HomePress Briefings…Department Press Briefing – March 28, 2024

# 											Department Press Briefing – March 28, 2024									

Matthew Miller, Department Spokesperson

March 28, 2024

## 										Article Index									

              - RUSSIA/NORTH KOREA/CHINA
              - ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES
              - RUSSIA/UKRAINE
              - ARMENIA
              - IRAN
              - AFGHANISTAN
              - ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES/REGION
              - AFGHANISTAN
              - VENEZUELA
              - COLOMBIA/ARGENTINA
              - HAITI
              - CHINA
              
1:18 p.m. EDT

**MR MILLER:** The United States is deeply disappointed by Russia’s veto of the United Nations Security Council 1718 Committee Panel of Experts mandate renewal. We are also disappointed that the People’s Republic of China decided to abstain after 14 years of supporting this important mandate.

For the past 15 years, the 1718 Committee Panel of Experts has been the gold standard for providing fact-based, independent analysis and recommendations on the implementation of UN sanctions on the DPRK. Throughout those 15 years, the panel of experts enjoyed the Security Council’s unanimous support, and up until this year has been renewed by consensus. Russia’s actions today have cynically undermined international peace and security, all to advance the corrupt bargain that Moscow has struck with the DPRK. Moscow appears to be intent on facilitating the DPRK’s illegal pursuit of weapons of mass destruction, and its veto today was a self-interested effort to bury the panel’s reporting on its own collusion with the DPRK to secure weapons that it can use to further its aggression against Ukraine.

Russia alone will own the outcome of this veto: a DPRK more emboldened to reckless behavior and destabilizing provocations, as well as reduced prospects for an enduring peace on the Korean Peninsula.

Despite today’s veto and abstention, all Security Council resolutions and UN measures addressing the DPRK’s unlawful WMD and ballistic missile programs remain in effect. We will continue to work to counter the DPRK’s unlawful actions, work with likeminded states through all available means to limit the threat posed by the DPRK, and respond to efforts by its enablers to shield the DPRK from responsibility.

And with that, Shaun.

**QUESTION:** Sure, let me follow up on that to begin with. You say Russia alone will own the outcome of the veto. Could you explain a little bit about what do you mean by that? Obviously, you’re saying that Russia has a self-interest in this, but do you think there are any repercussions? Is there anything that the U.S. or elsewhere is going to do to enforce the sanctions a bit more after this?

**MR MILLER:** So the sanctions will continue to be in effect, as I said. But unfortunately, this important panel has not seen its mandate renewed. And we will continue to work to secure information about the DPRK’s pursuit of illegal weapons, and we will continue to work to make that information public and make it available to other members of the Security Council. But I think what we’ve seen by – as a result of Russia’s or what we will see as a result of Russia’s actions today is a DPRK that’s emboldened. It continues to be largely isolated in the world, but we are in a different place than when you had Russia and China voting to uphold accountability for the DPRK. And now you’ve seen a Russia that has cut this bargain with the DPRK because it’s in desperate need of weapons to pursue its aggression against Ukraine. And then you saw today one of the ways that Russia is delivering on its end of the bargain with the DPRK, which is try to undercut what had been up until now unanimous United Nations Security Council actions.

**QUESTION:** Just to follow up on that, I know that the U.S. has publicly spoken of cooperation between the DPRK and Russia. Is it your view that this will actually pave the way for a greater cooperation? There are reports that the Russian spy chief was in Pyongyang – I think it was this week, even. Is there concern that – in light of this that there will be greater military cooperation?

**MR MILLER:** I don’t think that what happened today paves the way for greater DPRK-Russia cooperation. I think today – what happened today is an example of greater DPRK-Russia cooperation. We saw that cooperation kick off last year when they began having – when there began to be increased talks between the two, and then of course we’ve seen the DPRK transfer military equipment to Russia that has shown up on the battlefield in Ukraine. It’s been used by Russia to further its war against Ukraine. And we’ve been waiting to see how the – Russia – see some of the ways that Russia would hold up its end of the bargain. I think we saw one of them today.

**QUESTION:** Sure. Maybe I can switch topics, unless somebody else has the DPRK. I was wondering if you have a reaction to the ICJ, the International Court of Justice, just today on Israel, saying that Israel must ensure urgent humanitarian assistance, and that famine has already set in in Gaza.

**MR MILLER:** So that order, to my understanding, was just issued in the last hour. Our team is reviewing it right now, so I don’t have a detailed reaction to the full text of the order. It’s something we want to review before we give that reaction. But as a general proposition, of course, increasing humanitarian assistance to Gaza is something that we support, and something that we have urged Israel to help facilitate. So that general conclusion is very much something we agree with, but as it pertains to the exact text of the order, I want to give the team time here to look through it before I respond in detail.

**QUESTION:** Just one more for me, and I know you just said that you want time to review it, but is it – the word “binding” again, but the International Court of Justice, is it – is it the view of the United States that Israel must comply with this, that it must do more?

**MR MILLER:** Again, having not even reviewed the order myself and knowing that there is a team reviewing, I don’t want to respond until we’ve had a chance to do that.

**QUESTION:** I mean, just to follow up on that, can you say that in principle you are —

**MR MILLER:** In principle, of course, we support the work of the ICJ. But I don’t know if this – I just haven’t reviewed the exact text to know how it applies in this instance, so I’m obviously loath to comment on it for that reason.

**QUESTION:** I see, okay. We might come back to this, but just on – do you have a reaction on the new Palestinian cabinet that’s been announced? Is it – what do you think about it? Because U.S. has called for reform of the Palestinian Authority. Looking at the list and the fact that new prime – a new cabinet has been announced, is this something that the United States welcomes?

**MR MILLER:** So we have long urged the Palestinian Authority to form a reformed cabinet with new leadership. You’ve heard the Secretary speak to this during his travels in the region. And so now that the PA has appointed a new cabinet, we will be looking to this new government to deliver on policies and implement credible and far-reaching reforms. It’s something we’ve spoken to a number of times, our belief that a reformed PA is essential to delivering results for the Palestinian people and establishing the conditions for stability in both the West Bank and Gaza. So we will engage with this government based on its actions. We’ll be closely tracking the steps it takes to advance the key reforms and look forward to engaging with them on that matter.

**QUESTION:** Can you get into what the specific reforms you’re hoping for actually look like?

**MR MILLER:** So in – I’m not going to get into specific reforms, but broadly speaking we have encouraged them to implement reforms that crack down on corruption. We have encouraged them to implement reforms that increase transparency, that increase media freedoms, and increase the ability for civil society to engage with the government.

**QUESTION:** And you said you’re looking for them to – I think you said, like, act on policy. Like, which policies are you hoping that they act —

**MR MILLER:** Well, that’s why – just the ones I just referred to.

**QUESTION:** Those ones.

**MR MILLER:** Yeah, those.

**QUESTION:** Okay.

**MR MILLER:** But also I think it’s important – so we’ve always believed that the PA needed to be a government that was fully representative of the Palestinian people in the West Bank and in Gaza. I do note that there are Palestinians from Gaza who are members of this new cabinet. We have always made clear that we’re not going to pass judgement on specific individuals; that’s not for the United States to do. That – those are decisions for the Palestinian people, but we do welcome them taking steps to make a cabinet that is fully representative of the Palestinian people. And now we will look – look to them to implement policies that follow up on reform and deliver on the demands that we have heard over and over from the Palestinian people.

Said.

**QUESTION:** Thank you. Thank you, Matt. I hope you indulge me, and my colleagues. I want to go back to —

**MR MILLER:** I always indulge you, Said.

**QUESTION:** I know you do.

**MR MILLER:** I think, but I don’t know if that means —

**QUESTION:** Maybe —

**MR MILLER:** I don’t know if that means 14 questions are coming.

**QUESTION:** That is true. Maybe I —

**MR MILLER:** Maybe not that – maybe not that much indulgence.

**QUESTION:** Yeah, maybe I have more this time around. Anyway, I want to go back to the issue of the Albanese report yesterday, and you said that she made some antisemitic statements and so on in the past. Can you share those statements with us?

**MR MILLER:** I can. I didn’t actually think this was a controversial statement.

**QUESTION:** Okay.

**MR MILLER:** She made a remark at one point referring to the Jewish lobby controlling America, and in fact expressed regret for that remark afterwards. So that’s what I was referring to.

**QUESTION:** But the – I think the term that was – she was accused for is when she used the term Shoah for Nakba, which is exactly – that’s the word —

**MR MILLER:** So Said, I – hold on. I will – I’m not referring to anyone else’s comments.

**QUESTION:** Right.

**MR MILLER:** And I – that’s not what I was referring to.

**QUESTION:** That’s what she – I understand.

**MR MILLER:** So —

**QUESTION:** But the comment that she made, she said Shoah is Nakba in Arabic, which is exactly what it is.

**MR MILLER:** Said —

**QUESTION:** I mean, it’s a catastrophe.

**MR MILLER:** Said, I am not —

**QUESTION:** So – all right.

**MR MILLER:** I’m not even familiar with the comment you’re referring to —

**QUESTION:** Okay.

**MR MILLER:** — and that’s not what I was referring to in my remarks.

**QUESTION:** That’s fine. Okay, so let me – you also said that you disagree with the position itself, that you – you’re not – you don’t approve having that position in the United Nations. Why not?

**MR MILLER:** We have been very clear that the – that we do not believe genocide has taken place. We do not believe that’s an appropriate term or constructive one to use in this instance.

**QUESTION:** So let me ask you something. Is there a reasonable definition of genocide that would include what happened in Bosnia or to the Rohingya and at the same time exclude what is happening in Gaza?

**MR MILLER:** So, Said, the definition of genocide is one that is well —

**QUESTION:** Okay.

**MR MILLER:** — hold on, hold on – well-founded in international humanitarian law.

**QUESTION:** Right.

**MR MILLER:** And if you look at the position that the department’s legal advisors laid out before the —

**QUESTION:** Right.

**MR MILLER:** — ICJ, they do go through this chapter and verse. I’m not going to repeat all of it here from the podium. I obviously don’t have the filing with me, but you can look where we do go through exactly why we don’t believe genocide is an appropriate term to use in this – in this regard.

**QUESTION:** Okay. Although many countries in the world now are more and more using the term. In fact, France said that they would probably try the soldiers that served in this war for war crimes that they have committed if they are involved. But anyway, let me ask you about a couple of other things, if you allow me. The Canadian minister of – I’m sorry – a Canadian minister said that the United States implored them to continue aiding UNRWA. Can you confirm that, that the ambassador to the UN actually implored the Canadians to continue aiding UNRWA?

**MR MILLER:** I am not going to get into private diplomatic conversations, but we have always made clear that we think the work that UNRWA does is important —

**QUESTION:** Right.

**MR MILLER:** — that we support the – hold on; I see you – I see the —

**QUESTION:** No, I’m with you, I’m with you, I’m with you.

**MR MILLER:** I see the interruption coming, so sorry to – sorry —

**QUESTION:** It’s just my habit. That’s okay.

**MR MILLER:** That’s fine; I understand. We have always made – (laughter) – sorry – we have always made clear that we support the work that UNRWA does, and we have always made clear that it’s important that that work not be interrupted, even though we were – we thought it was appropriate on behalf of the United States to suspend our funding. Now, of course, that funding has been blocked going forward. So we have engaged with other countries about different ways to ensure that the delivery of humanitarian assistance to the Palestinian people is not interrupted, that it continues.

And again, I think you have to go back to something I said before that’s been lost a little bit. When we suspended our funding, we only had an upcoming funding of about – an upcoming payment of about $300,000 coming, not a major – when you look at the overall funding that we provide, it was not a major amount of money that we were providing any time before this summer anyway. So we have been working with other countries to make sure that that work can continue unimpeded.

**QUESTION:** So by the way, I mean, this suspension – now that something is blocked, does that make the investigation or waiting on the investigation moot? Does it make the issue moot?

**MR MILLER:** So with respect to a question of U.S. funding, it’s now blocked. That’s an act of Congress —

**QUESTION:** So you have —

**MR MILLER:** — and you —

**QUESTION:** You’re not waiting on the results?

**MR MILLER:** Hold on, hold on, hold on. It would – the members of Congress, I’m sure, will want to see the results of that investigation and decide what they might do in future funding cycles. But certainly, we want to see the results of that investigation as well, and should note that other countries have said they want to see it and the UN itself, which commissioned this investigation on its own accord, has made very clear that they think it’s important that they see – that they get timely – a timely, full accounting of what that investigation shows.

**QUESTION:** And finally, I promise, an Israeli officer —

**MR MILLER:** That wasn’t too – that’s not too many, Said. Go ahead.

**QUESTION:** All right. So that was –

**MR MILLER:** No, no.

**QUESTION:** Anyway, an Israeli officer said that Israel engaged in waste of – or over-bombing and so on. He said we could have done the same thing with 10 percent of the kind of destruction that they levied on Gaza. Have you seen that report and do you —

**MR MILLER:** I have – haven’t seen that comment. I’m not sure I follow, Said.

**QUESTION:** No, he’s saying that Israel engaged in obvious overkill in terms of the amount of bombing, the waste, and the destruction of urban areas, and so on; they could have done exactly the same thing with 10 percent of the destruction.

**MR MILLER:** So I —

**QUESTION:** Have you seen that report? And maybe you all have to take a look at it again.

**MR MILLER:** I have not seen that specific comment, but obviously we have urged the Government of Israel to take every step that it possibly can to minimize harm to civilians and minimize harm to civilian infrastructure.

**QUESTION:** Okay. Thank you.

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

**QUESTION:** May I go back to Russia, please?

**MR MILLER:** Sure.

**QUESTION:** Thanks so much. Starting from Kirby’s statements this morning, he revealed very interesting details about communications between Washington and Moscow in the run-up to last week’s attack. He said that there was a written warning to Russians early last month, and he also said it was one from multiple warnings since last September. I was hoping you could help us unpack a little bit how many terror attacks you believe you have prevented in Russia from happening? How many people’s lives you have saved, do you think? Were they all about ISIS threat? And finally, why do you think that they chose not to act on this very knowledge?

**MR MILLER:** I think you’re going to be disappointed in my answer, because unfortunately I’m not able to provide further information. As usual, when it comes to information that we are able to declassify and make public, there is a limit of what we can say to protect sources and methods, and that’s very much the case here.

What I can say is what the admiral said this morning, which is we did on March 7th provide a warning to Moscow. We provide clear, detailed information about the terrorist threat to large gatherings, including concerts. We then, the next day, put out a public warning urging citizens to avoid large gatherings, and that was not the first warning that we’ve given to Russia.

Now, when it comes to why they didn’t take any action or why they didn’t take sufficient action or whether they could have taken sufficient action, I just can’t speak to that.

**QUESTION:** So they chose not to take an action and to start blaming —

**MR MILLER:** No, that’s not what – that’s not what I said.

**QUESTION:** Right, right. Yeah, but the reality is that they didn’t act on that knowledge.

**MR MILLER:** They didn’t prevent the – they didn’t – certainly didn’t, obviously didn’t prevent the terrorist attack, but I can’t speak to any actions they —

**QUESTION:** Right. Then they start blaming Ukraine and the U.S., and then today they said they have established facts that there was some funding involved from Ukraine. Do you – how do you square those circles? So what is the intention there, and do you think that this was deliberate approach from Russia from get-go?

**MR MILLER:** A deliberate what from Russia?

**QUESTION:** Approach, like policy to – when they receive that knowledge, they decided to build around it some new —

**MR MILLER:** So I don’t think there’s any circle that needs to be squared here. I think the Russian Government is putting forward propaganda and disinformation. I think that’s been very clear, that they are trying to use this terrorist attack – this tragic incident, where we saw, unfortunately, Russian citizens killed – to justify their aggression in Ukraine. And if underlying facts don’t actually matter, they’re going to make up supposed facts to back up what they want to do. That’s what they’ve done really since the outset of this war, and sadly that’s what they’re doing here.

**QUESTION:** Thank you. Matt, on Evan Gershkovich, tomorrow is the first-year anniversary of his arrest. Kirby today confirmed that we are trying to still discuss with Russians some options to get him out of Russian jail. Is there any active offer from the U.S. since last December – they rejected the one – that they haven’t responded yet?

**MR MILLER:** I’m just not – I have never spoken in that level of our detail about our work to secure the release of either Evan Gershkovich or Paul Whelan, and I’m not going to do so today.

**QUESTION:** And a final one, if I may, on Armenia. We discussed yesterday Azerbaijan’s reaction and you responded to that, but Russia is also – seems to have been uneasy about this meeting. Zakharova today (inaudible) around what the Azeris said yesterday, that it was divisive. She said that the West is trying to, quote/unquote, create new rifts in the region and forcing the countries in the region to follow anti-Russian line. So what is your response to the comments?

**MR MILLER:** So I would say if anything the – some of the turbulence we have seen in the region has been fueled by Russia’s actions over the past few months.

With respect to this meeting in Brussels, as I said yesterday, it is to focus on economic resilience for Armenia as it works to diversify its trade partnerships and address humanitarian needs, and nothing else.

**QUESTION:** Thank you.

**MR MILLER:** Guita.

**QUESTION:** Matt, on Wednesday 11 women human rights activists in – were sentenced to 60 years of – a total of 60 years of imprisonment in Iran. I was wondering if you have any comments on that.

**MR MILLER:** So we condemn the Iranian regime’s use of harsh sentences for women’s rights activists that are meant to intimidate them and suppress their voices. As Iran’s leadership continues its violent crackdown on any dissent, they should know that the world is watching. Ongoing, widespread reports of torture, forced confessions, and restrictions on legal counsel undermine any shred of credibility in the decisions handed down by Iranian courts.

And the United States continues to coordinate with our allies and partners to condemn these sham trials and to pursue accountability for Iran’s human rights abuses, and we will continue to take action to support the people of Iran in practical ways – both seen and unseen – in coordination with our allies and partners.

**QUESTION:** Thank you.

**MR MILLER:** Yeah.

**QUESTION:** Thanks. On Afghanistan, the family of American citizen detained by the Taliban, Ryan Corbett, released a statement this week, saying that they have received a disturbing phone call from him, in which the family says it was clear that his mental and physical health is significantly deteriorating. CBS News interviewed the family in December last year, where they highlighted the same concern about his health. And I believe at the time, envoy Tom West was – he did have a meeting with the Taliban. I was wondering if you could update us on any talks between the U.S. and the Taliban with Tom West or otherwise.

**MR MILLER:** Let me just first say, with respect to the family, that as is always the case when you think about people who have their loved ones being wrongfully detained overseas, I cannot imagine the pain that they’re going through and the grief that they’re suffering and how difficult it must be knowing that their loved one is going through such a tragic hardship. And so what I can say to the family and what I can say to the American public on behalf of this government is that we are working every day to try and bring Ryan Corbett home.

We have continually pressed, including in our meetings with Taliban representatives, for the immediate and unconditional release of Ryan Corbett and other Americans detained in Afghanistan. We have made clear to the Taliban that these detentions are a significant obstacle to positive engagement, and we will continue to do that. We are using every lever we can to try to bring Ryan and these other wrongfully detained Americans home from Afghanistan.

Yeah.

**QUESTION:** Matt, I don’t know if you saw the reports in the Politico two hours ago about the day after, Gaza day after, and the talks between the U.S. and regional partners. And according to the report, quoting U.S. official, that there’s two ideas that gaining traction. One is to form a multinational task force and the second one is to form a peacekeeping Palestinian force. But my question is, if you can answer to this that – is the Palestinian Authority included in these talks?

**MR MILLER:** So I’m not going to speak to private diplomatic conversations or speak to what it sounds like are reported – anonymous comments from reported officials inside the United States Government. What I will say is that what the United States has made clear – and the Secretary first made this clear in a speech in Tokyo last November – is that there are a few principles that we want to see applied to when the conflict ends. And one of those is that the Palestinian Authority should govern both Gaza and the West Bank. We want to see a united West Bank and Gaza that is governed by the Palestinian people through the Palestinian Authority.

So we have engaged in talks with partner countries in the region, and we have engaged in talks with the Palestinian Authority about exactly what that might look like. And as you might imagine, there are a number of different proposals on the table. I won’t go into those here for probably obvious reasons. But yes, we have engaged with both the Palestinian Authority and with countries in the region about the full panoply of post-conflict issues that Gaza will face.

**QUESTION:** We – and you said before from your podium that countries in the region are committed to Gaza the day after, but they want something from Israel, to be committed, for example, to the two-state solution, all that. Israeli leadership still won’t commit to this. Is there any update on your talk with the Israelis about that? Do you – are you being able to push them beyond their public stance?

**MR MILLER:** So I don’t have any update to offer. Obviously they’ve spoken to this on a number of occasions. But the work that we have been doing with our Arab partners is to put together not just a kind of nebulous idea, but a concrete proposal of what this would look like, of what post-conflict governance would look like, both as it pertains to security in Gaza and the rebuilding and reconstruction of Gaza and a political path forward for the Palestinian people that answers their very legitimate aspirations.

As part of that, we have had discussions with Saudi Arabia about how to further integrate Israel with its neighbors, including with Saudi Arabia, and those are discussions that are ongoing as well. So that work continues. But at some point, our goal is very much to have something to put forward, to put it on the table for Israel to look at. And until we get to that point – and it’s something we’re working hard on every day – I don’t want to sort of speculate about what decisions might look like.

Yeah.

**QUESTION:** Yeah. Matt, what role will the Palestinian Authority play in the operation of the pier in Gaza in two or three weeks?

**MR MILLER:** So I would defer to the Pentagon to that question. They are the lead in the construction of this pier. And I would – for that sort of detail, I would defer to them.

**QUESTION:** But do you want the PA to play any role there?

**MR MILLER:** Again, I would defer to the Pentagon for that question. The PA is not currently operating in Gaza. I know they’ve had employees that were in Gaza, but of course the PA has not been the governing authority in Gaza for some time. So when it comes to any kind of concrete role in that – in the operation of the pier, in the delivery of humanitarian assistance, like I said, I’d have to defer to the Pentagon.

**QUESTION:** Can I follow up on this particular issue?

**MR MILLER:** Sure.

**QUESTION:** It is said that the Israelis have agreed to actually provide security for the operation of the pier. Are you aware of that?

**MR MILLER:**I’ve seen those reports. I don’t have any confirmation of them.

Yeah, go ahead.

**QUESTION:**A couple of weeks ago I asked you about repeated instances of Israeli soldiers rifling through and parading women’s underwear. Especially in light of ongoing allegations of sexual abuse against Israeli soldiers and allegations that they tortured and sexually abused UNRWA staffers in order to coerce false confessions, I’m wondering – since then we’ve heard troubling details of these allegations, including soldiers sticking electrified rods up people’s anuses. We’ve continued to see not single-digit but now piles of photos and videos of soldiers parading through women’s underwear. So I’m wondering, what are the updates on those instances we talked about a few weeks ago? And what is the update now that this keeps seemingly happening unabated?

**MR MILLER:**So I would say whenever we see these reports we make clear to the Israeli Government what we make clear publicly, which is that they need to be investigated and, if appropriate, there needs to be accountability.

And I would refer to you – to a comment that the IDF advocate general – Major General Yifat Tomer-Yerushalmi, who I believe is the chief investigator for the IDF, said several weeks ago in a letter when she wrote and said that she had encountered actions by IDF soldiers that “do not meet IDF values, that deviate from orders and disciplinary boundaries – and have crossed the criminal threshold,” causing “strategic damage” to Israel in the international area. “These acts and statements, on the part of individuals who do” represent the – “These acts and statements, on the part of individuals who do represent the collective... have no place in the IDF.” And you saw the chief of staff of the IDF, Herzi Halevi, say, “We must be careful not to use force where it is not required, to distinguish between a terrorist and... who [is] not, not to take anything that is not ours — a souvenir or weapons — and not to film revenge videos.”

So the IDF has made very clear itself – this isn’t the United States speaking – that they do see – they have seen inappropriate actions take place by IDF soldiers, and they need to be investigated, and those responsible need to be held accountable. And we would very much agree with that.

**QUESTION:**And then on the sexual abuse allegations, any sort of update on —

**MR MILLER:**I don’t have any update on those —

**QUESTION:**Okay.

**MR MILLER:**— what I understand are ongoing investigations.

**QUESTION:**And just on the assurances, earlier you said after receiving assurances from Israel that they’re not violating humanitarian law, the U.S. so far has not seen proof of that. I’m wondering what these assurances look like, because we have all seen proof from the International Court of Justice, from the United Nations, and from footage especially the past few weeks, over and over again, of Israel seemingly targeting civilians, hospitals, churches – footage even yesterday showing Israeli forces seeming to execute unarmed Palestinians waving white flags. They’re blocking aid to the point that the U.S. is trying to build a pier to deliver aid as if Israel is a belligerent and not an ally. So with all this, how is Israel not violating humanitarian law? Are these assurances just Israel saying that they promise they’re not, and they evidently continue to do so?

**MR MILLER:**So I – so I spoke to this extensively on Monday and Tuesday, and I would encourage you to check the transcript. I’ll do a little bit of it again, but I don’t think – I think I will spare everyone else here 15 or 20 minutes of me in vain on the national security memo again. But what I will say is we received assurances from the Government of Israel that are consistent with the requirements of the national security memo now, but I think to your underlying question, we look at those assurances through a lens of the ongoing processes that we have to answer this very question. And we do have – we do have processes going on examining specific incidents in the conduct of the campaign, and those processes are ongoing. They’ve not reached a final determination at this point.

Yeah.

**QUESTION:**Thank you, Matt. I’m wondering if you have any reaction and comments about the Hamas leader visit to Iran and what he said about Israel. He said that Israel is losing the international community’s support, and he took the UN Security resolution as an evidence that Israel is losing support. Do you have any reaction and comment on that?

**MR MILLER:**So I’m not going to respond broadly to something that a leader of Hamas said, but I would say with respect to the UN Security Council resolution, we’ve made very clear our position on that resolution, which is we think it is consistent with our longstanding – not think – it is consistent with our longstanding position that there ought to be a ceasefire linked to the release of hostages. And that’s what we have believed Israel’s position to be as well.

**QUESTION:**And do you any sense that Israel is losing the international community’s support because they are not following the UN Security Council resolution?

**MR MILLER:**Look, I think if you look around the world, there are a number of countries who have not supported Israel’s action from the beginning. I think that’s been pretty clear and not at all in dispute. And then there have been countries like the United States that have backed Israel’s right to defend itself while at times disagreeing with certain ways they went about this campaign and calling on them to do more to both protect civilians and deliver – increase the delivery of humanitarian assistance to those civilians.

**QUESTION:**Thank you, sir. According to some media reports, India has submitted the findings of the attempted murder of a Sikh human rights lawyer, Gurpatwant Singh Pannun, in New York. Could you share some details, please?

**MR MILLER:**I will have to get back to you. I’m not – I have not seen those reports.

**QUESTION:**Sir, after the attack in Moscow, officials are warning that the group has also set its sights on Western targets. How would you respond to the threat posed by ISIS?

**MR MILLER:**That it has set its sights on what?

**QUESTION:**Sir, how you —

**MR MILLER:**No, I missed the – I missed the middle part there of the buildup to the question.

**QUESTION:**Sir – sir, intelligence reports that officials are warning that the group has also set to – set its sights on Western targets. How would you respond to the threats posed by ISIS?

**MR MILLER:**On Western targets. Oh, I see. I’m sorry; I apologize. So we remain vigilant against the evolving threat posed by terrorist groups, including ISIS-K. We have maintained an unwavering focus on terrorism since the President took office three years ago, working both unilaterally and with our partners to successfully disrupt threats around the globe and degrade ISIS. In addition, in February 2022, operating on the President’s orders, U.S. military forces successfully targeted Haji Abdullah, the leader of ISIS, later that year. At the President’s direction, the United States successfully concluded an airstrike in Kabul, Afghanistan, that killed the emir of a different terrorist group, al-Qaida – Ayman al-Zawahiri. And we will continue to work to hold ISIS accountable for its actions and to prevent terrorist attacks against the United States and other Western countries.

**QUESTION:** Sir, the main hideouts of these terrorist groups are based in Afghanistan, and United States always said that it will continue to have the ability to target terrorists in Afghanistan who pose a threat to American interests. So is there any action expected on this?

**MR MILLER:** So we remain committed to ensuring that Afghanistan can never again be a launching pad for terrorism, and we continue to push the Taliban to fulfill all of their counterterrorism commitments to the international community. We have made clear to the Taliban that it is their responsibility to ensure that they give no safe haven to terrorists, whether it be al-Qaida or ISIS-K or any other terrorist organization. And we remain vigilant against the evolving threat of these terrorist groups, and our Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS and the C5+1 help intensify our efforts to monitor terrorist threats from the region and prevent terrorists’ ability to raise funds, travel, and spread propaganda.

Shaun, go ahead.

**QUESTION:** Sure. A couple other issues. Venezuela. I saw that you issued a statement last night on this, on the opposition’s struggle to field a candidate against Maduro. Are you under the impression that this violates the understandings in Barbados, the Norwegian-brokered understandings? And what does this mean about a potential snapback of sanctions on this?

**MR MILLER:** So I would say that we remain deeply concerned – and it’s not just the United States that’s deeply concerned, it’s our regional partners who share this concern about decisions by the Venezuelan National Electoral Council to prevent opposition parties from registering candidates for the upcoming presidential election. We are going to continue to make clear to Maduro and his representatives that there needs to be – they need to ensure international observer access, they need to end the jailing and harassment of civil society members, and they need to allow a free and fair election.

And then, as we have made clear, actions that run counter to the letter and the spirit of the Barbados Agreement will have consequences. We’ve spoken to that. We’ve spoken to the fact that there’s a general license that expires next month. I’m not going to make any determinations from here about how – about what decision we will take then, but we have been very clear with the – with Maduro and his representatives about what we expect them to take and what the consequences could be if they don’t.

**QUESTION:** Just a brief follow-up. Not to put words in your mouth, but are you saying that there’s no determination – there’s no determination from here as of now what decision you’ll take? Is there still time, basically? I mean, could they still – is there still time for —

**MR MILLER:** So the only thing I’ll say is we’ve made clear that that general license with respect to oil expires in April, and you heard us say some months ago that that’s an important date to watch. We allowed another general license to expire and not be renewed – I think it was one for gold – and there’s a big one coming up for oil. And that continues to be an important date, and we’re going to be watching the – Maduro’s actions and making determinations about how we will proceed.

**QUESTION:** Just a couple more. Don’t know if this is something you’re following, but tensions between Colombia and Argentina.

**MR MILLER:** (Laughter.) I have been following that, yeah.

**QUESTION:** Oh, okay. That makes two of us. The —

**MR MILLER:** It’s not the same as saying I’m going to have anything to say about it.

**QUESTION:** Right. I wasn’t —

**MR MILLER:** But I have been following it. (Laughter.)

**QUESTION:** Right. I wasn’t counting on it. But what do you make of it? I mean, the letters and the chronology. The president of Argentina, President Milei, said that President Petro is, quote, “a terrorist” and Colombia has expelled diplomats. Does the – has the U.S. been – has friendly relations with both countries. Has the U.S. been dealing at all with this?

**MR MILLER:** So I think I’m going to stay out of this one. This is ultimately an issue between Colombia and Argentina. I will say that we, as you noted, maintain strong relations with both of them, and we support continued dialogue and diplomatic relations between both sides. But as to this specific dispute, I think I will refrain from commenting.

**QUESTION:** And you’re going to stay out of the actual remarks, how he characterizes Petro?

**MR MILLER:** Yes, I think that would be wise.

**QUESTION:** Just one – just one more before I yield. Do you have anything more to say about Niger after yesterday? Anything more on —

**MR MILLER:** No, it’s something that we continue to work on and we continue to engage with the CNSP, but I don’t have an update.

Yeah.

**QUESTION:** Thanks, Matt. Can you give us any indication or awareness of the – of Haiti’s transitional presidential council being closer to formation? I believe eight members have been chosen of what’s supposed to be a nine-member council. And any update on U.S. plans for further evacuations of Americans from Haiti?

**MR MILLER:** So on the first, you may have seen that they issued a statement yesterday. We were encouraged to see the transitional presidential council release its first statement. We hope that the council will continue to work to take the steps they outlined in that statement, including finalizing their organization and operation, appointing an interim prime minister, and taking steps to restore order to Haiti. Ultimately, as we’ve said, these are decisions for Haitians to make. We will continue to work with CARICOM and our partners in the region to offer our support for them as they go through this process.

And then with respect to facilitating the departure of American citizens, let me first give you an update on the numbers. We now have successfully evacuated or facilitated the departure of somewhere around 450 U.S. citizens since March 17th. That includes over 300 that have departed Port-au-Prince and almost a hundred from Cap-Haïtien. There are helicopters that are going today from Port-au-Prince to Santo Domingo, and we continue to explore other alternatives and other options to get American citizens out of Haiti. But I don’t have any announcements today, but we’re going to continue to work on that and may have more to say tomorrow or over the weekend.

**QUESTION:** Thank you.

**MR MILLER:** Yeah.

**QUESTION:** Thank you very much, Matt. My first question is about Congress has asked the Assistant Secretary Donald Lu to send the Pakistani – U.S. ambassador in Pakistan, Mr. Blome, to meet Imran Khan. Any update when he’s meeting?

**MR MILLER:** Congress asked? Who in Congress?

**QUESTION:** You know the congressional hearing where Mr. Donald Lu had appeared?

**MR MILLER:** I remember that, yeah. I just – usually “Congress” means like an act of Congress. I – did you mean like a member of Congress, or —

**QUESTION:** Yes, yes. Couple of member of Congress have asked the assistant secretary that the U.S. ambassador should go and meet Imran Khan in jail to see how he is, what’s the situation.

**MR MILLER:** I don’t have any updates on meetings by the ambassador.

**QUESTION:** Okay. Just one more thing: 6,000 scholarships each year the U.S. gives to Pakistani students, and not a single complaint has ever been seen. All students are taken on merit; it’s amazing. But since the lady who you have called milestone – because I carry these values from the high school and university here from the U.S., so that’s why I do get upset at times when you use terms like “milestone” for corrupt people. This principal in Pakistan —

**MR MILLER:** Sorry – I’m sorry to have upset you.

**QUESTION:** Yes, it does – Michael Thompson, a principal at a university, a college in Lahore where the milestone lady that you call is the chief minister there, he just resigned there because one of her favorite try to waive off his son’s tuition fee. The principal, an Australian principal working in Lahore – isn’t this shameful? Like – and should you be calling milestone to people —

**MR MILLER:** I could not possibly have a comment on that situation.

Go ahead in the back.

**QUESTION:** Thank you, Matt.

**MR MILLER:** I’ll come to you next. In the back.

**QUESTION:** Okay. The United —

**MR MILLER:** No, no, behind you. Sorry, I’ll come to – I’ll come to you next.

**QUESTION:** Okay.

**MR MILLER:** Back of the room. You’re halfway through.

**QUESTION:** Okay. The United States approval of limited operation in Rafah acts as a green light for Israel to start a military operation in Rafah. This is seen as a step back in the U.S. stance, which – affecting its image and credibility. What’s your comment, please?

**MR MILLER:** I think that’s a bit of a mischaracterization of what we’ve said with respect to Rafah. First of all, we have always made clear that we support Israel’s right to hold Hamas accountable and its right to take the fight to Hamas operatives inside Gaza, including in Rafah. But what we have said is that we think that there is a better way to do that than the full-scale operation that Israel has said it’s contemplating, and we look forward to having a conversation in the coming days with Israel to lay out what those options could look like and what that better path could look like. We have always made clear, though, that whatever kind of military operation that Israel conducts, whether it be in Rafah, whether it be in Khan Younis, or whether it be anywhere else, needs to take into account the civilian population and minimize civilian harm to the population in those communities.

**QUESTION:** Excuse me.

**MR MILLER:** Yeah.

**QUESTION:** There is the guarantee that civilian will not affected or not dangerous, their lives?

**MR MILLER:** Look, I think it’s – I mean, it’s obviously in any war impossible to make a guarantee. What we want to see is civilian harm minimized to the maximum extent possible, and so that means putting – designing military campaigns around protecting civilians first. It’s one thing the Secretary has made clear in his conversations with the Government of Israel that they ought to do, and at the same time – it’s a separate issue but it’s very much connected – making sure that they do everything to facilitate the delivery of humanitarian assistance so that those civilians who do remain in Rafah or anywhere else inside Gaza have access to food and water and medicine and shelter that they need to survive in what is obviously a very difficult situation in the middle of an open war.

**QUESTION:** Okay, excuse me, I want to ask you about the mission of the American military delegation to Tel Aviv, whether is an alternative visit of the Israeli military delegation to Washington D.C., and what the idea they carry, yeah, and there is headlines of – for this delegation.

**MR MILLER:** So with respect to a military delegation, I think my colleagues at the Pentagon are briefing in an hour, a little over an hour, and I would encourage you to submit that question to them. They should speak to that.

Go ahead.

**QUESTION:** Okay. Thank you.

**QUESTION:** Daniele Compatangelo for Italian Television. Oops. So that’s my question – United States – NATO under President Biden got more strong and Europe is happy about it, but there are talks in Europe. The – different government would like to create a European force that can support NATO and the U.S. So what would it be the answer from the U.S., from the State Department, if Europe would create a European – their own European forces to protect Europe?

**MR MILLER:** So I don’t want to speculate. We will continue to work with our European partners, but as you made clear in – I think the lead-in to your question, we have been very clear about the United States commitment to NATO, the United States commitment to our transatlantic Alliance, United States commitment to all of our allies in Europe, and we think it’s important that NATO be bolstered and expanded, as we have seen happen with the increase – with the increase in two members in the last year or so.

Go ahead.

**QUESTION:** Yeah, can I ask – can I ask —

**MR MILLER:** Yeah, go —

**QUESTION:** Yeah. Yeah, yeah, so they’re not against NATO. They actually – they would – this force would make NATO stronger.

**MR MILLER:** Yeah.

**QUESTION:** But the other question would be do – does the U.S. believe that Europe should be more active to protect themself, let’s say also helping more Ukraine, or be more active in the Mediterranean with the Middle East? Or should be done always together with the U.S.?

**MR MILLER:** So I think that’s an incredibly broad question that’s hard to answer in the time I have here.

**QUESTION:** Well, what can you say shortly?

**MR MILLER:** I would say that we want to work together with our European allies, but that doesn’t mean that they can’t do things outside of cooperation with the United States. But we share values and interests with those countries, and we work together, and sometimes they do things separately but that pursue our common goals. And we, of course, support that.

Go ahead.

**QUESTION:** Thank you. So about a dozen CEOs from American businessmen met with Xi Jinping yesterday. So the CCP has been notorious for linking silence with human rights abuses on a trade relationship. How does the United States ensure that human rights is the foundation of these trade relationships with China?

**MR MILLER:** So I will say that in all of our meetings with officials from the PRC we make clear where we have concerns about China’s human rights practices. We raise them consistently. That includes the Secretary, when he has met with his counterparts, and it includes other officials from the U.S. Government who make very clear what we think about human rights in China and where we have deep concerns.

**QUESTION:** And also the CCP’s banning intel on AMD sales – their chips. How does the U.S. protect American companies in this regard doing business with China?

**MR MILLER:** Let me take that one back and get you an answer.

Go ahead.

**QUESTION:** Thank you very much. Coming back to the Moscow attack, *The**New York Times* reported today that the United States did not provide Moscow with all the information it had about the threat of the attack because it didn’t want to disclose its sources and methods. Do you believe the warning Washington provided to Moscow contained all the details about the attack?

**MR MILLER:** So I am not going to speak to intelligence information from here. I think that’s – I’ve always made that pretty clear. But what I’ll say is that we provided clear, detailed information to Russian authorities about terrorist threat – terrorist threats against large gatherings and concerts – notable word – in Moscow, and unfortunately I have to leave it at that.

**QUESTION:** One more question. There are media reports in Russia and Ukraine that Victoria Nuland had to resign because of an imminent investigation about her activity in Ukraine since 2014. Do you have anything on that?

**MR MILLER:** That – yeah, that is absolutely false. And I know Toria has long been a boogeyman for the Russian Government; it’s not the first time they’ve propagated disinformation against her. I guess I might have thought it would stop with her departure from the State Department, but maybe I’m surprised that it hasn’t. No, that is absolutely false.

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

(The briefing was concluded at 2:04 p.m.)

# # #

**Department Press Briefing Index**

**Thursday, March 28, 2024**

**1:18 p.m. EDT**

**Briefer: Spokesperson Matthew Miller**

**~****RUSSIA/NORTH KOREA/CHINA****~**

**~****ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES****~**

**~****RUSSIA/UKRAINE****~**

**~****ARMENIA****~**

**~****IRAN****~**

**~****AFGHANISTAN****~**

**~****ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES/REGION****~**

**~****AFGHANISTAN****~**

**~****VENEZUELA****~**

**~****COLOMBIA/ARGENTINA****~**

**~****HAITI****~**

**~****CHINA****~**

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATEDEPARTMENT PRESS BRIEFING

DPB # 35

MARCH 28, 2024(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)

Briefer: Matthew Miller, Spokesperson

1:18 p.m. EDT

**MR MILLER:** The United States is deeply disappointed by Russia’s veto of the United Nations Security Council 1718 Committee Panel of Experts mandate renewal. We are also disappointed that the People’s Republic of China decided to abstain after 14 years of supporting this important mandate.

For the past 15 years, the 1718 Committee Panel of Experts has been the gold standard for providing fact-based, independent analysis and recommendations on the implementation of UN sanctions on the DPRK. Throughout those 15 years, the panel of experts enjoyed the Security Council’s unanimous support, and up until this year has been renewed by consensus. Russia’s actions today have cynically undermined international peace and security, all to advance the corrupt bargain that Moscow has struck with the DPRK. Moscow appears to be intent on facilitating the DPRK’s illegal pursuit of weapons of mass destruction, and its veto today was a self-interested effort to bury the panel’s reporting on its own collusion with the DPRK to secure weapons that it can use to further its aggression against Ukraine.

Russia alone will own the outcome of this veto: a DPRK more emboldened to reckless behavior and destabilizing provocations, as well as reduced prospects for an enduring peace on the Korean Peninsula.

Despite today’s veto and abstention, all Security Council resolutions and UN measures addressing the DPRK’s unlawful WMD and ballistic missile programs remain in effect. We will continue to work to counter the DPRK’s unlawful actions, work with likeminded states through all available means to limit the threat posed by the DPRK, and respond to efforts by its enablers to shield the DPRK from responsibility.

And with that, Shaun.

**QUESTION:** Sure, let me follow up on that to begin with. You say Russia alone will own the outcome of the veto. Could you explain a little bit about what do you mean by that? Obviously, you’re saying that Russia has a self-interest in this, but do you think there are any repercussions? Is there anything that the U.S. or elsewhere is going to do to enforce the sanctions a bit more after this?

**MR MILLER:** So the sanctions will continue to be in effect, as I said. But unfortunately, this important panel has not seen its mandate renewed. And we will continue to work to secure information about the DPRK’s pursuit of illegal weapons, and we will continue to work to make that information public and make it available to other members of the Security Council. But I think what we’ve seen by – as a result of Russia’s or what we will see as a result of Russia’s actions today is a DPRK that’s emboldened. It continues to be largely isolated in the world, but we are in a different place than when you had Russia and China voting to uphold accountability for the DPRK. And now you’ve seen a Russia that has cut this bargain with the DPRK because it’s in desperate need of weapons to pursue its aggression against Ukraine. And then you saw today one of the ways that Russia is delivering on its end of the bargain with the DPRK, which is try to undercut what had been up until now unanimous United Nations Security Council actions.

**QUESTION:** Just to follow up on that, I know that the U.S. has publicly spoken of cooperation between the DPRK and Russia. Is it your view that this will actually pave the way for a greater cooperation? There are reports that the Russian spy chief was in Pyongyang – I think it was this week, even. Is there concern that – in light of this that there will be greater military cooperation?

**MR MILLER:** I don’t think that what happened today paves the way for greater DPRK-Russia cooperation. I think today – what happened today is an example of greater DPRK-Russia cooperation. We saw that cooperation kick off last year when they began having – when there began to be increased talks between the two, and then of course we’ve seen the DPRK transfer military equipment to Russia that has shown up on the battlefield in Ukraine. It’s been used by Russia to further its war against Ukraine. And we’ve been waiting to see how the – Russia – see some of the ways that Russia would hold up its end of the bargain. I think we saw one of them today.

**QUESTION:** Sure. Maybe I can switch topics, unless somebody else has the DPRK. I was wondering if you have a reaction to the ICJ, the International Court of Justice, just today on Israel, saying that Israel must ensure urgent humanitarian assistance, and that famine has already set in in Gaza.

**MR MILLER:** So that order, to my understanding, was just issued in the last hour. Our team is reviewing it right now, so I don’t have a detailed reaction to the full text of the order. It’s something we want to review before we give that reaction. But as a general proposition, of course, increasing humanitarian assistance to Gaza is something that we support, and something that we have urged Israel to help facilitate. So that general conclusion is very much something we agree with, but as it pertains to the exact text of the order, I want to give the team time here to look through it before I respond in detail.

**QUESTION:** Just one more for me, and I know you just said that you want time to review it, but is it – the word “binding” again, but the International Court of Justice, is it – is it the view of the United States that Israel must comply with this, that it must do more?

**MR MILLER:** Again, having not even reviewed the order myself and knowing that there is a team reviewing, I don’t want to respond until we’ve had a chance to do that.

**QUESTION:** I mean, just to follow up on that, can you say that in principle you are —

**MR MILLER:** In principle, of course, we support the work of the ICJ. But I don’t know if this – I just haven’t reviewed the exact text to know how it applies in this instance, so I’m obviously loath to comment on it for that reason.

**QUESTION:** I see, okay. We might come back to this, but just on – do you have a reaction on the new Palestinian cabinet that’s been announced? Is it – what do you think about it? Because U.S. has called for reform of the Palestinian Authority. Looking at the list and the fact that new prime – a new cabinet has been announced, is this something that the United States welcomes?

**MR MILLER:** So we have long urged the Palestinian Authority to form a reformed cabinet with new leadership. You’ve heard the Secretary speak to this during his travels in the region. And so now that the PA has appointed a new cabinet, we will be looking to this new government to deliver on policies and implement credible and far-reaching reforms. It’s something we’ve spoken to a number of times, our belief that a reformed PA is essential to delivering results for the Palestinian people and establishing the conditions for stability in both the West Bank and Gaza. So we will engage with this government based on its actions. We’ll be closely tracking the steps it takes to advance the key reforms and look forward to engaging with them on that matter.

**QUESTION:** Can you get into what the specific reforms you’re hoping for actually look like?

**MR MILLER:** So in – I’m not going to get into specific reforms, but broadly speaking we have encouraged them to implement reforms that crack down on corruption. We have encouraged them to implement reforms that increase transparency, that increase media freedoms, and increase the ability for civil society to engage with the government.

**QUESTION:** And you said you’re looking for them to – I think you said, like, act on policy. Like, which policies are you hoping that they act —

**MR MILLER:** Well, that’s why – just the ones I just referred to.

**QUESTION:** Those ones.

**MR MILLER:** Yeah, those.

**QUESTION:** Okay.

**MR MILLER:** But also I think it’s important – so we’ve always believed that the PA needed to be a government that was fully representative of the Palestinian people in the West Bank and in Gaza. I do note that there are Palestinians from Gaza who are members of this new cabinet. We have always made clear that we’re not going to pass judgement on specific individuals; that’s not for the United States to do. That – those are decisions for the Palestinian people, but we do welcome them taking steps to make a cabinet that is fully representative of the Palestinian people. And now we will look – look to them to implement policies that follow up on reform and deliver on the demands that we have heard over and over from the Palestinian people.

Said.

**QUESTION:** Thank you. Thank you, Matt. I hope you indulge me, and my colleagues. I want to go back to —

**MR MILLER:** I always indulge you, Said.

**QUESTION:** I know you do.

**MR MILLER:** I think, but I don’t know if that means —

**QUESTION:** Maybe —

**MR MILLER:** I don’t know if that means 14 questions are coming.

**QUESTION:** That is true. Maybe I —

**MR MILLER:** Maybe not that – maybe not that much indulgence.

**QUESTION:** Yeah, maybe I have more this time around. Anyway, I want to go back to the issue of the Albanese report yesterday, and you said that she made some antisemitic statements and so on in the past. Can you share those statements with us?

**MR MILLER:** I can. I didn’t actually think this was a controversial statement.

**QUESTION:** Okay.

**MR MILLER:** She made a remark at one point referring to the Jewish lobby controlling America, and in fact expressed regret for that remark afterwards. So that’s what I was referring to.

**QUESTION:** But the – I think the term that was – she was accused for is when she used the term Shoah for Nakba, which is exactly – that’s the word —

**MR MILLER:** So Said, I – hold on. I will – I’m not referring to anyone else’s comments.

**QUESTION:** Right.

**MR MILLER:** And I – that’s not what I was referring to.

**QUESTION:** That’s what she – I understand.

**MR MILLER:** So —

**QUESTION:** But the comment that she made, she said Shoah is Nakba in Arabic, which is exactly what it is.

**MR MILLER:** Said —

**QUESTION:** I mean, it’s a catastrophe.

**MR MILLER:** Said, I am not —

**QUESTION:** So – all right.

**MR MILLER:** I’m not even familiar with the comment you’re referring to —

**QUESTION:** Okay.

**MR MILLER:** — and that’s not what I was referring to in my remarks.

**QUESTION:** That’s fine. Okay, so let me – you also said that you disagree with the position itself, that you – you’re not – you don’t approve having that position in the United Nations. Why not?

**MR MILLER:** We have been very clear that the – that we do not believe genocide has taken place. We do not believe that’s an appropriate term or constructive one to use in this instance.

**QUESTION:** So let me ask you something. Is there a reasonable definition of genocide that would include what happened in Bosnia or to the Rohingya and at the same time exclude what is happening in Gaza?

**MR MILLER:** So, Said, the definition of genocide is one that is well —

**QUESTION:** Okay.

**MR MILLER:** — hold on, hold on – well-founded in international humanitarian law.

**QUESTION:** Right.

**MR MILLER:** And if you look at the position that the department’s legal advisors laid out before the —

**QUESTION:** Right.

**MR MILLER:** — ICJ, they do go through this chapter and verse. I’m not going to repeat all of it here from the podium. I obviously don’t have the filing with me, but you can look where we do go through exactly why we don’t believe genocide is an appropriate term to use in this – in this regard.

**QUESTION:** Okay. Although many countries in the world now are more and more using the term. In fact, France said that they would probably try the soldiers that served in this war for war crimes that they have committed if they are involved. But anyway, let me ask you about a couple of other things, if you allow me. The Canadian minister of – I’m sorry – a Canadian minister said that the United States implored them to continue aiding UNRWA. Can you confirm that, that the ambassador to the UN actually implored the Canadians to continue aiding UNRWA?

**MR MILLER:** I am not going to get into private diplomatic conversations, but we have always made clear that we think the work that UNRWA does is important —

**QUESTION:** Right.

**MR MILLER:** — that we support the – hold on; I see you – I see the —

**QUESTION:** No, I’m with you, I’m with you, I’m with you.

**MR MILLER:** I see the interruption coming, so sorry to – sorry —

**QUESTION:** It’s just my habit. That’s okay.

**MR MILLER:** That’s fine; I understand. We have always made – (laughter) – sorry – we have always made clear that we support the work that UNRWA does, and we have always made clear that it’s important that that work not be interrupted, even though we were – we thought it was appropriate on behalf of the United States to suspend our funding. Now, of course, that funding has been blocked going forward. So we have engaged with other countries about different ways to ensure that the delivery of humanitarian assistance to the Palestinian people is not interrupted, that it continues.

And again, I think you have to go back to something I said before that’s been lost a little bit. When we suspended our funding, we only had an upcoming funding of about – an upcoming payment of about $300,000 coming, not a major – when you look at the overall funding that we provide, it was not a major amount of money that we were providing any time before this summer anyway. So we have been working with other countries to make sure that that work can continue unimpeded.

**QUESTION:** So by the way, I mean, this suspension – now that something is blocked, does that make the investigation or waiting on the investigation moot? Does it make the issue moot?

**MR MILLER:** So with respect to a question of U.S. funding, it’s now blocked. That’s an act of Congress —

**QUESTION:** So you have —

**MR MILLER:** — and you —

**QUESTION:** You’re not waiting on the results?

**MR MILLER:** Hold on, hold on, hold on. It would – the members of Congress, I’m sure, will want to see the results of that investigation and decide what they might do in future funding cycles. But certainly, we want to see the results of that investigation as well, and should note that other countries have said they want to see it and the UN itself, which commissioned this investigation on its own accord, has made very clear that they think it’s important that they see – that they get timely – a timely, full accounting of what that investigation shows.

**QUESTION:** And finally, I promise, an Israeli officer —

**MR MILLER:** That wasn’t too – that’s not too many, Said. Go ahead.

**QUESTION:** All right. So that was –

**MR MILLER:** No, no.

**QUESTION:** Anyway, an Israeli officer said that Israel engaged in waste of – or over-bombing and so on. He said we could have done the same thing with 10 percent of the kind of destruction that they levied on Gaza. Have you seen that report and do you —

**MR MILLER:** I have – haven’t seen that comment. I’m not sure I follow, Said.

**QUESTION:** No, he’s saying that Israel engaged in obvious overkill in terms of the amount of bombing, the waste, and the destruction of urban areas, and so on; they could have done exactly the same thing with 10 percent of the destruction.

**MR MILLER:** So I —

**QUESTION:** Have you seen that report? And maybe you all have to take a look at it again.

**MR MILLER:** I have not seen that specific comment, but obviously we have urged the Government of Israel to take every step that it possibly can to minimize harm to civilians and minimize harm to civilian infrastructure.

**QUESTION:** Okay. Thank you.

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

**QUESTION:** May I go back to Russia, please?

**MR MILLER:** Sure.

**QUESTION:** Thanks so much. Starting from Kirby’s statements this morning, he revealed very interesting details about communications between Washington and Moscow in the run-up to last week’s attack. He said that there was a written warning to Russians early last month, and he also said it was one from multiple warnings since last September. I was hoping you could help us unpack a little bit how many terror attacks you believe you have prevented in Russia from happening? How many people’s lives you have saved, do you think? Were they all about ISIS threat? And finally, why do you think that they chose not to act on this very knowledge?

**MR MILLER:** I think you’re going to be disappointed in my answer, because unfortunately I’m not able to provide further information. As usual, when it comes to information that we are able to declassify and make public, there is a limit of what we can say to protect sources and methods, and that’s very much the case here.

What I can say is what the admiral said this morning, which is we did on March 7th provide a warning to Moscow. We provide clear, detailed information about the terrorist threat to large gatherings, including concerts. We then, the next day, put out a public warning urging citizens to avoid large gatherings, and that was not the first warning that we’ve given to Russia.

Now, when it comes to why they didn’t take any action or why they didn’t take sufficient action or whether they could have taken sufficient action, I just can’t speak to that.

**QUESTION:** So they chose not to take an action and to start blaming —

**MR MILLER:** No, that’s not what – that’s not what I said.

**QUESTION:** Right, right. Yeah, but the reality is that they didn’t act on that knowledge.

**MR MILLER:** They didn’t prevent the – they didn’t – certainly didn’t, obviously didn’t prevent the terrorist attack, but I can’t speak to any actions they —

**QUESTION:** Right. Then they start blaming Ukraine and the U.S., and then today they said they have established facts that there was some funding involved from Ukraine. Do you – how do you square those circles? So what is the intention there, and do you think that this was deliberate approach from Russia from get-go?

**MR MILLER:** A deliberate what from Russia?

**QUESTION:** Approach, like policy to – when they receive that knowledge, they decided to build around it some new —

**MR MILLER:** So I don’t think there’s any circle that needs to be squared here. I think the Russian Government is putting forward propaganda and disinformation. I think that’s been very clear, that they are trying to use this terrorist attack – this tragic incident, where we saw, unfortunately, Russian citizens killed – to justify their aggression in Ukraine. And if underlying facts don’t actually matter, they’re going to make up supposed facts to back up what they want to do. That’s what they’ve done really since the outset of this war, and sadly that’s what they’re doing here.

**QUESTION:** Thank you. Matt, on Evan Gershkovich, tomorrow is the first-year anniversary of his arrest. Kirby today confirmed that we are trying to still discuss with Russians some options to get him out of Russian jail. Is there any active offer from the U.S. since last December – they rejected the one – that they haven’t responded yet?

**MR MILLER:** I’m just not – I have never spoken in that level of our detail about our work to secure the release of either Evan Gershkovich or Paul Whelan, and I’m not going to do so today.

**QUESTION:** And a final one, if I may, on Armenia. We discussed yesterday Azerbaijan’s reaction and you responded to that, but Russia is also – seems to have been uneasy about this meeting. Zakharova today (inaudible) around what the Azeris said yesterday, that it was divisive. She said that the West is trying to, quote/unquote, create new rifts in the region and forcing the countries in the region to follow anti-Russian line. So what is your response to the comments?

**MR MILLER:** So I would say if anything the – some of the turbulence we have seen in the region has been fueled by Russia’s actions over the past few months.

With respect to this meeting in Brussels, as I said yesterday, it is to focus on economic resilience for Armenia as it works to diversify its trade partnerships and address humanitarian needs, and nothing else.

**QUESTION:** Thank you.

**MR MILLER:** Guita.

**QUESTION:** Matt, on Wednesday 11 women human rights activists in – were sentenced to 60 years of – a total of 60 years of imprisonment in Iran. I was wondering if you have any comments on that.

**MR MILLER:** So we condemn the Iranian regime’s use of harsh sentences for women’s rights activists that are meant to intimidate them and suppress their voices. As Iran’s leadership continues its violent crackdown on any dissent, they should know that the world is watching. Ongoing, widespread reports of torture, forced confessions, and restrictions on legal counsel undermine any shred of credibility in the decisions handed down by Iranian courts.

And the United States continues to coordinate with our allies and partners to condemn these sham trials and to pursue accountability for Iran’s human rights abuses, and we will continue to take action to support the people of Iran in practical ways – both seen and unseen – in coordination with our allies and partners.

**QUESTION:** Thank you.

**MR MILLER:** Yeah.

**QUESTION:** Thanks. On Afghanistan, the family of American citizen detained by the Taliban, Ryan Corbett, released a statement this week, saying that they have received a disturbing phone call from him, in which the family says it was clear that his mental and physical health is significantly deteriorating. CBS News interviewed the family in December last year, where they highlighted the same concern about his health. And I believe at the time, envoy Tom West was – he did have a meeting with the Taliban. I was wondering if you could update us on any talks between the U.S. and the Taliban with Tom West or otherwise.

**MR MILLER:** Let me just first say, with respect to the family, that as is always the case when you think about people who have their loved ones being wrongfully detained overseas, I cannot imagine the pain that they’re going through and the grief that they’re suffering and how difficult it must be knowing that their loved one is going through such a tragic hardship. And so what I can say to the family and what I can say to the American public on behalf of this government is that we are working every day to try and bring Ryan Corbett home.

We have continually pressed, including in our meetings with Taliban representatives, for the immediate and unconditional release of Ryan Corbett and other Americans detained in Afghanistan. We have made clear to the Taliban that these detentions are a significant obstacle to positive engagement, and we will continue to do that. We are using every lever we can to try to bring Ryan and these other wrongfully detained Americans home from Afghanistan.

Yeah.

**QUESTION:** Matt, I don’t know if you saw the reports in the Politico two hours ago about the day after, Gaza day after, and the talks between the U.S. and regional partners. And according to the report, quoting U.S. official, that there’s two ideas that gaining traction. One is to form a multinational task force and the second one is to form a peacekeeping Palestinian force. But my question is, if you can answer to this that – is the Palestinian Authority included in these talks?

**MR MILLER:** So I’m not going to speak to private diplomatic conversations or speak to what it sounds like are reported – anonymous comments from reported officials inside the United States Government. What I will say is that what the United States has made clear – and the Secretary first made this clear in a speech in Tokyo last November – is that there are a few principles that we want to see applied to when the conflict ends. And one of those is that the Palestinian Authority should govern both Gaza and the West Bank. We want to see a united West Bank and Gaza that is governed by the Palestinian people through the Palestinian Authority.

So we have engaged in talks with partner countries in the region, and we have engaged in talks with the Palestinian Authority about exactly what that might look like. And as you might imagine, there are a number of different proposals on the table. I won’t go into those here for probably obvious reasons. But yes, we have engaged with both the Palestinian Authority and with countries in the region about the full panoply of post-conflict issues that Gaza will face.

**QUESTION:** We – and you said before from your podium that countries in the region are committed to Gaza the day after, but they want something from Israel, to be committed, for example, to the two-state solution, all that. Israeli leadership still won’t commit to this. Is there any update on your talk with the Israelis about that? Do you – are you being able to push them beyond their public stance?

**MR MILLER:** So I don’t have any update to offer. Obviously they’ve spoken to this on a number of occasions. But the work that we have been doing with our Arab partners is to put together not just a kind of nebulous idea, but a concrete proposal of what this would look like, of what post-conflict governance would look like, both as it pertains to security in Gaza and the rebuilding and reconstruction of Gaza and a political path forward for the Palestinian people that answers their very legitimate aspirations.

As part of that, we have had discussions with Saudi Arabia about how to further integrate Israel with its neighbors, including with Saudi Arabia, and those are discussions that are ongoing as well. So that work continues. But at some point, our goal is very much to have something to put forward, to put it on the table for Israel to look at. And until we get to that point – and it’s something we’re working hard on every day – I don’t want to sort of speculate about what decisions might look like.

Yeah.

**QUESTION:** Yeah. Matt, what role will the Palestinian Authority play in the operation of the pier in Gaza in two or three weeks?

**MR MILLER:** So I would defer to the Pentagon to that question. They are the lead in the construction of this pier. And I would – for that sort of detail, I would defer to them.

**QUESTION:** But do you want the PA to play any role there?

**MR MILLER:** Again, I would defer to the Pentagon for that question. The PA is not currently operating in Gaza. I know they’ve had employees that were in Gaza, but of course the PA has not been the governing authority in Gaza for some time. So when it comes to any kind of concrete role in that – in the operation of the pier, in the delivery of humanitarian assistance, like I said, I’d have to defer to the Pentagon.

**QUESTION:** Can I follow up on this particular issue?

**MR MILLER:** Sure.

**QUESTION:** It is said that the Israelis have agreed to actually provide security for the operation of the pier. Are you aware of that?

**MR MILLER:**I’ve seen those reports. I don’t have any confirmation of them.

Yeah, go ahead.

**QUESTION:**A couple of weeks ago I asked you about repeated instances of Israeli soldiers rifling through and parading women’s underwear. Especially in light of ongoing allegations of sexual abuse against Israeli soldiers and allegations that they tortured and sexually abused UNRWA staffers in order to coerce false confessions, I’m wondering – since then we’ve heard troubling details of these allegations, including soldiers sticking electrified rods up people’s anuses. We’ve continued to see not single-digit but now piles of photos and videos of soldiers parading through women’s underwear. So I’m wondering, what are the updates on those instances we talked about a few weeks ago? And what is the update now that this keeps seemingly happening unabated?

**MR MILLER:**So I would say whenever we see these reports we make clear to the Israeli Government what we make clear publicly, which is that they need to be investigated and, if appropriate, there needs to be accountability.

And I would refer to you – to a comment that the IDF advocate general – Major General Yifat Tomer-Yerushalmi, who I believe is the chief investigator for the IDF, said several weeks ago in a letter when she wrote and said that she had encountered actions by IDF soldiers that “do not meet IDF values, that deviate from orders and disciplinary boundaries – and have crossed the criminal threshold,” causing “strategic damage” to Israel in the international area. “These acts and statements, on the part of individuals who do” represent the – “These acts and statements, on the part of individuals who do represent the collective... have no place in the IDF.” And you saw the chief of staff of the IDF, Herzi Halevi, say, “We must be careful not to use force where it is not required, to distinguish between a terrorist and... who [is] not, not to take anything that is not ours — a souvenir or weapons — and not to film revenge videos.”

So the IDF has made very clear itself – this isn’t the United States speaking – that they do see – they have seen inappropriate actions take place by IDF soldiers, and they need to be investigated, and those responsible need to be held accountable. And we would very much agree with that.

**QUESTION:**And then on the sexual abuse allegations, any sort of update on —

**MR MILLER:**I don’t have any update on those —

**QUESTION:**Okay.

**MR MILLER:**— what I understand are ongoing investigations.

**QUESTION:**And just on the assurances, earlier you said after receiving assurances from Israel that they’re not violating humanitarian law, the U.S. so far has not seen proof of that. I’m wondering what these assurances look like, because we have all seen proof from the International Court of Justice, from the United Nations, and from footage especially the past few weeks, over and over again, of Israel seemingly targeting civilians, hospitals, churches – footage even yesterday showing Israeli forces seeming to execute unarmed Palestinians waving white flags. They’re blocking aid to the point that the U.S. is trying to build a pier to deliver aid as if Israel is a belligerent and not an ally. So with all this, how is Israel not violating humanitarian law? Are these assurances just Israel saying that they promise they’re not, and they evidently continue to do so?

**MR MILLER:**So I – so I spoke to this extensively on Monday and Tuesday, and I would encourage you to check the transcript. I’ll do a little bit of it again, but I don’t think – I think I will spare everyone else here 15 or 20 minutes of me in vain on the national security memo again. But what I will say is we received assurances from the Government of Israel that are consistent with the requirements of the national security memo now, but I think to your underlying question, we look at those assurances through a lens of the ongoing processes that we have to answer this very question. And we do have – we do have processes going on examining specific incidents in the conduct of the campaign, and those processes are ongoing. They’ve not reached a final determination at this point.

Yeah.

**QUESTION:**Thank you, Matt. I’m wondering if you have any reaction and comments about the Hamas leader visit to Iran and what he said about Israel. He said that Israel is losing the international community’s support, and he took the UN Security resolution as an evidence that Israel is losing support. Do you have any reaction and comment on that?

**MR MILLER:**So I’m not going to respond broadly to something that a leader of Hamas said, but I would say with respect to the UN Security Council resolution, we’ve made very clear our position on that resolution, which is we think it is consistent with our longstanding – not think – it is consistent with our longstanding position that there ought to be a ceasefire linked to the release of hostages. And that’s what we have believed Israel’s position to be as well.

**QUESTION:**And do you any sense that Israel is losing the international community’s support because they are not following the UN Security Council resolution?

**MR MILLER:**Look, I think if you look around the world, there are a number of countries who have not supported Israel’s action from the beginning. I think that’s been pretty clear and not at all in dispute. And then there have been countries like the United States that have backed Israel’s right to defend itself while at times disagreeing with certain ways they went about this campaign and calling on them to do more to both protect civilians and deliver – increase the delivery of humanitarian assistance to those civilians.

**QUESTION:**Thank you, sir. According to some media reports, India has submitted the findings of the attempted murder of a Sikh human rights lawyer, Gurpatwant Singh Pannun, in New York. Could you share some details, please?

**MR MILLER:**I will have to get back to you. I’m not – I have not seen those reports.

**QUESTION:**Sir, after the attack in Moscow, officials are warning that the group has also set its sights on Western targets. How would you respond to the threat posed by ISIS?

**MR MILLER:**That it has set its sights on what?

**QUESTION:**Sir, how you —

**MR MILLER:**No, I missed the – I missed the middle part there of the buildup to the question.

**QUESTION:**Sir – sir, intelligence reports that officials are warning that the group has also set to – set its sights on Western targets. How would you respond to the threats posed by ISIS?

**MR MILLER:**On Western targets. Oh, I see. I’m sorry; I apologize. So we remain vigilant against the evolving threat posed by terrorist groups, including ISIS-K. We have maintained an unwavering focus on terrorism since the President took office three years ago, working both unilaterally and with our partners to successfully disrupt threats around the globe and degrade ISIS. In addition, in February 2022, operating on the President’s orders, U.S. military forces successfully targeted Haji Abdullah, the leader of ISIS, later that year. At the President’s direction, the United States successfully concluded an airstrike in Kabul, Afghanistan, that killed the emir of a different terrorist group, al-Qaida – Ayman al-Zawahiri. And we will continue to work to hold ISIS accountable for its actions and to prevent terrorist attacks against the United States and other Western countries.

**QUESTION:** Sir, the main hideouts of these terrorist groups are based in Afghanistan, and United States always said that it will continue to have the ability to target terrorists in Afghanistan who pose a threat to American interests. So is there any action expected on this?

**MR MILLER:** So we remain committed to ensuring that Afghanistan can never again be a launching pad for terrorism, and we continue to push the Taliban to fulfill all of their counterterrorism commitments to the international community. We have made clear to the Taliban that it is their responsibility to ensure that they give no safe haven to terrorists, whether it be al-Qaida or ISIS-K or any other terrorist organization. And we remain vigilant against the evolving threat of these terrorist groups, and our Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS and the C5+1 help intensify our efforts to monitor terrorist threats from the region and prevent terrorists’ ability to raise funds, travel, and spread propaganda.

Shaun, go ahead.

**QUESTION:** Sure. A couple other issues. Venezuela. I saw that you issued a statement last night on this, on the opposition’s struggle to field a candidate against Maduro. Are you under the impression that this violates the understandings in Barbados, the Norwegian-brokered understandings? And what does this mean about a potential snapback of sanctions on this?

**MR MILLER:** So I would say that we remain deeply concerned – and it’s not just the United States that’s deeply concerned, it’s our regional partners who share this concern about decisions by the Venezuelan National Electoral Council to prevent opposition parties from registering candidates for the upcoming presidential election. We are going to continue to make clear to Maduro and his representatives that there needs to be – they need to ensure international observer access, they need to end the jailing and harassment of civil society members, and they need to allow a free and fair election.

And then, as we have made clear, actions that run counter to the letter and the spirit of the Barbados Agreement will have consequences. We’ve spoken to that. We’ve spoken to the fact that there’s a general license that expires next month. I’m not going to make any determinations from here about how – about what decision we will take then, but we have been very clear with the – with Maduro and his representatives about what we expect them to take and what the consequences could be if they don’t.

**QUESTION:** Just a brief follow-up. Not to put words in your mouth, but are you saying that there’s no determination – there’s no determination from here as of now what decision you’ll take? Is there still time, basically? I mean, could they still – is there still time for —

**MR MILLER:** So the only thing I’ll say is we’ve made clear that that general license with respect to oil expires in April, and you heard us say some months ago that that’s an important date to watch. We allowed another general license to expire and not be renewed – I think it was one for gold – and there’s a big one coming up for oil. And that continues to be an important date, and we’re going to be watching the – Maduro’s actions and making determinations about how we will proceed.

**QUESTION:** Just a couple more. Don’t know if this is something you’re following, but tensions between Colombia and Argentina.

**MR MILLER:** (Laughter.) I have been following that, yeah.

**QUESTION:** Oh, okay. That makes two of us. The —

**MR MILLER:** It’s not the same as saying I’m going to have anything to say about it.

**QUESTION:** Right. I wasn’t —

**MR MILLER:** But I have been following it. (Laughter.)

**QUESTION:** Right. I wasn’t counting on it. But what do you make of it? I mean, the letters and the chronology. The president of Argentina, President Milei, said that President Petro is, quote, “a terrorist” and Colombia has expelled diplomats. Does the – has the U.S. been – has friendly relations with both countries. Has the U.S. been dealing at all with this?

**MR MILLER:** So I think I’m going to stay out of this one. This is ultimately an issue between Colombia and Argentina. I will say that we, as you noted, maintain strong relations with both of them, and we support continued dialogue and diplomatic relations between both sides. But as to this specific dispute, I think I will refrain from commenting.

**QUESTION:** And you’re going to stay out of the actual remarks, how he characterizes Petro?

**MR MILLER:** Yes, I think that would be wise.

**QUESTION:** Just one – just one more before I yield. Do you have anything more to say about Niger after yesterday? Anything more on —

**MR MILLER:** No, it’s something that we continue to work on and we continue to engage with the CNSP, but I don’t have an update.

Yeah.

**QUESTION:** Thanks, Matt. Can you give us any indication or awareness of the – of Haiti’s transitional presidential council being closer to formation? I believe eight members have been chosen of what’s supposed to be a nine-member council. And any update on U.S. plans for further evacuations of Americans from Haiti?

**MR MILLER:** So on the first, you may have seen that they issued a statement yesterday. We were encouraged to see the transitional presidential council release its first statement. We hope that the council will continue to work to take the steps they outlined in that statement, including finalizing their organization and operation, appointing an interim prime minister, and taking steps to restore order to Haiti. Ultimately, as we’ve said, these are decisions for Haitians to make. We will continue to work with CARICOM and our partners in the region to offer our support for them as they go through this process.

And then with respect to facilitating the departure of American citizens, let me first give you an update on the numbers. We now have successfully evacuated or facilitated the departure of somewhere around 450 U.S. citizens since March 17th. That includes over 300 that have departed Port-au-Prince and almost a hundred from Cap-Haïtien. There are helicopters that are going today from Port-au-Prince to Santo Domingo, and we continue to explore other alternatives and other options to get American citizens out of Haiti. But I don’t have any announcements today, but we’re going to continue to work on that and may have more to say tomorrow or over the weekend.

**QUESTION:** Thank you.

**MR MILLER:** Yeah.

**QUESTION:** Thank you very much, Matt. My first question is about Congress has asked the Assistant Secretary Donald Lu to send the Pakistani – U.S. ambassador in Pakistan, Mr. Blome, to meet Imran Khan. Any update when he’s meeting?

**MR MILLER:** Congress asked? Who in Congress?

**QUESTION:** You know the congressional hearing where Mr. Donald Lu had appeared?

**MR MILLER:** I remember that, yeah. I just – usually “Congress” means like an act of Congress. I – did you mean like a member of Congress, or —

**QUESTION:** Yes, yes. Couple of member of Congress have asked the assistant secretary that the U.S. ambassador should go and meet Imran Khan in jail to see how he is, what’s the situation.

**MR MILLER:** I don’t have any updates on meetings by the ambassador.

**QUESTION:** Okay. Just one more thing: 6,000 scholarships each year the U.S. gives to Pakistani students, and not a single complaint has ever been seen. All students are taken on merit; it’s amazing. But since the lady who you have called milestone – because I carry these values from the high school and university here from the U.S., so that’s why I do get upset at times when you use terms like “milestone” for corrupt people. This principal in Pakistan —

**MR MILLER:** Sorry – I’m sorry to have upset you.

**QUESTION:** Yes, it does – Michael Thompson, a principal at a university, a college in Lahore where the milestone lady that you call is the chief minister there, he just resigned there because one of her favorite try to waive off his son’s tuition fee. The principal, an Australian principal working in Lahore – isn’t this shameful? Like – and should you be calling milestone to people —

**MR MILLER:** I could not possibly have a comment on that situation.

Go ahead in the back.

**QUESTION:** Thank you, Matt.

**MR MILLER:** I’ll come to you next. In the back.

**QUESTION:** Okay. The United —

**MR MILLER:** No, no, behind you. Sorry, I’ll come to – I’ll come to you next.

**QUESTION:** Okay.

**MR MILLER:** Back of the room. You’re halfway through.

**QUESTION:** Okay. The United States approval of limited operation in Rafah acts as a green light for Israel to start a military operation in Rafah. This is seen as a step back in the U.S. stance, which – affecting its image and credibility. What’s your comment, please?

**MR MILLER:** I think that’s a bit of a mischaracterization of what we’ve said with respect to Rafah. First of all, we have always made clear that we support Israel’s right to hold Hamas accountable and its right to take the fight to Hamas operatives inside Gaza, including in Rafah. But what we have said is that we think that there is a better way to do that than the full-scale operation that Israel has said it’s contemplating, and we look forward to having a conversation in the coming days with Israel to lay out what those options could look like and what that better path could look like. We have always made clear, though, that whatever kind of military operation that Israel conducts, whether it be in Rafah, whether it be in Khan Younis, or whether it be anywhere else, needs to take into account the civilian population and minimize civilian harm to the population in those communities.

**QUESTION:** Excuse me.

**MR MILLER:** Yeah.

**QUESTION:** There is the guarantee that civilian will not affected or not dangerous, their lives?

**MR MILLER:** Look, I think it’s – I mean, it’s obviously in any war impossible to make a guarantee. What we want to see is civilian harm minimized to the maximum extent possible, and so that means putting – designing military campaigns around protecting civilians first. It’s one thing the Secretary has made clear in his conversations with the Government of Israel that they ought to do, and at the same time – it’s a separate issue but it’s very much connected – making sure that they do everything to facilitate the delivery of humanitarian assistance so that those civilians who do remain in Rafah or anywhere else inside Gaza have access to food and water and medicine and shelter that they need to survive in what is obviously a very difficult situation in the middle of an open war.

**QUESTION:** Okay, excuse me, I want to ask you about the mission of the American military delegation to Tel Aviv, whether is an alternative visit of the Israeli military delegation to Washington D.C., and what the idea they carry, yeah, and there is headlines of – for this delegation.

**MR MILLER:** So with respect to a military delegation, I think my colleagues at the Pentagon are briefing in an hour, a little over an hour, and I would encourage you to submit that question to them. They should speak to that.

Go ahead.

**QUESTION:** Okay. Thank you.

**QUESTION:** Daniele Compatangelo for Italian Television. Oops. So that’s my question – United States – NATO under President Biden got more strong and Europe is happy about it, but there are talks in Europe. The – different government would like to create a European force that can support NATO and the U.S. So what would it be the answer from the U.S., from the State Department, if Europe would create a European – their own European forces to protect Europe?

**MR MILLER:** So I don’t want to speculate. We will continue to work with our European partners, but as you made clear in – I think the lead-in to your question, we have been very clear about the United States commitment to NATO, the United States commitment to our transatlantic Alliance, United States commitment to all of our allies in Europe, and we think it’s important that NATO be bolstered and expanded, as we have seen happen with the increase – with the increase in two members in the last year or so.

Go ahead.

**QUESTION:** Yeah, can I ask – can I ask —

**MR MILLER:** Yeah, go —

**QUESTION:** Yeah. Yeah, yeah, so they’re not against NATO. They actually – they would – this force would make NATO stronger.

**MR MILLER:** Yeah.

**QUESTION:** But the other question would be do – does the U.S. believe that Europe should be more active to protect themself, let’s say also helping more Ukraine, or be more active in the Mediterranean with the Middle East? Or should be done always together with the U.S.?

**MR MILLER:** So I think that’s an incredibly broad question that’s hard to answer in the time I have here.

**QUESTION:** Well, what can you say shortly?

**MR MILLER:** I would say that we want to work together with our European allies, but that doesn’t mean that they can’t do things outside of cooperation with the United States. But we share values and interests with those countries, and we work together, and sometimes they do things separately but that pursue our common goals. And we, of course, support that.

Go ahead.

**QUESTION:** Thank you. So about a dozen CEOs from American businessmen met with Xi Jinping yesterday. So the CCP has been notorious for linking silence with human rights abuses on a trade relationship. How does the United States ensure that human rights is the foundation of these trade relationships with China?

**MR MILLER:** So I will say that in all of our meetings with officials from the PRC we make clear where we have concerns about China’s human rights practices. We raise them consistently. That includes the Secretary, when he has met with his counterparts, and it includes other officials from the U.S. Government who make very clear what we think about human rights in China and where we have deep concerns.

**QUESTION:** And also the CCP’s banning intel on AMD sales – their chips. How does the U.S. protect American companies in this regard doing business with China?

**MR MILLER:** Let me take that one back and get you an answer.

Go ahead.

**QUESTION:** Thank you very much. Coming back to the Moscow attack, *The**New York Times* reported today that the United States did not provide Moscow with all the information it had about the threat of the attack because it didn’t want to disclose its sources and methods. Do you believe the warning Washington provided to Moscow contained all the details about the attack?

**MR MILLER:** So I am not going to speak to intelligence information from here. I think that’s – I’ve always made that pretty clear. But what I’ll say is that we provided clear, detailed information to Russian authorities about terrorist threat – terrorist threats against large gatherings and concerts – notable word – in Moscow, and unfortunately I have to leave it at that.

**QUESTION:** One more question. There are media reports in Russia and Ukraine that Victoria Nuland had to resign because of an imminent investigation about her activity in Ukraine since 2014. Do you have anything on that?

**MR MILLER:** That – yeah, that is absolutely false. And I know Toria has long been a boogeyman for the Russian Government; it’s not the first time they’ve propagated disinformation against her. I guess I might have thought it would stop with her departure from the State Department, but maybe I’m surprised that it hasn’t. No, that is absolutely false.

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

(The briefing was concluded at 2:04 p.m.)

# # #

Tags
AfghanistanArgentinaArmeniaChinaColombiaHaitiIsraelOffice of the SpokespersonPalestinian TerritoriesRussiaUkraineVenezuelaBack to Top- White House
- USA.gov
- Office of the Inspector General
- Archives
- Contact Us
follow usFacebookTwitterInstagramYouTubeFlickrGovDelivery- Privacy Policy
- Accessibility Statement
- Copyright Information
- FOIA
- No FEAR Act
U.S. Department *of* StateThe Lessons of 1989: Freedom and Our Future