HomeOffice of the SpokespersonBriefings…Department Press Briefing – May 6, 2024

# 											Department Press Briefing – May 6, 2024									

Matthew Miller, Department Spokesperson

May 6, 2024

## 										Article Index									

              - ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES/REGION
              - RUSSIA/CHINA/REGION
              - ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES/REGION
              - RUSSIA/REGION
              - GEORGIA
              - ARMENIA/AZERBAIJAN/REGION
              - IRAN/IRAQ/REGION
              - RUSSIA/CHINA/REGION
              - SAUDI ARABIA/ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES/REGION
              - UKRAINE/RUSSIA/REGION
              - GEORGIA/RUSSIA/DEPARTMENT
              - SAUDI ARABIA/ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES/REGION
              - CANADA/INDIA
              - ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES/DEPARTMENT
              - RWANDA/DRC/REGION
              - MEXICO

1:47 p.m. EDT

**MR MILLER:** Good afternoon, everyone.

**QUESTION:** Good afternoon.

**MR MILLER:** Don’t have any opening comments, so to you, Matt.

**QUESTION:** You have nothing to say?

**MR MILLER:** I think I —

**QUESTION:** Nothing is going on in the world?

**MR MILLER:** I think I imagine what your first question is going to be, so –

**QUESTION:** Well, I figure —

**MR MILLER:** So go ahead.

**QUESTION:** You know what? I’m going to surprise you, because I don’t want – before we get into the long back and forth about Rafah and the ceasefire, I want to ask you if you can just answer this straight and – simply and straight about the Israeli closure of Al Jazeera. What is – what is your response?

**MR MILLER:** So we have seen the announcement from the Government of Israel about closing Al Jazeera. We have made quite clear that we support media freedom all around the world, including in Israel, and that we are quite concerned about this action.

**QUESTION:** You’re quite concerned about this action? Are you – are you asking the Israelis to do anything?

**MR MILLER:** So as the President said on May 3rd, journalists and media workers are an essential part of any democracy —

**QUESTION:** I know.

**MR MILLER:** — because well-informed dissent is critical to building stronger and more successful societies, and we will continue to support and advocate for free and independent media around the world. We think Al Jazeera ought to be able to operate in Israel, as they operate in other countries in the region.

**QUESTION:** Okay. So you oppose?

**MR MILLER:** We do.

**QUESTION:** You oppose this?

**MR MILLER:** We do.

**QUESTION:** Okay. All right. Then getting on to – so you’ve seen these reports in the last hour about Hamas accepting a ceasefire, but also the Israelis ordering or telling people in Rafah to get out. What’s your take on that?

**MR MILLER:** So I can confirm that Hamas has issued a response. We are reviewing that response now and discussing it with our partners in the region. As you know, Director Burns is in the region working on this in real time. We will be discussing this response with our partners over the coming hours. We continue to believe that a hostage deal is in the best interests of the Israeli people. It’s in the best interests of the Palestinian people. It would bring an immediate ceasefire. It would allow increased movement of humanitarian assistance. And so we’re going to continue to work to try to reach one.

**QUESTION:** And so – but you haven’t made any – yet made any determination about whether this is – whether they’re accepting what is on the table or they’re accepting something that is different?

**MR MILLER:** We have only received the response in the last hour, 90 minutes, and as I said, are going through it now and discussing with it – discussing it with partners in the region. So I don’t want to characterize the nature of that response just yet.

**QUESTION:** Okay. Thanks.

**MR MILLER:** Okay. Shannon.

**QUESTION:** Can I follow up on Al Jazeera?

**MR MILLER:** Wait. Shannon, go ahead.

**QUESTION:** Thank you. There have been some reports that – from Israel that perhaps Hamas agreed to a proposal that was put together by Egypt and Qatar that was softer than the initial framework that was in the works last week. Is it possible that there has been a different proposal that the U.S. is not involved with tracking?

**MR MILLER:** So I’ve seen those suggestions; I’ve seen some of those reports. And I think you’ll – I hope you’ll understand that because we are still reviewing the response that has come in and because we are working on this in real time and trying to reach an agreement, I’m just going to decline to comment in detail about any of those reports. We are going to be discussing this response with our partners in the region in the hours ahead. It remains our top priority to try to reach a ceasefire agreement that will lead to the release of hostages, that will allow a surge of humanitarian assistance both into Gaza and allow it to move around inside Gaza. But I don’t want to comment on any of the various reports about what they might have been responding to until we’ve been able to go through it in detail and come to a full understanding and discuss it with our partners.

**QUESTION:** And can you say at this point – maybe you can’t – but Hamas’s political wing and their militant wing, are they on the same page here? Do you feel like this is a response that at least indicates where the entire group is?

**MR MILLER:** I am just not going to – I am just not going to speak for Hamas at all. As we have said for some time, there has been a significant offer on the table. The ball has been in Hamas’s court. We have made clear that they should accept that offer, that Israel made significant compromises, showed that they wanted to reach an agreement that would lead to the release of hostages, that would bring an immediate ceasefire. And we have hoped that Hamas would take the deal that was on the table. Now, as to what’s in their response, what it looks like, we’re going to review that and withhold judgment until we’ve had a chance to conduct a full review.

Shaun.

**QUESTION:** Could I ask about the – this – the threatened Israeli offensive in Rafah? In the hours before this, there were lots of reports about evacuations – not just a report, but Israel is talking about evacuations from Rafah. How does this – what’s the U.S. message to this now? Do you think that Israel should hold off on the – on any operations in Rafah as we discuss this response from Hamas?

**MR MILLER:** Of course we do. We’ve made quite clear our position on Rafah for some time, which is that we cannot support an operation in Rafah as it is currently envisioned. We have made clear – the Secretary made this clear in his conversations with Prime Minister Netanyahu and other members of the Israeli Government last week – that we have not seen a humanitarian plan that is credible and that is implementable. And we believe a military operation in Rafah right now would dramatically increase the suffering of the Palestinian people, would lead to an increase in loss of civilian life, would dramatically disrupt the delivery of humanitarian assistance, all of which is coming through – I shouldn’t say “all,” but the great majority of which is coming through Kerem Shalom or Rafah and is being distributed inside the Rafah area. If you think about what it would do when you have people moving north to places where internal distribution lines are not currently set up and you’re going to have to try to re-establish those in the middle of conflict in Rafah, we think that would be very difficult, if not impossible, to do.

So even absent this latest response, we have made clear that we do not support Israel launching a full-scale military operation in Rafah.

**QUESTION:** Sure. I mean, you just said that in terms of – that’s the standard U.S. position on this. But has there been any communication with the Israelis about – I mean, in the past hours or so – about the response from Hamas and how this affects the situation in Rafah? Is there a message —

**MR MILLER:** I’m just not going to get into our – those conversations. As I said, we just literally in the past hour, 90 minutes received that response from Hamas in the first place. Of course, we will be discussing it with Egypt, with Qatar, with Israel – the three countries with whom we have been working throughout this negotiation process. But I don’t want to get into the timing of those, but obviously, if we have – if those conversations had not already started, they will be ongoing in the next several hours.

Humeyra.

**QUESTION:** Matt, under the current circumstances, do you still think a ceasefire is achievable, based on what you know coming here?

**MR MILLER:** I – what do you mean, is a ceasefire achievable?

**QUESTION:** Like —

**MR MILLER:** A ceasefire is what we are trying to achieve.

**QUESTION:** Yes, but I mean, it has —

**MR MILLER:** There is – there is —

**QUESTION:** — over the weekend there was, like, there was a quiet impasse, and right now Hamas has accepted it. But from Israel, we’re hearing that that’s not the proposal that we’ve sent; that’s a softened version. That throws into – the whole thing into doubt.

**MR MILLER:** Yeah. And I think I answered —

**QUESTION:** So I’m just wondering, like, what’s your sense here?

**MR MILLER:** A ceasefire is absolutely achievable. There has been a deal on the table – a proposal on the table – that would achieve an immediate ceasefire and the release of hostages. Now, as for Hamas’s response, which I think gets to your question, again, I don’t want to characterize it in any sort of detail until we’ve had a chance to review it in depth and talk with our partners in the region about it.

**QUESTION:** And one thing on the humanitarian aid. Last week, when the Secretary was in Israel, there was an increased emphasis on – in his – during his trip on the delivery of humanitarian aid. We visited Kerem Shalom, which got shut down over the weekend after the Hamas attack. But can you give us, like, a sense of what a Rafah offensive – how that would impact all of Gaza? Because there are issues with distribution in the north. If we have a Rafah offensive in the south, could there be any meaningful humanitarian aid delivery in the north?

**MR MILLER:** So let me just speak broadly to all of Gaza first, and then I’ll come to the north. So certainly a Rafah operation in – a Rafah operation would make it incredibly difficult to sustain the increases in humanitarian assistance that we have been able to deliver over the past few weeks since the President’s call with Prime Minister Netanyahu on April 4th. You have seen an increase in the number of trucks going in through Kerem Shalom; you have seen an increase in the distribution inside of Gaza, including inside southern Gaza. All of that would be put in jeopardy by a Rafah offensive because obviously, just look at what happened in the past 24 hours when you saw Hamas rocket attacks on Kerem Shalom that led to the death of three IDF soldiers and led to the closure of Kerem Shalom.

If you had an ongoing kinetic military operation, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out the impact that that would have on the delivery of humanitarian assistance – not just through Kerem Shalom, not just through Rafah gate, but of course inside all of Rafah and all of southern Gaza.

Now, separate from that, we have been working on standing up additional delivery mechanisms to get aid directly in to northern Gaza without having to go through Kerem Shalom – not because we anticipated an upcoming Rafah operation, but because it’s so difficult to get aid through Kerem Shalom and then move it all the way to the north of Gaza. So that’s why you saw the opening of Erez crossing, which is something that the President insisted on and something that we achieved last week when the Secretary was there, first in Jordan and then in Israel. So you can have trucks move directly from Jordan, through Erez crossing in the north, not have to go all the way to Kerem Shalom and come back up north. You saw Ashdod Port opening so goods can come directly from Ashdod and go in through a northern crossing, and it’s why we’re standing up the maritime operation.

So there will be ways to get humanitarian assistance in to northern Gaza directly; we have been working on those because it’s important to do so because we’ve seen how difficult it is to get aid from southern Gaza into northern Gaza. It’s hard to speculate what the impact of a Rafah operation would have on the delivery of that aid to northern Gaza, but certainly you can say without a doubt that it would dramatically impact the delivery of humanitarian assistance in southern Gaza.

Yeah, go ahead.

**QUESTION:** Just going off of that for a second, you said earlier – reiterated that the U.S. doesn’t support a full-scale invasion into Rafah. What about a limited invasion into Rafah?

**MR MILLER:** So I’m not going to speculate on the types of military operation. We —

**QUESTION:** It’s not speculating —

**MR MILLER:** No – so – no, I’m —

**QUESTION:** — the Israeli Government has said limited —

**MR MILLER:** I’m about to answer, Kylie. So there are proposals that we have put on the table – and this is why I’m not going to talk about some of this publicly — there are proposals that we have put on the table to the Israeli Government that we have discussed with them, that we think would be a much more limited, much more targeted, much more effective way of achieving their legitimate military – their legitimate military objectives, which is taking on the Hamas battalions that are remaining in Rafah. Those look very different than the types of operations that we have seen proposed publicly by the Israeli Government, and I think I’ll leave it at that.

**QUESTION:**So just to be clear, what you have proposed to them isn’t your understanding of what they are planning to go ahead with in the near future?

**MR MILLER:** I’m not going to speak to what they might be planning to go ahead with; I’ll let them speak to that. We’ve seen the announcement they made today about evacuation orders for not the entire – not entire southern Gaza, not entire – the entire Rafah area, but for a significant portion of it, 100,000 people. And I – of course we have concerns that any evacuation at all in such a crowded area, if you see 100,000 people move, you’re going to see other people in the next area move as well – which, of course, is something that you want to see happen if there is a military operation. But the problem now is there’s such limited places for them to go inside Gaza, and there is no effective way to distribute them – distribute aid to them and make sure they have access to shelter, access to sanitation, in the places that they would go if, say, you had hundreds of thousands of people moving from Rafah.

**QUESTION:** And then without characterizing the Hamas response, given you guys are still reviewing it, would you say it’s a hopeful sign that they have given a response here?

**MR MILLER:** I think that would be characterizing it, so I’m going to decline to do so until we have completed that review.

**QUESTION:** And when do you think you will be able to complete that review? When should we expect an assessment from the administration?

**MR MILLER:** The – Director Burns, as I said, is in the region literally working on this right now. I don’t want to put a timetable on it, but it is something that is a top priority for everyone in this administration from the President on down. You saw that the President had a phone call with Prime Minister Netanyahu today. Achieving a ceasefire deal that would lead to the release of hostages was one of the top priorities of the Secretary’s trip when he was in the region last week. So everyone is focused on this. Everyone is trying to get a deal over the line.

**QUESTION:** Thank you. Last week there was some reporting that the Biden administration had put a hold on a shipment of U.S.-made ammunition to Israel. Have you seen that report? Can you comment on its accuracy?

**MR MILLER:** I have seen that report. As is usually the case, we don’t comment on specific cases of arms transfers, and I’m not going to do so here.

**QUESTION:** (Off-mike.)

**MR MILLER:** Yeah, Said.

**QUESTION:** Thank you, Matt. Just to clarify on the offer, the offer that you said was generous and on the table and what seems to be accepted now. Does that mean that the ball is no longer in Hamas’s court?

**MR MILLER:** Said, it’s impossible for me to answer that question without characterizing the response that Hamas has given, which I’m not yet willing to do.

**QUESTION:** Okay, all right. On Al Jazeera, now we know that Israel is accusing the correspondents of Al Jazeera, our colleagues who are Israeli citizens by the way, accusing them of incitement that goes back many years and all these things, a crime that is punishable by imprisonment. Are you worried that these correspondents might actually be imprisoned by the Israelis? And if they are, what would the Government of the United States do?

**MR MILLER:** So I’m not going to speak to those specific allegations. It’s not something that we’ve reviewed in detail. We would have to do that. I’m certainly not going to speculate about what we might do in response to an action that has not yet been taken. I will just reiterate that when it comes to the decision to shutter Al Jazeera’s operations in Israel, it’s something that we are concerned by. We support the work that journalists and media do.

We have had – and I don’t think it’s any secret that we have had our differences with Al Jazeera —

**QUESTION:** Right, of course.

**MR MILLER:** — over the years, including in some of the ways in which they – that they cover this conflict. But we support the free media —

**QUESTION:** Right.

**MR MILLER:** — conducting their operations everywhere in the world.

**QUESTION:** Yeah, I think most countries have had an issue with Al Jazeera. Let me ask you about Rafah. Now the movement, 100,000 people and so on, now how many would need to move before Israel can go in and legitimately go after Hamas’s position? I mean, the area is so small – al-Mawasi, where they are moving and so on – just meters – kilometers away.

**MR MILLER:** It’s not —

**QUESTION:** What – would prevent, let’s say a Hamas fighter or Hamas leaders and so on to actually move to another place? They allegedly have a network of tunnels that would allow them to do that and so on. And then we have the same kind of situation. We see the Israelis saying we want to go after them in that area. I mean, how do you read this whole situation?

**MR MILLER:** So that is not really a question I can answer. I will just make clear, as I have already and as others in the administration including the President, including the Secretary have on a number of occasions, that an operation – a major operation in Rafah – is not something that we can support.

**QUESTION:** Yeah. And finally, I asked on Thursday about Dr. Adnan Al-Bursh. I was wrong. He wasn’t shot. He was – apparently he died and some say under torture and so on. I know that your colleague at the White House said what she said, that she was saddened and all these things, but have you followed up on this issue? How do you follow up on it? Because apparently they are keeping his corpse. I mean, they are not turning it to his family or others and so on for proper burial.

**MR MILLER:** It is one that we have raised with the Government of Israel. I don’t have a response to read out. We have made clear with Israel, as we have made clear publicly, that they must treat all detainees humanely and with dignity in accordance with international humanitarian law and that they must respect detainees’ human rights and also that they must ensure accountability for any abuses or violations.

**QUESTION:** Thank you.

**MR MILLER:** Yeah.

**QUESTION:** Hi, Matt. Since they took all the Al Jazeera questions, I’ll skip mine.

**MR MILLER:** No problem.

**QUESTION:** I just want to —

**MR MILLER:** Alex, did you have something?

**QUESTION:** No, no, no, no.

**QUESTION:** I just want to – because I’m a little bit confused, if you can clarify. So the Hamas response is not on the general’s proposal? It’s not – it’s not accepting this proposal?

**MR MILLER:** I think I made clear I am not going to characterize their response one way or the other until we’ve had a chance to fully review it, digest it, discuss it with our partners.

**QUESTION:** All right. My second question is about the pier that the United States is conducting. We believe we have, in our reporting, that it is close to being operational. Can you just tell us how this pier will operate? I mean, who will have the upper hand in all – in making this —

**MR MILLER:** So it is something that we have been trying to complete as soon as possible. And when I say we, I mean largely our colleagues at the Pentagon who are constructing the pier. We have been involved in liaising with humanitarian groups that will be involved in the distribution of humanitarian assistance once it comes in to Gaza, but with the actual timeline for the launch of the pier and its operation, any details I’m going to defer to the Pentagon to comment on those in any detail.

**QUESTION:** By the way, on the pier itself, it was – it was said over the weekend that it was moved to (inaudible) because of some high winds and waves and so on. Do you have any comment on that?

**MR MILLER:** I’m going to defer to the Pentagon for any of those operational kind of details.

**QUESTION:** Thank you.

**MR MILLER:** They’re the ones that are responsible for constructing and moving it and ultimately launching it.

Michel, go ahead, and we’ll do a few more in the Middle East before we —

**QUESTION:** Did you ask Qatar to expel Hamas leaders from Doha – from Doha, and is it the time for these leaders to leave?

**MR MILLER:** I am not going to speak to private diplomatic conversations. As we have said a number of times, the Secretary in his conversations has made clear with a number of partners in the region that any relationship they have with Hamas, any influence they have with Hamas, they should use to make clear to Hamas that it – to Hamas that it needs to accept a ceasefire deal that includes the release of hostages. And he has also made clear publicly that at the end of this process there can be – there can no longer be business as usual with Hamas, as existed in too many places before October 7th. And I think I’ll decline to comment for any further.

**QUESTION:** Thank you.

**MR MILLER:** Any more on the region? Yeah, go ahead.

**QUESTION:** In the region on —

**MR MILLER:** Go ahead.

**QUESTION:** Thank you. For World Press Freedom Day last week, the Secretary did put out a statement about that. I’m just curious as to why that was a decision not to mention the Gaza war, granted that many journalists have been affected by a lack of press freedom around the world and that – and also being killed in various conflicts, but there was a substantial number of journalists that were killed in Israel and Gaza at the end of last year. Was there a reason why that wasn’t mentioned?

**MR MILLER:** No. The Secretary has spoken to that a number of times, including in the region, including speaking directly to the colleagues of journalists in some instances who have lost their life tragically. We mourn the death of every journalist. You’ve heard the Secretary speak to the fact that it is because of journalists in Gaza that we see what’s happening, that the world knows what’s happening. And so we support their work. We want to see it continued. And we mourn the loss of every journalist, and I’ve spoken to that many times since the outbreak of this conflict.

**QUESTION:** Thank you.

**MR MILLER:** Go ahead.

**QUESTION:** Well, just one more on the —

**MR MILLER:** Yeah.

**QUESTION:** Or just on Kerem Shalom.

**MR MILLER:** Yeah.

**QUESTION:** Is it your understanding that the Israelis have agreed to reopen it after the attack that happened on Sunday?

**MR MILLER:** So, yes, that was a – if you looked at the readout from the President’s call —

**QUESTION:** Yeah, but —

**MR MILLER:** — it noted that the prime minister had agreed to open it in that conversation.

**QUESTION:** Okay. Because the Secretary was just there on Wednesday, and you believed that Kerem Shalom was critical —

**MR MILLER:** It is —

**QUESTION:** — with or without a Rafah —

**MR MILLER:** It is —

**QUESTION:** operation.

**MR MILLER:** Kerem Shalom is absolutely critical to the delivery of humanitarian assistance in Gaza, especially in southern Gaza now that we’ve stood up operations in the north. But —

**QUESTION:** Right. So is it open now, do you know?

**MR MILLER:** I do not know if it’s been reopened. I’ll say it was an incredibly cynical act for Hamas to attack Kerem Shalom yesterday knowing that Kerem Shalom is the linchpin to the delivery of humanitarian assistance in Gaza. It goes to this point we’ve made on a number of occasions that Hamas claims that they represent the interests of the Palestinian people, but when you see some of their actions – and we talk about them hiding behind humans, using them as human shields all the time. When you see them attacking the gate that serves as the delivery point – as we saw if you were there last week, as we saw with our own eyes – the delivery point for humanitarian assistance into Gaza, it really does undermine any claim that they have to acting on the people of Gaza’s behalf.

**QUESTION:** Thank you.

**QUESTION:** Can I switch regions?

**MR MILLER:** Let me – I’ll come back to you. Go ahead.

**QUESTION:** Thanks, Matthew. What action would the U.S. take if Israel were to invade Rafah?

**MR MILLER:** We have made clear that we cannot support an operation, and I don’t want to speculate on what actions we might take if one should proceed.

**QUESTION:** Okay. And what’s the department’s reaction to Türkiye suspending trade ties with Israel?

**MR MILLER:** I don’t have any comment on that. They are both allies of ours, and we would encourage them to work through their differences, but I don’t have any specific comment.

**QUESTION:** And finally, what is the department doing to hold the CCP accountable for continued Chinese assistance to Russia’s defense sector?

**MR MILLER:** So you heard the Secretary speak to this when he was in China and made clear that China can’t have it both ways. They can’t claim to be a partner of Europe on the one hand and then continue to fund the greatest threat to European security since the end of the Cold War on the other hand. He raised this directly with President Xi. He raised it with Director and Foreign Minister Wang Yi. And he made clear in those meetings that if China didn’t act, we would. And a couple of updates to that. You saw us roll out additional sanctions on Chinese entities who have supported Russia’s defense industrial base last week.

And then I want to note that we’ve made clear that it is not just the United States that is concerned about China’s activities, but it is also our partners in – and allies in Europe. And you know President Xi is in Europe today meeting with President Macron, meeting with the president of the EU. And if you noted the comments from the Government of France, they very much intended to press this same case with President Xi and make clear what a threat they see – that they see it the way we see it, which is that it is a threat not just to Ukraine but is a threat to European security. And we think it’s important that our allies and partners stand strong in sending that message as well.

**QUESTION:** And just one more?

**MR MILLER:** Yeah.

**QUESTION:** And what is the department’s message today given it’s Yom HaShoah, Israel’s Holocaust Remembrance Day, especially with Israel having suffered several months ago the largest single-day massacre of Jews since the Holocaust? And I note the Secretary’s step-father —

**MR MILLER:** Yeah, the Secretary put out a statement on that yesterday —

**QUESTION:** Oh, okay.

**MR MILLER:** — where he reiterated what has been our continuing message, which is never again. And I think you’ll see this President speak to this further.

**QUESTION:** Matt, can I piggyback off —

**MR MILLER:** (Inaudible) go ahead.

**QUESTION:** Matt, you said you (inaudible) —

**QUESTION:** Thank you.

**QUESTION:** — for a limited – more limited operation in Rafah. And you’re working – you are working on a ceasefire with your partners. What comes first? I mean, you share the objective, you said, with the Israelis that they have to defeat Hamas in Rafah. But since you are working on a ceasefire, it’s a little bit confusing what you support. What’s the priority here?

**MR MILLER:** Our immediate objective is to achieve a ceasefire that alleviates the suffering of Palestinian people, that secures the release of hostages, and then we want to build that ceasefire, as we have made clear, into something more sustained and something longer lasting. I’m – a little bit of a bind here because I can’t really speak to the options that we have proposed to Israel – you can see why we would want to keep those confidential – but we have proposed options that we believe are more effective and would be more effective in dealing with the threat that Hamas poses. And those are options that they could pursue, and I think I’ll leave it – I’m – unfortunately, I have to leave it at that.

**QUESTION:** One more question. In case these negotiations fail, are you preparing for a worst-case scenario that the Israeli went into Rafah – goes into Rafah and this lasts until the fall?

**MR MILLER:** Of course we are prepared for every scenario, but I don’t think I want to read out what actions we might take.

**QUESTION:** For every scenario?

**MR MILLER:** Well, that’s a fair point, Matt – every scenario that you can reasonably predict we prepare for.

**QUESTION:** Well, what happens if, like, aliens come down?

**MR MILLER:** That’s why I said every scenario you can reasonably predict.

**QUESTION:** Are you prepared for that one too?

**MR MILLER:** If that happens, I’ll run to the hills with – right behind you, probably.

Nike, go ahead.

**QUESTION:** Yeah. Are we ready to move on to different region?

**QUESTION:** Could I just do one more?

**MR MILLER:** Shaun – yeah, Shaun, go ahead.

**QUESTION:** I know you —

**MR MILLER:** Sorry, Nike. I tried. Let the record reflect I called on you, and Shaun, the head of the State Department Correspondent Association, stepped on your question.

**QUESTION:** Yes, I – exactly. Well, I’ll gladly defer to Nike – gladly defer to Nike after this, as – I figure you’re not – probably not going to answer this, but the – just —

**MR MILLER:** For a question I’m not even going to answer, too.

**QUESTION:** Exactly.

**MR MILLER:** Sorry. Go ahead.

**QUESTION:** But just a couple of – on a serious note – just a couple of moments ago, the Israeli army saying that the evacuation orders that it issued earlier – confirming that this is preparation for a ground invasion. I know they’ve been speaking about a ground invasion in – a ground operation in general for some time. Do you have any further comment on that? I mean the – this – whether – do you have signs that the Israelis are actually going ahead imminently with a ground operation?

**MR MILLER:** I’m just not going to speak to their military activities. We have made quite clear that we oppose a military operation there and I’m going to leave it at that.

Nike, go ahead.

**QUESTION:** Thank you. On Russia, Russia President Vladimir Putin will be set to start another six-year term on Tuesday. Do you have anything on that? I understand U.S. Ambassador Tracy is currently out of the country. My question is: Is anyone from the U.S. embassy attending his inauguration ceremony, or is the U.S. joining other countries to boycott?

**MR MILLER:** No, we will not have a representative at his inauguration.

**QUESTION:** U.S. is boycotting?

**MR MILLER:** We will not have a representative there. You can draw your own conclusions.

Alex, go ahead.

**QUESTION:** Thank you, Matt. Does that mean that you don’t consider Putin a legitimate president?

**MR MILLER:** He – we certainly did not consider that election free and fair, but he is the president of Russia and is going to continue in that capacity.

**QUESTION:** Let me get your immediate reaction to reports about Russia’s planned nuclear drills. How much it will complicate the situation, and what kind of response will that invite from the United States?

**MR MILLER:** So Russia’s rhetoric – their nuclear rhetoric – has been reckless and irresponsible throughout this conflict. That said, we have not seen any reason to adjust our own nuclear posture in response to these announcements, nor any indications that Russia is preparing to use a nuclear weapon in Ukraine.

**QUESTION:** Thank you. I have two more on South Caucasus, if I may. On Georgia, we had a protest in front of this building on Saturday. Georgian Americans were asking the State Department to impose sanctions on Ivanishvili and the GD MPs – not for actions that they might or might not take, but the actions they have taken already. So are you considering any measure?

**MR MILLER:** I’m just not going to make any sanctions announcements, whether that relates to what we might do or what we are considering, as is typically our practice here.

**QUESTION:** We heard from senior officials, this building – it feels like you guys are – you guys expecting some U-turn in this case or some offramp by suggesting that Ivanishvili might be misinformed, so all the statements we have heard from him are not his or his – or reflecting his viewpoints. Is that a reflection of what we have heard from them?

**MR MILLER:** I’m not going to characterize at all. We are going to keep pressing our case, which is we believe that the law that they are considering would put Georgia on a precarious trajectory. It would jeopardize Georgia’s Euro-Atlantic path and undermine the U.S.-Georgia relationship, and we will continue to make that clear, and they will make their own decisions.

**QUESTION:** And thank you. On – finally, on Armenia-Azerbaijan, ambassador to Baku today for the first time visited Karabakh. Let me get your sense of significance of it and where in – this week there will be ministerial in Kazakhstan. What are your expectations —

**MR MILLER:** I don’t have any comment on that or any expectations.

Go ahead.

**QUESTION:** Yeah. Thank you, Matt. A question on Iran. As you may be aware, the IKR president, Nechervan Barzani, he’s in Iran with an official visit with a purpose finding solutions to the disputes between Iraq, Iran, and Kurdistan region. How does the U.S. view this visit and efforts? Do you have any comments on that?

**MR MILLER:** So we have consistently encouraged de-escalation in the region, but we don’t have any comment about the specifics of that trip. I would leave it to the Kurdistan Regional Government to comment more in detail on President Barzani’s travel.

**QUESTION:** And one more question: Do you think that having these kinds of discussion with Iran could help and lift any impacts on the Iraqi stability? Because we witnessed they attacked the Iraqi Kurdistan and there were a lot of tensions between these two capitals.

**MR MILLER:** So I don’t want to speak to these specific conversations, but of course we have always encouraged any conversations that would lead to de-escalation and would lead to further stability in the region, including vis-a-vis Iran, which of course has been one of the greatest contributors to instability in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East.

**QUESTION:** And last question, as we are speaking of Iran. Minutes ago, the Iranian foreign minister put a post on X and he said that we sent Hamas response to the plan proposed by Egypt and Qatar. What he says that – he said that to stop the attacks by Israel, and second, exchange prisoners, and thirdly, the human blockades. And now the ball in the opposite court, we are honest with – in our intentions. This is what he posted. So how do you see the Iranian role in bringing that Gaza the conflict into the end and —

**MR MILLER:** Bringing a Gaza conflict to an end? I see no Iranian role in bringing a Gaza conflict to an end. You’ve seen Iran be one of the greatest instigators of this conflict in the first place, from financing Hamas and supporting Hamas to financing and supporting Hizballah and other groups that have contributed dramatically to instability, not just when it comes to attacks on Israel but when you look at the – their proxy, the Houthis, and attacking international shipping, and greatly destabilizing the region. So no, I don’t see Iran playing any kind of productive role.

**QUESTION:** And they are not the —

**MR MILLER:** That would be – that would be completely out of character for them.

**QUESTION:** They are not honest with their intentions, what he said on his post?

**MR MILLER:** They’re not what?

**QUESTION:** Honest with their intentions?

**MR MILLER:** With their – Iran’s honest with their intentions? No, I would not characterize them as honest with their intentions. When it comes to the specific comments that they made about Hamas’s response, I’m not going to comment on those, because as I said, we’re reviewing their response, so I don’t want to confirm what may or may not have been in it.

**QUESTION:** Thank you.

**MR MILLER:** Go ahead.

**QUESTION:** Thank you, Matt. So can I just get your reaction to this? Over the weekend, a Moscow court sentenced a Russian Falun Gong practitioner to two months in detention for her beliefs. It’s the only other country outside of communist China to incarcerate a citizen for the meditation practice. Jake Sullivan said that he wasn’t surprised by this, as China’s – Russia relies on China’s economic and technological support. So given these circumstances, what’s the State Department doing to address the broader implications of the spread of China’s persecution of Falun Gong into Russia, possibly in exchange for support?

**MR MILLER:** Let me take that back and get you a specific response, since it relates to this one case that you mentioned.

**QUESTION:** Thank you.

**MR MILLER:** Yeah. Go ahead.

**QUESTION:** A little over a week ago, China held unification, unity talks between Hamas leaders and Fatah. Sir – and they – I think it resulted in them just saying that they’re agreeing to —

**MR MILLER:** Keep talking, yeah.

**QUESTION:** Keep talking? What’s your reaction to China being involved in unity talks between these —

**MR MILLER:** So I don’t have any reaction to them playing a role in these talks. We saw previous talks take place between Hamas and Fatah in Moscow. They’ve held talks in other locations. Leaving that aside, we have long said that if China wanted to play a productive role in bringing this conflict to an end, that it’s something that we would welcome. If they wanted to play a productive role in helping prevent escalation in the region, that is something we would also welcome. The Secretary has spoken to his counterpart, Director Wang Yi, six times since October 7th to press this case, to press China to use all of its influence in the region. And we will continue to press them to do that.

We think there certainly are countries that they have a relationship – with whom they have a relationship in the region, including countries, most notably Iran, with whom we don’t really have a relationship. So if China can bring its influence to bear, that would be a productive step for it – it would be a productive step that it could take that would benefit the region and benefit the entire world.

**QUESTION:** One more on Saudi Arabia.

**MR MILLER:** Yeah.

**QUESTION:** The other day, you had said that in order for normalization to take place between Saudi Arabia and Israel, that Saudi Arabia is looking for calm in Gaza —

**MR MILLER:** Correct.

**QUESTION:** — as well as a path to peace. That path to peace, is that the Oslo Accords? Is that something different than Oslo? Is that expanding on Oslo or —

**MR MILLER:** So I don’t want to get into the details, because it’s something that we still continue to talk with Saudi Arabia about, but it is a path to the establishment of an independent Palestinian state with security guarantees for Israel. And the details of what that would look like is something that we’re continuing to discuss with them.

**QUESTION:** So would that make Oslo irrelevant?

**MR MILLER:** I just – I don’t want to – it’s a – it is a negotiation and a discussion that is ongoing right now; I don’t want to characterize it in any way with respect to how it would interact with past agreements.

**QUESTION:** Thank you.

**MR MILLER:** Yeah, go ahead.

**QUESTION:** Thank you.

**MR MILLER:** Yeah.

**QUESTION:** A ceasefire deal doesn’t end the war in Gaza. It means returning to fighting again and more Palestinian civilian victims, as it’s happened daily – ten of thousands have already murdered due to the bombing and the famine imposed by Israel, most of them children and women. My question: Why the U.S. doesn’t intervene to stop the war completely – I mean, permanent ceasefire – especially that the Palestinian civilian killed with the American weapon?

**MR MILLER:** So we have been working incredibly hard – it has been the focus of most of this briefing – to achieve an immediate ceasefire that would stop the fighting in Gaza and would alleviate the suffering of the Palestinian people, those who have died as a result of the conflict and also those who are suffering as a result of lack of humanitarian aid or inability to access humanitarian aid.

Now, that’s the first step. We want to get an immediate ceasefire and then we do want to see it turn into something more durable. We’re going to try to work to bring this conflict to an end as soon as possible. That said – and I know I’ve – hammer on this – have hammered on this in the past and the Secretary hammers it on the past – has hammered it in the past – Hamas could achieve an immediate ceasefire right now. Hamas, the entity that started this conflict by murdering civilians – innocent civilians – could lay down their arms, could surrender and stop putting the Palestinian people in harm’s way.

So it – when people ask questions about Israel that are legitimate questions, and when they ask questions about us that are legitimate questions, I hope people will also realize that Hamas plays – played the instigator role in beginning this conflict and could end it today if they wanted to.

**QUESTION:** But it’s not permanent. It’s temporary.

**MR MILLER:** We are – as I – I just spoke to that in my answer.

**QUESTION:** Yes. Excuse me, I want a question.

**MR MILLER:** Yeah, go ahead.

**QUESTION:** That IDF already requested the people in Rafah to evacuate. I wonder if the evacuation for Palestinian in Rafah across the Egyptian border is being considered.

**MR MILLER:** So Egypt has made quite clear that they do not want to see the displacement of the Palestinian people. It’s not just Egypt. We have heard that from virtually every country in the region: that they do not want to see Palestinians displaced because of the very unfortunate history in that regard. And we have made clear to the Israeli Government that Palestinian – the Palestinian people shouldn’t be replaced – or displaced.

Now, one of the major risks of a full-scale Rafah operation is that it would destabilize that border between Gaza and Egypt and would lead to that sort of displacement, which would destabilize the Sinai Peninsula, of course. It’s another reason why we believe such an operation is a bad idea in the first place.

**QUESTION:** Okay.

**MR MILLER:** Yeah, go ahead in the back.

**QUESTION:** Thank you very much. U.S. House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries said on Sunday that the United States will have to send troops to Ukraine if Ukraine is defeated in conflict with Russia. Any chances that is a real option for —

**MR MILLER:** I’m just not going to comment on statements made by members of Congress. The President has made clear that he will not send U.S. troops to fight in Ukraine.

**QUESTION:** Okay. And one more question. Can you explain why is it okay for the United States to have a law on foreign agents and it’s not okay for Georgia, Russia to have one?

**MR MILLER:** So the difference is in the nature of those laws. When you see the United States Foreign Agents Registration Act, it is to people who are acting on behalf of a foreign government, not people who are doing legitimate nongovernment organization work, who are doing humanitarian work, who are doing civil society work. It’s a very different type of thing. I’ve seen those false equivalencies drawn in the past. And when you look at the text of the proposal in Georgia and the text of the proposal that has been passed due to Kremlin influence in other countries, they are very different than the type of law that we have on the books here in the United States.

Go ahead.

**QUESTION:** Thank you very much. Question is regarding the ministers’ priorities on the normalization talks regarding Saudi Arabia and Israel. As National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan mentioned, insisted, in an interview that the administration will enter in any defense pact with Saudi Arabia if only they normalize ties with Israel. So question is: Is it diplomacy of United States for integration of Israel in the Middle East or it’s another defense pact by the United States to counter Iranian-backed movements in future from the Middle East?

**MR MILLER:** I’m not sure I completely understand the question. But I will say I don’t want to get too much into the details of our negotiations with Saudi Arabia and the ongoing discussions, but that we continue to work to finalize both the bilateral pieces of such an agreement as well as what the pathway to an independent Palestinian state would look like.

**QUESTION:** Secondly, Canadian authorities arrested three individuals linked with the killing of Sikh leader Hardeep Singh Nijjar. The United States have many findings on the connections of Indian foreign operations at U.S. soil, as *Wall Street Journal* reported last week regarding the connection of Indian Government with some targets here in the United States. So with this recent development, what do United States have more to take up with the Indian administration?

**MR MILLER:** So I would refer you to the Canadian authorities to speak to the details of the investigation there. With respect to the indictment that was returned in the United States, I’ll let the Department of Justice speak on behalf of that in detail. And then the only thing further I’d say: When it comes to the State Department, we made clear when these allegations were first made public that it’s something we think India should take very seriously and investigate. They opened a Committee of Enquiry to look into the matter, and that work is ongoing, and we’ll wait to see the results. But we made very clear that it’s something that we take seriously and we think it’s something they should take seriously as well.

 Hudson.

**QUESTION:** Matt, apologies for not asking in the Israel section, but I have nosebleed seats today so I didn’t get it. But —

**MR MILLER:** I’m just – I’m just happy to see you here in the briefing.

**QUESTION:** Great to be here. In response to the Axios report that the U.S. is withholding an ammunition shipment to Israel, the Biden administration has told several reporters around town that the U.S. has surged weapons into Israel since October 7th. I’m kind of curious about this response because for much of the conflict, the administration has downplayed reports about the near-constant approval and shipment of arms to Israel. I’m just wondering if you could clarify, what’s the case? Has the U.S. been surging weapons to Israel since October 7th or not?

**MR MILLER:** So we have provided weapons to Israel since October 7th. We have always made clear that we are committed to Israel’s defense. That commitment to Israel’s security remains ironclad, and that includes providing security assistance to Israel since October 7th to ensure that the attacks of October 7th can never be repeated.

**QUESTION:** Thanks.

**MR MILLER:** Kylie, and then I’ll come to Humeyra.

**QUESTION:** Can you just provide us an update on the NSM-20 report and if it’ll go to Congress on time, when it’s due on Wednesday?

**MR MILLER:** The only update I have is that we continue to work on it, and we’ll have more to say about it later in the week.

**QUESTION:** You can’t say that it’s on track to be delivered on time?

**MR MILLER:** It’s on track. We’re working on it. I just don’t have any updates. It is our intention to provide it on time, and we’ll have more updates as we get closer to the deadline.

**QUESTION:** And just two quick questions on it. I know you don’t want to get into it, but I still have two questions. There are concerns among lawmakers that the Political-Military Bureau in this building is leading the drafting of the report, and I wonder how you respond to that.

**MR MILLER:** So I’m not going to get into the internal mechanisms that we go through to develop such a report, but I will say that a broad spectrum of the department will contribute to this report. People will have a chance to make their views known. People will have a chance to offer their assessments of what they’ve seen. It’s important that different bureaus inside the department which bring different skills to bear and different points of view and different capabilities have the chance to review both of the section – both of the tasks that we were given in the report, both when it comes to compliance with international humanitarian law and the delivery of humanitarian assistance, and we expect all of them to speak candidly about what they’ve seen and make their recommendations and make their honest assessments, and we’ll deliver a report that reflects that.

**QUESTION:** And one more question. The memorandum requires all recipients of U.S. weaponry, including Israel, to make assurances that they’re using those weapons, quote, “in a manner consistent with all applicable international and domestic law and policy, including international humanitarian law and international human rights law.” Will U.S. officials at the department be probing those assurances that they get from Israeli officials if there’s reason to believe that they aren’t credible assurances?

**MR MILLER:** So we are taking very seriously the task that we were giving – that was given to us in this national security memorandum, and it pertains not just with respect to Israel but with other countries as well that receive U.S.-provided security assistance. So the initial step was to get assurances from those seven countries that they were complying with international humanitarian law and that they were not impeding the delivery of humanitarian assistance. We’ve received those assurances I think probably 43 days ago, somewhere around that, and now we are going through and looking at compliance with international humanitarian law and the delivery of humanitarian assistance. I don’t want to get into – too much in detail because we are close to when a report will be delivered and I should wait and let the report speak for itself, but it is – I can tell you it is something that we take incredibly seriously and there is a lot of work going on at the department to make sure we fulfill that obligation and we fulfill it thoroughly.

**QUESTION:** So you’re not taking those assurances on face value?

**MR MILLER:** I – let me just let the report speak for itself when it comes out, but it is something that we are absolutely taking seriously, and we are looking at a whole host of activities and actions when it comes to any one of the governments – the relevant governments in this case, and we’ll be making our own assessments not just based on what those governments have told us but based on what we have seen in our review here at the State Department.

**QUESTION:** Thank you.

**MR MILLER:** Humeyra, go ahead.

**QUESTION:** Just one thing on that, actually, Matt. So when the report is produced, we have reported that there are people – there are some U.S. officials at the State Department who have raised serious concerns about Israel’s possible noncompliance with international humanitarian law, and what they say is its arbitrary restrictions on humanitarian aid. So when you produce that report, you’re basically weighing in on whether the assurances are credible or not. Is there going to be a section where you address those countering, let’s say, opinions from different bureaus, or is it just going to be we found that credible or not?

**MR MILLER:** You – this is going to be a very unsatisfying answer, but you are just going to have to wait until —

**QUESTION:** I’m used to that.

**MR MILLER:** Yeah, sorry about that – until the report is complete. But I will say that one of the strengths of this department is that we have people with a rich diversity of experiences, a rich diversity of expertise, and a rich diversity of views, and the Secretary takes all of those seriously. He takes all of their points of view seriously, and the entire senior leadership of the department looks at the entire landscape when compiling – when going through an exercise and compiling a report like the one we are doing here.

**QUESTION:** Right. But really, from a format point of view, it’s just going to have, like, one assessment?

**MR MILLER:** I know, and I’m just – that I’m not – and that I’m just not going to speak to today.

**QUESTION:** Okay. And will there be a – because you said – in your answer to Kylie you said we collect recommendations. Can you confirm there is going to be a recommendation one way or the other from the legal department?

**MR MILLER:** I’m just not going to speak to the internal mechanisms of a report that is still being compiled.

**QUESTION:** Okay, thank you.

**QUESTION:** Can I just follow up on that?

**MR MILLER:** Go ahead, Said, and then Shaun, and then we’ll wrap for the day.

**QUESTION:** Yeah, very quickly, but on breaking international law and so on, is the threatening of the ICC by Israel or even by members of Congress itself a violation of international law, the threat itself?

**MR MILLER:** I am not enough of an expert in international humanitarian law to speak to that.

**QUESTION:** Okay. But this department —

**MR MILLER:** We have made clear that we do not believe the ICC has jurisdiction in this case and oppose their investigation.

**QUESTION:** Yeah, yeah. I’m just saying the threatening of the ICC by Israel.

**MR MILLER:** I see. You should take it up with an international humanitarian lawyer.

Go ahead, Shaun.

**QUESTION:** Sure. On two things – two different topics. Rwanda – the Rwandan Government didn’t really like a statement that you issued last week saying that the Rwandan Defence Forces were involved in the attack near Goma on the east of the DRC, saying that the statement’s ridiculous and that the Rwandan forces weren’t involved in that. Do you stand by that? Has there been any communication with Rwanda?

**MR MILLER:** We absolutely do. The attack in question came from the Rwandan Defence Forces and M23 positions on the Mugunga IDP camp. The Government of Rwanda must investigate this heinous act and hold all of those responsible accountable, and we have made that clear to them.

**QUESTION:** Has there been any communication directly with the Rwandans themselves?

**MR MILLER:** I’m not going to speak to diplomatic conversations, but we have made quite clear what we think about this act and the fact it ought to be investigated.

**QUESTION:** Great. And then a completely different topic, Mexico. The three surfers who were killed, one of them an American – I don’t know if you – do you have any lines, any communications with the U.S. on that?

**MR MILLER:** Yeah. So we can confirm the death of a U.S. citizen, Carter Rhoad, near Ensenada, Mexico, and are closely monitoring the situation. We offer our sincere condolences to the family on their loss. We are coordinating with local law enforcement on their investigation into the matter, and out of respect for the privacy of the family, we will decline to comment further at this time.

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

**QUESTION:** Thank you.

(The briefing was concluded at 2:35 p.m.)

# # #

Tags

ArmeniaAzerbaijanCanadaChinaDemocratic Republic of the CongoGeorgiaIndiaIranIraqIsraelMexicoOffice of the SpokespersonPalestinian TerritoriesRussiaRwandaSaudi ArabiaUkraine

Back to Top