# Ghana - United States Department of State

- Digital Press Briefing on the U.S.-Africa Business Summit Joy Basu, Deputy Assistant SecretaryBureau of African AffairsAlice Albright, CEO, Millennium Challenge CorporationReta Jo Lewis, President and Chair of the Board of Directors, Export-Import Bank of the United StatesMODERATOR:  Good afternoon to everyone from the U.S. Department of State’s Africa Regional Media Hub.  I welcome our participants logging in from across the continent and thank all of you for joining this discussion on the topic of the ongoing U.S.-Africa Business Summit in Dallas, Texas.  Today, we are very pleased to be joined by the U.S. Department of State’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of African Affairs, Joy Basu, the Chief Executive Officer of the Millennium Challenge Corporation, Alice Albright, and President of the Export-Import Bank of the United States, Reta Jo Lewis.  Our speakers will review the 2024 U.S.-Africa Business Summit in Dallas and how the U.S. works to increase trade and investment in Africa. We will begin today’s briefing with opening remarks from our speakers and then we’ll turn to your questions.  We’ll try to get to as many of them as we can during the briefing. So with that, I’d like to turn it over to the president of the Export-Import Bank of the United States, Reta Jo Lewis, for her opening remarks.  MS LEWIS:  Good morning and thank you very much.  It is such a pleasure to be here with all of you to speak about the Export-Import Bank of the United States’ commitment to fostering economic collaboration with nations in Africa.  The Export-Import Bank – as we call it, EXIM – is the official export credit agency of the United States.  We actually were established as of February – this February – 90 years ago.  EXIM has played a very critical role in fostering economic opportunity for U.S. companies and for partnering nations that American companies do business with around the world.   It is very exciting to be here at the Corporate Council on Africa’s U.S. annual meeting, and it has given us an opportunity to talk about the work that we have and to make some major announcements.  As those of you who do not know, EXIM offers direct loans, loan guarantees, and insurance products backed by the full faith and credit of the United States to support the exports of U.S.-made goods and services.   So we were actually proud to be able to announce that – on Tuesday, we announced alongside the president of Angola, where we participated in a signing ceremony to celebrate the closing of three key partnerships for global infrastructure and investment, PGII projects, in Angola.  The projects that we signed are historic direct loans for more than 900 million to support the construction of two solar energy power plants in Angola.  The project is the largest renewable energy project and largest transaction in Sub-Saharan Africa in EXIM’s 90-year history.   We also celebrated the closing of a 363 million transaction on the – our China and Transformational Export Program, which we call CTEP, which goes to support the export of small business Acrow Corporation’s prefabricated modular steel bridges and related equipment to construct bridge infrastructure across Angola.   And then the final transaction that we were able to announce with President Lourenço and signed by his minister of finance, Minister Vera Daves, was a final transaction for 42 million to support Gates Air’s export of EXIM – of FM transmitters, towers, training, and other equipment.  This authorization is going to help extend the Angolan Government’s ability to communicate by radio with approximately 95 percent of the country’s population.   These were projects that we were – have been working with the Government of Angola for the last year, and we know that these are the types of projects that epitomizes our commitment to the Biden-Harris administration’s PGII objectives, a collaborative effort by U.S. Government agencies to support sustainable, clean, resilient, and inclusive infrastructure projects. So our commitment to Sub-Saharan Africa is also one of our key mandates that Congress has placed on us since we were reauthorized in 2019 to make more financing available in Sub-Saharan Africa.  And we know there is still more work to be done.  We’re eager to continue building upon our strong work on the commitment – on the strong work on the continent and are excited to be here at the U.S.-Africa Business Summit to seek out additional new opportunities to support U.S. exporters doing business in Sub-Saharan Africa.   MODERATOR:  Thank you very much, Chair Lewis.  So for her opening remarks, now we’d like to go to CEO Alice Albright.  MS ALBRIGHT:  Thank you.  Thank you very much.  Good morning, good afternoon.  Wonderful to be with everybody.  So it’s a very exciting week for us.  There is, of course, as Chair Lewis has just said, the U.S.-Africa Business Summit going on.  It’s the 16th Summit, and there’s a lot of energy in the room, with a number of U.S. agencies there and then a number of participants, heads of state from the continent, and a number of businesses.  It was just a terrific – it is a terrific environment.   MCC has a lot going on in the continent.  One of the things that we also did this week was we celebrated 20 years of MCC being in operation.  We were started in 2004 by President Bush.  And since our founding, we’ve been squarely focused on working on the continent.  Of the $17 billion that we’ve invested globally so far, 10 billion of it has gone to the continent.  We’ve worked in 24 countries.  We’ve done – of the 10, almost all of it relates to infrastructure in one way or another.  We also have a lot going on right now in the continent.  We’ve got about $3 billion in active programs. So in addition to meeting with a lot of our partners, this week we also announced the implementation or the start of implementation of, as I’m very proud to say, our 79th program, and it is a $350 million program in Malawi to help farmers get their goods to market cheaper and faster.  So we are very excited about that.  We also had a chance to meet with a number of our bilateral partners – of course, President Chakwera was with us to announce the project.  We also had a wonderful meeting with President Neves from Cabo Verde.  Of course, Cabo Verde was one of our earliest partners at MCC, and we announced – well, we announced it earlier this year.  We had a chance to speak with him further about something that we think is going to be very interesting, which is a regional program with an island nation, and I think it speaks to that country’s very strong vision for the role that they occupy where they are.   From a trade and regional investment perspective, we think that our regional program is going to really be very additive to our work, and we’ve got a number of different regional programs that are in various states of play.   And then another program that we’re – I’m just jumping around a bit, but another program that we’re very excited about is our program in Mozambique we signed this past fall, and it’s a half-a-billion-dollar program that will focus on various aspects of infrastructure in Mozambique.  One big piece of it is a significant investment to restore the bridge that connects the southern – the Mocuba* Bridge that connects the southern part of the country to the northern part of the country, and it’s become very vulnerable due to flooding and other things to do with climate change.  So we’re very excited about that. We have a lot of other things going on.  We have currently $3 billion in active programs in the continent, and I’m happy to answer further questions about them if we have time.  But let me turn it back over to you all so you can get on to other questions.  Thank you. MODERATOR:  Thank you very much, CEO Albright.  So finally for her opening statement, let’s turn to Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Joy Basu. MS BASU:  Thank you so much, and thank you, everyone, for joining.  Good afternoon.  Thank you for your time today and thank you for the important work you do as journalists.  A free press is a critical part of a thriving democracy, and we know that those values go hand in hand with a thriving economy.  So thank you for the important work that you do, and we’re just very – I feel very lucky to be here with Chair Lewis and with CEO Albright.   I will just wrap up very quickly by saying it’s been a successful Summit for us so far, and it’s really exciting to see how much progress has been made with the U.S.-Africa trade relationship not only since the December 2022 U.S.-Africa Leaders Summit in Washington, but since I was with so many of you last summer in Gaborone at the CCA Summit last year.   We had a very comprehensive interagency delegation here to meet with the – I believe the final number of participants from CCA was 1,789, so almost 1,800 people were here.  And we had representation from across our interagency. As you heard from my colleagues, so much of the work that our interagency does is focused on energy and infrastructure, because that is so foundational to the work that other industries create.  We also had incredible deal signings with USTDA and Malawi, working on battery storage; with DFC and Sierra Leone, working on energy.  And we had meetings here to build on those industries with healthcare, with agriculture, and cross-functional industries like ICT. I think the goal of this is to really reiterate the U.S. commitment to Africa and the U.S. commitment to a 21st century economic partnership with the continent.  And the work here at USABS is really helping to partner with our African governments and African and American private sector to facilitate private sector-led economic growth and prosperity. So let me wrap there.  I’m very excited for your questions.  Thank you.  MODERATOR:  Well, thank you very much to each of our panelists today.  We’ll now begin the question-and-answer portion of today’s briefing. So for our first question today, we have a question from Mr. Andualem Sisay Gessesse of the New Business Ethiopia.  And his question is directed to Chair Reta Jo Lewis, and that question is this:  “Can you please explain the major achievements of the Export-Import Bank of the United States in advancing trade and investment with African countries over the past few years and your plans ahead to further enhance and support U.S. companies to invest in African countries and boost trade between the two sides?” So, Chair Lewis. MS LEWIS:  Yes, thank you so much for that question.  One of the things that we are very excited about is that EXIM, as I mentioned, is celebrating our 90th anniversary this year.  And our support for Africa really dates to nearly that beginning.  Since we did our first deal in Angola in 1942, EXIM has had a strong and reliable – and a trading partnership for Africa.  And so since 1997, that has been underscored by EXIM’s congressional mandate to build partnerships and increase financings in the region. I – in Fiscal Year 2023, not only did we – we approved over 1.6 billion in authorizations for Sub-Saharan Africa that I just mentioned, we also have undertaken over five trips and traveling throughout Africa, meeting not only with government officials but, of course, the private sector.  Because we know that it is going to be through public-private partnerships that we can all get this work done.  In the work that we’ve also done in support of U.S. exporters engaging with Africa is that we’ve signed six MOUs with African governments and institutions, as well as signing the memorandums of understanding with Tanzania, Cote d’Ivoire.  And we’re – each of these agreements have been designed to facilitate up to about 500 million in U.S. exports financing and deepen the commercial relationship with those countries. We are – we have been working very diligently with those on the continent where we have signed and begun work through MOUs totaling about 1.3 billion with the African Ex-Im Bank, with the Africa Finance Corporation, and then most recently with the Bank of Industry in Nigeria.  In total since I’ve joined EXIM, we have signed about 2.3 billion of MOUs.  And so we recognize that the continent is changing, and we’re committed to the administration’s various initiatives on Africa. You can see, by the MOUs that we have signed, we are prepared to work with African countries and partner with all stakeholders to ensure that our exporters compete on a level playing field.  And so we want to be partners in the work that all of us do in helping U.S. exporters contract with Africa, as well as as we work with the foreign buyers who want to – on the continent who want to purchase U.S. goods and services.   We know that as we have done – undertaken this work, we know that the needs around infrastructure, health care, women entrepreneurship are very vital for – and are vital, and investments for – are needed for economic growth and for job creation.  And so we stand ready as partners and collaborators to work with those on the continent. And as Alice mentioned, this conference has borne out to be very successful for us.  It is such high energy in the room, and to be able to see how far the relationships that we have garnered, along with others in the United States Government who are here in full force to support these efforts that the President has asked us to in building and strengthening and deepening our bilateral relationship.  And EXIM has been – is very proud to have done their part.  MODERATOR:  All right.  Thank you very much.  So we do have a question from Kemi Osukoya of Africa Bazaar magazine.  And I’d like to open Kemi’s mic and if Kemi can answer – ask that question live. QUESTION:  Hello, can you hear me?  MODERATOR:  Yes.  QUESTION:  Okay.  Thank you very much for taking my question.  And good morning and good afternoon to you guys.  My question is a two-part.  What percentage of the deals that were signed will be given to SMEs and women-owned businesses, both on the continent and as well as the U.S. entrepreneurs?  And the other part of my question is, being on the ground at events, you mentioned that you’re hearing feedbacks from the partners, with leaders.  So could you share some of those feedback that you hear regarding the work that you’re doing on the continent?  Thank you very much. MS LEWIS:  No, thank you very much for that question.  As it relates to SMEs, I think what a lot of – what we always like to say at EXIM is that we’re the bank for everyone.  And in being the bank for everyone, we have to strive exceptionally hard as we work with large, medium, and small businesses.  EXIM, when we were reauthorized in 2019, Congress gave us an additional mandate to make additional financing available in the small business arena, and not just – I call it not just small business for small business’s sake, but also to really drill down and go beyond a small business, but also around women entrepreneurship, around veterans, around – and rural communities, and really in the underserved populations. And so we’re very excited that with the agreements that have been signed on these particular deals that I just discussed in Angola, there is a significant amount of work that will be done in the supply chain, and most of those businesses are small business.  We have been – as we have worked through this process with Angola as well as with our own U.S. exporters, small business, they all know that small – that the small business exporters are very essential, and we’re going to be monitoring very, very closely what that looks like.   As it relates to – and then additional work that we have done to ensure that we reach those small businesses is to work with members in the diaspora.  The President announced – President Biden announced a diaspora council a few months ago, and one of the things that we’ve been really hard at work with them is to ensure that the work that we do at EXIM is expose to those members who are specifically focused on how do you develop and continue to build strong relationships with diaspora members throughout the continent.  So we’re really excited about the work that’s going to go forth in Angola and excited about the work that we do at EXIM overall, and the fact that last year, when we authorized the over $8.5 billion, 2 point – 2 billion of that was transactions that were in small business.  So we feel we are on target and on tap to reach those goals, as well as the fact that 90 percent – I think it’s like 88 percent, 88.5 percent – of the transition that EXIM does on a yearly basis is in the small business arena.  So we feel pretty confident that small business is going to be very much a part of the work that we’re doing, not only here in U.S. but those also in Angola and in Africa.  MODERATOR:  Thank you very much, Chair Lewis, for that response.  And we do have a lot of questions, and unfortunately, the time of our participants is limited, so we only have time probably for a few more questions today.  We did receive a question from Ms. Favour Okpale of BusinessDay in Nigeria, and the question is:  “African countries, including Nigeria, face enormous challenges, including inadequate power supply, lack of infrastructure, and security, among others.  Wondering whether these issues were on the front burner at this Summit; and in specific terms, are there concrete commitments from the U.S. to assist Nigeria and other African countries come out of this?”  And she also has a question about AGOA.  So I think if I could throw it to Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Basu for her take on this question.  MS BASU:  Perfect, thank you so much, and thank you again for the question.  We just came back, actually, from the bi-national mission in Abuja last week, which was co-chaired between Deputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell and Foreign Minister Tuggar, and we discussed these questions in depth there.  And so I will be brief right now as the readouts of those meetings come out.  But we had a large session on shared prosperity.  And we understand that the challenges that Nigeria are facing are quite acute, and we see them echoed across the continent – as you say, lack of infrastructure, increasing insecurity, and yes, the United States is committed to be a good partner across that spectrum.  What I would say is, in particular, we’ve made commitments both to work on the security situation, but also to, as you’ve heard today, work on infrastructure, whether that’s roads and bridges or that’s energy, huge challenges both in Nigeria and across the continent.  A few concrete commitments were to work on the business-enabling environment in Nigeria, and to make sure that American companies that are investing in Nigeria are having a transparent and positive experience to deliver those goods and services, and we see that across the continent.  We also talked about reaffirming the difficult but hard policy choices that Nigeria is making and that we see being made across the continent to really strengthen their economies.  So of course in Nigeria there’s been a lot of challenge with the currency, but it is hopefully something that will make the economy stronger and enable Nigerian businesses to thrive.  We see that work across the continent as African countries come out of the pandemic and try to come out from under quite significant debt burdens and foreign exchange challenges.  And so we are working closely both with our U.S. Treasury, with the central banks of African countries, particularly Nigeria, and the World Bank to make sure that these countries are on solid economic footing to really serve their people and meet the basic public needs, both first and foremost for their people, but also to create the public sector goods that then allow private sector companies to thrive. So let me pause there.  I’m happy to follow up afterwards as well.  Thank you.  MODERATOR:  All right, thanks very much.  So we have a question on MCC, and that came in from Sogah Blessed of Joy News TV in Ghana.  Sogah, I’d like to open your mic, but if you could please be very brief in asking your question because our time is very limited.  Thank you. QUESTION:  Thank you.  I’m grateful.  Thank you for the opportunity.  I’m asking this question because of a peculiar situation we face in Ghana in the energy sector, the power crisis.  In 2019 the MCC revoked a $190 million funding for the energy sector owing to some challenges we had with the privatization concession.  I’m asking, given the situation in which we find ourselves now, is the MCC willing to avail this crucial funding, or it will be on the condition that unless the Government of Ghana brings back the PDS concession, which was a privatization module, and at the MCC?  Thank you. MS ALBRIGHT:  Thank you for the question.  A couple – a couple of thoughts on Ghana.  We did have a compact with Ghana, and the compact is closed.  And we were able to complete a fair amount of that work.  Right now we don’t have any immediate plans to work again in Ghana, but we can always look again to see if Ghana may be – may become a country that we can work with again. Generally speaking with regard to energy, we’re working in a number of energy compacts across the continent right now, because I completely agree with you about how critical energy is to overall development, which is our main mandate. MODERATOR:  All right, thank you very much.  As I mentioned, our panelists’ time is very limited and I know that Chair Lewis has another commitment in a few minutes.  So I’d like to give her an opportunity to give some closing remarks if she has some closing thoughts for us.  MS LEWIS:  Well, thank you so much.  I think this has been a very important conversation.  We realize – we’re really excited to be able to talk with all the journalists this morning.  I think the thing that we want to emphasize at EXIM is that we have a vested interest in the continent.  But we have a vested interest about the people and improving peoples’ lives, not only in America but also in Africa.  And so that’s why we are here as well as the work that we have done over decades about building partnerships and collaborations.  And I just want to just continue to emphasize the fact that we are looking for ways of how to continue to work with all businesses, especially large, medium, and small, and that to end on saying that equity is a priority for us.  We proudly provide additional support for those critical businesses.  And so when we’re speaking about small business, we’re speaking about women entrepreneurship, we know that they have to overcome a number of challenges.  We know that access to capital is the number one thing to keep them from growing and expanding, and that’s why EXIM is proud to offer additional services to our U.S. exporters and to our foreign buyers and working with our small businesses as we continue to keep a spotlight on them.  And so we are offering the different products and services, and we stand ready to work with them whether it is through initial consultation, helping them as they analyze the opportunities, working – as we work alongside our Department of Commerce who is often leading number delegations that we participate in throughout the continent, and also working to assist small businesses and underserved populations and minority business with connections to resources.  We have a 20-year – five-year history of doing that work, and we have recently introduced some additional products that is going to go to the benefit of that community.  So we are really excited to have been able to have a few minutes to share with you our continued commitment to work on the continent.   MODERATOR:  All right, thank you very much.  And as I mentioned, our panelists’ time is limited, so I’d like to also ask Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Basu and also CEO Albright if they have any closing thoughts for us. MS BASU:  I will defer to CEO Albright first.  MS ALBRIGHT:  Thank you.  Just very, very briefly, we too at MCC are very committed to a very inclusive approach to economic growth.  We didn’t get to touch on it earlier, but we work in almost every country on either figuring out how to include women and women-owned businesses into our work or small and medium-sized businesses.  So this often takes the form of different reforms that are necessary to enable parts of the society that are typically not included to get included.  We’ve got some wonderful examples – one in Lesotho just recently where there were some laws that were changed to enable women to own – to inherit land.  We’ve got a terrific program that we’ve just closed out in Morocco that introduced opportunities to a range of people in that country.  We’ve got a wonderful program in Cote d’Ivoire, a partnership with Microsoft that is focusing on bringing digital skills to women entrepreneurs in Cote d’Ivoire.   So inclusive growth is very much a focus of our work, and I think we’re making good, slow, steady progress on it.  MODERATOR:  All right, thank you.  And finally for Deputy Assistant Secretary Basu.  MS BASU:  Happy to, and happy to quickly answer a couple of questions that were coming up earlier, one around the feedback that we’ve gotten.  The feedback has been for more.  Right, we want more U.S. companies, more trade.  The momentum is really great and we cannot let our feet off the pedal – our foot off the pedal when it comes to strengthening this economic partnership.   U.S. companies in Africa not only help raise standards, but the work that we do, as CEO Albright mentioned, really creates the enabling environment for all businesses to thrive – African businesses, multinational businesses, American businesses.  And we know the marketplace works better when there are more choices, and so we’re glad to be able to facilitate and foster that.  And so that’s the main feedback that we have heard across the last – that I’ve at last heard across the last few days, is for more, and a lot of excitement about momentum that’s been made so far.  There was also a question about AGOA, and I would defer to my colleagues in Congress, who really have the responsibility for reauthorizing AGOA since it is a law.  But I will emphasize that the Biden administration has expressed strong support for the reauthorization of AGOA and the modernization of AGOA.  We want to see it reauthorized in order to be – to continue to be the cornerstone of trade, but also to facilitate our utilization, and to be more impactful and more strategic.   And so we have had great conversations with our colleagues on the Hill, in Congress, and there is what we call bipartisan and bicameral support for AGOA, which I think really emphasizes that our Africa relationship is important across the United States.  However, we do need to see ways that that law will actually get signed, and so we are working closely with our partners in Congress to see what can be done.  My push to our African partners on the continent is to develop utilization strategies to increase their usage of AGOA, which is a really incredible unilateral program for African companies to export to the United States duty-free.  And we want to see more companies – small companies, large companies – take advantage of that.  And so my push to the African partners on the line is to increase awareness but also increase national strategies that will let small companies and large companies make the most of this benefit.  And that maybe leads to my final point, which is a push to all our journalists on the line, which is twofold.  One is to keep doing what you’re doing in bringing transparency to your local markets about what is happening, because that is what is required for economies to thrive, is that transparency and that information and accountability.  So thank you for the work you do there and the ways that enables democracy but also economic growth.  And so keep up that great work.   But also, help us to tell the good-news stories across Africa, but also across the U.S.-Africa business relationship.  I think in the last year there have been a lot of hard stories across Africa, and those are very important, and we are working as a U.S. Government to address the democratic backsliding and the incredible insecurity we’re seeing in many areas.  But one challenge in enabling U.S. businesses to come to Africa is the risk perception.  And so one thing our team does very closely is try to, on one hand, right-size that risk perception and tell the good-news stories of countries that are taking the right policy decisions, that do have the right enabling environments; and then, other side, working to actually reduce the risk of investing by helping shore up security, helping to foster democracy and reinforce democracy.   So I ask your partnership in both sides of that, both in bringing accountability where it’s required, but also in telling the good-news stories because we know there are so many incredible innovations and entrepreneurs, and the world needs those African entrepreneurs to solve the problems of the future, and you are an important conduit for making sure their stories are told.  So thank you. MODERATOR:  All right.  Well, that concludes today’s briefing.  I want to thank Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of African Affairs Joy Basu, Chief Executive Officer of the Millennium Challenge Corporation Alice Albright, and President of the EXIM Bank of the United States Reta Jo Lewis for joining us today.  Thank you also to all the journalists for participating.  As always, a recording and a transcript of today’s briefing will be distributed to participating journalists as soon as we can produce them.   If you have any questions about today’s briefing, you may contact us here at the Africa Regional Media Hub at AFMediaHub@state.gov.  I would also like to invite everyone to join us on Twitter, or X, at our handle @AfricaMediaHub.  Thank you very much and have a great day. # # # 
- Richard Nargetey Teinor Corporal Richard Nargetey Teinor, Local Law Enforcement, was shot by protestors while protecting the U.S. Embassy in Accra, Ghana, on April 18, 1986.
- 2024 Interagency Fact Sheets HomeU.S. Strategy to Prevent Conflict and Promote Stability &#8230;2024 Interagency Fact Sheets				hide		if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}																										2024 Interagency Fact Sheets																																																																										The following fact sheets were created to provide a snapshot of efforts under the U.S. Strategy to Prevent Conflict and Promote Stability (SPCPS) in each priority country/region.  Each fact sheet details the main objectives and lists a sample of activities that the wider U.S. government is leveraging for SPCPS.Coastal West AfricaHaitiLibyaMozambiquePapua New Guinea						Tags																					Benin																								Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations																								Côte d&#039;Ivoire																								Ghana																								Guinea																								Haiti																								Libya																								Mozambique																								Papua New Guinea																								Togo
- Ghana HomeReportsBureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices&#8230;Ghana				hide	document.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded", function(event) {	if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}});																							2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Ghana																																					Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor																																																																																							Download Report																																																							Translations																																																																 In this section										/																							EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																																													EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																															Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person																																																									a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings																																																																											b. Disappearance																																																																											c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses																																																																			Prison and Detention Center Conditions																																																																																																																		d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention																																																																			Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees																																																																																																																		e. Denial of Fair Public Trial																																																																			Trial Procedures																																																								Political Prisoners and Detainees																																																																																																																		f. Transnational Repression																																																																											g. Property Seizure and Restitution																																																																											h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence																																																																																	Section 2. Respect for Civil Liberties																																																									a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media																																																																			Internet Freedom																																																																																																																		b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association																																																																			Freedom of Peaceful Assembly																																																																																																																		c. Freedom of Religion																																																																											d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country																																																																											e. Protection of Refugees																																																																											f. Status and Treatment of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs)																																																																											g. Stateless Persons																																																																																	Section 3. Freedom to Participate in the Political Process																																																									Elections and Political Participation																																																																																	Section 4. Corruption in Government																															Section 5. Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights																															Section 6. Discrimination and Societal Abuses																																																									Women																																																																											Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination																																																																											Children																																																																											Antisemitism																																																																											Trafficking in Persons																																																																											Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics																																																																											Persons with Disabilities																																																																											Other Societal Violence or Discrimination																																																																																	Section 7. Worker Rights																																																									a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining																																																																											b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor																																																																											c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment																																																																											d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																																																											e. Acceptable Conditions of Work																																																																																																							EXECUTIVE SUMMARY				There were no significant changes in the human rights situation in Ghana during the year.Significant human rights issues included credible reports of: cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment by the government or on behalf of the government; arbitrary arrest or detention; serious restrictions on freedom of expression and media freedom, including violence or threats of violence against journalists and unjustified arrests or prosecutions of journalists; refoulement of refugees to a country where they would face torture or persecution; serious government corruption; extensive gender-based violence, including domestic or intimate partner violence and female genital mutilation; laws criminalizing consensual same-sex sexual conduct between adults, although not fully enforced; crimes involving violence or threats of violence targeting lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or intersex persons; and crimes involving violence or threats of violence targeting persons with disabilities.The government took minimal steps to identify and punish officials who may have committed human rights abuses.																														Section 1.													 Respect for the Integrity of the Person												    																																																a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings										In contrast with 2022, there were no reports the government or its agents committed arbitrary or unlawful killings, including extrajudicial killings, during the year.																																				b. Disappearance										There were no reports of disappearances by or on behalf of government authorities.																																				c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses										While the constitution and law prohibited such practices, there were credible reports police beat and otherwise abused detained suspects and other citizens. Victims were often reluctant to file formal complaints. Police generally denied allegations or claimed the level of force used was justified.In March the armed forces conducted an operation in Ashaiman, a suburb of Accra, after armed robbers killed an off-duty soldier. Soldiers detained 184 persons, while bystanders filmed the stripping, handcuffing, and beating of dozens of men. Senior defense leaders claimed the operation was justified but regretted the excessive use of force by the soldiers. Authorities later released all 184 persons without charge, and police arrested the armed robbers. The armed forces did not release the results of an internal investigation.Impunity was a significant problem in the Police Service.																Prison and Detention Center Conditions						Prison conditions were generally harsh due to overcrowding, inadequate sanitary conditions, lack of medical care, and substandard and inadequate food.Abusive Physical Conditions: The Prisons Service reported overcrowding was substantially more than existing capacity. Overcrowding at medium-security prisons was considerably higher than in lower-security “camp prisons.”While prisoners had access to potable water, the quantity and quality of food were inadequate. Meals routinely lacked fruit, vegetables, or meat, forcing prisoners to rely on charitable donations and their families to supplement their diet. Authorities did not provide food to pretrial detainees. If community or family members were not able to provide them, prison officers paid with their own funds.Prisons were aging or abandoned public or military buildings, which despite improvements had poor ventilation and sanitation, substandard construction, and inadequate space and light. There were not enough toilets available for the number of prisoners, with as many as 100 prisoners sharing one toilet. Toilets often overflowed with excrement. There were no facilities to support intersex or transitioning persons.Most prison infirmaries had a severely limited supply of medicine. Prisons did not provide dental care. Prisons often lacked ambulances to transport inmates offsite for emergency care.Administration: Each prison designated an officer-in-charge to receive complaints, and they sometimes investigated credible allegations of mistreatment.Independent Monitoring: The government permitted independent monitoring of prison conditions by local nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), which were independent of government influence. They monitored juvenile confinement and pretrial detention, bail, and recordkeeping procedures. Local news agencies also reported on prison conditions.																										d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention										The constitution and law prohibited arbitrary arrest and detention and provided for the right of any person to challenge the lawfulness of their arrest or detention in court, but the government sometimes disregarded these protections.																Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees						The law required detainees be brought before a court within 48 hours of arrest in the absence of a judicial warrant, but authorities frequently detained individuals without charge or a valid arrest warrant for periods longer than 48 hours. The constitution granted a detained individual the right to be informed immediately, in a language the person understood, of the reasons for detention and the right to a lawyer. Most detainees, however, could not afford a lawyer. While the constitution granted the right to legal aid, the government often did not provide it. The government had a Legal Aid Commission providing defense attorneys to those in need, but the commission was often unable to do so due to the limited number of available attorneys and high volume of cases. Defendants in criminal cases who could not afford a lawyer typically represented themselves.The law required any detainee not tried within a “reasonable time,” as determined by the court, be released either unconditionally or subject to conditions necessary to compel the person’s appearance at a later court date, including use of bail. The definition of “reasonable time,” however, was never legally determined or challenged in the courts, and courts often struggled to come to timely decisions regarding release and often set bail at prohibitively high levels. As a result, officials rarely observed this provision. The government sought to reduce the population of prisoners in pretrial detention by placing paralegals in some prisons to monitor and advise on the cases of pretrial detainees and assist with the drafting of appeals, as well as by directing judges to visit prisons to review and take appropriate action on pretrial detainee cases. In October the government issued guidelines and encouraged prosecutors and defense attorneys to plea bargain in advance of trial.Arbitrary Arrest: There was a general practice of holding detainees without proper warrant or charge. Members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or intersex (LGBTQI+) community were at particular risk for arbitrary arrest.In September police arrested three men in Kumasi, including one HIV educator, on false charges of promoting homosexuality. Police demanded an immediate cash payment before releasing them hours after the intervention of local activists and paralegals.Pretrial Detention: Lengthy pretrial detention was a serious problem. Officials detained some prisoners for indefinite periods by renewing warrants or simply allowing warrants to lapse while an investigation took place. Other problems included: the government keeping prisoners in extended pretrial detention (up to many months) due to police failure to investigate or follow up on cases; the loss of case files when police prosecutors rotated to other duties every three years; slow trial proceedings marked by frequent adjournments; detainees’ inability to meet bail conditions that were often set extremely high even for minor offenses; and inadequate legal representation for criminal defendants. In some instances the length of pretrial detention exceeded the maximum sentence for the alleged crime.																										e. Denial of Fair Public Trial										While the constitution and law provided for an independent judiciary, the government sometimes did not respect judicial independence and impartiality, and the judiciary was subject to unlawful influence and corruption. Judicial officials reportedly accepted bribes to expedite or postpone cases, lose records, or issue favorable rulings.The government generally respected court orders.																Trial Procedures						The constitution and law provided for the right to a fair and public trial, and the judiciary generally enforced this right.Although defendants had the right to an attorney at public expense if unable to pay, most indigent accused persons represented themselves in court. Defendants had the right not to be compelled to testify or confess guilt, although generally defendants were expected to testify if the government presented sufficient preliminary evidence of guilt.						Political Prisoners and Detainees						There were no reports of political prisoners or detainees.																										f. Transnational Repression										Not applicable.																																				g. Property Seizure and Restitution										Not applicable.																																				h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence										The constitution prohibited such actions, and there were no reports the government failed to respect these prohibitions.																																					Section 2.													 Respect for Civil Liberties												    																																																a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media										The constitution and law provided for freedom of expression, including for the press and other media, and the government generally respected this right.Violence and Harassment: In March prosecutors arrested journalist Noah Dameh and charged him with “false publication” stemming from a May 2022 social media post accusing police and a politically well-connected salt mining company of corruption. Dameh died before further court proceedings occurred.In September police detained members of the press and some protest participants following an anti-corruption protest in front of Jubilee House, the presidential office. Authorities released the protesters and members of media without charge, most within 24 hours of their detention.Censorship or Content Restrictions for Members of the Press and Other Media, Including Online Media: The law provided for criminal penalties for those who posted false or misleading information online, with penalties of up to five years in prison and substantial fines. Unlike in 2022, there were no known examples of authorities censoring media.Nongovernmental Impact: Supporters of opposition political parties in several incidents harassed and attacked journalists. Unknown assailants also occasionally attacked journalists and harassed and intimidated them. For example, in May, a former political operative with the opposition National Democratic Congress and another man entered a radio station and assaulted a journalist while he was hosting a live show. In October, 20 youth activists affiliated with the New Patriotic Party stormed UTV studios during a live broadcast, halting the broadcast. Police arrested and charged the perpetrators of the May and October attacks, who pled guilty and paid a fine.																Internet Freedom						The government did not restrict or disrupt access to the internet or censor online content.																										b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association										The constitution and law provided for the freedoms of peaceful assembly and association, but the government sometimes restricted the freedom of peaceful assembly.																Freedom of Peaceful Assembly						The constitution and law provided for the freedom of peaceful assembly, but the government sometimes did not respect it. The Police Service and judges’ rulings on protest permits sometimes impeded demonstrations or heavily restricted demonstration routes. In September, police arrested or detained for unlawful assembly dozens of protesters and journalists at the Occupy Julorbi protest, after the court denied a permit to protest in front of Jubilee House. Authorities released the journalists without charge but charged 49 of the protesters with violations of public order.																										c. Freedom of Religion										See the Department of State’s International Religious Freedom Report at  https://www.state.gov/religiousfreedomreport/.																																				d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country										The constitution provided for freedom of internal movement, foreign travel, emigration, and repatriation, and the government generally respected these rights.Foreign Travel: The government banned labor recruitment for work in Gulf countries to curb abuses of migrant workers. The policy, however, impacted legal migration, subsequently increasing worker vulnerability to trafficking. Media investigations revealed some recruitment agencies continued their operations despite the ban.																																				e. Protection of Refugees										The government cooperated with the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and other humanitarian offices in providing protection and assistance to refugees, returning refugees, or asylum seekers, as well as other persons of concern.Access to Asylum: The law provided for the granting of asylum or refugee status, and the government operated an effective system for providing protection to refugees. The law allowed rejected asylum seekers to appeal and remain in the country until their appeal was adjudicated. A four-member appeals committee, appointed by the minister of the interior, was responsible for adjudicating the appeals, but the process was subject to delays. These delays sometimes meant asylum seekers could not obtain documentation needed for certain services.Refoulement: In July authorities conducted a 10-day operation to forcibly repatriate approximately 1,200 persons (called Burkinabe) to Burkina Faso, more than 80 percent of whom were women and children. UNHCR stated the operation “amounts to a violation of the non-refoulement principle.” The expelled Burkinabe were not able to claim asylum due to a delay in the regional registration process. Many on-the-ground reports indicated the operation targeted members of the Fulbe ethnic community. As of November, UNHCR reported no further cases of forced returns to Burkina Faso.Abuse of Refugees and Asylum Seekers: UNHCR reported a few cases of gender-based violence in the refugee camps despite awareness, response, and prevention programs by UNHCR and partners. UNHCR reported constraints regarding legal aid for survivors but indicated in most cases survivors received pro bono services from individual lawyers. UNHCR noted xenophobic attitudes against Burkinabe Fulbe and other indigent migrants.																																				f. Status and Treatment of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs)										Not applicable.																																				g. Stateless Persons										The country contributed to statelessness through discrimination and exclusion on grounds such as ethnicity (such as stateless Fulbe persons), administration of nationality laws, and birth registration.																																					Section 3.													 Freedom to Participate in the Political Process												    																						The constitution and law provided citizens the ability to choose their government through free and fair periodic elections held by secret ballot and based on universal and equal suffrage.																										Elections and Political Participation										Abuses or Irregularities in Recent Elections: Both the 2020 national elections and more recent by-elections were widely reported to be fair and mostly free of abuses and irregularities. Some observers noted concerns regarding the misuse of incumbency, lack of enforcement of regulations on campaign financing, and unequal access to state-owned media during the campaign.Participation of Women and Members of Marginalized or Vulnerable Groups: Cultural and traditional factors limited women’s participation in political life. Women held significantly fewer leadership positions than men, and women in political campaigns and in elected office faced sexism, harassment, and threats of violence. Research organizations found that insults, concerns regarding physical safety, and overall negative societal attitudes toward women politicians hindered women from entering politics.																																					Section 4.													 Corruption in Government												    																						The law provided criminal penalties for corruption by government officials, but the government did not implement the law effectively, and officials frequently engaged in corrupt practices with impunity. There were widespread reports of government corruption.Corruption: Corruption was present in all sectors of government, according to media and NGOs, including recruitment into the security services. A January report by Afrobarometer revealed a widespread perception of corruption and waste of public funds. Seventy-seven percent of Ghanaians said the level of corruption in the country increased from the previous year. A 2022 study by the UN Office on Drugs and Crime found 26 percent of the adult population either paid a bribe to a public official or declined to do so when requested.The Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) conducted investigations into the minister of sanitation, who resigned after media reports of large amounts of cash stolen from her home. OSP investigations led to the arrest of four individuals for corruption, including officials from the Office of the Vice President, the National Insurance Commission, and the Customs Division of the Revenue Authority.For additional information concerning corruption in the country, please see the Department of State’s Investment Climate Statement for the country, and the Department of State’s International Narcotics Control Strategy Report, which includes information on financial crimes.																											Section 5.													 Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights												    																						A variety of domestic and international human rights groups generally operated without government restriction to monitor and investigate human rights conditions and cases and publish their findings. Government officials were often cooperative and responsive to the views of these groups.Government Human Rights Bodies: Established as an autonomous agency, the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) had offices across the country and mediated and settled cases brought by individuals against government agencies or private companies. CHRAJ operated with no overt interference from the government; however, some critics questioned its ability to investigate high-level cases independently. Its biggest obstacles were low salaries, poor working conditions, and the loss of many of its staff to other governmental organizations and NGOs.The Police Professional Standards Board also investigated human rights abuses and police misconduct and brought some cases to conclusion, although rarely with any publicity. Observers considered the board to be relatively independent but minimally effective in its deliberations.																											Section 6.													 Discrimination and Societal Abuses												    																																																Women										Rape and Domestic Violence: The law criminalized the rape of women, including spousal and domestic or intimate partner rape. Rape of a man could be charged as indecent assault, a misdemeanor. Prison sentences for rape ranged from five to 25 years, while indecent assault was a misdemeanor subject to a minimum term of imprisonment of six months. Domestic violence was punishable by a fine or a sentence of up to two years in prison. Rape and domestic violence were serious problems. Although the Domestic Violence and Victim Support Unit (DOVVSU) of the Police Service, working with other government offices, sought to address rape and domestic violence, authorities did not enforce the law effectively.Unless specifically called upon by the DOVVSU, police seldom intervened in cases of domestic violence, in part due to a lack of counseling skills and shelter facilities to assist survivors. Few of the cases in which police identified and arrested suspects for rape or domestic abuse reached court or resulted in convictions due to witness unavailability, inadequate training on investigatory techniques, police prosecutor case mismanagement, and, according to the DOVVSU, lack of resources on the part of survivors and their families to pursue cases. Police could refer survivors to government or NGO-operated shelters. In cases deemed less severe, survivors were returned to their homes. Authorities reported officers occasionally had no alternative but to shelter survivors in the officers’ own residences until other arrangements could be made.There were three government-run shelters for survivors of domestic violence, the Madina Social Welfare Center, the Center for Abused Children, and the DOVVSU’s national One-Stop Center collocated with the Criminal Investigations Department of the Police Service.DOVVSU taught a course on domestic violence case management for police officers assigned to the unit, which had one clinical psychologist to assist domestic violence survivors. DOVVSU reached out to the public through various social media accounts. It also addressed rape through public education efforts on radio and in communities, participation in efforts to prevent child marriage and other forms of gender-based violence, expansion of its online data management system to select police divisional headquarters, and data management training. Pervasive cultural beliefs regarding gender roles, as well as sociocultural norms and stereotypes, posed additional challenges to combatting domestic violence. A July 2022 study at a teaching hospital in Accra indicated 31 percent of pregnant women experienced domestic violence during pregnancy.Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C): Several laws included provisions prohibiting FGM/C. Although rarely performed on adult women, the practice was a serious problem for girls younger than age 18 in some regions. According to the Ministry of Gender, Children, and Social Protection, FGM/C was significantly higher in the Upper East Region with a prevalence rate of 27.8 percent, compared with the national rate of 3.8 percent.Other Forms of Gender-based Violence or Harassment: The constitution prohibited practices that dehumanized or injured the physical and mental well-being of a person. Media reported several killings and attempted killings of women for ritual purposes. In the Northern, North East, Upper East, and Upper West Regions, families or traditional authorities banished rural women suspected of “witchcraft” to “witch camps.” Most of those accused of witchcraft were older women, often widows. Some women suspected to be witches were killed. The number of persons in the camps declined from a high in 2020 due to education, support, and reintegration services provided by churches and civil society organizations. In July parliament criminalized the “naming, accusing, or labelling” of another person as a witch, with offenders facing up to five years in jail.The law criminalized harmful mourning rites, but such rites continued, and authorities did not prosecute any perpetrators. In the north, especially in the Upper West and Upper East Regions, some widows were required to undergo certain rites to mourn or show devotion for a deceased spouse. The most prevalent widowhood rites included a one-year period of mourning, tying ropes and padlocks around the widow’s waist or neck, forced sitting beside the body of the deceased spouse until burial, solitary confinement, forced starvation, shaving the widow’s head, and smearing clay on the widow’s body. In the Northern and Volta Regions along the border with Togo, “wife inheritance” continued, forcing a widow to marry a male relative of her deceased husband.Discrimination: The constitution and law provided for the same legal status and rights for women as for men under family, labor, property, nationality, and inheritance laws. While the government generally made efforts to enforce the law, predominantly male tribal leaders and chiefs were empowered to regulate land access and usage within their tribal areas. Within these areas women were less likely than men to receive access rights to large plots of fertile land. Widows often faced expulsion from their homes by their deceased husband’s relatives, and they often lacked the awareness or means to defend property rights in court. Women in urban centers and those with skills and training encountered little overt bias, but resistance persisted to women entering nontraditional fields or seeking related vocational education or training. There were insufficient systems in place to protect women from sexual harassment and other violence in the workplace, and employment discrimination occurred.Reproductive Rights: There were no reports of coerced abortion or involuntary sterilization on the part of government officials.Sexual and reproductive health services were part of the National Health Insurance Scheme for all women, including survivors of sexual violence. This comprised multiple methods of family planning, including emergency contraception as part of method mix and as part of the clinical management of rape cases, and long-term contraception free of additional charge.According to the February UN Trends in Maternal Mortality 2000 to 2020 report, the maternal mortality rate was 263 per 100,000 live births. The national Health Service indicated neonatal and maternal deaths had increased since the outbreak of COVID-19, primarily due to the inability to provide adequate services in rural areas. Data on maternal mortality was limited. Cultural and economic factors posed barriers to menstruation hygiene, impacting school absenteeism. Pregnant adolescent girls and adolescent mothers faced barriers in completing their education or returning to school, with 30 percent of school dropouts attributed to pregnancy.																																				Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination										The law protected members of racial or ethnic minorities from violence and discrimination, but it was unclear whether the government enforced the law effectively.																																				Children										Birth Registration: Authorities denied some Fulbe birth registrations in a discriminatory manner, based on ethnicity, and thus contrary to law.Children unregistered at birth or without identification documents could be excluded from accessing education, health care, and social security. Although a birth certificate was required to enroll in school, authorities indicated children would not be denied access to education based on a lack of documentation.Education: Girls in the northern regions and rural areas throughout the country were less likely to continue and complete their education due to the weak quality of educational services, inability to pay expenses related to schooling, prioritization of boys’ education, security problems related to distance between home and school, lack of dormitory facilities, and inadequate sanitation and hygiene facilities.Child Abuse: The law prohibited sex with a child younger than age 16 with or without consent and sexual abuse of children. Authorities did not enforce the law effectively. For example, local social workers rarely monitored cases of child abuse and neglect.Child, Early, and Forced Marriage: The minimum legal age for marriage was 18. Child, early, and forced child marriage, while illegal, was a problem. The government did not effectively enforce the law. According to the 2017-2018 Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey, child marriage was highest in the Northern, North East, Upper East, Savannah, and Volta Regions; it was lowest in the Greater Accra, Ashanti, and Ahafo Regions.The Child Marriage Unit of the Domestic Violence Secretariat of the Ministry of Gender, Children, and Social Protection led governmental efforts to combat child marriage. The ministry’s National Strategic Framework on Ending Child Marriage in Ghana (2017-2026) prioritized interventions focused on strengthening government capacity to address neglect and abuse of children, girls’ education, adolescent health, and girls’ empowerment through skills development. The National Advisory Committee to End Child Marriage and the National Stakeholders Forum, with participation from key government agencies and civil society organizations, provided strategic guidance and supported information sharing and learning on child marriage among partners in the country. The Child Marriage Unit maintained a manual with fact sheets and frequently asked questions and used social media accounts to reach wider audiences.Sexual Exploitation of Children: The law prohibited commercial sexual exploitation of children, although it did not specifically mention sale, grooming, or use of children for commercial exploitation. Participating in sexual activities with anyone younger than 16 was illegal. The law criminalized the use of a computer to publish, produce, procure, or possess child pornography. Authorities did not effectively enforce the law. The minimum age for consensual sex was 16.Infanticide, Including Infanticide of Children with Disabilities: The law banned infanticide, but several NGOs reported communities in the Upper East Region killed “spirit children,” or those born with physical disabilities and suspected of being possessed by evil spirits. Authorities enforced governing prohibitions on infanticide.																																				Antisemitism										The Jewish community had a few hundred members. There were no reports of antisemitic incidents.																																				Trafficking in Persons										See the Department of State’s annual Trafficking in Persons Report at  https://www.state.gov/trafficking-in-persons-report/.																																				Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics										Criminalization: The law criminalized the act of “unnatural carnal knowledge,” which was defined as “sexual intercourse with a person in an unnatural manner or with an animal.” The offense covered only persons engaged in same-sex male relationships and those in heterosexual relationships. There were no reports of adults prosecuted or convicted for consensual same-sex sexual conduct, but police used the law to harass the LGBTQI+ community through detention, extortion, and arbitrary arrest. Police and local leaders also used false arrests to “out” members of the LGBTQI+ community to humiliate and alienate them.Violence and Harassment: The LGBTQI+ community reported police violence against LGBTQI+ persons. Civil society organizations and activists reported police were reluctant to investigate claims of assault or violence against LGBTQI+ persons. Stigma, intimidation, and the perceived bias of some police against LGBTQI+ persons dissuaded survivors from reporting abuse. Activists noted great difficulty in engaging officials on problems facing the LGBTQI+ community because of social and political prejudice. Evictions, extortion, public humiliation, and community ostracism were common. LGBTQI+ persons in prison were vulnerable to harassment, as well as sexual, mental, and physical abuse, which authorities generally did not investigate.Attacks by private citizens on LGBTQI+ persons were frequent and growing in number. Many attacks were well organized and sometimes shared on social media to further humiliate and ostracize LGBTQI+ persons. A local civil society organization tracking violence against the LGBTQI+ community reported more than 76 such attacks during the year. In January, assailants disrupted a traditional celebration with a homophobic attack against the chief celebrant. Social media harassment continued following the incident, until the victim left the country. In May, three persons assaulted and robbed a man after contacting him on social media, justifying the assault because they believed the victim was gay. Verified attacks against LGBTQI+ persons occurred in March, June, July, August, and October. Police arrested the perpetrators from the May attack, but the prosecutor repeatedly delayed the case in court. Police never identified the perpetrators in the other cases.Increased harassment compelled many members of the LGBTQI+ community to relocate from their homes; some family members publicly revealed their LGBTQI+ relatives’ identities. Civil society groups reported several LGBTQI+ community members permanently left the country because of increasing hate speech and harassment.Discrimination: The law did not prohibit discrimination by state and nonstate actors based on sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or sex characteristics. The law did not explicitly recognize LGBTQI+ couples and their families nor grant them rights equal to those of other persons. LGBTQI+ persons faced widespread discrimination in education, employment, financial services, and housing. For the third year in a row, there was a notable increase of anti-LGBTQI+ statements by high-ranking political figures and by religious and community leaders, as well as media coverage of these statements. Most activists believed the presence of an anti-LGBTQI+ bill in parliament encouraged the statements. Some members of parliament called on LGBTQI+ persons to not seek medical services and for medical providers to refuse to treat them.Availability of Legal Gender Recognition: Legal gender recognition was not available.Involuntary or Coercive Medical or Psychological Practices: There were an increasing number of reported instances of so-called conversion therapies or practices, including by religious organizations, pressuring LGBTQI+ persons to “recant” their identity and reveal the identities of others in the LGBTQI+ community. There were reports of surgeries performed on intersex children. There were no reports of surgeries performed on nonconsenting adult intersex persons.Restrictions of Freedom of Expression, Association, or Peaceful Assembly: There were no laws restricting individuals from speaking or reporting on LGBTQI+ matters, forming associations, registering organizations, or convening events. LGBTQI+ persons, however, were unable to meet in public or demonstrate, and landlords closed many private spaces community members used for meetings. Media coverage of LGBTQI+ matters was usually negative.																																				Persons with Disabilities										Persons with disabilities could not access education, employment, health services, public buildings, or transportation on an equal basis with others. The law prohibited discrimination against persons with disabilities and protected the rights of persons with disabilities to have access to health services, information, communications, transportation, public spaces such as schools and public buildings, the judicial system, and other state services, but the government did not effectively enforce the law. The government did not provide information and communication on disability concerns in accessible formats.Persons with both mental and physical disabilities, including children, were frequently subjected to abuse and intolerance. Authorities did not regularly investigate and punish violence and abuses against persons with disabilities. Children with disabilities who lived at home were sometimes tied to trees or under market stalls and were caned regularly; families reportedly killed some of them.Thousands of persons with mental disabilities, including children as young as seven, were sent to spiritual healing centers known as “prayer camps,” where mental disability was often considered a “demonic affliction.” Some residents were chained for weeks in these environments, denied food for days, and physically assaulted. Officials took few steps to implement the law monitoring prayer camps and barring involuntary or forced treatment of disabilities.Few adults with disabilities had employment opportunities in the formal sector, often due to bias and discrimination. Employers rarely offered reasonable accommodation to persons with disabilities.																																				Other Societal Violence or Discrimination										Chieftaincy disputes, which frequently resulted from the lack of a clear chain of succession, competing claims regarding land and other natural resources, and internal rivalries and feuds, resulted in deaths, injuries, and destruction of property. According to the West Africa Centre for Counter-Extremism, chieftaincy disputes and ethnic violence were the largest sources of insecurity and instability in the country. Disputes that occurred among Fulbe herdsmen, as well as between herders and farmers, at times led to violence. The government generally sought to tamp down violence and encourage dialogue and peaceful resolution of disputes.The law penalized discrimination against a person with HIV and AIDS, although the government did not effectively enforce the law. The law contained provisions that protected and promoted the rights and freedoms of persons with, as well as those who were suspected of having, HIV and AIDS. These included the rights to health, education, insurance benefits, employment, privacy, confidentiality, nondisclosure of HIV and AIDS status without consent, and holding public or political office.Discrimination against persons with HIV and AIDS was a problem. Fear of stigma, and fear that getting tested would mean immediate labeling as gay, discouraged persons from getting tested for HIV infection. Many of those who tested positive avoided seeking timely care. HIV-positive persons faced discrimination in employment and often were forced to leave their jobs or houses. The government and NGOs subsidized many centers providing free HIV testing and treatment for citizens, although high patient volume and the physical layout of many clinics often made it difficult for the centers to protect confidentiality. The country’s AIDS Commission raised concerns regarding how discrimination and high levels of stigma contributed to the spread of HIV in the country.There were frequent reports of violence against suspected criminals in “mob justice” incidents, and the failure of police to prevent or respond to them. Community members often saw such vigilantism as justified considering the difficulties and constraints facing the judicial and police sectors.																																					Section 7.													 Worker Rights												    																																																a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining										The law provided for the right of workers, except for members of the armed forces, police, Prisons Service, and other security and intelligence agencies, to form and join unions of their choice without previous authorization or excessive requirements. The law prohibited but did not provide adequate protection against antiunion discrimination. The law required trade unions or employers’ organizations to obtain a certificate of registration and be authorized by the chief labor officer, an appointed government official. Union leaders reported fees for the annual renewal of trade union registration and collective bargaining certificates were exorbitant.The law provided for the right to conduct legal strikes but restricted this right for workers who provided “essential services.” Workers in export processing zones were not subject to these restrictions. The Ministry of Employment and Labour Relations designated a list of essential services, which included many sectors outside of the essential services definition set by the International Labor Organization. The ministry’s list included services carried out by utility companies (such as water and electricity), ports and harbors, medical centers, and the Bank of Ghana. These workers had the right to bargain collectively, but parties to any labor dispute were required to resolve their differences within 72 hours. The right to strike could also be restricted for workers in private enterprises whose services were deemed essential to the survival of the enterprise by a union and an employer. A union could call a legal strike only if the parties failed to agree to voluntary arbitration or if the dispute remained unresolved at the end of arbitration proceedings.The law provided a framework for collective bargaining, which included obtaining a collective bargaining certificate from the chief labor officer. In cases where there were multiple unions in an enterprise, the majority or plurality union would receive the certificate but had to consult with or, where appropriate, invite other unions to participate in negotiations. The certificate holder generally included representatives from the smaller unions. Workers in decision-making or managerial roles were not provided the right to collective bargaining under the law, but they could join unions and enter into labor negotiations with their employers.The government effectively enforced applicable laws regarding freedom of association, collective bargaining, and the right to strike, but penalties were not commensurate with those for analogous crimes such as violating civil rights. Penalties were rarely applied against violators, and specific penalties were usually not set forth, although employers who resorted to illegal lockouts could be required to pay workers’ wages.Some instances of subtle employer interference in union activities occurred.																																				b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor										See the Department of State’s annual Trafficking in Persons Report at  https://www.state.gov/trafficking-in-persons-report/.																																				c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment										See the Department of Labor’s Findings on the Worst Forms of Child Labor at  https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ilab/resources/reports/child-labor/findings /.																																				d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																														e. Acceptable Conditions of Work										Wage and Hour Laws: The law provided for a national minimum wage for some sectors of the economy, and the minimum wage exceeded the government’s poverty line. There was widespread violation of the minimum wage law in the formal economy across all sectors.The maximum workweek was 40 hours, with a break of at least 48 consecutive hours every seven days. These provisions, however, did not apply to part-time workers, domestic workers in private homes, or others working in the informal sector. The law did not prescribe overtime rates and did not prohibit excessive compulsory overtime.Occupational Safety and Health: There were generally appropriate occupational safety and health (OSH) standards for the main industries in the country. The government did not proactively identify unsafe conditions and only responded to workers’ OSH complaints. By law workers could remove themselves from situations endangering their health or safety without jeopardy to their employment. The law only covered workers in the formal sector, who comprised approximately 10 percent of the labor force. The law reportedly provided inadequate coverage to workers due to its fragmentation and limited scope. Few workers believed they were free to exercise this right.Violations of OSH standards were common in the mining sector, often in illegal mining. Civil society organizations stated corruption and lax enforcement allowed unsafe illegal mining practices to continue.Wage, Hour, and OSH Enforcement: The Ministry of Employment and Labour Relations set wage and overtime standards but did not effectively enforce the law. The government also did not effectively enforce health and safety regulations, which were set by a range of agencies in the various industries, including the Food and Drugs Authority, the Roads Safety Commission, and the Inspectorate Division of the Minerals Commission. Penalties for violations were not commensurate with those for similar crimes, such as fraud or negligence, and penalties were never applied against violators. The government did not employ sufficient labor inspectors to enforce compliance. Although inspectors had the authority to make unannounced inspections, they were poorly trained and did not respond to violations effectively. Inspectors did not impose sanctions and were unable to provide data on how many violations they addressed. In most cases inspectors gave advisory warnings to employers, with deadlines for taking corrective action.Approximately 77 percent of the working population was employed in the informal sector, according to the Statistical Service. Most of these workers were self-employed.Some labor laws, such as legislation governing working hours, applied to the informal sector, but authorities did not enforce the minimum wage law in the informal sector. Employers widely flouted labor law in the informal sector, and the government did not enforce it.																																				    							View report by:																				Afghanistan											Albania											Algeria											Andorra											Angola											Antigua and Barbuda											Argentina											Armenia											Australia											Austria											Azerbaijan											Bahrain											Bangladesh											Barbados											Belarus											Belgium											Belize											Benin											Bhutan											Bolivia											Bosnia and Herzegovina											Botswana											Brazil											Brunei											Bulgaria											Burkina Faso											Burma											Burundi											Cabo Verde											Cambodia											Cameroon											Canada											Central African Republic											Chad											Chile											China (Includes Hong Kong, Macau, and Tibet)											Colombia											Comoros											Costa Rica											Côte d&#8217;Ivoire											Croatia											Cuba											Cyprus											Czech Republic											Democratic Republic of the Congo											Denmark											Djibouti											Dominica											Dominican Republic											Ecuador											Egypt											El Salvador											Equatorial Guinea											Eritrea											Estonia											Eswatini											Ethiopia											Fiji											Finland											France											Gabon											Georgia											Germany											Ghana											Greece											Grenada											Guatemala											Guinea											Guinea-Bissau											Guyana											Haiti											Honduras											Hungary											Iceland											India											Indonesia											Iran											Iraq											Ireland											Israel, West Bank and Gaza											Italy											Jamaica											Japan											Jordan											Kazakhstan											Kenya											Kiribati											Kosovo											Kuwait											Kyrgyz Republic											Laos											Latvia											Lebanon											Lesotho											Liberia											Libya											Liechtenstein											Lithuania											Luxembourg											Madagascar											Malawi											Malaysia											Maldives											Mali											Malta											Marshall Islands											Mauritania											Mauritius											Mexico											Micronesia											Moldova											Monaco											Mongolia											Montenegro											Morocco											Mozambique											Namibia											Nauru											Nepal											New Zealand											Nicaragua											Niger											Nigeria											North Korea											North Macedonia											Norway											Oman											Pakistan											Palau											Panama											Papua New Guinea											Paraguay											Peru											Philippines											Poland											Portugal											Qatar											Republic of the Congo											Romania											Russia											Rwanda											Saint Kitts and Nevis											Saint Lucia											Saint Vincent and the Grenadines											Samoa											San Marino											Sao Tome and Principe											Saudi Arabia											Senegal											Serbia											Seychelles											Sierra Leone											Singapore											Slovakia											Slovenia											Solomon Islands											Somalia											South Africa											South Korea											South Sudan											Spain											Sri Lanka											Sudan											Suriname											Sweden											Switzerland											Syria											Taiwan											Tajikistan											Tanzania											Thailand											The Gambia											The Netherlands											Timor-Leste											Togo											Tonga											The Bahamas											Trinidad and Tobago											Tunisia											Turkey (Türkiye)											Turkmenistan											Tuvalu											Uganda											Ukraine											United Arab Emirates											United Kingdom											Uruguay											Uzbekistan											Vanuatu											Venezuela											Vietnam											Yemen											Zambia											Zimbabwe															Build A Custom Report																						On This Page				search													>																										EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person																																							a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings																																																						b. Disappearance																																																						c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses																																																				Prison and Detention Center Conditions																																																																																				d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention																																																				Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees																																																																																				e. Denial of Fair Public Trial																																																				Trial Procedures																																												Political Prisoners and Detainees																																																																																				f. Transnational Repression																																																						g. Property Seizure and Restitution																																																						h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence																																																			Section 2. Respect for Civil Liberties																																							a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media																																																				Internet Freedom																																																																																				b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association																																																				Freedom of Peaceful Assembly																																																																																				c. Freedom of Religion																																																						d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country																																																						e. Protection of Refugees																																																						f. Status and Treatment of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs)																																																						g. Stateless Persons																																																			Section 3. Freedom to Participate in the Political Process																																							Elections and Political Participation																																																			Section 4. Corruption in Government																Section 5. Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights																Section 6. Discrimination and Societal Abuses																																							Women																																																						Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination																																																						Children																																																						Antisemitism																																																						Trafficking in Persons																																																						Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics																																																						Persons with Disabilities																																																						Other Societal Violence or Discrimination																																																			Section 7. Worker Rights																																							a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining																																																						b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor																																																						c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment																																																						d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																																						e. Acceptable Conditions of Work																																																									Tags																					Bureau of African Affairs																								Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor																								Ghana
- Department Press Briefing – April 3, 2024 HomeDepartment Press Briefing – April 3, 2024				hide		if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}																										Department Press Briefing – April 3, 2024																																																					April 3, 2024																																																								1:37 p.m. EDMR MILLER: All right. I don’t have anything from the top, so Shaun, do you want to start us today?QUESTION: Sure. Welcome. I wanted &#8212;MR MILLER: Don’t look at me that way. Yeah, I’m going to call you out on that dirty look you flashed me. You can go second. (Laughter.) Sorry. Meant in jest.QUESTION: As you might guess, we – I’m sure all of us want to start on the – this issue with the foreign aid workers who were tragically killed in Gaza. What do you make of the Israeli explanation of it? Prime Minister Netanyahu says it was unintentional and that they’re investigating this. Is that enough at this point? What is the United States looking for Israel to do?MR MILLER: So we are looking for them to do two things – one, to conduct a full, swift, and transparent investigation; and if that investigation shows that accountability is appropriate, then there of course should be accountability. And we will wait to see the results of that investigation before we pass judgment on it. The Israelis have said to us, and they’ve said publicly, that they intend to conduct this investigation swiftly. We want to see it wrapped up as soon as possible and see them put in place any measures to prevent this from happening again in the future.And that’s – go to the second point that we think we need to see, not just – and they don’t have to wait for the outcome of this investigation to do it – they need to put in place better deconfliction and better coordination measures to protect humanitarian workers and to protect all the civilians on the ground. And it is something that we have consistently said to them over the past few months, is that they need to improve their deconfliction measures and they need to improve their coordination measures.I saw that the defense minister, Minister Gallant, said that they are going to stand up a situation room to improve coordination between aid workers and the IDF. That’s something that is absolutely critical; it’s something that’s overdue. Secretary Blinken has, in his conversations with Israeli counterparts, made the case for some time that they need to stand up something like that. He raised that with Minister Gallant as recently as last week when he was here in Washington. And so we’re glad to see them do it. It should have been done sooner, but it’s an important step for them to take going forward. But ultimately, as is – as the case with all of the measures they’ve put into place, we’re going to judge them on the results, not the intent.QUESTION: Now, I mean, there’s – this obviously is something that’s happened before. And not to have a – not exactly this situation, but there was the tragedy with people searching – receiving aid who were killed. If you go even before October 7th, there was the investigation into the killing of Shireen Abu Akleh. I mean, do you think that the Israeli investigations and the U.S. responses have had an impact? Particularly the U.S. responses. I mean, do you think that the – that just saying that you’re going to wait for the Israeli investigation, for the Israelis to act, has had an impact?MR MILLER: So there have been times that the steps they have put into place because of – at our urging have had an impact, and have had an impact to the – to – have had a positive impact. For example, when the Secretary traveled to Israel and pushed them to implement better deconfliction, we did see an improvement in deconfliction. We saw them evacuating specific neighborhoods instead of just sending blanket evacuation orders across entire stretches of north Gaza, and those did have a positive impact, but they haven’t been sufficient. And so that’s why I made this point at the beginning, that we want to see them take further steps – like the ones that they say they’re standing up – but we’re going to watch, and if there are more things that need to be done, we will of course call on them to do so.With respect to investigations, look, I don’t want to pass judgment on what this investigation will show, just as you don’t want to pass judgment on what any investigation would show before it’s concluded. It’s important that they conduct a full, transparent, swift investigation. They need to find out exactly what happened, and we will – I’ll wait to pass judgment on it until it’s completed.QUESTION: Just one more before – following up on that, but I mean, the President himself laid out this aid plan at the State of the Union. It was quite a – the United States was – is it – was very visible on that, saying that – talking about the portable pier and everything. What does this say about that? I mean, is this – is this ruining the U.S. efforts to get aid in? I mean, obviously it – the U.S. can still do it, but tons of aid that were supposed to go in are – have already gone back because of – because of this killing.MR MILLER: So it will not affect our efforts to stand up the pier to deliver aid through sea. That effort is ongoing. The Pentagon is working hard on that, and I know they brief on that on a regular occasion, and we want to get that stood up as soon as possible. Of course, this strike does reveal the very difficult situation that aid workers on the ground inside Gaza face when it comes to not just receiving aid in Gaza but then actually delivering it. So, for example, and I know we’ve talked about this quite a bit over the past few months, it’s one thing to get aid into Gaza, either through Rafah or Kerem Shalom or through a maritime option when we have that up and running. The real question is being able to distribute it, and that’s of course – it’s in the distribution efforts where we saw this tragic strike take place yesterday.So it does, of course, raise real concerns about the safety of those aid workers who are doing that dangerous work. And I think it’s important to remember that these were seven tragic deaths yesterday, but over 200 aid workers have lost their lives since this conflict began. So that just reiterates and heightens the need for Israel to do better going forward, and it’s why the steps that Minister Gallant outlined yesterday, we are going to be watching closely to see if they are fully implemented and implemented in a way that yields better results, because there very much need to be better results.And again, I’ll come back to one point that we often make, and you – you’ve heard me say this; you’ve heard the Secretary say this publicly, but this is a case that we make directly to the Government of Israel. We need – they need to do better in delivering – in allowing humanitarian assistance to be delivered, and in achieving better deconfliction and coordination measures for the benefit of the innocent civilians inside Gaza who are suffering. That’s enough of a reason to do it on its own; that should be enough of a reason to do better. But it is also in Israel’s security interest to do better. And so we will continue to press them to do that.QUESTION: Just one more. Is – could there be any repercussions for the United States? I mean, I know you’re going to say that you’re waiting for the result of the investigation and everything, but as we’ve discussed, I mean, the – we’ve had this before investigations; we keep seeing these – it wasn’t just these seven; I think there are 208 workers or so who have been killed, by some tallies.MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: So obviously, something’s not happening. Are there more measures that the United States could do, could – more pressure that the United States could employ?MR MILLER: So we are going to continue to say exactly what we think about this publicly, we’re going to say exactly what we think about this privately, we’re going to offer our best advice to them on things that they could do better, and we are going to push them to do better, as we have done since the beginning.Humeyra.QUESTION: Matt, there’s been reporting in Israeli media about how the attack has taken place. Basically it said the drone fired three missiles in succession and, like, each of them sort of struck one of the cars. And Reuters just – we have an interview with José Andrés, actually, just on our wire. And he told us that the Israeli army targeted the convoy, quote, “systematically car by car.” And president – Prime Minister Netanyahu talked about this being a mistake and unintentional. How do you reconcile those two, the reporting and what José Andrés is saying, and what Prime Minister Netanyahu is saying?MR MILLER: So two things about that. So, number one, the chief of staff for the Israeli Defense Forces has come out and said it’s a – it was a misidentification. So while they were – I took that to mean while they were targeting those cars, they did not believe that it was a World Central Kitchen that was operating those vehicles at the time. But that said, we need to wait and see the outcome of this investigation to know with any confidence what it was that happened, and we’re going to wait to do that.But the second thing is – the second point is, it doesn’t really matter how they made the mistake. At the end of the day, you have seven dead aid workers who were there trying to deliver humanitarian assistance. So whatever the reason was that led to this tragedy, whatever the mistake that happened inside the IDF, it’s unacceptable, and they need to do better, and they need to put measures in place to ensure that it doesn’t happen again.QUESTION: And given there was an American citizen killed in this attack, why isn’t the United States conducting its own investigation?MR MILLER: So we don’t conduct investigations of the type I believe you’re referring to from this building, so I wouldn’t – I wouldn’t presume to speak to any.QUESTION: The – I mean, could the administration consider sort of Department of Justice can do that, FBI can do that?MR MILLER: Again, that – we don’t conduct that type of investigation from the State Department. I’m not going to speak on behalf of any other agency.QUESTION: And I just want to ask the evergreen question. We’ve reported, and other media outlets have reported as well, that U.S. – that the administration is looking at furthering a big $18 billion aircraft package, weapons package, to Israel. We reported that earlier this week. And looking at President Biden’s statement last night saying, like, this is not a one-off, there are – and you just talked about the number of humanitarian workers who’ve been killed. There are a lot of journalists who’ve been killed. Doesn’t this kind of, like – given the accusations of disregard for noncombatants by the IDF, doesn’t this kind of incident make U.S. stop and reconsider its arms sales or military aid to Israel?MR MILLER: So let me say two things with respect to that question. Number one, with respect to some of the reporting that we’ve seen over the past few weeks about arms transfers or potential arms transfers to Israel, some of which we have not officially notified to Congress and have not moved forward on at all, but a lot of those are with respect to weapon systems that would not be delivered for years – long after, hopefully, the conflict in Gaza has been resolved. It&#8217;s something we’re –QUESTION: But I’m not – I’m not entirely &#8212;MR MILLER: No, no – but no – I just want to say that I think it’s important to – because it does go to the exact point. We have had a longstanding security relationship with the State of Israel that predates this administration, that predates the current government in Israel. And that has existed through Democratic and Republican administrations in Washington, and through governments of different parties in Israel, because we are committed to Israel’s long-term security.So when I get questions and when I see some of the reporting about arms transfers or potential arms transfers to Israel, some of which started years ago or were approved years ago, and some of which relate to systems that won’t be delivered until years down the road, I think it’s important to put in context that those relate to our overall security relationship with Israel and our overall commitment to Israel’s defense against a number of adversaries that it faces in the region that are committed to the destruction of Israel.Now, with respect – with respect to the question I know that you’re getting at, which we’ve addressed a number of times here, we continue to be committed to Israel’s defense, but we continue to press them consistently to ensure that they fully comply with international humanitarian law; and, critically, that when they do make mistakes, as they very well – they very obviously did yesterday, that they are transparent about those mistakes, that they investigate them, and, if appropriate, there’s accountability.QUESTION: I’m not entirely sure how the delivery date for this being down the line four years, five years, has an impact on your decision-making today because you’re making the decision today with the information that you know there are, like, various accusations about Israeli military’s conduct in Gaza; elsewhere there are incidents that the State Department is looking at whether Israel has breached international rules – like humanitarian law – so I’m not entirely sure how relevant it is that the delivery of those are, like, down the line. But – just one last thing. You said a minute ago – so you talked about misidentification. Are you referring to the video of Israel chief of staff, or are you &#8212;MR MILLER: Correct.QUESTION: I mean &#8212;MR MILLER: Yeah, correct. The statement he said publicly.QUESTION: And also is that what Israel – is that what U.S. Government have been told, that it was a misidentification?MR MILLER: They have told us – they have told us the same things privately that they have said publicly.QUESTION: But I mean, that – they took the strike, but they didn’t – they weren’t aware that it was a WCK convoy?MR MILLER: I am not going to – they have – they have – as I said, the thing that – the point about misidentification that General Halevi said in that public statement is what they have communicated to us privately. I’m not going to get further into the conversations, but ultimately what’s important is that they conduct an investigation to identify how that mistake happened – exactly how it happened and what they can do to prevent it from happening in the future?QUESTION: So &#8212;QUESTION: (Off-mike.)MR MILLER: Go ahead.QUESTION: &#8212; a short follow-up on that. Also, in the IDF statement, Halevi said that the misidentification was at night. Is that the understanding of the U.S. Government as well? And can you shed any light on why aid convoys are traveling at night at the moment?MR MILLER: I don’t have any reason to dispute that statement. And with respect to aid convoys traveling at night, I think they – they travel at different times during the day, but some of them, especially those traveling to the north of Gaza where the aid situation has been much more restricted and there’s been much – a more desperate humanitarian situation, sometimes they’ve been traveling at night to minimize the scenes like we saw several weeks ago where you saw stampedes of desperate individuals trying to rush out and take aid from the trucks. So they’ve been trying to move at times that would mitigate the risk of that happening.QUESTION: And just one &#8212;MR MILLER: But I – they also do move during the day. They don’t move only at night.QUESTION: Okay. And one on just timing. I know you say a swift investigation. Can you give us any more detail whether this is days, weeks &#8212;MR MILLER: I would defer to the Government of Israel to speak to that. We want to see it happen as soon as possible while ensuring that it is thorough and gets to the actual bottom of what happened.QUESTION: Thank you.QUESTION: Just one more on this and then a question on the Benny Gantz comments from today. So has the Government of Israel shared with you any information that prove that this was what they’re saying, a misidentification, or are you just trusting that at this point?MR MILLER: They – what we are trusting is that they’re going to conduct a full investigation. But that said, we will look at how that investigation is conducted, we will look at the results of that, and then we will pass judgment on it. So I don’t want to pass judgment on anything that they have said privately or publicly until they’ve conducted a full investigation. And I only say that because, as is true with our own military, as is true with militaries around the world, oftentimes the early events of what happened don’t bear out when you conduct a full investigation into the underlying facts. So we’re going to wait and pass judgment when we see the full results.QUESTION: But in a way you’re passing judgment by standing up there and saying it was a misidentification already before you have the actual facts before you.MR MILLER: I don’t have any reason to dispute that, but we will pass – we will wait and see the full investigation.QUESTION: Okay. Benny Gantz, Israeli war cabinet minister, said today that he would call for parliamentary elections in September. What is the U.S. response to that? Would you support such elections taking place?MR MILLER: That is entirely a decision for the Israeli people and the Israeli – members of Israeli Government to make.Yeah, go ahead.QUESTION: (Inaudible) something that Humeyra asked? When you’re talking about three strikes on this convoy, I mean, even if we take at face value that it’s just a misidentification, I mean, is that appropriate? I mean, you have a convoy which is apparently clearly marked by aid, but if it’s – whoever it was in there – having three strikes, so systematically destroying it – is – do you think that’s an appropriate way to go at &#8212;MR MILLER: I – it’s hard to comment on that without getting into a hypothetical. You can obviously see a scenario if they were a convoy of clear terrorists, that it might be appropriate. That obviously was not the case here. So I think we will wait, as I said, for the results of the investigation to pass judgment on how this mistake happened. But as I said, it ultimately doesn’t matter whether it was three or two – they killed seven aid workers. How ever they made the mistake, it resulted in a tragedy that should have never happened, and that’s what they need to prevent from happening again.QUESTION: Can I – can I &#8212;MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: Thank you. On the investigation, Matt, do you believe that Israel’s record in investigating itself is a good record? They have come up with good results in the past? I mean, there have been – there has been so many investigations. Can you cite one investigation where they actually came clean?MR MILLER: So they have spoken to a number of investigations, including one where you had members of the IDF who behaved inappropriately inside a mosque, and they spoke to those members being disciplined. They have spoken to a number of other investigations that they have ongoing. I’ve read comments last week from the chief lawyer inside the IDF who talked about a number of ongoing investigations they have. But ultimately, let’s just wait, see what the investigation comes up with, and then we can make our judgments.QUESTION: Okay. Now, I have a couple more – just bear with me. On the misidentification, so when they say misidentification, does that tell us that they were actually after three-car convoy that had Hamas fighters in it and they were targeting, or – I mean, movement of fighters by cars, which is obviously unusual and so on? Is that – is that what you think they meant?MR MILLER: I don’t know what they were after. And ultimately, as I said, it doesn’t really matter what they were intending to do, because what they did do was kill seven aid workers, and it’s unacceptable and should not happen again.QUESTION: Okay. So there’s been about 196, I believe, 196 aid workers killed in Gaza; 175 UN workers, including UNRWA workers and so on. So I want to ask you: Do you believe there’s any kind of – what is different about this strike, the fact that this particular strike was – owned or headed by a famous chef and it had citizens of Canada and Australia and Britain and the United States, and not just Palestinians. Is that the only difference for this strike to garner such a great deal of space and to engender the anger of the President of the United States of America and your anger?MR MILLER: So Said, I won’t speak to why anyone strike gathers more attention than others. That’s a decision is largely not made by the United States Government. I will say, when it comes to the United States Government speaking out, we have talked at length about the need for Israel to do more to minimize civilian harm and minimize death to aid workers. That didn’t start this week with these deaths, this – the tragic death of these seven World Central Kitchen workers. We have talked about it for some time and we have pressed the Israeli Government to do better and offered them ideas on how to do better. And as I said at the outset, one of those ideas was to stand up the kind of situation room that they are now standing up.QUESTION: Last question, on Rafah and the meeting that took place on Monday. It seems that there are deep differences between the United States of America and Israel on the Rafah invasion. Can you update us on what’s going on? What will the United States – what does the United States expect – does it – what does the United States expect Israel to do? Because we’re talking about movement of maybe one and a half million people.MR MILLER: We – I couldn’t tell if you were – I was just going to jump in, and sometimes I’ve jumped in and you &#8212;QUESTION: No, please, please. Go ahead.MR MILLER: &#8212; you’ve not been done with the question, so I didn’t want to interrupt you.QUESTION: No, I’m fine. Go ahead.MR MILLER: So with respect to a potential operation in Rafah, what we have made clear to them is we share the goal of dismantling the remaining Hamas battalions that are – that exist in Rafah and do pose a legitimate security threat to the State of Israel and the people of Israel. But we do not want them to conduct a full-scale operation that we believe would not only lead to a high number of civilian deaths and would hinder the delivery of humanitarian assistance, but would ultimately weaken Israel’s security. So what we did in that meeting that the Secretary attended at the White House a couple of days ago is to offer them our best advice on other ways to accomplish that mission. And we will have follow-up meetings in the coming days to further that conversation.Go ahead. I’ll come to you next.QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. So you said that we have seven dead international aid workers and you want to avoid seeing more killing in the future. So therefore, you said that you asked Israel to coordinate better and to establish deconflicting zones. But this is contradict with what exactly happened with World Central Kitchen. They coordinated with Israelis to every detail and they went into exactly the deconflict – deconflicting zone on the beach, and yet they were targeted. So how this applies now? What difference does it make?MR MILLER: That has been – that is exactly the point I was making. They have had deconfliction measures, they have had coordination measures to try to prevent tragedies like this from happening, and they haven’t worked well enough. Clearly they haven’t worked well enough when you see not just these seven aid workers that have been killed, but over 200 aid workers that have been killed since the outset of this conflict. And so they need to do a better job. Some of this has been bureaucratic with aid workers not talking to the – having the right – with the IDF not having set up the right channels to communicate with aid workers and messages not getting passed back and forth.But as I said, ultimately, whatever the details are that broke down here, the result is unacceptable, and that’s why they need to do better. And so that’s why they need to have improved deconfliction and coordination measures to prevent tragedies like this from happening in the future.QUESTION: Okay. So as a result of the killing of the World Central Kitchen staff – also Anera, which is an American NGO, suspended their work in delivering aid to Gaza. And before that, UNRWA was targeted by the Israelis of saying there is some people who are involved in the October 7 attack, and we’re still waiting for the investigation. So practically, three of the vital organizations that providing aid to Gaza either suspended their work or they don’t have enough fund to help the people who are starving in Gaza.Some people believe that this actually is kind of a strategy on behalf of the Israelis to use food as a weapon of war and to prevent Gazans of receiving the aid, and therefore forcing them to leave, as some kind of strategy by Prime Minister Netanyahu. Do you see it? Can you entertain this for a second, this thought that actually this is not a mistake or unintentional or haphazard or was accident, but actually there is some kind of thought process that get into it by the Israelis.MR MILLER: So a few things just in the preface to the question first. So with respect to UNRWA, it’s not just the Israeli Government that found that there were UNRWA workers that participated in the terrorist attacks – it was UNRWA itself. And I think that’s always an important thing to remember, UNRWA itself that actually briefed the United States on its own findings.With respect to UNRWA, it does continue to operate. Obviously it’s faced funding challenges, but you’ve seen a number of countries who have resumed their funding. And UNRWA is continuing to do important work on the ground now – vital work – that we want to see continued. So while they have faced funding challenges, they are continuing to deliver humanitarian assistance inside Gaza, and it’s critical that that work continue. I – obviously there are organizations that are going to look at what happened the other day now and be worried about the safety and security of their employees. How could they not be? And so it is why it is incumbent on the Government of Israel to institute better measures to give confidence to aid workers that their employee – or to give aid organizations that their employees won’t be killed just trying to deliver humanitarian assistance.With respect to the overall policy, look, I can just speak to what the Government of Israel has said and what they have done. So they have said they want to see humanitarian assistance come in and they have allowed humanitarian assistance to come in through Rafah, through Kerem Shalom, through the 96 gate. They’re working with us on this maritime option that we are standing up with the cooperation of other countries in the region. But in all of these circumstances, it has been not enough. It has been too little. It has been plagued in many cases by bureaucratic delays and bureaucratic obstacles that we are continuing to try to work through.But it’s kind of the same thing as – with respect to – it’s the same point I’m making with respect to these deaths. Whatever the reason the number – the amount of humanitarian assistance hasn’t gotten in at the levels it should had, the ultimate fact is the fact, which is not enough food, not enough water is getting in right now. And the Government of Israel needs to do more to allow it to get in and to facilitate it getting in.Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you. Just want to follow up Said’s questions on nearly 200 aid workers killed in Gaza and your – difference in your approach. President Biden yesterday expressed outrage over the killing of seven aid workers from the World Central Kitchen in Gaza. Is the administration also outraged by the killing of nearly 200 aid workers, 100 journalists, 30,000 – 33,000 Palestinians, mostly women and children? Are you outraged by this too?MR MILLER: We are outraged by every loss of civilian life in Gaza. And you have heard the President speak to this, you’ve heard the Secretary speak to this in saying far too many civilians have been killed, too many aid workers have died in this conflict, too many journalists have died in this conflict, and we want to see Israel do a better job in minimizing all of those casualties.QUESTION: Just one more on that. Biden also, in the same statement, said that Israel has not done enough to protect aid workers and civilians. And you yourself said that you have repeatedly urged Israel to take some steps to minimize civilian harm in Gaza. If there are steps that Israel needs to take and Israel chooses not to take them, doesn’t that mean that Israel is deliberately attacking aid workers and civilians?MR MILLER: No, I don’t think you can necessarily make that conclusion because there &#8212;QUESTION: Why?MR MILLER: Because sometimes there are bureaucratic obstacles that are presented. And we try to work through those bureaucratic obstacles. But &#8212;QUESTION: How do you explain the killing 33,000 Palestinians, then?MR MILLER: So partly this is because Israel is operating in an incredibly difficult environment where Hamas hides behind human shields. They’re operating in an urban environment where Hamas has constructed tunnels beneath apartment buildings, hides in mosques, hides in hospitals, even hospitals that – like al-Shifa that Israel had cleared. Hamas returns to those hospitals. And so it is an incredibly difficult environment, and the Israeli Defense Forces face real challenges &#8212;QUESTION: But does this justify killing of civilians?MR MILLER: Real challenges – but I’ll say it does not minimize at all their responsibility to do everything possible to prevent taking civilian life.Tom.QUESTION: Just to follow up on the several questions about the value of investigations after actions by the IDF, I mean, you have called numerous times for investigations after Palestinians have been killed in recent years. Some of those have been U.S. citizens. In the last two years, Omar Assad, February 2022, found dead after being detained by Israeli soldiers. You called for a thorough criminal investigation, full accountability. Shireen Abu Akleh, as we know, May 2022, a U.S. citizen – you called for a full investigation. June 2023, Omar Qatin, a U.S. resident in Turmus Ayya, which is a town full of U.S. passport holders in the West Bank – you called for full accountability and justice. I haven’t – what – are you satisfied with the outcome of those three investigations, for a start? And then what should we read into your call for an investigation in this case &#8212;MR MILLER: So I can’t speak to the specifics of every one of those investigations. Some of them predate my &#8212;QUESTION: (Off-mike.)MR MILLER: I would say some of them predate my time here before I was working at the State Department. I can say with respect to the investigation of Shireen Abu Akleh, of course, we called on Israel to investigate and we also called on them to cooperate with our investigation. And they did cooperate with our investigation that the U.S. security coordinator conducted that concluded that gunfire from IDF positions was likely responsible for her tragic death. And so there were steps that they took to cooperate with the investigation that we had.Ultimately, as it pertains to the deaths of – and I should say there are two other cases that are ongoing right now, one of American citizens who were killed in the West Bank, one that’s being conducted by – one investigation that’s being conducted by Israeli law enforcement, one that’s being conducted by Palestinian Authority law enforcement. And in all of those cases, we want the same thing. We want a full investigation. We want to – it to happen as quickly as possible, but we don’t want that swiftness to come at the expense of thoroughness. Ultimately, it’s important that they get it right.And then with respect to all of them, we will make judgments on a case-by-case basis on whether that investigation was conducted fully and appropriately and led to appropriate outcomes and results.QUESTION: I mean, B’Tselem, which is a very well respected Israeli human rights group, several years ago said it would stop cooperating with military investigations in Israel because – in its words – they are “nothing more than a masquerade.” Do you see that view? Do you have any sympathy with it?MR MILLER: Let me just say with respect to – I think we’re all going to have a chance, the entire world, including the journalists in this room, including the United States Government, to look at an investigation being conducted by the Israeli Defense Forces with respect to the killing of these World Central Kitchen workers, and we are all going to be able to make our own independent judgments about the thoroughness and the reliability of that investigation. I know that we will do so, and I’m sure that all of you as well – will as well.QUESTION: (Off-mike.)MR MILLER: Yeah, let’s stay on. Alex, I’m just &#8212;QUESTION: Yes.MR MILLER: I’ll come back to you. Stay on – I’m sure we’ll stay in the region.QUESTION: Matt, just want to follow up on Said and a Rabiyah question regarding this attack on WCK convoy. It’s not an isolated incident. Been attacks on conveys before, on UNRWA’s storage facilities; people queuing for aid in Gaza have been also targeted by Israel forces. And now you’re calling them for an investigation. You’re calling them to change some – to make some changes so this incident doesn’t happen again. But don’t you think that the U.S. soft approach toward Israel in this war also let them to get away with it, for example?MR MILLER: So I would &#8212;QUESTION: (Inaudible) do that?MR MILLER: Sorry, sorry. I would disagree with the characterization. We have on a number of occasions pressed them to do more on deconfliction measures, on protection of civilians, and they have taken steps that have been important; in most cases – nearly all cases – not enough, but steps that have been tangible and that have produced results. But we want to see them do better, and that’s why we’ll continue to engage with them on that – in that regard.QUESTION: But do you think it was better enough? Let’s say, I mean, that northern Gaza is on the verge of famine already. Aid are not coming in for a while now, for months. Your pressing the Israelis’ counterparts, it seems that doesn’t yield results any more.MR MILLER: So I will say that you can look back at the history of our engagements with the Government of Israel and show where it has produced tangible results. And that includes in the immediate aftermath of October 7th, right up to the recent history, starting with the first trip that the Secretary made to the region when he urged the Government of Israel to open Rafah, and then the President came two days later and cemented that agreement to open Rafah, which allowed humanitarian assistance to get in.We then engaged with them to urge the opening of Kerem Shalom, which is an important step to allowing more humanitarian assistance to get in. The same thing is what led to the opening of the 96th gate in the north, the same thing that led to flour coming in through Ashdod, the same thing that is leading to the opening of a maritime route to get more humanitarian assistance in.When it comes to deconfliction measures, it was our involvement that led to them to implement a humanitarian pause, not just the pause of one week, but three-hour pauses with four hours’ notice in the early days of the war when they were bombing neighborhoods, oftentimes with kind of blanket notices but not with any kind of specificity. And it was our involvement that led them to start offering those pauses. It is our involvement that led to them offering, as I said earlier, specific neighborhood evacuation orders rather than just these blanket orders.That said, in all of these cases, we want to see them do more and we want to see them do better. We want to see them to do more to let humanitarian assistance in and to protect civilian lives. And that is why we are consistently engaged with them, from the President of the United States, to the Secretary of State, to our team on the ground, and everyone in the United States Government who works on this matter.QUESTION: The last – my last question about the statement that issued by the White House’s today on the – President Biden’s statement regarding this attack on – the latest attack on the convoy. The President sounded outraged and heartbroken, and blamed Israel that they are not doing enough to protect aid workers. Does this language signal a change in policy, or is just a statement regarding this incident?MR MILLER: It was a statement about this incident. But it’s not a change in policy because we have always, as I said, consistently been telling the Government of Israel that they need to do more to protect aid workers and civilians and journalists. Now, we’re glad to see them taking additional measures now; as I said, those measures were overdue. We’ve been urging them to do them from some time – for some time. But this has always been the policy that we have clearly communicated to them that we want them to follow.Camilla.QUESTION: Matt, sorry, just one on the U.S.-Canadian dual national who was amongst those killed. World Central Kitchen has also named him. Can you confirm that the State Department has reached out to his family, and what if any consular support the U.S. can give?MR MILLER: We have reached out to his family. We reached out to his family yesterday to offer our condolences and to offer any consular assistance that we can provide. That is always our standard practice in these cases when we see an American citizen who has tragically lost their life overseas. We offer any type of assistance that we can to facilitate whatever they need in the wake of this tragedy. And we’ll keep, obviously, the details of that private, but we have been in touch with his family.Let me just make sure. Stay in the – finish up on Gaza before – go ahead. Guita, sorry.QUESTION: Thanks. In the neighborhood?MR MILLER: In the neighborhood, yeah.QUESTION: Yes. Thank you. Regarding the attack on the Iranian facility in Damascus, I was wondering, well, we know that the United States has sent messages to Iran saying that it was not involved. It had no idea of this operation. I was wondering what – how was the American message received? Was it accepted, do you think, considering that there are now a number of officials threatening retaliation?MR MILLER: So I am not going to speak to how it might have been received. The Iranians can speak for theirselves. I will just say that we made very clear to the Iranians that we had no involvement in this strike, we didn’t know about it at the time, and we warned them not to use this attack as a pretext to attack U.S. facilities or personnel.QUESTION: Since then, have you – has the administration possibly followed up with reaching out to an intermediary, somebody that – a country that Iran trusts – to hone in that message?MR MILLER: I am not going to speak to our range of diplomatic engagements, but as we have made clear over a number of months, we have the ability to send messages, very clear messages, to Iran both directly and indirectly, and we do so when it’s in our interest.QUESTION: Matt, do you know if – have you – has the administration been able to ascertain the – that the facility, the Iranian facility, was indeed a diplomatic one, as Iran claims?MR MILLER: We are still gathering details about what it – what precisely type of facility that was.QUESTION: And given the Iranian response or threats, are U.S. interests – troops – in the region and across the world, have they been put on alert?MR MILLER: So I would defer to the Pentagon to speak to that. Obviously, we have been broadly – excuse me – we have been broadly – and I’m not speaking on behalf of the Pentagon but just on behalf of the State Department – broadly concerned about escalation since October 7th, and if you’ve seen us take a number of steps over time with respect to our embassies. We are constantly monitoring the situation and making assessments about the precise threat environment at any given day. But I don’t have any updates to posture to announce. And with respect to American forces in the region, I would defer to the Pentagon for comment.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you so much. Two questions, basically. First question specifically: For you being diplomat, do you think so attacking diplomatic missions and diplomats in an area that is dedicated or declared a diplomatic mission? It sounds like the U.S. have no condemnation on this Israeli strike. It will be another continuation for Israel, another signal to continue this effort. Because the attack, where it happened, that location were adjacent to other missions, like Iranian mission is right next to it. So what is your comment?MR MILLER: We do not support attacks on diplomatic facilities, but as I said in response to Guita’s question, we’re still gathering information about what type of facility this was.QUESTION: And my other question is regarding the United States position on the strong support to Indian opposition as the State Department issued many statements in the support of Delhi Chief Minister Kejriwal and then the (inaudible) of Congress. So it seemed like United States have very strong position to – to condemning the attempts to silence the opposition in India. But regarding the political prisoners in Pakistan, specifically the female prisoners that are still behind the bars of a many political charges. So why so strong position for Indian opposition and nothing for the Pakistani political prisoners?MR MILLER: So I would – I would – I would not agree with that characterization. We have made clear on a number of occasions that we want to see everyone in Pakistan treated consistent with the rule of law, treated with respect for human rights, as is our position with respect to any country in the world.QUESTION: The female prisoners &#8212;MR MILLER: (Inaudible) go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. It’s been 110 days since journalist Samer Abu Daqqa was killed; 65 days since six-year-old Hind Rajab, her family, the medics sent to save her were killed. Per Shaun and other colleagues’ earliest question, today should be Shireen Abu Akleh’s birthday, our Palestinian-American colleague, I might add, killed in 2022. So I’m wondering if you have updates on not just the investigations but actual accountability measures in response to these? And if not, how can this administration’s approach of relegating things to months-long investigations while not changing policy – all as thousands more are killed – be a justified approach?MR MILLER: So I would say that with respect to Shireen, I did speak to that a moment ago. We can &#8212;QUESTION: Right, but in terms of accountability measures as well.MR MILLER: Yeah, I know. I know. We condemned her killing when it happened. We still condemn it now. There was an investigation conducted by the United States that found no reason to believe that that death was intentional, but it is a tragedy nonetheless. With respect to investigations – and, look, this is – I used to have to answer questions on behalf of the Justice Department that were very similar to this – investigations in some cases take time. You heard me a minute ago say we want them in every case to be conducted swiftly but not at the expense of thoroughness. And that is our position with respect to these investigations in Israel; it is our position with respect to investigations anywhere in the world, whether they impacted American citizens or they involve other types of tragedy. So we will continue to press for not just full investigations but, when warranted, all appropriate accountability measures.QUESTION: But so – yeah, like, given that approach, I understand; but given, again, that thousands of people have been killed since these instances I’ve laid out – Hind Rajab’s killing, the journalist’s killing – like, how is this justified given – and as you’ve said yourself, like, the material consequences of these things matter. The fact that seven aid workers have been killed matters. So how can this approach continue to be justified if – well, at the end, what matters is thousands of people continue to be killed with no change in policy.MR MILLER: So there are two things here. I think one is with respect to investigations, and we want to see accountability measures, when appropriate, for people who have behaved inappropriately, in violation of IDF code of conduct or in violation of international humanitarian law, we want to see accountability inside the Israeli system. But it’s also true that we have pressed the government to enact operational changes to prevent further civilian loss of life. And we have seen them – as I have spoken to at length – enact changes over time. Those haven’t been sufficient. We have seen Minister Gallant announce new changes that they are putting in place just yesterday, and we are going to watch those and make our judgments based on how they work.QUESTION: Finally, one more. As our colleagues have pointed out, hundreds of aid workers, doctors, volunteers have been killed even before this week. U.S. has cut funding to UNRWA, the World Central Kitchen is pausing operations, Anera is pausing, all out of fear of their workers being killed. And you think of, for instance, the Mr. Rogers quote, the infamous Mr. Rogers quote, if you’ll humor me: “When I was a boy and I would see scary things on the news, my mother would say to me, ‘Look for the helpers. You will always find people who are helping.’” I imagine you and your colleagues have come into this work hopefully trying to be helpers, too. So I wonder, what’s the United States’s message to the helpers in the world trying to help people in Gaza, given those helpers are being killed with American military aid?MR MILLER: So you saw the Secretary speak to this not the – with a very similar quote yesterday, speaking in Paris about how aid workers are the helpers that run into conflict to provide help to those who need it. And our message to them is what it has been throughout this conflict, that we support the work that you do, we fund the work that aid organizations do in Israel, in Gaza, all around the world, and we want to see that work continue, and we will continue to make very clear to the Government of Israel that it needs to do much better to protect those workers from harm.All right. Any more in the region before move on?QUESTION: It’s a – one follow-up question.MR MILLER: We’ll finish here, and then I’ll take a few.QUESTION: When you said that you don’t expect that this attack is going to impact the humanitarian pier being set up and the support from that pier getting to where it needs to go, I assume, or are you &#8212;MR MILLER: No, I was – what I was speaking to is the – you have to – when you think about the pier, you have to think about the same way as I think delivery through Rafah or anywhere else. There is both getting aid in through the pier and into Gaza, that’s the first step; and then there’s the delivery of that aid inside Gaza.QUESTION: Sure.MR MILLER: We do not expect that it would impact the first; of course, the ability of humanitarian aid workers to deliver aid inside Gaza, which is what we saw tragically impacted yesterday, continues to be an ongoing concern. And so it’s why it’s important that the Government of Israel improve deconfliction and coordination measures.QUESTION: So could this incident delay that pier being up and running and getting the support to people?MR MILLER: I would refer to the Pentagon for any comment about the timeline of this pier, which you should not read into one way or the other, other than that it’s a project that they are managing. It’s just something I’ve never been able to speak to from here.Humeyra.QUESTION: Just on – to follow up on that one, actually, have you had since yesterday any conversations with any – with Pentagon or with any possible humanitarian aid partners on the ground about how concerned they are because now it would be expected that perhaps they would look for additional measures to ensure their safety and security?MR MILLER: We’ve had a number of conversations with humanitarian aid organizations who, as you might expect, as you would obviously expect, are incredibly concerned about what happened. But the sad truth is – as we’ve spoken to, as some of you have mentioned in your questions I’ve spoken to – these are not the first death of aid workers. There have been 200 aid workers that have been killed. So the very sad truth is that the workers doing this important work are aware of the risk, because they’re living with them every day and are putting their lives potentially on the line to deliver humanitarian assistance.So what we have heard from aid groups is they want to see the Government of Israel do better, and that’s what we have pushed the Government of Israel to do.QUESTION: And have you picked a partner on who’s going to distribute from that pier, who’s going to pick it up from the pier?MR MILLER: I’m not aware of any further updates or developments on that question. It’s something we’re continuing to work through.QUESTION: Just a couple of other things. Is it the State Department’s or is it U.S. understanding that there are – there is already famine in Gaza? You have warned of imminent risk, but is it your understanding that there is already famine in &#8212;MR MILLER: I am not aware of an assessment that there is currently famine. Now, there are places where we have a lack of information, particularly in northern Gaza, where it is very clear that there is acute food insecurity and there is a potential for famine. What’s actually occurring on the ground is very difficult to know. Bottom line is there needs to be more food delivered to people who desperately need it, because if famine is not already occurring, there are at least parts of Gaza that are on the brink of famine, and we need to get food in to those people.QUESTION: And two more things. Palestinian Authority wants a vote at the UN Security Council in April to become a full member. Does the U.S. oppose this, and if necessary would you veto it?MR MILLER: So I am not going to speculate about what may happen down the road. But we have always made clear that we believe the – while we support the establishment of an independent Palestinian state, and you’ve seen the Secretary engage in very intensive diplomacy over the past few months to try to establish a Palestinian state with security guarantees for Israel, that is something that should be done through direct negotiations through the parties – something we are pursuing at this time – and not at the United Nations.QUESTION: Okay. And the final thing is &#8212;QUESTION: (Off-mike.)QUESTION: &#8212; Kirby said – sorry, I’m almost done – Kirby said yesterday on the podium that the State Department has not found that Israel’s military conduct has violated international humanitarian law. His comment sounded conclusive and definitive. So I just want to follow up and clarify: Does the State Department have such a definitive conclusion that it has looked at all of the incidents raised so far, and all of the incidents and the review on those have been concluded, and as a result, you have a definitive assessment that no violations have occurred?MR MILLER: So I saw what the admiral said. He also said that we have ongoing processes here at the State Department, and that is &#8212;QUESTION: Yes, that is what he &#8212;MR MILLER: I – so that is correct. We have ongoing processes here at the State Department to examine that very question, and we have not at this time concluded that Israel has violated international humanitarian law, but these are very much ongoing processes with respect to that question.QUESTION: Can I just follow up one single thing on that?MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: Is – have any of those – when you’re making the assessments, have any of those gone to the Office of the Legal Adviser?MR MILLER: I have made it clear that we are not going to talk about the specifics of internal deliberations and how we’re conducting those processes. But there &#8212;QUESTION: This is – it’s about international humanitarian law, so it’s a legal assessment &#8212;MR MILLER: There – and there are a number of offices inside the State Department that are involved in these assessments, but I’m not going to speak to the exact specifics.QUESTION: Are you able to say how many incidents in total are you looking at? Is it a couple? Is it dozens?MR MILLER: A number of them. I’ll leave it at that.Shaun.QUESTION: Hey, Matt, in yesterday’s presser &#8212;MR MILLER: I meant Shaun, but go ahead, Alex. I’ve been – I’ve been overlooking you for some times, so go ahead.QUESTION: Yeah, back to yesterday’s presser. At the presser the Secretary seemed to suggest that Russia has already received Iranian ballistic missiles and – and has used it in Ukraine. The White House yesterday couldn’t confirm that. Did the Secretary mean to say that? Was it translation error? I should mention that he was speaking in French.MR MILLER: He was speaking in French, and we have made very clear that we have been concerned about the burgeoning security partnership between Iran and Russia. The Secretary was speaking to the fact that they have delivered drones already.QUESTION: Thank you. I want to move to the South Caucasus. Secretary spoke with Aliyev today. If you look at Azerbaijan readout, Aliyev was venting about this week’s meeting-slash-Armenia summit. And he said that the failure to postpone the trilateral meeting – despite his concerns, he says – will lead to escalation of tension and – rather than peace. Does the Secretary agree with that assessment, and is a meeting still on?MR MILLER: So I – with respect to that, I am going to defer to a statement that we have coming out shortly. The President spoke to – I’m sorry – the Secretary spoke to President Aliyev earlier today, and we’ll have a readout coming.QUESTION: About – about the particular point that Aliyev made, did the Secretary – will that change any decision? Yeah.MR MILLER: We will speak to that in the readout, but their meeting is – the meeting is still ongoing.QUESTION: All right. On Georgia, do you have anything for me on Georgian Government’s trying to press – reintroduce, let’s say, the Russian law? They tried it last year; they failed. It looks like they are trying &#8212;MR MILLER: So we’ve seen the reports that they are considering that potential legislation. And And I would just say that last year, tens of thousands of Georgians took to the streets to make their European ambitions known and to reject the last attempt to implement this law. Georgia has a historic opportunity to open EU’s accession talks, and we stand ready to continue to support Georgia in that process.QUESTION: I have one more, if I may, on Russia sanctions. It appears as the administration removed three of Russia sanctions from the SDN list, targeting VTB Bank subsidiaries. U.S. imposed them two months ago against a Russian oligarch because of sanction violations. What is the reason for that decision?MR MILLER: So with respect to that specific question, I’ll refer you to the Treasury Department. But I would note that we have continued to impose new sanctions on Russia, including just in the past few months, and have taken measures to tighten the enforcement of our existing sanctions.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Shaun, go ahead. And then I’ll come to you next.QUESTION: A different topic – Uganda. The constitutional court in Uganda today struck down a bid to undo the anti-LGBTQ law. I was wondering if the U.S. has any reaction to the court ruling and whether this will have any implications on policy toward Uganda, including potentially more sanctions (inaudible).MR MILLER: So the United States continues to be deeply troubled by human rights abuses in Uganda and by the anti-homosexuality act. We believe that law undermines the human rights, prosperity, and welfare of all Ugandans. The Ugandan Government’s failure to safeguard the human rights of LGBTQI+ persons is part of the broader degradation of human rights protections that puts all in Uganda at risk and damages the country’s reputation abroad.And with respect to United States actions, so we have already imposed sanctions, including the visa restriction policy. We have ended Uganda’s eligibility for the African Growth and Opportunity Act, curtailed direct government-to-government funding to programs implemented with Uganda, issued a business advisory, a travel advisory, and advocated for Uganda’s full compliance with the social safeguards agreed to in the World Bank lending – in World Bank lending. And we will continue to take all appropriate measures.QUESTION: And just – just a very brief follow-up on that. I mean, it’s not the only place in Africa where this is happening. Ghana – there’s still the debate there. I mean, is there a concern about a broader push against LGBTQ equality in Africa? And particularly on Ghana, is there any communication on that with the Ghanaians?MR MILLER: So we are deeply concerned by legislation under consideration elsewhere in Africa and globally – it’s not just in Africa – that targets LGBTQI+ persons and their allies. We believe that governments should protect the – all individuals in their countries, and that every person deserves full dignity, and that these laws, whether they be in Africa or anywhere else in the world, undermine the human rights, prosperity, and welfare of individuals, and risk damaging their country’s reputation abroad.Go ahead, and then I’ll come to &#8212;QUESTION: Would you have a comment on the earthquake in Taiwan, the worst in 25 years?MR MILLER: I would say first and foremost we express our deepest condolences on behalf of the United States to the at least nine people dead and 900 injured and their families and everyone who was affected. We stand ready to support the people of Taiwan at this difficult time. USAID staff in the region and here in Washington will continue to closely monitor the earthquake and tsunami warnings, and will remain in close contact with the American Institute in Taiwan and are ready to provide assistance if necessary.QUESTION: Also, with the AIT chairperson now in Taipei, would you have a message ahead of the inauguration next month of Taiwan’s president-elect?MR MILLER: I would say that the chair will meet during this trip with a range of senior Taiwan leaders, political figures, and scholars from across party lines to discuss continued U.S.-Taiwan collaboration on issues of mutual interest, such as regional security, mutually beneficial trade and investment, and people-to-people, educational, and cultural ties. But broadly, U.S. policy has not changed. We have a longstanding, rock-solid partnership with Taiwan, and we look forward to continuing that unofficial relationship through the Taiwan political transition.QUESTION: Thank you.QUESTION: On equality, the Secretary announced a new chief DEI officer yesterday, but there’s criticism both internally and outside of State on why this took so long. The position was vacant for 10 months and doesn’t require Senate confirmation, so why did it take so long if this is such a top priority for the Secretary?MR MILLER: So we were working to find the best possible candidate, and we believe we did find the best possible candidate. Oftentimes when it comes to these jobs, you have to go through difficult bureaucratic procedures to fill basic positions, but I will say the emphasis that the Secretary has put on this job has not wavered – and has put on this issue has not wavered – throughout that time, that our work to expand diversity has continued since the outset of this administration because the Secretary believes that having a workforce that reflects America in all of its diversity makes us stronger and improves our national security. And we look forward to working this – with this new diversity officer to expand the work that we are already doing.And I’ll take one more and then wrap for the day.QUESTION: Thank you, sir. An Indian internal investigation has found the involvement of the intelligence officials into the assassination attempt on Sikh leader Gurpatwant Singh Pannun in New York. According to Indian media, that report is also shared with the State Department. Do you have any response on that because you were also waiting for that (inaudible)?MR MILLER: So I’m not going to speak to media reports. I will just say that we have made clear to the Government of India that we want to see them conduct a full investigation, and we continue to look forward to the results of that investigation, but I don’t have any updates to offer.QUESTION: Sir, according to some media reports, the United Nations has delivered more than $2.9 billion in cash to Afghanistan since the Taliban seized control, resulting in the flow of U.S. funds to the extremist group. So sir, is this happening with the consultation of U.S. Government or &#8212;MR MILLER: No, not at all. So let me make clear that we require all of our partners to have safeguards in place to ensure that assistance reaches those who need it. We also require robust monitoring and reporting from partner organizations implementing assistance programs, including those in unstable and unfriendly environments. When there is cause for concern related to the delivery of assistance, we have plans and protocols in place to respond, and we will continue to monitor all of our assistance programs and seek to mitigate the risk that U.S. assistance could indirectly benefit the Taliban or could be diverted to unintended recipients.QUESTION: Any response to the President Biden’s letter? Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif has said that Pakistan is willing to work with the U.S. for global peace and regional prosperity. What support can U.S. offer Pakistan in addressing security threats from neighboring countries and combatting the Pakistani Taliban?MR MILLER: So we will continue to work to expand the security partnership between the United States and Pakistan. We have spoken to that a number of times from this podium. It’s been a priority for us and will continue to be so.And with that, I’ll wrap for today. Thanks.(The briefing was concluded at 2:35 p.m.)# # #						Tags																					Afghanistan																								Georgia																								Ghana																								India																								Iran																								Israel																								Office of the Spokesperson																								Palestinian Territories																								Russia																								Taiwan																								Uganda
- Ghana National Day Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of StateOn behalf of the United States of America, I join President Akufo-Addo and the people of Ghana in celebrating 67 years of independence on March 6.  As we celebrate this milestone, let us reflect on the rich history and the enduring ties of democracy that bind our two nations and our dynamic partnership. The United States deeply values our longstanding friendship and our combined, constant efforts to strengthen our democracies and protect the human rights of all people.
- Department Press Briefing – February 29, 2024 HomeDepartment Press Briefing – February 29, 2024				hide		if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}																										Department Press Briefing – February 29, 2024																																																					February 29, 2024																																																								1:37 p.m. ESTMR MILLER: Good afternoon, everyone. Let me start by addressing the tragic incident in northern Gaza today, where more than 100 Palestinians are reported to have been killed and many more injured.I, first of all, want to express the United States’ deepest condolences to the families of those who died. Far too many innocent Palestinians have been killed over the course of this conflict, not just today, but over the past nearly five months. And when you think about today’s tragedy, it is especially heartbreaking to consider how many of those families affected will be burying loved ones not for the first time. In fact, I’m sure that many of those affected have buried multiple loved ones over – since this conflict began.When it comes to establishing facts on the ground, we are urgently seeking additional information on exactly what took place. We have been in touch with the Israeli Government since early this morning and understand that an investigation is underway. We will be monitoring that investigation closely and pressing for answers.This tragic event also underscores the importance of expanding and sustaining the flow of humanitarian assistance into Gaza in response to the dire humanitarian situation, including through the – a potential temporary ceasefire as part of a hostage deal.If there’s anything that the aerial footage of today’s incident makes clear, it is just how desperate the situation on the ground is. People need more food; they need more water; they need medicine and other humanitarian goods, and they need it now.We continue to make clear in all of our discussions with the Government of Israel that all possible measures must be taken to allow the entry of more assistance into Gaza through as many points of access as possible and to enable safe and secure distribution of that aid throughout Gaza.But as we have said before, the best way to alleviate the ongoing suffering of the Palestinian people is to reach an agreement for a temporary ceasefire that would get hostages out, enable more aid to come in, and allow that aid to move everywhere inside Gaza.We continue to work, day and night, to achieve that outcome, including through calls the President held this morning with President El-Sisi of Egypt and the Emir of Qatar Sheikh Tamim, as well as ones Secretary Blinken held earlier today with Qatari Prime Minister Al Thani.Every leader on those calls agreed that this terrible event underscores the urgency in bringing the hostage talks to a close. We continue to believe a deal is possible and that a deal is in the interest of Israel, the Palestinian people, and the broader region, and we will continue to push for it to be concluded as soon as possible.With that, Matt.QUESTION: Yes. Thanks. So on that, what is your understanding of what happened?MR MILLER: So our understanding is that it – the – there was a commercial convoy delivering humanitarian assistance, that there were no UN agencies involved. They were delivering assistance, and then beyond that, we have seen, obviously, conflicting reports. We’ve seen the reports from the Government of Israel; we’ve seen accounts from local Palestinians who were on the scene. We don’t have ground truth on what happened. We know what we’ve seen people say publicly, and we’re seeking more information and looking for the results of the investigation, as I said in my opening comments.QUESTION: Understanding that you don’t have anyone on the ground, and you don’t know – all you have to go on right now, I presume, are what you’ve heard from the Israelis, what you’ve heard from witnesses, and the footage that you’ve seen. Based on all of that, what can you say about what it appears happened?MR MILLER: I don&#8217;t want to say – I don&#8217;t want to draw any conclusions about what appears happened, because I think it’s too early to say. Oftentimes, the early accounts in these situations have turned out to be incorrect.But two things are clear. One, just from the aerial footage, you can look at that and right away conclude the situation is incredibly desperate, that people are swarming these trucks because they’re hungry, because they need food, because they need medicine and other assistance. And that tells you that we need to do more to get humanitarian assistance in. And then the second thing is that too many Palestinians died today, as has been true far too many days since October 7th.And so that’s why we continue to push for a temporary ceasefire agreement that would alleviate the suffering of the hostages that continue to be held by Hamas and get them home to their families, and that would alleviate the suffering of the Palestinian people.QUESTION: Well, when you say too many Palestinians died today, does that mean that there’s some kind of acceptable number of Palestinian deaths?MR MILLER: The acceptable number is zero. The acceptable number is zero of innocent Palestinians – I’m differentiating that from Hamas fighters, obviously. But the acceptable number of innocent Palestinians dying is zero.QUESTION: All right. And then last one. So you talked about how it’s important to expand aid deliveries but also to increase the access points. You’ve been speaking publicly and privately for weeks now about your push for the Israelis to open Erez crossing for aid deliveries. How is that going?MR MILLER: I don&#8217;t have any updates on it, other than it continues to be a high priority for us. And if you look at the situation today, the reason we have been pushing for an opening of a crossing in northern Gaza is because we know that the situation there is incredibly dire. Even when you’ve had assistance flowing – not enough assistance flowing ever, but certainly over the past few weeks, not enough assistance flowing in the south at least there has been assistance getting in. The situation in the north has been much more difficult because of the difficulty of trucks traveling all the way from the south to the north and the difficulty of guarding those trucks, which I think is one of the things that we saw today. So we continue to push for a northern crossing to be open. It continues to be a high priority for us, but I don’t have an update on it.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Shaun.QUESTION: Could I just pursue, I mean, some elements of that? You talk about the safe delivery of aid. The Israeli military being there – I mean, do you have an idea what the situation was and is this – are there risks in this in itself on having the military so closely near aid delivery?MR MILLER: I don’t have any updates, other than what I’ve seen the Israeli military say publicly, which is that they were military stationed there not as part of the aid, but I think it was either as a checkpoint or a normal military staging facility.So I think the – obviously, whenever you have a military operating in any area, you have a risk of misunderstanding, you have a risk miscalculation, you have a risk of civilian casualties. That is an ongoing risk as long as there is an ongoing military operation.But you also see that risk increase now because of – as I said earlier – how desperate people are, right. Just look at the footage, and you can tell. You can see the people swarming those trucks. They’re desperate. They need food. And so whenever you have that kind of situation you have the risk not just of harm from military action that goes wrong and unfolds in a way that no one anticipates or no one wants, but you also have a heightened risk of accident. You have a heightened risk of criminal activity. You have all of those heightened risks to innocent people who are just trying to get food and water and medicine and things that they need to feed their families and make their families comfortable and try to keep their families safe.And so that’s why you keep – hear me keep saying we are trying so hard to get this temporary ceasefire agreement to release the hostages, because it would do so much to alleviate every problem that the Palestinian people are facing now. It would allow us to get more aid in. It would allow aid to be delivered safely throughout Gaza. And it would allow people in Gaza more freedom of movement to move around and get to aid and get to their homes and get to their neighborhoods. So it is urgent that this agreement be reached, and that is why you see the President and the Secretary and others in the United States Government pushing so hard to get it over the finish line.QUESTION: And just when you say that you – I mean that the United States is pressing for answers, in what form does that take? I mean, have there been calls initially? And to what extent will the U.S. follow up on that? Is there – are there – is there talk about accountability already for this?MR MILLER: Again, I think it’s appropriate to let the investigation unfold and see what it produces, but we – I can tell you we were in touch at senior levels with the Government of Israel early this morning U.S. time. Obviously, Israel is seven hours ahead of us, so by the time we woke up here, people in Israel – in the embassy were already in touch. And those contacts were followed up by people here in the State Department, pushing for answers and pushing – and we’re told that there’s an investigation. We’ll look to see what the results of that investigation yield and what further measures, if any, are appropriate.Jenny, go ahead.QUESTION: President Biden said that he believes that this will complicate the negotiations to secure that ceasefire and free the hostages. Can you give us any details about what’s underlying his assessment there?MR MILLER: I won’t other than to say it very well could, but the reason you saw the President on the phone with the president of Egypt and the emir of Qatar, and the reason you saw the Secretary on the phone with the prime minister of Qatar is to try and push past this situation and to try to make clear that, in fact, this incident today – this tragedy today – just underscores why we need to get a hostage deal and why we need to get a temporary ceasefire as soon as possible. So it may very well complicate it, but our hope is that it will not. And we are going to push very hard to try to get a deal over the line.QUESTION: And can you give us any more details on what other measures the U.S. is considering to try to get aid into Gaza? We’ve seen reports of potentially air drops. Is there any contemplation &#8212;MR MILLER: So &#8212;QUESTION: &#8212; serious contemplation there?MR MILLER: There are a few – so we continue to try to improve the distribution system and work through that with the Government of Israel and the United Nations and try to find a way to unstick this problem that we have right now with providing security to convoys of assistance. We also continue to explore other measures – I’m not going to get into what those are from this podium – but we continue to consider another – a number of other possible measures to get assistance in, as well as working with our countries to get assistance in. You saw the Government of Jordan facilitate an air drop earlier this week, something that we very much support.But, again, our – it’s not to say that we are not focused on those, because we are and those would help immediately, but the real solution here to this is to try to get – or to get, I should say – an agreement that would dramatically increase the flow of assistance in and help with the distribution problems and help with the problem that civilians face of being able to move safely to get to aid when it actually does make it in.QUESTION: I mean, is there any discussion about any other crossings in the north of Gaza beyond Erez being opened or instead of Erez?MR MILLER: All I can say about that is that we continue to push for a crossing in the north to be open, and I’ll leave it at that.Simon.QUESTION: Come back to the crossings specifically, could you – I mean, a lot of people will be looking at this and saying you’re the main supporter of Israel. Israel is completely in charge of this crossing – the Erez crossing – and other border crossings and potentially – that could potentially open up aid to northern Gaza. We see these images, as you say, that demonstrates the desperation that people are feeling. Why is Israel unable to open that border?MR MILLER: So there are a number of security and technical challenges that they have been willing to work through. They can, of course, speak to those directly. I won’t try to speak for them, but I will speak on behalf of the United States and say that the Secretary has made clear directly in conversations with Israeli Government partners and as have others in the United States Government that we want to see a crossing opened in the north as soon as possible.You may recall that it was our intervention and our push that got Rafah first open for humanitarian assistance and then our push that got Kerem Shalom open for humanitarian assistance. In both those cases, it’s not something that happened over night. It’s something that we pushed for repeatedly and were eventually able to achieve, and we are hopeful to eventually be able to achieve a crossing – the opening of a crossing in the north because we think it’s incredibly important.QUESTION: So are you telling the Israelis that you don’t think that their security, whatever concerns they have, are enough to justify keeping that border closed?MR MILLER: I’m not going to get into our private conversations, but I will say that we do continue to press with them the urgent importance of opening a crossing in the north.QUESTION: And there’s been this question of the Israelis targeting Palestinian police who have – in other instances are guarding aid. As Shaun was getting at, we seem to have an instance here where the Israelis have ended up involved in securing aid that’s being delivered. What does – does the U.S. have, like, a vision or a plan for how aid delivery should be secured, given the kind of chaos that we’ve seen today?MR MILLER: I’m not at a point where I can discuss those details publicly. It’s something that, as I said earlier, we are engaged with the Government of Israel as well as the United Nations, who provides most of the convoys coming in; they provide most of the humanitarian assistance coming in. But then there are, as we saw today, some commercial convoys that are coming in as well delivering goods that are available for sale.So we’re continuing to work through that situation and trying to get it solved as quickly as possible. Our special envoy, David Satterfield, has been engaged with it, but I just don’t have – I just can’t get into the details publicly, unfortunately.Said, go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. You don’t have any doubt that only one side did the shooting, and the killing, and the shelling, and so on of these people, correct?MR MILLER: Said, I have seen reports of – I have seen different reports with respect to that very question.QUESTION: Right.MR MILLER: We don’t know, as I said earlier, the ground truth of what happened, which is why we think it’s appropriate that an investigation be conducted.QUESTION: So you think that there were other people shooting Palestinians who were then &#8212;MR MILLER: Said, I said I have seen reports that other people were shooting. I don’t know the veracity of any of those reports &#8212;QUESTION: Right.MR MILLER: &#8212; which is why we’re seeking more information.QUESTION: And you expect to get any results from these investigations &#8212;MR MILLER: We do.QUESTION: &#8212; these reports?MR MILLER: We do.QUESTION: Will you come back to us next week and tell us this is what happened?MR MILLER: I can’t promise you next week because I don’t know how long an investigation will take, but certainly &#8212;QUESTION: So what &#8212;MR MILLER: &#8212; but – hold on – certainly, when an investigation is completed and we’re briefed on that investigation, I’m happy to come brief you on that.QUESTION: On the principle of it, why is it so difficult for this government to say we condemn the killing of children, Palestinian women and children? Why can’t you say the word “condemn”?MR MILLER: We do – Said, if you listened to what I said a moment ago, I &#8212;QUESTION: No, I listened very carefully.MR MILLER: Hold on, hold on. Said, please don’t interrupt me.QUESTION: Yeah.MR MILLER: I said far too many &#8212;QUESTION: Right.MR MILLER: &#8212; Palestinians have died, thousands of Palestinian children have died, and it is a tragedy when one of them dies. Of course we don’t want to see a single child die.QUESTION: Right.MR MILLER: We don’t want to see anyone die &#8212;QUESTION: Right.MR MILLER: &#8212; as a result of this conflict, which is why we have been working to bring this conflict to a close as soon as possible. But whenever you ask me these questions, I do think you continue to kind of just elide over the fact that Hamas bears a great deal of responsibility for putting those children in harm’s way. Remember it was Hamas that launched this war in the first place with an attack on Israel that killed men, women, and children, and that Hamas – that hid and continues to hide behind children as human shields.So yes &#8212;QUESTION: Okay. We &#8212;MR MILLER: Yes, we do not want to see &#8212;QUESTION: Right.MR MILLER: &#8212; any child die. We don’t want to see any innocent civilian die, which is why we are working so hard to try to achieve a temporary ceasefire that would alleviate their suffering.QUESTION: Yet I have not heard the word “condemn.” I mean, this war began way before October 7. I mean, in fact, the reason that this administration was so strong on pursuing a Middle East peace and so on because the war has been going on for decades before and so on. We heard this administration when they came into office talking about the opening of the consulate, talking about the opening of the PLO office here, talking about restarting and reigniting the peace talks and so on, re-aiding UNRWA and so on, simply because that war has been going on for a very long time, because Gaza was under siege for a very, very long time.MR MILLER: Said, that being – hold on. Nothing that happened before October 7th justifies what Hamas did on that day. And it is – and it is what Hamas did on that day that led to the outbreak of this war and led to the suffering of so many innocent Palestinians.QUESTION: Right. So you are &#8212;MR MILLER: And I just feel it’s important to correct that fact.QUESTION: Okay, that’s fine. I mean, you guys said this many times before. But in fact, Israel has been waging war on Gaza for a very, very long time.Let me ask you on the aid issue, on the trucks and the trailers and so on: Is there anyone other than Israel that is holding the aid from going in?MR MILLER: It is not a question of aid going in. That’s not the problem right now, Said. The problem is that when aid gets in there is a distribution problem &#8212;QUESTION: Right.MR MILLER: &#8212; inside Gaza right now because there are police officers, some of whom are members of Hamas &#8212;QUESTION: Right.MR MILLER: &#8212; who have been providing the security for those – for that distribution inside Gaza. And what Israel says is that they have a legitimate right to go after members of Hamas. So we would obviously prefer to see members of a security force inside Gaza who are not Hamas members, but that’s not where we are today. So it is &#8212;QUESTION: So &#8212;MR MILLER: It is the situation that we continue to try to work through.QUESTION: So this is really the classic catch-22 kind of situation, because Hamas governed Gaza for a very long time – all of the police, all the – many &#8212;MR MILLER: I’m well aware.QUESTION: Many of security forces and so on. Unless you supply Gaza with police and other staff people, whatever, who are from Egypt, from anywhere, to distribute these things, it’s going to be the same people to distribute it, correct?MR MILLER: As I said, it is an &#8212;QUESTION: So this is really you’re saying okay, you can’t – it’s a catch-22 situation, you can’t do it?MR MILLER: I don’t think you’re listening to what I said. What I said is we believe the way to ultimately solve this problem is to try to get a temporary ceasefire that would get hostages out and alleviate this problem and make it possible for aid to move around, and get food in people’s mouths so they’re not so hungry and they’re not so desperate that they’re swarming the convoys that do come in.QUESTION: Last question. A last &#8212;MR MILLER: Said, just let me go to &#8212;QUESTION: I have one last question.MR MILLER: One last question then. Yes.QUESTION: Allow me one last question. Do you suspect that Mr. Netanyahu perhaps authorized this raid to scuttle the negotiations?MR MILLER: There is no &#8212;QUESTION: Do you have any suspicions?MR MILLER: There is no evidence of that that I have seen, Said.Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. You keep saying that you don’t want to see any Palestinian civilians dead, and the number of civilians should – killed should be zero. But you saw the numbers – I’m sure you did – today; they are staggering. There are 30,000 dead, 70,000 wounded, and 7,000 are missing. With due respect, Matt, many people in the Arab and Muslim world do not believe that this administration is sincere when they keep saying the same message that we don’t want to see Palestinian dead, for many reasons. Number one, you supply Israel with lethal weapon with no conditions and no reviews, as much as we ask about it. And second is you shelter them in the Security Council and you are still siding with Israel that no ceasefire till now. You want a short pause, and it didn’t work out.So how can you respond to people who criticize this administration that actually you are the one who’s supporting the Israelis when they’re killing &#8212;MR MILLER: So I would – I would turn it around with a question – not to you, because I know that’s not the way this exchange is supposed to work. But to anyone that wants Israel to stop, just to stop the war unilaterally, what is their solution to the Hamas leadership that launched the attacks of October 7th and continue to be at large? What is their solution to the thousands of Hamas fighters who continue to be operating inside Gaza and continue to say that they are committed to the destruction of the state of Israel, to say that they continue to be committed to the intentional murder of Israeli civilians?So anyone that is asking the question about Israel and Israel’s conduct in this campaign – which are fair questions, and it’s why we stand up here and answer them – also needs to ask questions about Hamas’s culpability and Hamas’s side in it. Because this is a difficult problem, and we continue to believe that Israel has a legitimate right to go after terrorists that are right across its borders, right in Gaza, that are committed to the destruction of the state of Israel and are committed to killing Israeli civilians. But we want them to do it in accordance with international humanitarian law, and it is important that they do that.Again, as I’ve said before, if Hamas came out and laid down arms, all of this could be over today – all of it, every bit of it.QUESTION: The only difference is we are journalists covering the State Department, so it’s our right to ask you.MR MILLER: It’s why I made clear – it’s why I made clear I’m not asking the question of you. I’m very aware.QUESTION: We’re holding the administration accountable.MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: Other journalists will hold Hamas. But one – another question. Senator Coon said today that if Israel does not present a secure and credible plan to evacuate civilians – 1.5 million from Rafah – then he’s willing to consider restriction on arms sales to Israel. And this is an advanced position from – the senator is very close to the Biden administration. So do you believe now you start losing the argument even among – in Congress? And do you support that at one stage, that even this administration will impose arms restriction?MR MILLER: I think it’s important that we take things one step at a time, and where we are today is that we have said we cannot support an operation in Rafah unless there is a credible and executable plan to deal with the more than 1 million civilians who are sheltering there. And we have not yet seen such a plan. We haven’t been briefed on such a plan. And we can’t support it until we see that plan.And so to speculate about what may happen down the road, I, of course, can’t do. I can’t tell you what’s going to happen tomorrow, but I’ll take it one step at a time and say right now there’s not a plan on – there’s not a plan in place that we have seen that we can endorse.Alex, go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. A couple of questions. May I get the department’s reaction to Putin’s speech, his accusations against the West, and obviously a renewed nuclear war threat? Anything in particular stood out?MR MILLER: So it is not the first time we have seen irresponsible rhetoric from Vladimir Putin. It is no way for the leader of a nuclear-armed state to speak. We have communicated in the past privately and directly with Russia about the consequences of the use of a nuclear weapon. That said, we do not have any sign that Russia is preparing to use a nuclear weapon, and we will continue to monitor this carefully.QUESTION: Thank you. Yale University just came out with a report this morning. They highlighted 323 incidents of targeting Ukraine energy infrastructure, damaging it, mostly outside of the front line. This is something the Secretary flagged last fall. Now that you have a report backing it, is there any action you’re going to take to hold Russia accountable?MR MILLER: Any action we’re going to take to hold Russia accountable?QUESTION: If it’s verified.MR MILLER: I think you have seen us take a number of actions to hold Russia accountable over the two years since this war began, the more than two years now since this war began, when it comes to imposing sanctions on Russia, imposing exports on Russia to try and dry up the fuel for the Russian economy and the Russian military machine, and you have most significantly seen us hold Russia accountable by providing security assistance to Ukraine to defend itself and repel the Russian aggression from its borders. And it’s why we continue to say that the most effective step that can be taken to hold Russia accountable would be for Congress to pass the present supplemental request to make sure that Ukraine continues to get what it needs to hold Russia accountable.QUESTION: In Vienna at OSCE, you guys invoked today Moscow Mechanism, along with other countries. Criticism is that the Moscow Mechanism has been invoked multiple times last year, but there is no impact – real impact if Russia stays a member of the OSCE. So what are you guys trying to achieve with the next round of Moscow Mechanism?MR MILLER: So we continue to hold Russia accountable at all levels, in multiple fora, and I don’t think you should look at actions in just one as the totality of our engagement.Janne – let me &#8212;QUESTION: Can I – let me have one more.MR MILLER: Let me go ahead. We’re already half an hour in.QUESTION: Please come back to me.MR MILLER: Janne, go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you very much, Matt. Strengthening cooperation in responding to North Korea was discussed at the U.S. and South Korea foreign ministers’ meeting yesterday. However, China is violating sanctions against North Korea and continues to provide used ships, including fuel, to North Korea. Why are there no additional sanctions against China?MR MILLER: So the Secretary and the foreign minister of the Republic of Korea did discuss yesterday their concerns about the DPRK’s increasingly aggressive behavior, their repeated violations of UN Security Council resolutions. And I can tell you that in every conversation the Secretary’s had with his Chinese counterpart, Wang Yi, he has raised North Korea’s activities, and he will continue to do so. And I don’t want to preview any further actions.QUESTION: Second question. President Biden signed executive order banning the sale of information about U.S. individual and U.S. Government to adversaries. As you know, China is carrying out information activities through Confucius Institute around the world, including United States. What measures is the United States currently taking on this?MR MILLER: Let me take that one and get back to you.Michel.QUESTION: Yeah. Matt, CNN reported that American – the American administration is concerned that Israel is planning to – is planning a ground incursion into Lebanon that could be launched in the spring or next summer. Can you elaborate on that, and to what extent are you concerned?MR MILLER: I am not going to comment on leaked reports, even ostensibly to your esteemed colleagues at CNN in the room here. But as you have heard me say before and as you’ve heard the Secretary say before, we believe that the best way to achieve Israel’s legitimate security concerns in the north of Israel is to pursue a diplomatic path and achieve a diplomatic resolution. The Government of Israel has said it believes that the diplomatic path is the best way to seek a resolution, and that’s what we’ll continue to engage in.QUESTION: And do you expect an incursion in the spring or in the summer?MR MILLER: I do not want to comment, again – I talked a minute ago about taking things step by step. Let’s take this step by step. Right now, we take the Government of Israel at their word that they want to pursue a – or pursue a diplomatic resolution, and that’s what we’re engaged on.QUESTION: And can you tell us about the efforts that the U.S. is taking to achieve a diplomatic solution?MR MILLER: I can tell you that they’re private, and in the best – in the – the best prospect of them being successful is to keep them private, but that we are engaged intensively on them.QUESTION: Thanks.MR MILLER: Go ahead in the back, all the way.QUESTION: Matt, thank you. Mark &#8212;MR MILLER: Because I know I skipped you a couple of briefings ago, so &#8212;QUESTION: Thank you. Mark Stone from Sky News. The Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said today that – he was asked how many women and children had been killed by Israel since October the 7th. He said it was 25,000. If the total number is 30,000, that leaves 5,000 men killed. If you assume that all those men are combatants, which is an absurd assumption but some have made that assumption, that means that more than 80 percent of the people killed since October the 7th are civilians. How is that anything other than a complete disaster and a total failure of American leadership?MR MILLER: So I have seen the comments by the Secretary of Defense. I haven’t seen them in full, so I will refer you to the Department of Defense to discuss exactly what he meant. But I will say whatever the exact number is of civilians that have been killed, it is far too high, which is what you heard me addressing a moment ago, and which is why we continue to try to perceive a temporary ceasefire that would alleviate that suffering.QUESTION: So what is – but if I can follow up.MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: First of all, are you suggesting that maybe the Defense Secretary got it wrong?MR MILLER: No, I’m suggesting that for comments about the things the Defense Secretary said, you should take that up with the spokesperson for the Defense Department, who does have a daily briefing and I’m sure will be happy to talk about &#8212;QUESTION: So how many civilians do you think – how many women and children &#8212;MR MILLER: I don’t – I don’t have a further estimate to offer.Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you. Two questions on Iran. So what does the department think about the parliamentary elections to be held in Iran tomorrow? What is the expectation and assessment, and does it think that it’s fair and free? And then I have another Iran question.MR MILLER: So I have no expectation that Iran’s elections will be free and fair, and I suspect that a great number of Iranians have no expectation that those elections will be free and fair. As you probably already know, thousands of candidates were already disqualified in an opaque process, and the world has long known that Iran’s political system features undemocratic and nontransparent administrative, judicial, and electoral systems.QUESTION: And my second question is: What is, again, department’s assessment of Russia putting an Iranian satellite into orbit? Does it believe that it – the satellite is, as the Iranians say, to be used for civilian purposes?MR MILLER: So we’ve seen the reports of this satellite launch. It’s yet another indication of the deepening military partnership between Iran and Russia. As we have warned publicly on a number of occasions, this partnership is harmful to Ukraine, to Iran’s neighbors, and to the international community. We have demonstrated our ability to take action in response to the military partnership between Russia and Iran in close coordination with our partners and allies. And if Iran goes further and sells ballistic missiles to Russia, I can assure you the response from the international community will be swift and severe.Go ahead. And I’ll come to you next.QUESTION: Today is the fourth anniversary of controversial Doha Agreement which paved the way for Taliban to return to power. Many U.S. experts and politician believe it as the worst agreement in the history of United States in diplomatic way. And you and Taliban also accusing each other to violating the terms of this agreement. Don’t you think this moment is the time for you to abrogation this agreement and announce it as null and void?MR MILLER: So in our view, the agreement empowered the Taliban, weakened our partners in the Afghan Government, and committed the United States to withdrawing our troops with no clear plan for what should come next. The Taliban have not fulfilled their commitments in the Doha Agreement. While they have taken some steps regarding certain terrorist groups in Afghanistan, it is well known that the Taliban also sheltered al-Qaida leader Zawahiri in downtown Kabul, which flies directly in the face of the agreement. They have not fulfilled their Doha commitment to engage in a meaningful dialogue with their fellow Afghans leading to a negotiated settlement and an inclusive political system. So we will continue to make clear to them what we believe their obligations are.Go ahead.QUESTION: Okay, thank you, Matt.QUESTION: Well, so why didn’t you – why didn’t you pull out of it?MR MILLER: Because we are continuing to make clear what we believe their obligations are under the agreement. And &#8212;QUESTION: Well, yeah, but if they’re – but if they’re not doing it, then – hey, look, you guys took what you say now is a flawed and bad agreement from the previous administration but forged ahead with it, even while knowing that – or knowing – even while thinking that it was a bad agreement. Why?MR MILLER: I think has been litigated from this podium many times, mostly before I got here, is that we were playing the hand that we were dealt and thought it was important to withdraw U.S. troops from Afghanistan. And the &#8212;QUESTION: Yes, but the hand that you were dealt on other things, such as the Paris Climate Accord – you rejoined that after it had been pulled out of. You – there are other examples.MR MILLER: And the – and the idea of leaving U.S. troops in Afghanistan was not one that the President supported.QUESTION: All right, and then related to this &#8212;MR MILLER: I told her I was going to go next, but go ahead.QUESTION: Well, yeah, I know, but this is &#8212;MR MILLER: (Laughter.) Yeah.QUESTION: But this is directly related to Afghanistan.MR MILLER: Sure.QUESTION: So I asked you yesterday to follow up on Nick’s question &#8212;MR MILLER: Oh, yeah.QUESTION: &#8212; on the HFAC. So Chairman McCaul has just announced a March 7th markup for a bill that would hold the Secretary in contempt of Congress for refusing, allegedly, to turn over these after-action report interview notes. What’s your response to that, and do you have any response to the questions that I asked you yesterday on that?MR MILLER: Let me – let me first – let me take the second question first, because I hadn’t really looked at that statement, which came out right before the briefing. So what I said two days ago was accurate; I stand by it. We did not tell the committee that the interview notes were the property of other agencies, as the committee said in its letter from a couple of days ago. We also did not tell the committee that the interview notes implicated other agency equities and needed to be cleared for release by other agencies, as the committee said in its statement yesterday.So what I said was accurate and I stand by it, but as it relates to the overall question, this is a matter we have been trying to resolve amicably for some time. We recognize the committee’s legitimate oversight function, and we – that’s why we have – we have supplied them with thousands of pages of documents. It’s why we have made people available for transcribed interviews. As you know, we have gotten – we have come to kind of loggerheads at certain points in the past and been able to reach a resolution, and that’s what we’ll try to do here.QUESTION: Yeah, okay, so – but you’re still not prepared to turn over what they’re asking for. Whether their interest is in your view legitimate or illegitimate, they do have a legitimate interest in the subject, but you’re still not going to hand them over. Is that correct?MR MILLER: Two things. One, they have a legitimate interest in the subject, but that does not mean that there aren’t also longstanding Executive Branch equities that we need to be mindful of. So that’s the first thing. The second thing is I’m not going to negotiate over this in public, but we are and will be in contact with the committee about this to try to reach some kind of resolution.QUESTION: Well, are you at all concerned that there’s going to be this markup in the committee that would hold the Secretary in contempt of Congress?MR MILLER: We are going to try to achieve a resolution. We’ve seen these markups announced &#8212;QUESTION: Before then?MR MILLER: Yes, before then.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Now go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you. Going back to humanitarian aid into Gaza, the ICJ ordered last month immediate and effective measures to protect Palestinians in Gaza from a risk of genocide. That includes ensuring humanitarian assistance. So do you think that Israel is complying with this ICJ ruling? And do you believe – do you agree that today’s attack near Gaza on starving people waiting for humanitarian assistance violates this ICJ’s ruling?MR MILLER: So again, let me just say I don’t believe we have established the facts of what actually happened today. But it is important that those facts be established, which is why we have called for an investigation and will look forward to the results of that investigation. As I have seen, there are conflicting accounts and we don’t know the ground truth of what happened. When it comes to the overall question, we certainly have seen Israel take some steps to facilitate the assistance of humanitarian aid into Gaza, but we think that there’s more that they can do and more that they should do. And it’s why we continue to press them on it.QUESTION: And I have a follow-up on that.MR MILLER: Yeah, go ahead.QUESTION: Because UNRWA’s head Lazzarini today said during an interview with CNN that there has been a 50 percent reduction of humanitarian aid entering Gaza compared to last month, despite the ICJ’s ruling. So it seems that Israel is not taking maybe those steps to allow more humanitarian aid. Do you think that Israel maybe should face some consequences for not complying with this ruling?MR MILLER: So we think they should allow more humanitarian assistance in, but ultimately, this goes to this problem I was referring to a minute ago, where you have the problem not just of it getting in but then getting properly distributed to those who need it because of the very severe security situation on the ground. That’s what we want to see resolved and that’s what we’re working with the Government of Israel as well as the appropriate UN agencies on trying to accomplish.Go ahead, Jen.QUESTION: The Palestinian factions are meeting in Moscow today. I’m wondering what the U.S. assessment is of Moscow taking this role to try to play I guess a diplomatic role here.MR MILLER: So we have not seen Moscow play much of any role in trying to resolve this conflict since October 7th. We have always said that we would welcome countries that were willing to play a constructive role in trying to achieve a diplomatic resolution, but I will say it has never been our assessment that that is the role that Moscow wants or is willing to play.Shaun.QUESTION: Could I take you to Africa for a few questions?MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: Ghana. I know there’s a statement that you issued last night on the anti-LGBTQ bill. Just to follow up on that, if my understanding is that the President Akufo-Addo hasn’t signed it yet, are there talks with Ghana trying to stop this from becoming law? And if it comes to fruition, are – is there a sense of what the repercussions, if any, could be from the U.S.?MR MILLER: So we have made very clear what our opinion is on that law – you can look at my statement yesterday – and we have made that clear in private conversations with the Government of Ghana as well. I don’t think I should get any more specific than that, but if this bill becomes law, it would certainly have a chilling effect on foreign investment and tourism in Ghana. You’ve seen that same chilling effect bear fruit in Uganda, which passed a very similar law in the past, and I can say that should the bill pass, it would potentially have ramifications on U.S. assistance in the country.QUESTION: Sure. Just a couple more on Africa.MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: In Chad, the opposition leader was killed, Mr. Dillo Djérou. I wonder if the U.S. has any comment on that in terms of what this – how this complicates, if at all, the situation in Chad.MR MILLER: No – so we are aware of the targeted violence that transpired yesterday in a neighborhood in the capital. That violence has abated, but we continue to monitor the situation closely, and we’ve seen reports of his death – widespread reports of his death – but have not confirmed them and don’t have any other assessment at this point.QUESTION: Sure. And just one more. I know I’ve asked about this before, but in Senegal, the date for the election – the opposition is calling for it to be held before April 2nd, when President Sall has said he’ll step down. I know you’ve said before you want – that the U.S. wants the election as soon as possible. Does the U.S. want to weigh in on that timeline, whether it should be before he leaves office?MR MILLER: I don’t want to weigh in other than to reiterate what we have said before, which is, as the supreme court ordered, we want to see the constitutional process followed and we want to see the election as soon as possible.I’ll take a couple more and then wrap. Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you very much, Matt. Thank you very much. A gentleman named Jiao Diego, a Portuguese American from Texas, did $200,000 business with China, got cheated, got robbed. To date there is no clue about who did it. Three months before him, a gentleman from Reston did the business with the same company for about 120,000, went to the Beijing office of the state – of the U.S. embassy, complained, filed the name of the person, phone number, picture. That same person basically cheated this other gentleman three, four months later. Any protection for U.S. businessmen regarding State Department officials sitting in Beijing about solving their business-related issues?MR MILLER: I do not know the underlying specifics of the cases that you’ve raised so can’t possibly comment on it.QUESTION: Just one more – one, please.MR MILLER: No, go – go – let me just – we’re – it’s been a busy day.QUESTION: Please, one more.MR MILLER: Go ahead. Just fine – yeah, go ahead.QUESTION: So as you know, the Polish foreign minister was in town recently, and in many comment before his meeting with Secretary Blinken, he repeatedly warned that if America fails to honor the President’s pledge of supporting Ukraine as long as it takes, it will badly damage America’s credibility as an ally and then the – some allies will look for security elsewhere and others will look to pursue their own nuclear weapons. Is that – what’s your response to that? And do you share this worry?MR MILLER: So we think that America’s credibility when it comes to upholding our commitments to our allies is well established, and it’s something that has been well established over decades. That said, I am quite sure that our allies are watching closely what the United States Congress does when it comes to supporting Ukraine. And even more than that, I know our adversaries are watching closely what the United States Congress does when it comes to Ukraine – most importantly President Putin, who I am sure is watching and waiting to see if the United States Congress is going to stand with democracy and stand with those who support freedom or if it is going to allow President Putin to continue his aggressive – aggression against Ukraine without ongoing military support from the United States.QUESTION: Sorry. You’re &#8212;MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: Upholding our commitment to allies is well established?MR MILLER: Believe so.QUESTION: Yeah?MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: Okay. Well, you’re going to tell that to the Montagnards, to the Hmong, to the Cambodians, the South Vietnamese, to the Kurds, to the Afghans – all of whom were abandoned by the United States after having gotten firm commitments of support.MR MILLER: So we could do a long tour through United States foreign policy, I’m sure most of which &#8212;QUESTION: Well, we don’t have to do the long tour.MR MILLER: Well, hold on. Hold on. Most of which we don’t &#8212;QUESTION: I just want to know who comes up with the language that your commitment to allies is well established, when, in fact, what’s well established is a long history of you abandoning allies.MR MILLER: I think when it comes to our allies – and specifically I was speaking about our NATO Allies in response to that question – I think our track record of support them is clear. And the – more importantly, the commitment from the President is clear.QUESTION: All right. My last thing is just &#8212;MR MILLER: And then we’ll wrap.QUESTION: &#8212; I have asked you before &#8212;MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: &#8212; about Chinese – complaints from the Chinese embassy about the treatment of Chinese students will valid U.S. visas being harassed and/or deported on their arrival in the United States.MR MILLER: Right.QUESTION: Do you guys have anything more to say about that and how widespread an issue this is? I realize it’s not mainly a State Department concern once people arrive at a port of entry, but you do give the visas out. And if someone has a valid visa &#8212;MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: &#8212; they should have an expectation of not – at least not being harassed.MR MILLER: Let me say generally that people-to-people ties are one area where we can work cooperatively and constructively with China, and it’s something that we have sought to increase. You may have seen the announcement just recently that we agreed with China to allow 100 weekly flights, direct flights, between the United States and China – 50/50 between – split between the PRC and the United States.When it comes to people from China coming to the United States, students make up a significant portion of those who come. And my understanding – you’re right that it is not primarily a State matter when it comes to this question of people being detained or denied admission, but my understanding is that the percentage of Chinese students who have been detained is less than one-tenth of 1 percent and that overall the percentage has been stable over the past few years. So I’ll just say that we believe that people‐to‐people ties are important, and we’ll continue to push to expand them.QUESTION: Do you have any idea what that actual – one-tenth of 1 percent, what the number – what that number is, either what the &#8212;MR MILLER: I &#8212;QUESTION: &#8212; total number of visa holders are?MR MILLER: I was going to say I don’t, because I don’t know what the numerator is – or maybe it’s the denominator. I don’t know what the total number of students that come in is, which is what we need to figure that out.QUESTION: Okay. Well, do you know what one-tenth of 1 percent of – even without &#8212;MR MILLER: Of students? It’s &#8212;QUESTION: &#8212; even without knowing what the total number of visa-holding Chinese students is? Do you know what the number &#8212;MR MILLER: No.QUESTION: &#8212; of one-tenth of 1 percent is?MR MILLER: No, I don’t. I don’t know either the numerator or the denominator. I know the ratio. That’s the extent &#8212;QUESTION: Ah-hah. Okay.MR MILLER: That is the extent of it. That is the extent of the math I’m going to do from this podium &#8212;QUESTION: How extremely – (laughter) – okay.MR MILLER: &#8212; as a government and English major.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: So with that, we’ll wrap for today and the week. Thanks, everyone.(The briefing was concluded at 2:22 p.m.)# # #						Tags																					Afghanistan																								Chad																								China																								Ghana																								Iran																								Israel																								North Korea																								Office of the Spokesperson																								Palestinian Territories																								Russia																								South Korea																								Ukraine
- Ghanaian Parliament’s Passage of Legislation Undermines Human Rights Matthew Miller, Department SpokespersonThe United States is deeply troubled by the Ghanaian Parliament’s passage of legislation, officially called the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill, which would threaten all Ghanaians&#8217; constitutionally protected freedoms of speech, press, and assembly.&nbsp; The bill seeks to criminalize any person who simply identifies as LGBTQI+, as well as&nbsp;any friend, family, or member of the community who does not report them.&nbsp; Limiting the rights of one group in a society undermines the rights of all.&nbsp; The United States echoes the call by those Ghanaians who have urged a review of the constitutionality of the bill to protect the rights of all individuals in Ghana.The bill would also&nbsp;undermine Ghana’s valuable public health, media and civic spaces, and economy.&nbsp; International business coalitions have already stated that such discrimination in Ghana would harm business and economic growth in the country.Ghana’s&nbsp;tradition of tolerance, peace, and respect for human rights is a source of stability and prosperity that has long served as a model for countries around the globe.&nbsp; This legislation is inconsistent with these values and will, if it becomes law, undermine this laudable tradition.						Tags																					Bureau of African Affairs																								Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor																								Ghana																																Human Rights																															Office of the Spokesperson
- Digital Press Briefing on U.S. Environmental Efforts on the African Continent Jennifer R. Littlejohn, Acting Assistant SecretaryBureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific AffairsDownload or listen to the audio here .MODERATOR:  Good afternoon to everyone from the U.S. Department of State’s Africa Regional Media Hub.  I welcome our participants logging in from across the continent and thank all of you for joining this discussion on the topic of U.S. environmental efforts on the African continent.  Today, we are very pleased to be joined by the U.S. Department of State’s Acting Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs, J.R. Littlejohn, who is visiting Ghana and traveling on to the United Nations Environment Assembly in Nairobi.  Acting Assistant Secretary Littlejohn will discuss how the United States is working with partners across the continent to address key environmental issues like air quality, deforestation, nature crimes, plastic pollution, and promoting a sustainable blue economy.  She will also discuss the United States’ work to build partnerships on science and space exploration with countries in Africa, as well as U.S. efforts to combat illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing.We will begin today’s briefing with opening remarks from Acting Assistant Secretary Littlejohn and then we will take your questions.  We will try to get to as many of them as we can during the briefing.As a reminder, today’s call is on the record.  And with that, I will turn it over to Acting Assistant Secretary Littlejohn for her opening remarks.ACTING ASSISTANT SECRETARY LITTLEJOHN:  Thank you so much, and good morning, everyone.I’m actually thrilled to connect with you from Accra, Ghana, and to share the tremendous progress we’re making together on environmental and scientific cooperation across Africa.I’d say the main message I want to share with you today is that the United States is partnering with Ghana and countries across Africa to address the major challenges of our time – this includes addressing the climate crisis, the biodiversity crisis, and the pollution crisis.  We are working together to protect the ocean and the environment – for the benefit of all people all over the world.Now, let me start I think best with a few observations from my time here in Ghana.Yesterday, I visited a major harbor and spoke with community members about efforts to protect the fisheries industry that supports their livelihoods and provides a vital source of food.  Unfortunately, like in many places around the world, illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing is threatening the sustainability of fisheries there – and I’d say we’re proud to be working with Ghana on efforts to combat IUU fishing, as well as the crimes often associated with it.Today, I will meet with partners in the Ghanaian Ministry of Environment, Science, Technology, and Innovation and the Ministry of Fisheries and Aquaculture Development.  I will also speak to students at the University of Ghana, where we have supported important work that monitors air quality.Ghana is a great example of environmental ambition, and I’d like to take a moment to talk about several of the environmental projects we are working on here in Ghana.Ghana&#8217;s commitment to forest conservation is translating into tangible outcomes, with initiatives like the LEAF Coalition and Forest Carbon Partnership Facility, a coalition of 32 governments working to halt and reverse deforestation by 2030.  Under LEAF, the Emissions Reduction Payment Agreement will make up 50 – or up to 50 million available for Ghana&#8217;s efforts to protect forests and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.Ghana also has shown strong leadership as co-chair with the United States of the Forest and Climate Leaders’ Partnership, a global coalition working to halt and reverse forest loss and land degradation by 2030 while delivering sustainable development and inclusive rural transformation.  The United States was a key partner on the “Resilient Ghana” country package announced at COP28 to help support Ghana’s forest and climate goals.The U.S. Agency for International Development is supporting access to clean energy in Ghana through initiatives like supporting smallholder farmers to install solar-powered irrigation.  In addition, USAID provided technical assistance to the Bui Power hydro-solar plant.  The plant, the first of its kind in West Africa, will put Ghana on track to cut its power sector greenhouse gas emissions by 235,000 tons per year.These are groundbreaking moves.Since 2018, we have worked with Ghana to address the health risks created by mercury use in artisanal small-scale gold mining.  Similar projects are in motion in Mali, the DRC, Guinea, Senegal, and Burkina Faso – a collaborative effort that’s evolving and adapting.Journalists like you play a key role in exposing crimes like illegal logging and wildlife trade.  Last year, we inaugurated a program to train journalists in Ghana on how to report on nature crimes, and I am grateful to the 21 Ghanaian journalists who graduated from this program last December – oops, nope: September, if I’m corrected.  Right?I mentioned earlier my visit later today to the University of Ghana.  Since 2018, we’ve worked with experts at the university on projects related to air quality.  And just last month, they teamed up with colleagues at Columbia University to train 100 scientists, engineers, and policy makers from across West Africa on best practices for air quality management.  This is what it looks like to empower experts across a region to tackle air pollution.And of course, other countries across Africa are taking similar steps to protect nature and the health and livelihoods of all the people who depend on it.  I’m looking forward to discussions on a breadth of environmental topics of importance to the African continent in Nairobi, where I am headed next to lead the U.S. delegation to the United Nations Environmental Assembly.  Air quality will be a key focus for the United States at UNEA.  At that meeting, we will advocate for increased regional cooperation on air pollution.  Because, as we all know, air pollution doesn&#8217;t stop at international borders, so supporting collaboration across national borders is key to solving this problem.Now, illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing, or IUU fishing for short, is another challenge we’re actively working on with partners across the continent.  This is a critical issue in Africa, and the United States recognizes regions in the Atlantic and Indian Ocean coasts of Africa as priority regions in the fight against IUU fishing activity.  In too many places, large foreign fishing fleets and some local bad actors are bringing in catches well above sustainable limits and are endangering the health of essential fish stocks and the livelihoods of those who rely on those stocks.  Through cooperative enforcement, information sharing, and working to implement the global Port State Measures Agreement, we have powerful tools to keep IUU-caught fish out of ports and markets, but more work, again, remains to be done.In partnership with our Department of Defense colleagues, last year 18 nations participated in the Obangame Express exercise to combat IUU fishing.  USAID is providing $17.8 million over five years to reduce fishing overcapacity and improve fisheries management in West Africa.  Now, it does so by working in small fishing villages and fish landing sites along the coasts.More broadly, we are also working with African countries through the new Partnership for Atlantic Cooperation that launched last fall.  The partnership is a platform for Atlantic coastal states to address common challenges and promote healthy, sustainable, and resilient Atlantic resources for generations to come.  It currently has 38 Atlantic member states.  Sixteen of those members are African countries, including Ghana.Next, I think I’d like to talk a little bit, if you’ll allow, about space.  Nigeria, Rwanda, Angola are all among the 35 countries around the world that have signed on to the Artemis Accords, committing to make the space environment safer and more predictable.  As African countries develop their space policy and capabilities, we also strongly encourage them to consider joining the Outer Space Treaty – the basis for international space law and for the Artemis Accords.Space exploration isn’t just for a select group of players; from our perspective, it’s for everyone willing to play fair.  And every country in the world, whether or not they have a space program, can reap benefits from space exploration and activity.  We already collaborate with African nations on multiple space-related issues like earth observation, helping to provide data to support decision making on forest conservation and water management.Now, back on Earth, we must make sure that all people – men and women, Indigenous people, and other marginalized communities – have a voice in our discussions and solutions.  These are the ones who have often felt the brunt of climate change and environmental degradation.  This means that the need to make sure that women have the same opportunities as their brothers to work in STEM fields – that is science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.  In the United States and around the world, barriers have made this difficult.  The only way to address the challenges of our time is through scientific discovery and innovation.  We want the best and the brightest working on these solutions, and that includes – it must include – women.OES is helping to build connections through our Embassy Science Fellows program to bring government scientists to serve at our overseas embassies.  Just in the past eight years, the State Department has built partnerships for 18 government scientists to work across West Africa, including two in Ghana.  As one example of this program, the State Department brought a U.S. expert on biotechnology to Accra to connect with Ghanaian companies on mentorship for young women on research in agricultural sciences.Now, as you can see, we have made a lot of progress by working collaboratively.  We are already making a difference, but we have, as I said earlier, so much work to do.  The United States will continue to be a steadfast partner to countries across Africa on environmental and scientific issues.  And of course, as President Biden said at the U.S.-Africa Leaders Summit, “the United States is all in on Africa and all in with Africa.”I want to thank you, and I’m eagerly awaiting your questions.MODERATOR:  Thank you, Acting Assistant Secretary Littlejohn.  We will now begin the question-and-answer portion of today’s briefing.  Our first question, since you raised IUU fishing:  “What is the – what is driving the growth of illegal, unregulated, and unreported fishing, and what are the consequences for biodiversity and for people?  What can we do about this problem?”  ACTING ASSISTANT SECRETARY LITTLEJOHN:  Thank you.  That’s a really, really good question.  I think the way I’d answer that is by stating something that we all know, and that’s that global demand for seafood, as it continues to grow, there are more and bigger fishing vessels than ever before working to feed this market.  And as a result of that, we now see increased pressure on the fish stocks from fleets that fish around the world both on the high seas and in areas under national jurisdiction.  And of course, we know that the lucrative but competitive global fisheries market also spurs vessels to try to avoid the operational costs associated with sustainable fisheries management by engaging again in IUU fishing.  So fisheries subsidies can lead in many instances to overcapacity, overfishing, and artificially reduced prices.  And subsidies, I would say, and forced labor practices, perhaps, reduce the cost of fishing, making it cheaper for boats to be out on the water through support for operational or capital costs.  That’s how I would kind of frame the initial part of what’s driving this.Now, in terms of the consequences, I think we’ve all seen them and experienced them in some level.  Maybe I’d say that the 2019 Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity Ecosystem Services – it’s a mouthful, but it’s important – this report on global biodiversity concluded that fishing has had the greatest impact on marine biodiversity in the past 50 years, which is exacerbated by IUU fishing.  So IUU fishing can result in overfishing, which damages ocean biodiversity, and additionally, the use of prohibited gear can result in bycatch of non-target species, causing yet even greater harm to biodiversity.So IUU fishing may also degrade, I would say, marine ecosystems such as corals and sea mounds with negative consequences for the marine species that depend on these habitats.  So we can see from that a range of challenges that emerge.  And in terms of – I think you – if I heard the question correctly, you asked in addition to the consequences.  I would also flag one other thing, or two, perhaps – because, again, I mentioned that the consequences are quite vast.  IUU fishing costs the world about tens of billions of dollars each year, and according to a recent report that I have reviewed from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, IUU fishing may in fact represent up to 26 million tons of fish caught annually.  And in the United States alone, that could translate into seafood imports worth as much as two and a half billion a year, or – if we translated that – nearly 11 percent of the U.S. market derived from IUU fishing, according to a U.S. International Trade Commission report.  Now, as both a major harvester and a top market for fishing products, the United States has, I would say, long emphasized working with other countries to improve fisheries governance and enforcement to prevent IUU-sourced fish and fish products from entering our markets, and I know that that is the same for markets around the globe.  So that gets at, I think, the consequences.  If we talk about consequences, then I suspect that it’s really important that we also talk about some of the tools that are associated with that.  At least I’d like to flag a few that we’re noticing that we are using to combat this around the world.So speaking from the U.S. perspective, the United States is a leader in promoting sustainable fisheries internationally through effective, science-based fisheries management and cooperative tools to combat IUU fishing, including strong monitoring, control, and surveillance measures.  Now, the United States promotes the implementation of the Port State Measures Agreement, a groundbreaking treaty designed to ensure catches from IUU fishing vessels cannot be offloaded in ports and then, of course, enter the global market.  Now, one other thing we did is we also helped launch, through the FAO, the Global Record of Fishing Vessels – it’s Refrigerated Transport Vessels and Supply Vessels.  This innovative, publicly accessible record of the world’s fishing vessels increases transparency in international fisheries and enhances the ability of countries and markets to verify fishing’s identity.  I suppose for that I’ll stop and I – and there may be additional questions, but I did want to give you a sense of the breadth and depth of the tools that we have at our disposal, the consequences of not acting, and, of course, a little bit about what it is.  MODERATOR:  Thank you.  Our next question is from Ms. Sarah Mawerere of the Uganda Broadcasting Corporation, in Uganda.  Her question is:  “Kaveera – or polythene bags – control has become a nightmare in Uganda.  What is your take on this?”ACTING ASSISTANT SECRETARY LITTLEJOHN:  So plastic pollution is just a scourge on society, period.  And we applaud Uganda for its work to combat plastic pollution, and I believe it’s been since 2009, if I recall correctly, and we also recognize that it takes time to create the momentum among a range of stakeholders from really private sector, civil society, and subnational governments for successful implementation of those actions.  So we would want to work with Uganda and other countries to end plastic pollution, which will require action throughout the lifecycle of plastic, from upstream to downstream.  And of course, this is why we’re advocating for a new global agreement on plastic pollution that would encourage and support local and national efforts like Uganda’s to reduce plastic bags entering into the environment.  MODERATOR:  Thank you.  Our next question comes from Mr. Emmanuel Igunza of the Associated Press/Freelance, in Kenya.  He asks:  “How can the U.S. lead global commitments for climate financing for the least polluters, but who are really bearing brunt of the climate crisis?”ACTING ASSISTANT SECRETARY LITTLEJOHN:  Okay.  So this is what I think is an excellent question.  I’ll start there.  And I would say on this, Kenya is one of the United States’ strongest partners in Africa, and we appreciate that Kenya has joined on to the multilateral climate initiatives like, I would say, the Agriculture Innovation Mission for Climate – AIM4C – and the global pathways to net zero.  We know that Kenya is already experiencing, like others, firsthand the impact of climate change and is dealing with significant food security challenges brought on by severe drought, in the larger, I’d say, Horn of Africa region – across the region.  And so from the U.S. perspective, we have committed $2 billion in humanitarian assistance to respond to the drought in the Horn of Africa.  This would include about $356 million, if I have my numbers correct, specifically for Kenya in the past year.  We also allocated $45 million, including $20 million in supplemental funding, and this was funding development assistance to help Kenya address the current food security crisis in I believe it was Fiscal Year 2022.  I’d have to double-check, but I believe that’s correct. MODERATOR:  Thank you.  We’re going to take a question from the Q&amp;A next, also from Sarah Mawerere of the Uganda Broadcasting Corporation, in Uganda.  She asks:  “Ugandans are breathing badly due to air pollution, which causes respiratory diseases.  How would you advise Uganda as a country?” ACTING ASSISTANT SECRETARY LITTLEJOHN:  First I’d say that that is a very accurate and a very timely question.  Air pollution more broadly is the fourth leading cause of premature death worldwide, and it’s responsible for nearly 7 million premature deaths, about $5 trillion in economic welfare losses, and $200 billion in productivity losses each year.  And I’d also add that transboundary air pollution cannot be addressed without international cooperation and policy coordination.  We are looking for – at least on the U.S. side, we’re looking for opportunities to get countries talking to each other about air pollution.  And frankly, every time I have a conversation with colleagues, they share our view on this.  It is a critical issue, and one of the critical issues of our time.  And one of the things that we’ve done about this is the United States has proposed an air quality resolution for UNEA-6 and submitted the zero draft on I believe it was December 18th.  And our goal is to elevate the need to address air pollution due to the risks to human health and the environment and leverage the expertise in existing regional bodies that take a regional cooperation approach to addressing air pollution.So that’s what I would say on that, and I hope that’s helpful.  MODERATOR:  Thanks for that.  We have time for one last question.  The last question goes to Mr. Pedro Alonso of the Spanish News Agency EFE, in Kenya.  He asks:  “What will the U.S. advocate for in the United Nations Environment Assembly 6?”ACTING ASSISTANT SECRETARY LITTLEJOHN:  Well, again, a wonderful question because it allows me to emphasize what I think is a key point.  Just as I had mentioned in the last comment, air quality is going to be one of the primary objectives.  Again, we know air pollution is the leading environmental risk to human health, as I mentioned, and that is why we’re introducing a resolution on air quality.  This resolution, again, aims to leverage expertise in existing regional cooperation bodies for addressing air pollution, and build on UNEA resolutions 1/7 and 3/8.  And the goal is to re-energize the intention of these prior resolutions and to provide a platform to operationalize and drive multi-stakeholder actions that target the causes of climate change, biodiversity loss, and pollution.  So those – that’s one of the key overarching objectives.  And frankly, another area that we will focus on will be nature crimes.  And we’ll be launching something called the Nature Crime Alliance at UNEA, which I think will be something that we hope that you all will follow quite closely going forward.  I’m told my time is wrapping up, and so I will stop there. MODERATOR:  Great, thank you.  Acting Assistant Secretary J.R. Littlejohn, do you have any final words before we close?  ACTING ASSISTANT SECRETARY LITTLEJOHN:  I just want to thank everyone for joining this call.  These are critical issues.  And I mentioned sort of the triple threat of the crises of biodiversity loss, pollution, and climate change, and it is so important that these stories are told – that the narratives get out there with accuracy, based on the science.  And we need you to help do that.  And so I thank you very much for joining this call.  I thank you for asking really, really sharp questions, and I look forward to hearing or reading your stories.  MODERATOR:  Thank you.  That concludes today’s briefing.  I want to thank the U.S. Department of State’s Acting Assistant Secretary for Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs, J.R. Littlejohn, for joining us today.  Thank you to all the journalists for participating.  A recording and transcript of today’s briefing will be distributed to participating journalists as soon as we can produce them.  If you have any questions about today’s briefing, you may contact the Africa Regional Media Hub at AFMediaHub@state.gov.  I would also like to invite everyone to follow us on Twitter at our handle @AfricaMediaHub.  Thank you.# # #
- Countering the Spread of Weapons of Mass Destruction Darby FitzSimmonsIn December 2002, the United States received intelligence that a North Korean ship – the So San – was in the Arabian Sea carrying missiles destined for Yemen. The U.S. alerted the Spanish navy, which had ships in the area and agreed to intercept the ship.The intelligence was right. Upon boarding the So San, Spanish naval personnel discovered 15 complete Scud missiles, 15 conventional warheads, 85 drums of unidentified chemicals, and 23 tanks of missile fuel, all hidden under bags of cement.However, after a day of back and forth between the U.S. and Yemeni governments, the ship was released. The U.S. said it lacked clear legal authority to seize the missile parts.Less than a year later, in October 2003, the U.S. and UK once again received intelligence that a ship, the BBC China, was carrying illicit cargo. U.S. government officials contacted German authorities who intercepted the ship. They found and permanently confiscated nuclear centrifuge parts destined for Libya. In 2018, PSI countries held a Mediterranean maritime exercise in the bay of Catania in Sicily. (State Department photo)The difference in outcome between these two events was no accident – it was the result of the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI). Launched in May 2003 by eleven like-minded countries, the PSI is a global effort to prevent the spread of weapons of mass destruction.A Global EffortToday, there are 111 participating countries that endorse the PSI Statement of Interdiction Principles. These include committing to stopping the trafficking of WMD, delivery systems, and related materials, and enhancing relevant legal, diplomatic, financial, military, and law enforcement tools.Although the PSI does not have any formal legal authority, the PSI has played a key role in global counterproliferation efforts for more than 20 years. PSI-endorsing countries agree to work together to impede or stop shipments of WMD-related materials to or from states and non-state actors of proliferation concern.Many PSI-endorsing countries also have ship boarding agreements, allowing them to carry out searches and seizures of illicit material on ships originating from each other’s countries.PSI in AfricaPSI endorsing states regularly conduct multilateral meetings, workshops, and exercises to improve their counterproliferation readiness and share best practices. One such event occurred in early February when the United States and Morocco co-hosted the 2024 Proliferation Security Initiative African Political Meeting and Outreach event. This was the largest ever PSI event on the African continent. More than 160 attendees from 35 countries attended, including 25 African countries.During the three-day event, civilian and military leaders discussed the current state of counterproliferation, shared best practices, and emphasized the importance of continuing to expand upon nonproliferation efforts on the African continent through the PSI and similar mechanisms. Representatives from 35 countries gather in Marrakech for the kick-off of a PSI event in February. (State Department photo)Looking AheadThese PSI efforts are more important than ever. In recent months, several developments have shaken the global nonproliferation regime. These include:Iran withdrawing permission for international verification at several nuclear sites;DPRK continuing to develop its unlawful nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs, andRussia continuing to violate nonproliferation norms by attacking Ukraine with missiles and has doubled down on its dangerous nuclear rhetoric – including withdrawing from the PSI in 2022.However, despite the challenges posed by the current security landscape, the PSI remains strong. Following the meeting, Benin, Equatorial Guinea, Ghana, Togo, and Zambia became endorsers of the PSI, affirming their commitment to countering the spread of WMDs.The success of the 2024 PSI African Political Meeting and Outreach event is a sign that the international community at large is steadfast in their support of counterproliferation efforts. The United States looks forward to working with the five new endorsing countries to improve our multilateral interdiction efforts and prevent the spread of nuclear weapons-related technologies.Darby FitzSimmons is an intern in the Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation.