know, we haven’t reached any, you know, final options on what a security footprint could look like in Gaza, how it would be comprised, where it would be deployed, who would run it. We just haven’t come to conclusion on those kinds of options.

But clearly, the people of Gaza, when this war is over, should have every right to seek peace and security and a way to go about their lives where they don’t have to worry about those lives being shattered by violence.

And so, there’s going to have to be a security footprint here and a security component to whatever the day after looks like. It’s just that we’re still working our way through that with not only the Israelis, but with our Arab partners. And I would go so far as to say we’re also working that through with Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinian Authority as well.

Q Great. Thank you so much.

MR. KIRBY: Yes, ma’am.

MODERATOR: Thank you. And unfortunately, that’s all the time we have today. As always, if we weren’t able to get to your questions, reach out to the press distro, and we’ll get back as soon as we can. Thanks.

12:36 P.M. EDT