# Ecuador - United States Department of State

- Ecuador HomeReportsBureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices&#8230;Ecuador				hide	document.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded", function(event) {	if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}});																							2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Ecuador																																					Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor																																																																																							Download Report																																																							Translations																																																																 In this section										/																							EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																																													EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																															Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person																																																									a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings																																																																											b. Disappearance																																																																											c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses																																																																			Prison and Detention Center Conditions																																																																																																																		d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention																																																																			Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees																																																																																																																		e. Denial of Fair Public Trial																																																																			Trial Procedures																																																								Political Prisoners and Detainees																																																																																																																		f. Transnational Repression																																																																											g. Property Seizure and Restitution																																																																											h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence																																																																																	Section 2. Respect for Civil Liberties																																																									a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media																																																																			Internet Freedom																																																																																																																		b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association																																																																			Freedom of Peaceful Assembly																																																																																																																		c. Freedom of Religion																																																																											d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country																																																																											e. Protection of Refugees																																																																																	Section 3. Freedom to Participate in the Political Process																																																									Elections and Political Participation																																																																																	Section 4. Corruption in Government																															Section 5. Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights																															Section 6. Discrimination and Societal Abuses																																																									Women																																																																											Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination																																																																											Indigenous Peoples																																																																											Children																																																																											Antisemitism																																																																											Trafficking in Persons																																																																											Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics																																																																											Persons with Disabilities																																																																											Other Societal Violence or Discrimination																																																																																	Section 7. Worker Rights																																																									a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining																																																																											b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor																																																																											c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment																																																																											d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																																																											e. Acceptable Conditions of Work																																																																																																							EXECUTIVE SUMMARY				There were no significant changes in the human rights situation in Ecuador during the year.Significant human rights issues included credible reports of: cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment by the government; harsh and life-threatening prison conditions; serious problems with the independence of the judiciary; serious restrictions on freedom of expression and media, including violence against journalists and the existence of criminal libel laws; serious government corruption; and extensive gender-based violence, including domestic or intimate partner violence, sexual violence, workplace violence, and femicide.The government took credible steps to identify and punish officials who may have committed human rights abuses.Violence, including killings, by criminal groups increased. Members of criminal gangs in prisons committed acts of torture and killed their rivals during prison disturbances. There were incidents of violence and threats of violence against politicians, journalists, prosecutors, and judges likely perpetrated by nongovernment actors. Members of society engaged in crimes involving violence or threats of violence targeting lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or intersex persons. The government investigated and prosecuted such actions.																														Section 1.													 Respect for the Integrity of the Person												    																																																a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings										There were no reports that the government or its agents committed arbitrary or unlawful killings, including extrajudicial killings, during the year.Regarding the deaths of protesters during the June 2022 demonstrations, a local human rights organization reported the attorney general’s investigation had yielded few results and progressed slowly. Although the Attorney General’s Office summoned more than 80 police officers to testify, fewer than 20 came forward. Civil society and social organizations claimed authorities failed to call individuals to testify who were with one of the persons killed, Byron Guatatuca Vargas, when he died.As of October 31, police reported more than 6,550 homicides, an increase of almost 70 percent compared with 2022. Police attributed a large part of the country’s rising homicide rate to increased drug trafficking and conflicts among gangs fighting over drug trafficking routes. On March 3, President Guillermo Lasso declared a state of emergency in the coastal province of Esmeraldas. Media reported a mass killing on April 11 at the fishing port in Esmeraldas, when 30 hooded men arrived aboard boats and began shooting at residents and fishermen, killing nine and wounding four. The minister of interior attributed the killings to a dispute between local drug gangs for control of the port.Drug gang violence dramatically increased in the coastal provinces of Guayas, Santa Elena, and Los Rios. In March and April, authorities registered a surge in kidnappings, robberies, and killings, including a beheading. On April 1, President Lasso announced urgent security measures to confront crime, including declaring a state of emergency and curfew in the three provinces.Media reported 14 attempts to kill candidates and elected officials, resulting in the deaths of four political candidates, five elected officials, and one political party leader as of October. On August 9, gunmen shot and killed presidential candidate Fernando Villavicencio at a Quito campaign event. The attack occurred 11 days before the first round of snap presidential and legislative elections. Police shot the suspected killer seconds after the event, and he died from his injuries shortly afterwards. Police arrested 13 additional suspects in the killing, and on August 10, a judge ordered pretrial detention for all 13 suspects. Six suspects were found killed in the Litoral prison in Guayaquil on October 6. Another suspect was found dead in the El Inca prison in Quito on October 7. A pretrial hearing date for the remaining six suspects was scheduled for December 19.On February 26, the Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador reported two unidentified gunmen killed the confederation’s director for international relations and environmental activist, Eduardo Mendua, outside his home in the Amazonian province of Sucumbios. Mendua’s death occurred amid confrontations between Indigenous communities and the state-owned oil company Petro Ecuador. According to the Attorney General’s Office, three suspects were in custody.In December 2022, the Guayas Provincial Court sentenced a member of Los Águilas gang to 30 months in prison for his involvement in the August 2022 attack in the Cristo del Consuelo neighborhood in Guayaquil that killed five persons, injured 17 others, and destroyed seven houses.																																				b. Disappearance										There were no reports of disappearances by or on behalf of government authorities.																																				c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses										While the law prohibited torture and similar forms of intimidation and punishment, there were credible reports police officers and prison guards abused suspects and prisoners.On August 1, the Attorney General’s Office initiated criminal proceedings against five active-duty police officers for the alleged rape of a citizen detained in a Community Watch Unit in Guayaquil on July 30. According to the complaint, two of the accused officers allegedly raped the individual with an object, while the others allegedly sprayed him with pepper spray and hit him in his back and face.Authorities also were investigating two alleged cases of rape by four active-duty military officers in Cuenca. The sexual assaults allegedly occurred on different dates and against two different women: a second lieutenant and an enlisted soldier. According to the allegations, the first case allegedly occurred in December 2022 inside a military compound, while the second case allegedly occurred in March in a hostel.																Prison and Detention Center Conditions						Prison conditions were harsh and life threatening due to gross overcrowding, food shortages, inadequate sanitary conditions, lack of medical care, and gang violence.Abusive Physical Conditions: Prisons continued to be overcrowded. According to the government’s National Service of Comprehensive Attention to Adults Deprived of Liberty and Adolescent Offenders, the overcrowding rate was 13 percent above designed capacity as of July 21, compared with 8 percent in 2022. The overcrowding rate varied by prison, with some prisons such as the Guayaquil Regional Prison (and the Litoral prison in particular) significantly overcrowded and others such as the Riobamba Prison operating under capacity.Access to and quality of food, potable and hot water, heating, sanitation, and medical care were inadequate.Multiple institutions, government officials, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) reported criminal gangs controlled most prisons. An NGO reported health workers were reluctant to enter the prisons because they feared being attacked. The NGO said gangs monopolized the food supply and distributed meals at their discretion.Prison officials and human rights organizations agreed most violent deaths in prisons were the result of rivalries among criminal gangs with links to drug cartels. Fighting between drug trafficking gangs in prisons led to 54 violent deaths through August 21. On July 22, a three-day clash between gangs in a Guayas prison left 31 dead, according to the Attorney General’s Office.On September 6, several human rights organizations reported that male inmates entered the women’s pavilion in a prison in Quevedo to rape, attack, and torture female inmates in complicity with the prison’s authorities. Authorities’ responses were pending as of the end of November.Administration: Authorities sometimes conducted investigations of credible allegations of mistreatment in prisons.Independent Monitoring: Civil society representatives continued to report restrictions to monitoring by independent NGO observers.																										d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention										The law prohibited arbitrary arrest and detention and provided for the right of any person to challenge the lawfulness of their arrest or detention in court, but there were reports provincial and local authorities did not always observe these provisions. According to NGOs, illegal detentions continued to occur.																Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees						The law required authorities to issue specific written arrest orders prior to detention, and a judge was required to charge a suspect with a specific criminal offense within 24 hours of arrest. NGOs stated judges frequently did not determine a specific criminal offense, particularly for arrests of protesters. Authorities generally observed the time limit for charging a suspect, although in some provinces initial detention was often considerably longer.Detainees had a constitutional right to an attorney. Those without financial means to pay for an attorney had the right to request a court-appointed attorney from the Public Defender’s Office. Although court-appointed defenders were available, the number of cases and limited time to prepare for the defense continued to present a disadvantage to defendants using a public defender during trials.The law entitled detainees to prompt visits by lawyers and family members, but NGOs continued to report delays depending on the circumstances and the willingness of local courts and prison guards to enforce the law.Pretrial Detention: Corruption and general judicial inefficiency caused trial delays. The length of pretrial detention did not usually exceed the maximum sentence for the alleged crime. A human rights organization reported the misuse of pretrial detention was common throughout the country and led to overcrowding, violence, and insufficient health services in prisons.																										e. Denial of Fair Public Trial										While the constitution provided for an independent judiciary, corruption impaired the judicial process. Legal experts, bar associations, and NGOs reported on the susceptibility of the judiciary to take bribes for favorable decisions and faster resolution of cases. Violence and outside pressure, especially from criminal groups, further compromised judicial independence and impartiality.Civil society organizations expressed concern regarding judicial independence and pointed to events that, in their judgment, reflected attempts to influence the judiciary or constituted power struggles among judicial officials that compromised the administration of justice. In February, the National Court of Justice appointed Wilman Teran as head of the Judicial Council. Teran then made a series of decisions that civil society groups characterized as “dubious.” At midnight on February 17, the Judicial Council removed all its provincial directors and designated Teran’s alleged close contacts as directors to form a new majority on the council. Civil society groups claimed this new majority approved questionable resolutions to hire, fire, and reassign judges nationwide. For example, on August 19, in a late-night virtual vote, the council, despite not having a majority present, moved to fire one of its members, Judge Walter Macias. President Lasso, Attorney General Diana Salazar, and the entire National Court of Justice called for the resignation of Teran and other council members. On September 14, a Pichincha judge annulled the council’s decision to remove Macias and ordered his immediate reinstatement as a National Court of Justice judge. Once reinstated, on September 28, Macias called to trial two council members for influence peddling. Both members were subsequently removed from the council.Media reported criminal groups killed Guayas Province prosecutor Leonardo Palacios on June 1 in Duran. According to the Attorney General’s Office, Palacios had been investigating a homicide. Separately, on June 1, six armed, hooded individuals threatened to kill Attorney General Salazar through a video sent to her personal cell phone.On July 14, police reported an armed attack on the local offices of the Attorney General’s Office in Santo Domingo. One official was injured in the attack. On July 27, the Attorney General’s Office announced prosecutors and judicial officials in the coastal provinces of Guayas, Manabi, Esmeraldas, Santo Domingo, and Los Rios would telework for security reasons.In March, a judge sentenced three individuals to 34 years in prison as coauthors of the May 2022 murder of prosecutor Luz Marina Delgado and her assistant. As of September, the Attorney General’s Office continued to investigate the August 2022 killings of prosecutor Federico Estrella and judge Nelson Patricio Yánez.According to the Judiciary Council, there was a $265 million deficit for the administration of justice, including shortfalls in funds necessary to pay salaries of judiciary officials, update infrastructure and technology, and buy office supplies. The council also noted a deficit of 692 judges and 500 prosecutors nationwide, which, according to an NGO, led to high workloads for public servants and delays and potential violations of due process.																Trial Procedures						The law provided for the right to a fair and public trial, and the judiciary generally enforced this right. While defendants had the right to free assistance from an interpreter, some defendants complained the lack of an interpreter at court hearings made preparation of a defense problematic for non-Spanish speakers, and that the quality of interpreters was poor and caused problems when working with public defenders.Judges reportedly rendered decisions more quickly or more slowly due to media and political pressure or fear in some cases. There were reported delays of up to one year in scheduling some trials. Prisoners reported lengthy delays in setting dates for preliminary hearings after their cases reached a higher court.						Political Prisoners and Detainees						There were no reports of political prisoners or detainees.																										f. Transnational Repression										Not applicable.																																				g. Property Seizure and Restitution										Not applicable.																																				h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence										The law prohibited such actions, and there were no reports the government failed to respect these prohibitions.																																					Section 2.													 Respect for Civil Liberties												    																																																a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media										The constitution provided for freedom of expression, including for members of the press and other media, but laws restricted this right. Civil society organizations reported criminal groups perpetrated widespread violence and harassment against journalists, causing them to self-censor their reporting.Freedom of Expression: There were significant restrictions on media freedom. Journalists and NGOs said certain politicians and political parties continued to use the “press as enemy” trope and accuse media of being “corrupt” and “liars.” The media watchdog NGO Fundamedios said the government had not made substantial progress on freedom of expression rights, noting both the lack of progress on investigating and prosecuting high-profile past abuses and continuing abuses.Several journalists and news outlets objected to President Lasso’s speech criticizing the press following a government corruption investigation – spurred by investigative reporting – that allegedly connected him to criminal groups. During a February 14 national broadcast, the president referred to journalists as “mercenaries of news entertainment” and “media terrorists,” suggesting the journalists were seeking “likes” [on social media] to “continue collecting their pay.”The law prohibited persons from using “discrediting expressions,” treated as a misdemeanor with a 15- to 30-day detention. There were no reports the government invoked this law to restrict freedom of expression.Violence and Harassment: Local government authorities and criminal groups committed acts of violence and harassment against journalists. Fundamedios reported 39 acts of violence or harassment against journalists perpetrated by state actors between January and July. Civil society organizations maintained the state did not adequately investigate or prosecute the crimes and demonstrated little effort to halt the aggressions.Censorship or Content Restrictions for Members of the Press and Other Media, Including Online Media: Fundamedios reported four censorship cases between January and July, three of which were initiated by the state and one by a news outlet. The NGO noted the government did not adequately investigate or prosecute these cases.According to Fundamedios, the government canceled the bidding process for the allocation of FM radio and broadcast television frequencies, announced in 2020. Civil society organizations had criticized the Agency for the Regulation and Control of Telecommunications-administered bidding process as lacking transparency and allowing two bidders to accumulate a disproportionate number of frequencies.Libel/Slander Laws: Libel and slander were criminal offenses under the law, with penalties of up to three years in prison, plus fines. The law assigned responsibility to media owners as well as journalists, who were held liable for opinion pieces or statements by reporters or others, including readers, using their media platforms. Monitoring organizations reported the national government did not prosecute journalists for libel during the year, but they reported three cases in which politicians initiated legal proceedings against journalists.Civil society organizations reported a judge sentenced Guayaquil News journalist and director Guillermo Lizarzaburu and businessman Juan Pablo Paz to two years in prison following a complaint filed by former legislator Pablo Muentes. Muentes accused Lizarzaburu and Paz of using anonymous social media accounts to slander Muentes.El Universo newspaper cartoonist Xavier Bonilla (whose nom de plume was “Bonil”) faced a libel suit after he published a cartoon allegedly accusing Alembert Vera, president of the Citizen Participation and Social Control Council and previously a lawyer for former President Rafael Correa, of embezzlement and involvement in organized crime. According to Fundamedios, Vera’s father, Gutemberg Vera, filed the libel case against Bonil.Nongovernmental Impact: Unknown persons not presumed connected with government authorities conducted attacks against journalists during the year. Civil society organizations reported criminal groups perpetrated widespread violence and harassment against journalists. According to Fundamedios, as of July 31, five journalists fled the country following serious death threats from criminal groups. Karol Noroña, a journalist from digital news outlet GK who reported on organized crime and prison violence, fled the country on March 24 after receiving death threats. Journalists and civil society organizations reported journalists covering corruption, prison violence, and violence linked to the drug trade often self-censored their reporting due to fear of reprisals from criminal groups.On March 20, television stations and journalists simultaneously received envelopes containing explosive devices. Unknown individuals sent three envelopes to the newsrooms of the television stations Ecuavisa, Teleamazonas, and TC Television, while the other two were sent to radio station EXA FM and journalist Carlos Vera. Most journalists were unharmed except for Ecuavisa journalist Lenin Artieda, who suffered minor injuries when he inserted into his computer a memory stick that contained an explosive device. The Attorney General’s Office opened an investigation into the attacks.On April 24, the Attorney General’s Office reported that a judge sentenced two individuals each to 34 years and six months in prison for the murder of journalist Gerardo Delgado in August 2022. In February 2022, a Guayas court convicted and sentenced to prison six other individuals for the crime. As of August 25, five of the individuals were appealing the court’s decision.Actions to Expand Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media: On August 23, the government issued a decree that defined risk prevention and protection measures for journalists. The decree included new risk prevention measures, such as mapping risks facing journalists, the development of protection protocols, and the creation of support networks. New protection measures included monitoring threats and attacks and security training for journalists.																Internet Freedom						The government did not restrict or disrupt access to the internet or censor online content.A government regulation required that internet service providers comply with all information requests from the superintendent of telecommunications, allowing access to client Internet Protocol addresses and information without a judicial order. The law held media outlets responsible for online comments from readers if the outlet had no established mechanisms for commenters to register their personal data (including national identification number) or no system to delete offensive comments. The law also prohibited media from using information obtained from social media unless they verified the author of the information.As of August 25, the government had not issued regulations for the application of a 2021 law regarding personal data protection and had not appointed a data protection superintendent. Media watchdog groups such as Fundamedios previously had largely praised the law for establishing high standards for data and privacy protection while protecting freedom of expression.																										b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association										The law provided for the freedoms of peaceful assembly and association, and the government generally respected these rights, although authorities declared four states of exception throughout the year due to rising crime and natural disasters. The related executive decrees included restrictions on freedom of assembly, association, and the inviolability of home and correspondence. Three decrees enabled the government to deploy the armed forces to support police operations.																Freedom of Peaceful Assembly						The law provided for freedom of peaceful assembly, and the government generally respected this right. Public rallies required prior government permits, which authorities usually granted.Human rights organization reported that after a Global Marijuana March in Guayaquil on May 5, police officers harassed demonstrators and removed them from the street, citing lack of permits. According to a human rights activist, police officers attempted to confiscate a speaker and other equipment from a demonstrator and assaulted other participants with batons and pepper spray.																										c. Freedom of Religion										See the Department of State’s International Religious Freedom Report at  https://www.state.gov/religiousfreedomreport/.																																				d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country										The law provided for freedom of internal movement, foreign travel, emigration, and repatriation, and the government generally respected these rights.																																				e. Protection of Refugees										The government cooperated with the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and other humanitarian organizations in providing protection and assistance to refugees, returning refugees, or asylum seekers, as well as other persons of concern.Access to Asylum: The law provided for the granting of asylum or refugee status, and the government had established a system for providing protection to refugees.Abuse of Refugees and Asylum Seekers: Migrants and refugees, especially women, children, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex (LGBTQI+) individuals, sometimes experienced gender-based violence and human trafficking, according to UN agencies and local NGOs. Authorities reported an increase in forced labor, sex trafficking, and the forced recruitment of migrants and refugees into criminal activity, such as drug trafficking and robbery, on the northern and southern borders, particularly by domestic criminal groups and transnational criminal organizations that also operated in Colombia. Forced recruitment increasingly took place in schools and targeted young persons, especially young men and adolescents. Continued migrant and refugee arrivals at irregular crossings, due to visa requirements for Venezuelan nationals; increasing xenophobia; and a lack of local and municipal government coordination or capacity to address the protection of particularly vulnerable groups complicated the government’s ability to address and prevent abuses against migrants and refugees. Migrants reported a lack of trust, significant corruption, and xenophobia in public institutions, including within police and the Attorney General’s Office, that made it difficult to report abuse, especially gender-based violence and human trafficking.Migrants faced abuses such as overtime work without due pay, especially in the growing digital platform sector. According to a union, 80 percent of digital platform workers were migrants.Freedom of Movement: With the end of the special protocol in August for registering and regularizing unaccompanied minor migrants, they risked being institutionalized.Access to Basic Services: The law provided for protection and access to health care, education, and other services to all individuals irrespective of their migration status. Nonetheless, some Venezuelan migrant and refugee children remained out of the school system, according to official government statistics. According to NGOs, barriers to the enrollment and retention of refugee and migrant children in school included a lack of information regarding the right to access to education, hidden costs of schooling such as uniforms, lack of classroom space, and in some instances xenophobic attitudes towards Venezuelans, including discrimination and arbitrary documentation requirements for school enrollment.According to UN agencies and NGOs, refugees encountered discrimination in accessing employment and housing. Recognized refugees received national identification cards intended to facilitate access to education, employment, banking, and other public services; however, refugees and migrants reported that at times employers did not recognize government-issued documents that established their right to work, and international organizations reported that registration documents were often not sufficient to access bank accounts in practice. Further, international organizations and NGO partners reported the public health system had “totally collapsed.” A strained public health system complicated access to health care for migrants and refugees with serious and chronic illnesses, as well as gender-based violence survivors, LGBTQI+ migrants, and sex workers seeking access to sexual and reproductive health services.Durable Solutions: The government accepted refugees for resettlement and offered naturalization to refugees but recognized very small numbers of Venezuelan refugees. Colombian nationals constituted 96 percent of all recognized refugees. Discrimination and limited access to formal employment and housing affected refugees’ ability to integrate into the local community.Temporary Protection: Registration for an estimated 350,000 Venezuelans who entered the country irregularly opened on February 16. Previously, in September 2022, the Ministry of Interior opened the registration process to an estimated 120,000 Venezuelan migrants who had entered the country regularly, as well as all unaccompanied minors, regardless of nationality or migration status. Registration for an estimated 90,000 non-Venezuelans who entered the country regularly opened in November 2022. Registration produced a certificate that acted as a temporary residence permit and protected the holder from deportation on migration-related grounds or from incurring migration-related fines while the regularization process was underway. On August 31, registration closed for all groups, after more than 200,000 migrants had completed registration. Through April 2024, registered individuals could request a temporary residency visa from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. As part of the larger regularization initiative, the Ministry of Social and Economic Inclusion implemented a special procedure to register and regularize 776 unaccompanied minors.																																					Section 3.													 Freedom to Participate in the Political Process												    																						The law provided citizens the ability to choose their government in free and fair periodic elections held by secret ballot and based on universal and equal suffrage.																										Elections and Political Participation										Abuses or Irregularities in Recent Elections: National elections were widely reported to be fair and free of abuses and irregularities.Participation of Women and Members of Marginalized or Vulnerable Groups: Social media harassment of women politicians and candidates continued. The NGO Participación Ciudadana (Citizen Participation) found 331 derogatory tweets against 38 women in politics and government in a study conducted between January 3 and February 2, which coincided with the official electoral campaign period leading up to the February 5 local and provincial elections. According to the study, derogatory tweets contained discriminatory messaging dealing with the perceived roles of women in society.																																					Section 4.													 Corruption in Government												    																						The law provided criminal penalties for corruption by officials, and the government generally implemented the law effectively. There were numerous reports of government corruption throughout the year.Corruption: The government launched or continued multiple investigations, judicial proceedings, and legislative audits of officials accused of corruption related to state contracts and commercial endeavors that reached the highest levels of government. In December 2022, President Lasso inaugurated the country’s first specialized court for corruption and organized crime. The court began hearing cases early in the year and won its first convictions in July and August.On May 25, judge Banny Molina, who granted a habeas corpus that many considered legally dubious to former Vice President Jorge Glas (convicted on corruption charges in August 2022), was charged with unlawful usurpation of power and sentenced to one year in prison. In November 2022, a judge from Santo Domingo Province approved an early release for time served for Glas. Emerson Curipallo, a judge from Guayas Province, restored Glas’s political rights on June 8, despite the law stipulating that Glas’s political rights could be restored only upon completion of his prison sentence. The Electoral Dispute Tribunal fined Curipallo $31,500, removed his political rights, and dismissed him from office on August 24 for interfering in the electoral process.On February 22, the Attorney General’s Office announced it had filed bribery-related charges against former President Lenin Moreno and 37 others related to the construction of the controversial Chinese government-backed Coca Codo Sinclair dam and hydroelectric plant. Investigations began in 2019, after journalists exposed an offshore Panamanian company with links to Moreno and dam builder Sinohydro’s Ecuadorian lobbyist. The preliminary hearing took place on March 3, and the Attorney General’s Office included three new suspects in the case. The Solicitor General’s Office charged 18 of the 37 persons originally accused by the Attorney General’s Office in June. The case continued as of November 15.For additional information about corruption in the country, please see the Department of State’s Investment Climate Statement for Ecuador and the Department of State’s International Narcotics Control Strategy Report, which includes information on financial crimes.																											Section 5.													 Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights												    																						A number of domestic and international human rights groups generally operated without government restriction to monitor or investigate human rights conditions or cases and publish their findings. Government officials were often cooperative and responsive to the views of these groups.A human rights organization reported cases in which the government denied or was reluctant to provide updated information to local human rights NGOs who were conducting investigations.Retribution Against Human Rights Defenders: A human rights organization reported continuous harassment and threats to community-based human rights defenders and their families. As a result, some human rights activists were forcibly displaced from their communities.Government Human Rights Bodies: The Ombudsman’s Office was an administratively and financially independent body focused on human rights and subordinate to the Transparency and Social Control branch of government. Some human rights groups viewed the Ombudsman’s Office as lacking sufficient initiative and experience to deal effectively with critical human rights cases.																											Section 6.													 Discrimination and Societal Abuses												    																																																Women										Rape and Domestic Violence: The law criminalized rape of men and women, including spousal and intimate partner rape and other forms of domestic and sexual violence. Rape was punishable with penalties of up to 22 years in prison. The law did not specify so-called corrective rape of LGBTQI+ individuals. The penalty for rape where death occurred was 22 to 26 years’ imprisonment. Domestic violence was punishable with penalties ranging from four days to seven years in prison and a substantial fine for “damages, pain, and suffering,” depending on the severity of the crime. The government did not enforce the law effectively.According to local experts, reporting rapes and other forms of violence continued to be a traumatic and revictimizing process, particularly for girls. For example, a rape survivor had to file a complaint at the Attorney General’s Office and submit to gynecological evaluations (akin to forensic exams designed) administered by medical experts. Many individuals did not report cases of rape and sexual assault due to fear of retribution from the perpetrator and social stigma. Women living in rural areas of the country encountered further difficulties reporting assaults, due to the limited presence of government offices in their towns.The law provided for reparations to survivors of gender-based violence. The law defined rape, including spousal rape or incest, forced prostitution, sexual harassment, and other analogous practices, as forms of sexual violence. It also entitled survivors to immediate protective measures designed to prevent or stop additional violence, such as police surveillance, placement in shelters, and assistance programs for the survivor and family. These measures were generally enforced.According to human rights organizations, survivors were generally reluctant to press domestic violence charges. Judges lacked specialized training for dealing with gender-based violence, and the court system was insufficiently staffed to deal with the caseload.Other Forms of Gender-based Violence or Harassment: The law provided for penalties of one to five years in prison for sexual harassment. The law mandated that judges prohibit contact between the aggressor and the survivor to prevent revictimization and intimidation, and the law was generally enforced. Despite the legal prohibition of sexual harassment and government implementation of the law, women’s rights organizations said survivors tended not to report alleged harassment and that harassment remained common in public spaces, including on social media.In November 2022, the government elevated the Secretariat of Human Rights to a ministry, renamed the Ministry of Women and Human Rights. Civil society and international organizations reported slow progress in government efforts to prevent femicides and implement the Unified Registry of Violence Against Women, as stipulated by law.As of August 23, the Attorney General’s Office reported 64 femicides, on track to exceed the 88 total femicides in 2022. The Attorney General’s Office also reported the judiciary had sentenced individuals involved in 13 of the 88 femicide cases in 2022.Police Lieutenant Colonel German Caceres, sought for allegedly killing his spouse in September 2022, was captured by Colombian police in December 2022. Caceres confessed to the crime of femicide, and on May 25, a judge sentenced him to 34 years and eight months in prison. The judge also ordered Caceres to pay $260,000 in compensation to the victim’s family.Discrimination: The constitution afforded women the same legal status and rights as men. Nevertheless, discrimination against women was prevalent, particularly with respect to economic opportunities for older women and for those in the lower economic strata. Women continued to face wage disparities compared with men. NGOs said women also faced discrimination in job recruitment, housing access, and some judicial proceedings, namely, in reporting and filing charges in cases of alleged sexual abuse.According to union leaders, employers continued to assign women heavier workloads, forcing them to “clean up” workstations afterhours, especially in the agricultural sector. A workers’ association alleged this also occurred in a textile factory where women regularly worked overtime and did not receive minimum wage. Official statistics showed that in July, the average monthly income for an employed man was 22 percent higher than for an employed woman.On January 10, the National Assembly approved a “violet economy law” to promote gender equality in the labor market. The law mandated that men and women in the public and private sectors receive equal pay; that companies with three or more members on their boards of directors ensure that at least one of them be a woman; that protocols exist to prevent sexual harassment and deal promptly and fairly with complaints; and that companies refrain from asking discriminatory questions during selection processes or request different or additional documents to verify women’s competencies. The law also strengthened the labor inspection system to adequately address gender issues. Private companies were to receive tax incentives when creating jobs for women.On May 12, the legislature passed the “human care law,” which created and extended workers’ paid and unpaid leave for the birth of a child. The law extended nursing leave by three months, added five days of paternal leave after the baby was born, and granted paid leave to attend medical checkups for both parents during pregnancy, labor, and birth. The law provided for permanent lactation rooms in offices with 50 or more women of childbearing age and 20-minute breaks every two hours to use the rooms. At the worker’s request, employers were required to provide child care onsite or pay for offsite child care for children under five years of age.Reproductive Rights: There were no reports of coerced abortion or involuntary sterilization on the part of government authorities.Some women’s rights activists complained that a lack of comprehensive sex education limited individuals’ ability to manage their reproductive health and that ineffective distribution of birth control reduced access to contraception. Emergency contraception was available as part of methods for family planning; however, conservative groups’ stance against contraceptive use and social stigma, including potential social ostracization, discouraged women from seeking family planning services.The government provided access to sexual and reproductive health services for survivors of sexual violence. Emergency contraception and postexposure prophylaxis was available as part of clinical management of rape.A 2019 study found income status affected equity in sexual and reproductive health access and outcomes, with low income and rural individuals having significantly less access. UN agencies reported that vulnerable populations, including Afro-Ecuadorians, Indigenous groups, rural inhabitants, LGBTQI+ individuals, persons with disabilities, HIV-positive persons, and migrants, faced limited access and discrimination regarding the provision of reproductive health services. Adolescents also encountered barriers to access reproductive health services.International organizations said public hospitals continued to face problems when stocking and restocking emergency contraception materials nationwide. Organizations reported that despite government efforts to make contraception materials available, the lack of supply and demand studies to accurately calculate quantities, delays in delivering material from central warehouses to local hospitals, the lack of updated population statistics, and unpredictable migration flows complicated these efforts.While the law prohibited discrimination against girls who become mothers, NGOs reported some faced discrimination and subsequently left school. A lack of resources also resulted in young mothers discontinuing their education to pursue work.Following a 2020 Inter-American Court of Human Rights ruling that held the state accountable for failing to protect the rights of a girl who was harassed and sexually abused by her school’s vice rector, which led to her suicide, the Ministry of Education launched the National Strategy for Comprehensive Sex Education on August 14. Although several international and civil society organizations applauded the initiative, they reported that implementation remained the initiative’s biggest problem.																																				Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination										The constitution declared the state to be plurinational and affirmed the principle of nonviolence and nondiscrimination by recognizing the rights of Indigenous, Afro-Ecuadorian, and Montubio (an independent ethnic group of persons with a mixture of Afro-Ecuadorian, Indigenous, and Spanish ancestry) communities. It also mandated affirmative action policies to provide for the representation of minorities. NGOs and civil society representatives said those provisions were not effectively enforced.Citing 2021 official data, media reported Indigenous, Afro-Ecuadorian, and Montubio populations experienced the highest poverty rates in the country. Among those populations, the most affected were Indigenous children, followed by Montubio girls.Afro-Ecuadorians, who accounted for approximately 4.8 percent of the population according to the most recent census (2022), suffered pervasive discrimination, particularly regarding educational and economic opportunity. Afro-Ecuadorian organizations noted that despite the absence of official discrimination, societal discrimination and stereotyping in media continued to result in barriers to employment, education, and housing. A national gender survey published in 2019 found Afro-Ecuadorian women were particularly vulnerable to gender-based violence and harassment based on racial, gender, and sexual stereotypes.An Afro-Ecuadorian rights NGO reported media discriminated against Afro-Ecuadorians. Local human rights NGO Regional Human Rights Advisory Foundation reported that while conducting an operation, military personnel approached a young Afro-Ecuadorian on May 29 in Quito when he was walking home after school. A news outlet was broadcasting the operation live, and journalists misconstrued the boy’s presence and described him as an alleged criminal. A local human rights group provided legal assistance to the family and filed an injunction on June 12, arguing the journalists had violated his right to equality, nondiscrimination, identity, and good name, and demanding the journalists clear his name. On July 7, a judge rejected the injunction.Afro-Ecuadorians reported employers often profiled them based on their job application photographs and racial stereotypes.Indigenous and LGBTQI+ individuals as well as persons with disabilities also experienced employment discrimination.																																				Indigenous Peoples										There were isolated reports of restrictions on Indigenous persons and their institutions in decisions affecting their property or traditional ways of life.The law provided Indigenous persons the same civil and political rights as other citizens. The constitution recognized Kichwa and Shuar as “official languages of intercultural relations.” The constitution obligated the state to consult local communities and Indigenous persons prior to initiation of projects on their lands through a process that was free, informed, and culturally appropriate (FPIC), although Indigenous peoples’ organizations noted public- and private-sector actors often ignored this process. In 2008, Indigenous leaders began pressing the government to formally consult its communities affected by extractive activities, but the government had yet to pass a national-level community consultation law.The constitution allowed Indigenous persons to participate in the economic benefits that natural resource extraction projects brought and to receive compensation for any damages that resulted. In the case of environmental damage, the law mandated immediate corrective government action and full restitution from the responsible company, although some Indigenous organizations asserted a lack of consultation and remedial action. The law recognized the rights of Indigenous communities to hold property communally, although the titling process remained incomplete in parts of the country.On May 31, the government reformed the law that regulated the environmental consultation process (different from FPIC) required prior to granting environmental licenses for projects that impacted the environment within a community. The process consisted of informing involved communities regarding the details of extraction projects that would impact the environment (but not necessarily obtaining consent from those communities).Human rights organizations reported violent confrontations on July 14 between antimining activists and police in Las Naves, Bolivar Province, during an information session for a mining project. The clashes resulted in two arrests and 10 individuals injured. Antimining activists alleged the government deployed a disproportionate police and military force to the area to safeguard the process and repress protesters. The Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador filed a lawsuit questioning the reform’s constitutionality. The Constitutional Court accepted the case on August 1, which suspended the application of the new regulation, halting 178 key infrastructure, mining, renewable, and oil and gas projects for an unspecified amount of time.																																				Children										Birth Registration: According to UNICEF, registration of children with teenage mothers and fathers continued to pose a problem for the government, since the law required underage parents be accompanied by an adult to register their children. While the law prohibited schools from requesting civil registration documents for enrollment, some (mostly public) schools continued to require them. Other government services, including welfare payments and free primary health care, required some form of identification. Migrant children were particularly affected by this requirement, which prevented adequate access to these services.Child Abuse: The law criminalized child abuse and provided penalties of 30 days to 26 years in prison, depending on the severity of the abuse. The government enforced the law effectively.Child, Early, and Forced Marriage: The legal marriage age was 18. There were reports of early and forced marriage in rural and poor areas. The government did not enforce the law effectively.According to a study by the Planning and Social Studies Center, Plan International, the UN Population Fund, and UNICEF, 27 percent of women ages 18-49 married or entered a domestic partnership before they turned 18. The study showed girls belonging to the poorest quintile were four times more likely to marry by age 18 compared with girls in the richest quintile.Sexual Exploitation of Children: The law prohibited the sale, grooming, or use of children for commercial sexual exploitation, including sex trafficking, sexual exploitation of children, and child pornography, with penalties of 22 to 26 years’ imprisonment. The government enforced the law effectively. The penalty for human trafficking, including child sex trafficking, was 13 to 16 years in prison. Authorities did not criminalize all forms of child sex trafficking. The criminal code required proof of force, fraud, or coercion as essential elements of a trafficking crime, neglecting to recognize that anyone younger than age 18 was unable to provide informed consent. The age of consent was 14.																																				Antisemitism										There was a small Jewish community, including an estimated 500 individuals in Quito, 50 individuals in Guayaquil, and an unspecified number of individuals elsewhere in the country. The Jewish community reported the vandalization of an external wall of the Jewish cemetery in Quito with Nazi symbols on January 27. The community painted over the wall and decided not to take legal action against the aggressors.																																				Trafficking in Persons										See the Department of State’s annual Trafficking in Persons Report at  https://www.state.gov/trafficking-in-persons-report/.																																				Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics										Criminalization: No laws criminalized same-sex conduct or gender identity or expression.Violence and Harassment: The NGO Silueta X reported 25 killings of LGBTQI+ individuals as of November 20. The killings were allegedly perpetrated by nonstate actors. LGBTQI+ organizations claimed government institutions in general failed to properly register and categorize violent acts against the LGBTQI+ community, leading to underreporting. LGBTQI+ groups claimed police and prosecutors did not thoroughly investigate deaths of LGBTQI+ individuals, including when there was suspicion that the killing was motivated by anti-LGBTQI+ bias. The NGO Fundación Ecuatoriana Equidad (Ecuadorian Equality Foundation), a sexual health and LGBTQI+ advocacy group, cited police and prosecutors’ lax attitude and the lack of technical capacity and knowledge regarding LGBTQI+ individuals to explain insufficient investigations into crimes committed against LGBTQI+ persons.The law also prohibited hate crimes, but LGBTQI+ activists asserted that since the legal codification of hate crimes in 2008, there had been no hate crime convictions for crimes against LGBTQI+ persons.Discrimination: The constitution included the principle of nondiscrimination with respect to gender identity or sexual orientation. The law prohibited discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. LGBTQI+ persons continued to suffer discrimination from both public and private entities, particularly in education, employment, and access to health care. LGBTQI+ organizations reported transgender persons suffered more discrimination because they were more visible. The law recognized LGBTQI+ couples but did not allow same-sex adoption. For this reason, the law did not grant LGBTQI+ couples rights equal to rights of other persons.LGBTQI+ persons continued to report the government sometimes denied them equal access to formal education. Fundación Ecuatoriana Equidad indicated the government did not comprehensively apply policy provisions to prevent and combat discrimination. LGBTQI+ students, particularly transgender students, sometimes were discouraged from attending classes and were more susceptible to bullying in schools. Human rights activists argued the Ministry of Education and school administrators were slow to respond to complaints regarding harassment, discrimination, or abuse against LGBTQI+ persons.LGBTQI+ persons involved in the commercial sex trade reported abusive situations, extortion, and mistreatment by security forces. In March, sex workers in Quito filed an unprecedented injunction against Quito’s then Mayor Santiago Guarderas, who proposed to relocate them outside the city’s historic center to remote locations, which they perceived would have been detrimental for their work. Local judges initially ruled in their favor, and as of August 3, the plaintiffs were awaiting the municipality’s decision whether to appeal the ruling. According to a spokesperson for the plaintiffs, transgender sex workers would be among those most affected by a possible relocation.Availability of Legal Gender Recognition: The law prohibited changing gender on identity documents for LGBTQI+ persons younger than 18, even with parental consent. As of August 2, a decision remained pending in a case before the Constitutional Court to determine the age at which transgender underage individuals could change their identity information.In May 2022, the Constitutional Court ruled the Office of the Civil Registry could change an individual’s sex on record at the person’s request without requesting any additional documents. An LGBTQI+ organization reported that despite the ruling, there were cases in which the Office of the Civil Registry denied individuals their right to change their sex on record. The same organization also noted migrants were more vulnerable to the denial of this right. The court also ordered the National Assembly to “discuss and approve a bill to regulate the procedure for changing the sex of transgender persons.” As of October, no bill had been approved.Involuntary or Coercive Medical or Psychological Practices: An LGBTQI+ organization reported the existence of clandestine private treatment centers confining LGBTQI+ persons against their will to “cure” or “dehomosexualize” them despite the illegality of such treatment. LGBTQI+ organizations reported the practice persisted under the guise of religious or “wellness” retreats or drug addiction treatment centers. According to one LGBTQI+ organization, the government, with support from civil society organizations, had some success in identifying and closing such institutions. Another LGBTQI+ organization claimed the Attorney General’s Office had not taken any action against the individuals who ran these establishments. There were no reports medically unnecessary and irreversible “normalization” surgeries were performed on children or on nonconsenting adult intersex persons.According to human rights NGO Diálogo Diverso (Diverse Dialogue), many individuals confined to the “clinics” were afraid to report involuntary or coercive practices because in most cases their family members forced them into the “treatments.” The NGO reported that in 2022, 19 percent of young LGBTQI+ individuals reported being forced to receive “treatment” to change their gender identity or sexual orientation. LGBTQI+ organizations also reported relatives took LGBTQI+ persons to neighboring countries, where clinics reportedly used violent treatments, including rape, to attempt to change LGBTQI+ persons’ sexual orientation. With support from civil society groups, the government established an interagency roundtable on May 10 to provide effective and coordinated responses to the dangers posed by these so-called clinics.Restrictions of Freedom of Expression, Association, or Peaceful Assembly: In June, Guayaquil mayor Aquiles Álvarez did not approve a permit to allow the annual pride parade to pass through one of the city’s main avenues as it had since 2000, claiming it would cause “great impact to traffic.” Instead, the municipality offered secondary roads for the parade, which civil society organizations interpreted as a way of “hiding” LGBTQI+ individuals. Several LGBTQI+ organizations filed an injunction that led to a judge reversing the mayor’s decision. Álvarez allowed the parade to take place as long as there was not any “disorderly conduct, no nudity, and no mockery.”																																				Persons with Disabilities										The law prohibited discrimination against persons with physical, sensory, intellectual, and mental disabilities. The law stipulated persons with disabilities had the right to health care and health insurance; to employment and job security; to education, including programs for scholarships and student loans; and to access buildings, transport, and communications. The government did not fully enforce the law.By law, children with disabilities could attend specialized schools, but all educational establishments were required to accommodate students with disabilities. An advocacy NGO for persons with disabilities said nonspecialized institutions lacked the capacity and staff to accommodate the range of disabilities. The NGO said children with disabilities attended primary and secondary education at similar rates to other children, but they attended higher education at lower rates due to a lack of access to quality support and accessible infrastructure. According to the NGO, the lack of interagency coordination especially in the public sector hampered the possibility for persons with disabilities to transit smoothly from high school to universities or technical institutions and then to an independent life.The law required that 4 percent of employees in all public and private enterprises with more than 25 employees be persons with disabilities, and it gave the Ombudsman’s Office responsibility for following up on alleged violations of the rights of persons with disabilities, stipulating fines and punishments for lack of compliance. As of 2021, approximately one-half of enterprises complied with the law.																																				Other Societal Violence or Discrimination										Fundación Ecuatoriana Equidad said that although HIV-positive individuals were registered with the social security system, diagnosis, follow-up testing, and treatment continued to be inadequate due to mistreatment toward patients. The NGO said most HIV-positive individuals abandoned treatment due to discrimination from health-care providers.Although Ministry of Labor regulations prohibited discrimination against hiring HIV-positive individuals and banned HIV tests as entry requirements for a job, LGBTQI+ organizations argued many employers continued requiring tests.																																					Section 7.													 Worker Rights												    																																																a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining										The law, with exceptions, provided certain workers the right to form and join trade unions of their choice, to bargain collectively, and to strike. The law required a minimum of 30 workers for the creation of an association, work committee, or labor union, regardless of the total number of employees in the workplace. The law did not allow foreign citizens to serve as trade union officers.The law prohibited the dismissal of union members from the moment a union notified the labor inspector of its general assembly. Employers were not required to reinstate workers fired for union activity but were required to pay such workers compensation and a fine of one year’s annual salary for everyone wrongfully dismissed. Individual workers still employed could take complaints against employers to the Labor Inspection Office. Individuals no longer employed could take their complaints to courts charged with protecting labor rights. While courts upheld the right for sectoral unions to negotiate, the government failed to issue implementing regulations, thus preventing negotiations.Unions could take complaints to a tripartite arbitration board established to hear their complaints. Despite the legal obligation to begin mediation within 48 hours of issuing a complaint, these procedures often were subject to lengthy delays because the Ministry of Labor lacked the skills and staff to address all arbitration requests and appeals. All private employers with unionized employees were legally required to negotiate collectively when the union so requested.Ministerial resolutions allowed for the use of certain types of short-term or outsourcing labor contracts, with specific provisions for the flower, palm, fishing, livestock, and construction sectors. Unions alleged contracts could be used to undermine the right to organize. For example, employers could refuse to renew a short-term or temporary contract to a worker who was attempting to organize a union, or they could outsource workers to prevent collective bargaining.The right for workers to organize at a sectoral level was recognized by the courts but was not always implemented. In 2021, a provincial court ordered that the Ministry of Labor recognize the Trade Union Association of Agricultural Banana Workers and Peasants as a sector-wide union for banana workers, and the court tasked the Ombudsman’s Office with monitoring the decision’s implementation. This decision followed requests by the International Labor Organization to permit sector-wide union organizing in compliance with international labor standards.The law provided for the right of private-sector employees to strike and conduct three-day solidarity strikes or boycotts on behalf of employees in other industries but only after multiple mandatory steps had been taken. The law established that before most strikes, collective labor disputes had to be referred to courts of conciliation and arbitration.The law required a 10- to 20-day “cooling-off” period from the time a strike was declared before it could take effect. During this time, workers and employers had to agree on how many workers were needed to ensure a minimum level of service; at least 20 percent of the workforce had to continue to work to provide essential services. The law provided the employer could contract substitute personnel only when striking workers refused to send the number of workers required to provide the minimum necessary services. Contracting substitute personnel was effectively impossible, however, as the law did not provide for time-limited, seasonal, hourly, or part-time contracts.The law prohibited formation of unions and restricted the right to collective bargaining and striking of public-sector workers in a long list of “strategic sectors,” including environmental sanitation, education, justice, social security, electrical energy, hydrocarbon production, fuel processing, transport and distribution, public transportation, and postal service and telecommunications, which exceeded the International Labor Organization standard for essential services. Workers in these sectors attempting to strike could face charges with penalties of two to five years’ imprisonment. The government effectively enforced the law on “strategic sectors.”All unions in the public sector fell under the Confederation of Public Servants. Although most public-sector workers also maintained membership in labor-sector associations, the law did not allow such associations to bargain collectively or to strike. The law specified that only the private sector could engage in collective bargaining.The government did not effectively enforce all applicable law. Penalties were commensurate with those for other laws involving denial of civil rights, such as discrimination. Penalties were rarely applied against violators.Employers did not always respect freedom of association and collective bargaining, and labor rights advocacy groups said that influential business interests tied to local officials sometimes used criminal proceedings to restrict workers’ right to unionize. Unions reported the Ministry of Labor delayed unions’ requests to update their boards of directors, which led to delayed registration. Labor unions and associations reported difficulties and delays in registering unions in the ministry due to excessive and ever-changing requirements – sometimes not stated in the regulations – and ministry staff shortages.There were several cases in which employers fired leaders of new unions while the unions were awaiting ministry registration. Even if a court supported a union’s registration efforts, dismissed leaders were entitled only to compensation, not reinstatement, which undermined the union’s ability to form. In addition, dismissed union leaders could not turn to the Ministry of Labor but had to go through the courts.Independent union leaders alleged there were unions controlled by the government that received preferential treatment in administrative processes as well as invitations to roundtables to discuss labor policies.																																				b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor										See the Department of State’s annual Trafficking in Persons Report at  https://www.state.gov/trafficking-in-persons-report/.																																				c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment										See the Department of Labor’s Findings on the Worst Forms of Child Labor at  https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ilab/resources/reports/child-labor/findings/ .																																				d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																														e. Acceptable Conditions of Work										Wage and Hour Laws: The law provided for a minimum monthly wage, which was above the poverty income level. The law limited the standard work period to 40 hours a week, eight hours a day, with two consecutive days of rest per week. Minors were limited to six hours a day and could work only one additional hour a day with premium pay. Overtime was limited to no more than four hours a day and a total of 12 hours a week. Mandatory overtime was prohibited. The law mandated prison terms for employers who did not register domestic workers with the Social Security Administration.The law allowed employers and employees to enter into force majeure agreements, although the dismissal of an employee was permitted only if the business ceased operations permanently. The law also permitted employers to reduce working hours and salaries by up to 50 and 45 percent, respectively, by signing “emergency contracts” with their employees to prevent job losses. Citing government data, media reported that as of June 2022, companies had enrolled 111,826 workers under “emergency contracts”; most were in the agriculture, manufacturing, and trade sectors. Unions and labor organizations said the law enabled precarious work conditions, reduced wages below the minimum wage, and allowed unfair dismissals without due compensation because of employers’ leverage over employees. In 2021, the Constitutional Court declared the force majeure provision unconstitutional, arguing it was “incompatible with the right to legal certainty recognized in the constitution.” In June 2022, the National Assembly approved a partial repeal of the law, but the president vetoed the repeal in July 2022, which prevented the legislature from addressing it for a one-year period. Labor unions filed a lawsuit with the Constitutional Court the same month challenging other provisions in the law. The law remained in effect.Labor leaders and NGOs said there were no specific sectors with a concentration of alleged violations of wage, hour, or overtime laws. They reported the number of complaints against public and private companies in the service, agricultural, and manufacturing sectors, however, was rising because of perceived unfair dismissals, mostly under “emergency contracts” as provided in the law. They stated women and young workers were sometimes vulnerable to wage exploitation in the informal sector, and that domestic and service-sector workers sometimes had to accept conditions including unpaid or underpaid overtime.Occupational Safety and Health: The law provided for the health and safety of workers and outlined occupational safety and health (OSH) standards, which were appropriate for the country’s main industries. Authorities could conduct labor inspections of formal workplaces either by appointment, after a worker complaint, or through unannounced visits. If a worker requested an inspection and a Ministry of Labor inspector confirmed a workplace hazard, the inspector then could close the workplace. Labor inspections generally occurred because of complaints, not as a preventive measure. In some cases, violations were remedied, but other cases were subjected to legal challenges that delayed changes for months.Workers in the formal sector could generally remove themselves from situations that endangered health or safety without jeopardy to their employment, and authorities effectively protected employees in this situation. Labor representatives from the agricultural sector said they registered cases in which employers forced workers to return to plantations shortly after fumigations took place, risking illness or bodily harm.Wage, Hour, and OSH Enforcement: The Ministry of Labor was responsible for enforcement of wage, hour, and OSH laws. The government did not effectively enforce the laws. Inspectors had the authority to make unannounced inspections. The ministry issued fines for wage and hour law and OSH violations. Penalties were commensurate with those for similar crimes, such as fraud or negligence, but were rarely applied to violators. The ministry had an insufficient number of inspectors to ensure compliance.The law singled out the health and safety of miners, but the government did not enforce safety rules in informal, often illegal, small-scale mines (frequently linked to local community leaders and criminal groups), which made up the vast majority of mining enterprises. Migrants and refugees were particularly vulnerable to hazardous and exploitative working conditions. According to media and labor associations, local organizations reported complaints of Venezuelans receiving below the minimum wage, particularly in the informal sector. Gig workers reported conditions that did not follow wage, hour, and safety laws.The informal sector employed 55 percent of the working population as of July. The government did not enforce applicable labor laws in this sector. Wage, hour, and OSH regulations and standards did not apply to workers in the informal sector.																																				    							View report by:																				Afghanistan											Albania											Algeria											Andorra											Angola											Antigua and Barbuda											Argentina											Armenia											Australia											Austria											Azerbaijan											Bahrain											Bangladesh											Barbados											Belarus											Belgium											Belize											Benin											Bhutan											Bolivia											Bosnia and Herzegovina											Botswana											Brazil											Brunei											Bulgaria											Burkina Faso											Burma											Burundi											Cabo Verde											Cambodia											Cameroon											Canada											Central African Republic											Chad											Chile											China (Includes Hong Kong, Macau, and Tibet)											Colombia											Comoros											Costa Rica											Côte d&#8217;Ivoire											Croatia											Cuba											Cyprus											Czech Republic											Democratic Republic of the Congo											Denmark											Djibouti											Dominica											Dominican Republic											Ecuador											Egypt											El Salvador											Equatorial Guinea											Eritrea											Estonia											Eswatini											Ethiopia											Fiji											Finland											France											Gabon											Georgia											Germany											Ghana											Greece											Grenada											Guatemala											Guinea											Guinea-Bissau											Guyana											Haiti											Honduras											Hungary											Iceland											India											Indonesia											Iran											Iraq											Ireland											Israel, West Bank and Gaza											Italy											Jamaica											Japan											Jordan											Kazakhstan											Kenya											Kiribati											Kosovo											Kuwait											Kyrgyz Republic											Laos											Latvia											Lebanon											Lesotho											Liberia											Libya											Liechtenstein											Lithuania											Luxembourg											Madagascar											Malawi											Malaysia											Maldives											Mali											Malta											Marshall Islands											Mauritania											Mauritius											Mexico											Micronesia											Moldova											Monaco											Mongolia											Montenegro											Morocco											Mozambique											Namibia											Nauru											Nepal											New Zealand											Nicaragua											Niger											Nigeria											North Korea											North Macedonia											Norway											Oman											Pakistan											Palau											Panama											Papua New Guinea											Paraguay											Peru											Philippines											Poland											Portugal											Qatar											Republic of the Congo											Romania											Russia											Rwanda											Saint Kitts and Nevis											Saint Lucia											Saint Vincent and the Grenadines											Samoa											San Marino											Sao Tome and Principe											Saudi Arabia											Senegal											Serbia											Seychelles											Sierra Leone											Singapore											Slovakia											Slovenia											Solomon Islands											Somalia											South Africa											South Korea											South Sudan											Spain											Sri Lanka											Sudan											Suriname											Sweden											Switzerland											Syria											Taiwan											Tajikistan											Tanzania											Thailand											The Gambia											The Netherlands											Timor-Leste											Togo											The Bahamas											Tonga											Trinidad and Tobago											Tunisia											Turkey (Türkiye)											Turkmenistan											Tuvalu											Uganda											Ukraine											United Arab Emirates											United Kingdom											Uruguay											Uzbekistan											Vanuatu											Venezuela											Vietnam											Yemen											Zambia											Zimbabwe															Build A Custom Report																						On This Page				search													>																										EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person																																							a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings																																																						b. Disappearance																																																						c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses																																																				Prison and Detention Center Conditions																																																																																				d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention																																																				Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees																																																																																				e. Denial of Fair Public Trial																																																				Trial Procedures																																												Political Prisoners and Detainees																																																																																				f. Transnational Repression																																																						g. Property Seizure and Restitution																																																						h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence																																																			Section 2. Respect for Civil Liberties																																							a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media																																																				Internet Freedom																																																																																				b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association																																																				Freedom of Peaceful Assembly																																																																																				c. Freedom of Religion																																																						d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country																																																						e. Protection of Refugees																																																			Section 3. Freedom to Participate in the Political Process																																							Elections and Political Participation																																																			Section 4. Corruption in Government																Section 5. Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights																Section 6. Discrimination and Societal Abuses																																							Women																																																						Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination																																																						Indigenous Peoples																																																						Children																																																						Antisemitism																																																						Trafficking in Persons																																																						Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics																																																						Persons with Disabilities																																																						Other Societal Violence or Discrimination																																																			Section 7. Worker Rights																																							a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining																																																						b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor																																																						c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment																																																						d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																																						e. Acceptable Conditions of Work																																																									Tags																					Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor																								Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs																								Ecuador
- Department Press Briefing – April 11, 2024 HomeDepartment Press Briefing – April 11, 2024				hide		if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}																										Department Press Briefing – April 11, 2024																																																					April 11, 2024																																																								2:16 p.m. EDTMR MILLER: Good afternoon, everyone. We have a couple of guests today. Run of show: Our Ambassador to the United Nations Linda Thomas-Greenfield is here along with our Special Envoy for Sudan Tom Perriello. Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield is going to kick it off with some open remarks. They’ll take a few questions about the conflict in Sudan, and then I will return for the remainder of the briefing.So, Ambassador.AMBASSADOR THOMAS-GREENFIELD: Thank you very much and good afternoon everyone. Let me just start by welcoming Special Envoy Tom Perriello back from Chad just last week but also welcome him back to the State Department. Last week, Tom traveled to Adré Refugee Camp right along the border of Sudan. It’s a trip that I know quite well. I was at that same refugee camp just a few months ago in September. I also visited the camp 20 years ago.Hundreds of thousands of Sudanese refugees had fled for this camp in the months prior – 90 percent of them women and children. And among those refugees was a six-month-old baby, born only days before the fighting broke out in Sudan. When I saw her, she was suffering from acute malnutrition – so small, so fragile, I thought she was a newborn. There is so much about her story that I don’t know: how she arrived at the MSF hospital, whether she ever left the hospital. But I think about her today as the world nears a grim milestone: one year of horrific civil war in Sudan; how she was born as her country spiraled into conflict; how she was carried into Chad, her protectors walking miles and miles to reach a semblance of safety; how she spent those formative few months in a hospital too small and weak to even cry as doctors tried desperately to nurse her back to health; and how now she reaches her first birthday having only known violence, hunger, and displacement.April 11th should be a historic occasion as we mark the five-year anniversary of the revolution that toppled the Omar al-Bashir’s regime, 30 – his 30-year reign. Five years ago, you could practically taste the spirit of freedom, peace, and democracy in the air as women and young people took to the streets demanding change. And yet that baby I met in September is not growing up in a free, peaceful, democratic Sudan. Instead, she’s one of millions whose lives have been upended and forever altered by this war.Today, nearly 25 million Sudanese people live in dire need of humanitarian assistance and protection; three-quarters of them face acute food insecurity. Nearly 8 million have had to flee their homes in what has become the world’s largest internal displacement crisis. We’ve seen reports of gang rape, mass murder at the hands of the Rapid Support Forces militia, of girls sold into sexual slavery, boys being made into child soldiers, of urban areas destroyed by arial weapons, and entire villages burned to the ground. And yet, as communities barrel toward famine, as cholera and measles spread, as violence continues to claim countless lives, the world has largely remained silent. And that must change and it has to change now. The international community must give more, it must do more, and it has to care more.And let’s start with the funding piece because that’s critical. To date, just 5 percent – 5 percent – of the UN’s humanitarian appeal for Sudan has been met. Already, the World Food Program has had to cut assistance to over 7 million people in Chad and South Sudan, and that includes 1.2 million refugees like the ones I met in Adré, people who were already struggling to feed themselves and their families.This is a matter of life and death. Experts warn that the coming weeks and months, over 200,000 more children could die of starvation. The United States, for our part, plans on significantly increasing our funding in the days to come.More than just lacking aid, however, humanitarian workers have been systematically obstructed from delivering aid to those in need. From the beginning, brave people have been on the ground, often putting their lives at risk, to save people in Sudan. But at every turn, combatants on both sides of the war have undermined their work. That includes the Sudanese Armed Forces, which has impeded the major humanitarian aid crossings from Chad into Darfur.And that’s where doing more comes in. Should the SAF not reverse course immediately, the Security Council must intervene to ensure lifesaving aid is delivered and distributed, including, if necessary, through a cross-border mechanism. What’s more, we must continue urging the warring parties to stop the fighting and get back to the negotiating table, as well as urge those outside supporters prolonging this conflict and enabling these atrocities to stop sending weapons to Sudan.Finally, I want to talk about the lack of care, the lack of attention, the world has paid to Sudan. Just five years after a revolution that offered a glimpse at a free, peaceful, democratic Sudan, people are losing hope. Aid workers have begun calling this conflict the forgotten war. Sudanese children are asking why the world has forgotten them. And let’s be clear: I don’t believe the dearth of attention is because people are ignorant or unfeeling. In fact, I believe it’s the opposite. I believe it’s because there are so many terrible crises, so much violence and pain, that people don’t quite know which way to turn.And this is where I need the help of all of you – the members of the press who join me in this briefing. As we mark one year of this conflict, please don’t let it go uncovered. Don’t let stories like the ones I heard in Chad go unheard. Don’t let perpetrators of this horrific violence go unexposed, from the generals who started the war to the backers who continue to fuel it. Don’t let the feeling that we have forgotten Sudan become a reality, because we need – we need to reignite that spirit of revolution, the hope and promise that characterized this day five years ago. I’m counting on you, and the people of Sudan are counting on you as well.So thank you, and Special Envoy Perriello and I will now take a few questions.MR MILLER: Matt, do you want to – do you have anything?QUESTION: I don’t really have anything.MR MILLER: Shaun.QUESTION: Sure, thanks. Thanks, Ambassador and Special Envoy. Could I ask you two things?Tom, you’ve said before that you’re hopeful with the end of Ramadan that the talks could resume. Do you think that that’s on the cards now? Do you see an interest – a strategic decision by both sides – to resume talks?And Ambassador, you mentioned a cross-border mechanism. I know you’ve spoken about that before. How close do you think we are to that becoming reality? Do you see that as realistically something that the Security Council with the vetoes there can push through?AMBASSADOR THOMAS-GREENFIELD: You want to come first?MR PERRIELLO: First. We do sense a great deal of urgency to resume talks. And in fact, talks are already ongoing in the sense that we are negotiating every day and trying to align key actors inside and outside with a plan that would end this war. We appreciate that Saudi Arabia has committed to hosting a new round of talks and that those will be inclusive talks. We hope that that will be a date that we can be able to announce soon and build momentum coming out of the gatherings in Paris and start to have a sense of when that date will be. But in the meantime, we are not waiting to continue to try to put pressure on the parties to come to the table, and we do think that there are some signs – while many, many signs point to the war getting even worse, in some ways it’s gotten so bad and it’s starting to have such regional implications that it’s also increased, I think, some of the diplomatic appetite to try to find an end to this war. And we’re going to try to use every lever we have to build that into enough political momentum and political will to end this war.AMBASSADOR THOMAS-GREENFIELD: Look, on the cross-border concept, we know that it is a concept that can work. It worked in Syria. We hope we don’t have to go there. We hope we don’t have to push for a resolution to go there. And for that reason, we’re engaging very actively with the SAF as well as the RSF and other parties on the ground to see how we can work with all of them to facilitate getting needed humanitarian assistance into these areas that is so desperately needed.But if we’re not able to work with them, if we’re not able to get their cooperation, then we have to find another way. We can’t sit back and not look for other opportunities to see – to get humanitarian assistance to people who are in desperate need.MR MILLER: Michele Kelemen in the back.QUESTION: Hi, thanks for taking my question. You talked about other countries fueling the conflict. I wonder if you can name them. What are you telling them? Because I think some of them are U.S. partners.AMBASSADOR THOMAS-GREENFIELD: Yeah, we &#8212;QUESTION: And what more can the U.S. do to put pressure on the political players in terms of sanctions?AMBASSADOR THOMAS-GREENFIELD: With all of the countries who have been identified as possibly fueling this conflict, we have had direct conversations with every single one of them to press them to cease their support and fueling of this war. They’ve been named in the press. We’ve seen the Emiratis be named in the press. We’ve seen Egypt be named in the press. There are others who have been identified in the press as well. And with all of them we have constant engagements, and I know that Tom has had those engagements as well.MR MILLER: (Off-mike.)QUESTION: Thank you. Just to elaborate a little bit more on that, to what extent is the UAE – can you talk about them helping the RSF and refusing to listen to U.S. messages to stop its weapons shipments? Can you speak about that at all?MR PERRIELLO: I think we’ve been making very clear to all partners across the region that escalating the war at this time is something that is going to not only have increasing humanitarian costs but actually risks destabilization of the entire region. We see a conflict that in some ways has been between two sides that shows signs of being increasingly factionalized in ways that brings in some of the tribal militias that have stayed neutral and affects the ability of some of the neighboring countries to – that have tried to stay – be constructive and not get more involved to get pulled in. And right now is a time that every arms shipment, every bit fueling this conflict, is something that pushes us closer to not only famine, but to a failed state. And the flip side is this is a situation in which everyone in the region can benefit from a peaceful and stable Sudan. The Sudanese people are extremely clear about what they want. They want a return to the constitutional transition begun with great courage just a few years ago. They want to see a unified professional military that is accountable to the people. They want to see not a return of extremists and former corrupt officials. And they want that full humanitarian access.And I think they’re going to be looking across the region at who stood with the Sudanese people at this time of great crisis, and who was pouring fuel on the fire. And those consequences for those that are making the situation worse need to increase, and I think we are seeing particularly around this anniversary on the 15th that finally some attention is being paid to this issue, and we need those actors to know that the world is watching. And we need that not to just be one day, but that people continue to cover the sheer scale of this – this tragedy, but also cover the inspiring stories. If you look at the emergency response rooms, you see young Sudanese who’ve created cash apps in local kitchens to completely disrupt the kind of barriers being set up by the belligerent actors to get food into some of the hardest-hit areas. These are stories of courage and of innovation, and ones that are literally a lifeline for many of the Sudanese left behind.MR MILLER: We have time for one more. Simon.QUESTION: Just to follow up on this point about the direct conversations with countries fueling the conflict, does that include Iran? And we’ve reported that Iranian-made armed drones have had a big impact on the course of the war. Is – so is that something that you’re – you’ve communicated directly with Iran on? Are they included in those countries? And what would be the message &#8212;AMBASSADOR THOMAS-GREENFIELD: We’ve had numerous discussions with countries in the region. And in those discussions with countries in the region, we’ve encouraged them to encourage other countries like Iran not to engage. I won’t get into what discussions we may or may not have had with Iran, but in our discussions with other countries in the region we’ve also asked for their assistance in pressing each other as well as others to stop fueling this war.QUESTION: (Off-mike.)MR PERRIELLO: And the one thing I would just – sorry – add on that is I think this speaks to the idea that for people in the region, there are many, many reasons to become pro-peace right now. The continuation of this conflict and the introduction of additional actors and additional negative elements only takes the situation into a more destabilizing direction in addition to the human costs of this. And we think it’s very important for people to notice those trend lines and see that this is an opportunity and a moment to switch from either not paying attention, or playing a not-constructive role, to realizing we all benefit, everyone in the region will benefit from finding a path to peace.MR MILLER: Thank you &#8212;AMBASSADOR THOMAS-GREENFIELD: Thank you.MR MILLER: &#8212; to you both.AMBASSADOR THOMAS-GREENFIELD: Okay, thank you.MR MILLER: Ambassador.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Okay. So before we get to questions, I have just a couple opening comments about the situation in the Middle East.We continue to be concerned about the risk of escalation in the Middle East – it’s something we have been working to mitigate and contain since the attacks of October 7th – and specifically about the threats made in recent days by Iran against the State of Israel and the Israeli people. You saw the President make clear yesterday that we stand in strong support of Israel’s security against these threats. Secretary Blinken has been engaged in diplomacy over the past 24 hours through a series of calls to foreign counterparts, including Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, and Saudi Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan to make clear that escalation is not in anyone’s interest, and that countries should urge Iran not to escalate. We have also engaged with European allies and partners over the past few days and urged them as well to send a clear message to Iran that escalation is not in Iran’s interest, it’s not in the region’s interest, and it’s not in the world’s interest.Separately, the Secretary spoke yesterday to Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant to reiterate our strong support for Israel against these threats. On that call, the Secretary also emphasized the importance of Israel meeting the commitments that Prime Minister Netanyahu made to President Biden last week to improve the delivery of humanitarian assistance into Gaza, and to put in place enhanced deconfliction and coordination measures. Our teams, including our Special Envoy for Middle East Humanitarian Issues David Satterfield, have been meeting with Israeli, UN, and private relief organizations this week to push forward on all of those fronts. And while we have seen progress, it is critical that that initial progress continue and that it be sustained. And that is the message we have been delivering consistently to the Government of Israel.And with that, Matt.QUESTION: Right. Thanks, Matt. Just to – logistically, the calls that you just mentioned with the Turk, the Chinese, and the Saudi foreign ministers were all today?MR MILLER: He talked to the Turkish foreign minister last night, he talked to Wang Yi this morning, and then – early this morning, and then talked to the Saudi foreign minister later this morning.QUESTION: Okay. Are there others planned as well?MR MILLER: I don’t have any calls to announce, but we have been engaged in a series of contacts – not just at his level, but at other levels too – to talk to foreign counterparts to send this very clear message to Iran that they should not escalate this conflict.QUESTION: All right. I didn’t want to raise this with the previous two speakers, because obviously the Sudan situation is a situation in and of itself. But so much of what they said very powerfully about the conflict in Sudan could also – or does also apply to what’s happening in Gaza. And when they say – when the ambassador and special envoy talk about how every arms shipment leads us closer to famine and a failed state, do you not think that that same logic applies in Gaza?MR MILLER: I would &#8212;QUESTION: Just because it’s you who are supplying the weapons as opposed to whoever it is – the Iranians, the Emiratis, the Egyptians, whoever it is that’s supplying the weapons in Sudan – doesn’t the same thing apply?MR MILLER: I would say that we are incredibly concerned about the humanitarian situation in Gaza, and that’s why you’ve seen the United States Government working to get more humanitarian assistance in and it’s why we’ve been pushing the Israeli Government so hard to let more humanitarian assistance in and to improve their deconfliction and coordination measures so there isn’t such a loss of political life.And then on the political front, it’s why we have been pushing with partners in the region to develop a plan for post-conflict governance in Gaza so we don’t see a failed state, so we don’t see anarchy in Gaza, so we see a path forward for the Palestinian people’s legitimate aspirations. That is very much the policy that we are trying to pursue and that we have been engaged in in this administration from the President on down.QUESTION: But is it correct then, though, that the administration believes that every arms shipment to Sudan leads us closer to famine and a failed state – that that does not apply &#8212;MR MILLER: You have a very &#8212;QUESTION: &#8212; in Gaza?MR MILLER: You have a very &#8212;QUESTION: I get that, but &#8212;MR MILLER: You have a very – it is – they’re – it is a very different situation in Sudan, where you have a brutal civil war, two warring parties trying to seize control of the government; and in Israel, where you have Israel responding to a terrorist attack against its people and trying to achieve a legitimate counterterrorism and military purpose. That does not change at all the severity of the humanitarian situation, which is why we have been working so hard to improve that humanitarian situation for the people in Gaza.QUESTION: So you don’t think that arms shipment to Israel leads us closer to famine and &#8212;MR MILLER: We have continued to support Israel’s right to &#8212;QUESTION: Is that correct?MR MILLER: We have &#8212;QUESTION: I just – I don’t know.MR MILLER: Let me say &#8212;QUESTION: It doesn’t matter to me one way or the other what you say, but &#8212;MR MILLER: They are different conflicts, but the – I’d say &#8212;QUESTION: I know they are, but I’m just asking you &#8212;MR MILLER: I would say &#8212;QUESTION: They made the point in Sudan &#8212;MR MILLER: And I’m answering the &#8212;QUESTION: &#8212; and I just want to know if you have – if you feel the same way about Gaza.MR MILLER: They are very different conflicts, but the humanitarian situation in Gaza is dire, and that is why we are working so hard from the President on down to get more humanitarian assistance in, and it’s why we are working to improve deconfliction and coordination so we don’t see such a high number of civilian casualties as we have seen over the past six months.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Shaun, go ahead.QUESTION: Can I just press you briefly on the – what – on the opening comments on calling Wang Yi and others? I realize you’re probably not going to give a full readout, but how successful was that? I mean, do you think there’s an interest from these other countries as well to see Iran not escalate?MR MILLER: So I’m not going to speak for any of those other countries. I will let them speak for themselves. But the point that the Secretary has been making to each of these counterparts – foreign counterparts, both those in the region and foreign counterparts outside of the region – is that further escalation of this conflict doesn’t just hurt Israel, doesn’t just hurt Iran, doesn’t just hurt the countries in the region, but that it harms every country in the world. Every country in the world would be hurt by wider regional conflict. Every country in the world would be hurt by wider regional war, both economically, diplomatically. And so the Secretary has been making clear to every country that has any semblance of a relationship with Iran that it is in their interest to use that relationship to send a message to Iran that they should not escalate this conflict. But I will let those countries speak for themselves about what action they may or may not take.QUESTION: And I have to ask – I know this has been asked before – but Iran, of course, argues that a diplomatic facility was struck in Damascus. Has there been an assessment at this point from the United States whether this was indeed a strike on a diplomatic facility?MR MILLER: We do not have a final determination. It’s something we’re still assessing.QUESTION: Is it – do you think there will be an assessment at some point from the U.S. on that?MR MILLER: I do, but it’s something we’re continuing to work through.QUESTION: Matt, on this.MR MILLER: Yeah, Michel, go ahead.QUESTION: Reports say today that Iran delayed or changed plans to attack Israel at the last moment due to U.S. warnings. Can you confirm that? And do you still expect an Iranian reaction to the attack on Damascus?MR MILLER: So I’m not going to speak to what Iran may or may not do, or what our assessments are. You don’t need an Intelligence Community assessment to see the threats that Iran has been making. They’ve been making those threats quite publicly and quite loudly over the past few days. So we will continue to send the message to them that it is not in their interest to escalate this conflict and it’s not in the region’s broader interest, and we hope other partners will send that same message.QUESTION: Can I follow on Iran?MR MILLER: Yeah, go ahead, Nadia.QUESTION: Sure. I wanted to ask this question actually to the ambassador, but the Iranian mission at the UN said that basically if the U.S. – or the Security Council, rather, condemn the attack on the consulate in Damascus, this could – any retaliation could’ve been avoided. So is this your understanding, that actually you don’t condemn it because you cannot verify whether it is a diplomatic mission or not? And also, do you think that Israel can go and attack any other diplomatic mission if this is proved to be actually a diplomatic mission, and you don’t expect any country to retaliate? Just explain those points.MR MILLER: So a few – a few things in order. First of all, I think that’s a pretty flimsy excuse from the Iranian Government. If they don’t want to widen this conflict and they don’t want to attack Israel, they don’t need permission from anyone else either at the United Nations or – they just have to make the decision not to do that, and that’s the decision that they should make.Now, with respect to your second question, no, we do not want to see attacks on diplomatic facilities. We oppose attacks on diplomatic facilities. We continue to assess the exact status of that facility in Damascus, and don’t have a final determination on that question.QUESTION: Okay.QUESTION: Can I do a follow-up on Iran?MR MILLER: Said, go ahead.QUESTION: Can I – yeah. I – not Iran, but &#8212;MR MILLER: Go ahead.QUESTION: Like Matt, I was struck with what the ambassador said, the similarity. You could change the word “Sudan” for “the Palestinians” or “Gaza” and it’d be exactly the same, with one difference. I mean, you don’t have any control over the conflict in Sudan, but you certainly have control &#8212;MR MILLER: Said, that’s – let me just say &#8212;QUESTION: Can I just finish my question? I have not asked my question.MR MILLER: Fine, fair enough. Go ahead.QUESTION: So my question to you is: Why has the United States not taken its – the moral high ground and its ability and its leverage to end this conflict, as it can? We have seen this happen in the past. We’ve seen it happen in 1982. We’ve seen it happen with this administration in May – in 2021. So my question to you: Why has not this administration taken that step to end this conflict now?MR MILLER: So first of all, Said, they are very different conflicts and very different situations, and that’s incredibly important. The conflict in Sudan is two warring military factions, following a coup that overthrew a democratic government, who are fighting for control of Sudan. That is a different question than the conflict in Gaza that was started not by Israel, but by Hamas – Hamas launching a brutal terrorist attack that killed over 1,200 Israelis and citizens of other foreign countries. And Israel has the right to hold Hamas accountable for those attacks, as the United States would, as other countries in the region would, as any country in the world if it were the victim of such a brutal terrorist attack.That said, we are trying to bring this conflict to an end. You have seen us work to try to achieve a ceasefire, an immediate ceasefire of at least six weeks that would bring the hostages home and that we have said consistently we would like to see widen into a broader end to the conflict. You have seen us work on post-conflict governance to try to find a path forward for the Palestinian people’s legitimate political aspirations. And you have seen us work to address the very, very severe needs of the Palestinian people in Gaza. So we are working to try and do exactly that.QUESTION: Okay, let let me just follow up.QUESTION: A follow-up?MR MILLER: Please don’t interrupt.QUESTION: Let me just follow up.MR MILLER: Just let me go – I’ll go through the questions and get to who I get to.QUESTION: If I may, I just want to follow up. I mean, you talked about Palestinian legitimate aspirations and so on, but insisting that this conflict began on October 7th does not recognize that, does it? Does it recognize that this – that the Palestinians have legitimate aspirations that go back 75 years, not just to October 7th?MR MILLER: So they do have legitimate political aspirations that go back decades. It has been the policy of the United States for decades to try to achieve two states. But, Said, I don’t want to – not only I don’t want to, I fundamentally degree – or disagree that October 7th had anything to do with trying to answer the Palestinian people’s legitimate political aspirations. It was a terrorist attack targeting civilians, that killed civilians, by a terrorist group that does not recognize the existence of the State of Israel. So when you look at trying to achieve a peaceful resolution to the decades of violence and the decades of political conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians, it is Hamas that has firmly rejected a political solution to that decades-long dispute.QUESTION: Yeah, but do you – do you acknowledge that Gaza was under siege for basically 17 years and &#8212;MR MILLER: Said &#8212;QUESTION: &#8212; every other year there would be an attack and a war by Israel, time after time after time, killing hundreds and thousands of Palestinians?MR MILLER: Said, there – there have been incidents going back in this dispute, in this conflict for decades. Nothing that happened in – on either side justifies the attacks of October 7th.QUESTION: Can I just have a quick question on Iran before we &#8212;MR MILLER: Yeah, go ahead.QUESTION: Just one, there are reports of the Iranian foreign minister coming to New York City next week to visit the UN. I’m wondering how the U.S. assesses the likelihood of an Iranian attack happening during that period of time, if it would have any attack – any impact at all?MR MILLER: I don’t want to speak to a timeframe. We’re obviously very concerned about the threat of an Iranian attack. We’ve made that clear from the President on down, but I don’t want to put any kind of timeframe on it. We were hoping, of course, to avoid such an attack in the first place.QUESTION: Do you think it’s moving in the direction of avoiding one?MR MILLER: I don’t want to give any type of assessment. As I said, it is not in Iran’s interest, it’s not in anyone’s in the region – anyone the region’s interest for Iran to escalate this conflict. And that’s the message we are sending to them.QUESTION: Wait, you were hoping to avoid an attack in the first place? Has one happened?MR MILLER: An attack by Iran. Yeah, we’re – no, one has not happened. We are &#8212;QUESTION: Well, weren’t you hoping to avoid the Israelis attacking an Iranian diplomatic facility?MR MILLER: I – her question – her question was – her – hold on.QUESTION: I know, but you – but you made it &#8212;MR MILLER: No, hold on, let me just answer the question.QUESTION: Your answer to her seemed to suggest &#8212;MR MILLER: My &#8212;QUESTION: &#8212; that you thought the Iranians had already retaliated.MR MILLER: No, my – well, that’s not what I was suggesting.QUESTION: Okay. All right.MR MILLER: My answer was in the context of the question she asked me, which was about an attack coming next week.QUESTION: Fair enough.MR MILLER: So let’s go – let me – just in – yeah.QUESTION: On that call, just – the call with the Turkish foreign minister, was it purely Iran call or did they have a chance to discuss Ukraine, the Caucasus, President Erdogan’s upcoming trip? And why Türkiye? Do you guys believe that Türkiye has enough leverage to move the needle on Iran – they have Iran’s ear?MR MILLER: It’s not just Türkiye; it’s a number of countries. It’s other countries as well that have relationships with Iran – Saudi Arabia, China. And we have made other – have had other diplomatic engagements with countries in Europe and other countries in the world because we want to send a very unified message. With respect to the call itself, the primary purpose of the call was to discuss Iran’s threats against Israel. There were other issues discussed, but I don’t want to get into those any further.QUESTION: Last thing, because we have a statement from Khamenei last night saying that any Islamic countries supporting Israel or not supporting their narratives, they’re engaged in treason.MR MILLER: Any countries that what?QUESTION: Any Islamic countries that do not fall in line with their narratives, they are engaged – they’re engaged with treason. I’m just wondering how much this – your calculation of calling Türkiye in this case is part of &#8212;MR MILLER: So it doesn’t &#8212;QUESTION: &#8212; fits into this &#8212;MR MILLER: &#8212; have anything to do with the with those comments. Obviously, his comments are not – are ones that wouldn’t be – just be rejected by the United States but would be rejected by other countries in the region.QUESTION: I have different coverage of questions. Please come back to me.MR MILLER: Let me stay in the region and then we’ll – yeah, go ahead.QUESTION: Thanks. On the hostage talks, can you give any update on whether there’s been a response from Hamas? And also, is there a level of concern in the U.S. Government about the Israeli strike that killed Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh’s family members and how that might affect the talks?MR MILLER: I’m not going to give any update on the talk – excuse me – the talks themselves, other than that we continue to engage in them and try to pursue a successful resolution.With respect to those strikes, I certainly hope that it will not, but I wouldn’t want to make any kind of assessments.Stay – want to stay in the region? Nadia, go ahead. And then we’ll come back.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: There is a record number of land that has been confiscated in the West Bank that came out today. It’s like between 2018 and 2023 is 5,900 acres have been confiscated. The administration has always talked about this two-state solution, and the major – one of the major obstacles is settlements. So if this land has been taken and there’s – just like condemnation from the administration but actually there is nothing practical that we see that will stop this land from being taken, that will undermine the President’s vision. So what – or how can you go forward when actually there’s not even base for to have a state in the future?MR MILLER: So two things. First, we have made consistently clear that we oppose further settlement activity in the West Bank. We think they are a barrier to peace; we think they are inconsistent with international humanitarian law.And I will just say, to put those actions in the larger context, there have been a number of things that the Government of Israel has done over time that we have said are detrimental to Israel’s long-term security. Obviously, settlements in the West Bank are one of them. There are other actions that it has taken in Gaza that we think are detrimental to Israel’s long-term security.So what fundamentally it comes down to is we are working, as you know, with partners in the region to develop a path forward for Israel and the Palestinian people that we would present to them, that would provide for post-conflict governance in Gaza, that would have a component to reconstruct Gaza, that would provide further assurances for Israel’s security by its partners in the region, and there are other countries ready to step up.And so I’m making this a broader answer, because all of this relates to that very question. It’s not just about settlements; it’s about what kind of future the Israeli people see for them in the region. And ultimately – and we’re not there yet, because we’ve not finished this plan and we’ve not presented it to the people of Israel and the Government of Israel – but ultimately, this is a choice that Israel’s going to have to make.QUESTION: Okay, just very quickly, the ambassador made a passionate appeal to us, the press corps, to cover Sudan, not to forget civilians, rightly so. But we haven’t hear from any senior officials the same appeal about Palestinian civilians in Gaza. Number one, we have many journalists who’ve been killed, including our colleagues. We don’t hear any – apart from condemnation, nothing is being done to protect them. And second, why can’t the United States allow independent journalists to go to Gaza, since you don’t have anybody on the ground, so they will have access and tell us what’s happening there?MR MILLER: So a few things. First of all, the reason you heard the ambassador make that appeal with respect to Sudan – and this is not for me to play editor or segment producer – but it is that we don’t see as much coverage about atrocities in Sudan. We don’t see as much coverage about the plight of the Sudanese people. We do see a lot of coverage of the Palestinians in Gaza, appropriately so, but I think her point was that we would welcome seeing coverage of this very difficult conflict that we are trying to resolve in Sudan.When it comes to journalists in Gaza, we have made clear on a number of occasions that we want to see journalists protected. And the coordination and deconfliction measures that we have been pushing the Government of Israel on so hard, that the President pushed the Government of Israel on in his call on Friday, would ultimately help with journalism and make it safer for journalists to operate inside Gaza.And I’ll just make it very clear that we have pressed the Government of Israel directly to allow journalists to go into Gaza. It’s not something that we control, but we have made clear that we all benefit from seeing what’s happening on the ground, that we know what’s happening there – not because we have U.S. officials there, many other countries don’t have officials there, but because of journalists who are putting their lives on the line to bring us those stories. And we’ve made clear to the Government of Israel that we think they ought to let more journalists in.QUESTION: Israel?MR MILLER: Yeah. Go ahead. And then I’ll come to you, and then we’ll start taking other ones. I’m going to come to you, Janne, but I know – I doubt it’s an Israel question, so that’s why I’m moving around the room first.QUESTION: There’s some &#8212;MR MILLER: You may surprise me, so I’ll just &#8212;QUESTION: Yes, yes. (Laughter.)MR MILLER: Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you. Thank you, Matt. America has a number of allies. What message do they receive when America harangues one its closest allies, Israel, and their democratically elected leader Benjamin Netanyahu? And a follow-up.MR MILLER: I think the message they should see is that we want Israel to live up to its values, that we want to see Israel live up to the same standards that we expect every country in the world, including ourselves, to live up to.QUESTION: Thank you. Benjamin Netanyahu is the longest serving prime minister in Israel’s history. Clearly a majority of Israelis agree with his policies, since the majority of voters keep re-electing him. How does this mesh with what President Biden seems to be calling for, which is essentially a rejection of Israeli democracy?MR MILLER: So first, I think that is a vast conflation of two very different things. So it is up to the Israeli people to choose their leaders. We strongly support their right to choose their leaders, as we do for the people of every country in the world. But we are going to engage with the governments that they choose to talk with them about what we think are the policies that are in our interest, what are the policies that are in their interest.And you have heard – the President himself spoke to this in the week right after October 7th, when he made the point – these aren’t the exact words, but it’s the general gist – that sometimes in the aftermath of a horrific event your vision can be clouded, and you can make mistakes. And we are there to offer them our very best advice as a country that’s made mistakes in the aftermath of horrific events and try to keep them from making some of those same mistakes.QUESTION: Well, it seems like there is an attempt to demonize the current Israeli Government, there are efforts to support the overthrow of the Israeli Government with a lot of protests and so forth.MR MILLER: So that is not – and that is not what you’ve seen from this administration. We’ve traveled to Israel – the Secretary has been there – eight times I believe since October 7th meeting with Prime Minister Netanyahu. The President has been there and talks to Prime Minister Netanyahu all the time. The Secretary just talked to the defense minister yesterday. We fully support the right of the Israeli people to decide who their leaders are.QUESTION: Thank you.QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. As Secretary Blinken spoke with the regional leaders about sending a message to Iran, were there any connections with Iraqi leaders to send any message to Iran &#8212;MR MILLER: I don’t have any – I don’t have any engagements to read out today.QUESTION: Okay. And have you received any signals from the Iranian Government that they taking these messages into their consideration?MR MILLER: I’m just not going to speak for the Iranian Government at all.QUESTION: And in the past few times the Iranian use it to – use its baseless accusation to attack the Erbil and also Kurdistan region in their response to the threats from Israel. Is there something that you’re concerned maybe Iran this time use the same justification and to attack the U.S. allies and U.S. friends in the region in their retaliation for that attack?MR MILLER: So two things. We have made clear to them that they shouldn’t escalate this conflict in any way – with respect to Israel, with respect to others in the region, with respect to U.S. forces. One of the first messages we sent to them when the Iranians were making these baseless claims that the U.S. was involved in the strike in Damascus is that that is not true, we weren’t involved, we didn’t know about it, and you should not use this as a pretext to strike U.S. forces in the region, including in Iraq, as we have seen their proxy groups do over the past few months and the past few years.QUESTION: And last thing. Have you granted visa for the Iranian foreign minister to attend the Security Council?MR MILLER: We never speak to visa records. They’re confidential by law, and so I can’t speak to visa records from here. But as has long been the case, we take our obligations as the host of the United Nations very seriously.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Janne.QUESTION: So when he shows up in New York, we can just assume that that’s confirmation that he got a visa?MR MILLER: Well, you can’t travel here without one. So I can’t speak to it, but you can’t travel here without one. But I would note that Iranian foreign ministers have traveled to New York &#8212;QUESTION: Yes, they have.MR MILLER: &#8212; under administrations of both parties, including the last one.QUESTION: Yes. No, I’m not suggesting that there’s anything inappropriate or untoward about it. It’s just that I just – I mean, it’s ridiculous. The guy shows up in New York, if he shows up in New York, it’s pretty damn clear that he got a visa.MR MILLER: I would welcome your advocacy to the United States Congress to change the law and allow me to speak more about any number of things from here, not just visa records.Janne, go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you. I didn’t surprise you today that I had to ask this. (Laughter.) Yeah, I had to ask Ambassador Greenfield and I hope you can answer this, all right?MR MILLER: I’ll do my best.QUESTION: Okay, are you ready? Ambassador Greenfield will be visit South Korea this weekend. What agenda will she discuss with the South Korea? Also she will visit to Panmunjom this time?MR MILLER: So I said I’d do my best. I’m afraid I’m going to disappoint you. I am not in a position to preview her trip. She does have a press office in New York, and I would urge you to send the inquiry there. Go ahead.QUESTION: That’s why you didn’t give me any chance to ask it?MR MILLER: She had a limited time. Sorry.QUESTION: Okay.MR MILLER: I would have loved her to stay longer. The more questions she takes, the fewer I have to – not that I don’t enjoy our lengthy engagements.QUESTION: She can take – all right, second question quick. The United Nations Security Council’s expert panel on sanctions against North Korea was disconnected. Will the U.S. submit a report together with the other countries, and do you expect to discuss with the South Korea or Japan about the continuation of this report?MR MILLER: So as I’ve said in the past from this podium, we are incredibly disappointed that Russia chose to block that panel from going forward. And I don’t have any specific actions to preview today, but we are engaged with our allies and partners in other ways to continue to monitor North Korea’s nuclear aspirations.QUESTION: Have you any discussion when the – I mean, Prime Minister Kishida was here? Do you have any chance to discuss it?MR MILLER: I would defer to the White House to speak to those engagements.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Go ahead.QUESTION: Hey, Matt. I’m going to ask you about your new Diversity and Inclusion Chief Zakiya Carr Johnson. She’s drawing new criticism for past comments. In a 2019 piece she claimed America’s organizations and institutions were, quote, “riddled with racism, patriarchy, and exclusion,” that they refused to reconcile with the colonizing past, and called them a, quote, “failed historic model.” Do you find those comments problematic?MR MILLER: So I would say that, first of all, our new Chief Diversity and Inclusion Officer Zakiya Carr Johnson is one of the most qualified experts in this field. She has 20 years of experience working to expand diversity, and it’s something that we see as important here at the State Department that the Secretary has put a premium on because he believes that when our workforce looks like America and reflects the full diversity of America, our workforce is stronger and our ability to protect America’s national security is improved and enhanced. And that’s why he selected her to do this incredibly important job.Second of all, with respect to her quote, I have seen that people have used excerpts, have not used the full context of it. But I would say a lot of this criticism seems to be from individuals. I saw former officials tweeting about this.QUESTION: Secretary Pompeo took the hardest &#8212;MR MILLER: Certain former officials who don’t seem – for whatever reason – to support our work to expand diversity inside the State Department. And that’s just where we have an honest agreement – disagreement where we think that’s work that we ought to do and we ought to hire experts who have experience in doing that. And that’s what we’re going to continue to do, and I think we’re just going to have to disagree with some of those critics.QUESTION: Can I just lastly read you – Secretary Pompeo obviously worked here in the building. He said, quote, “The State Department should be staffed by individuals who love America and believe in our core principles, not ideologues who think that America represents a ‘failed historic model.’” Do you want to respond to that?MR MILLER: Well, apparently, he believes there are different ways to love America, because one of the ways we believe you can best love America is to love its full diversity and build a workforce that reflects that full diversity.Alex. I’ll come to you next. Alex, sorry.QUESTION: Okay. Thank you so much. Turning to Ukraine &#8212;MR MILLER: Sorry, I should not mumble my &#8212;QUESTION: No, no, no. Thank so much. Let’s turn to Ukraine if I may. Going back to last night’s strikes, which Ukraine believes that was designed to maximize attacks on infrastructure, what is your reaction and what is your take of the state of play on the battlefield? And do you still believe that Ukraine doesn’t have a right to retaliate?MR MILLER: So we have seen Russia, unfortunately, continue to attack Ukraine’s energy infrastructure. That’s something they’ve done not just overnight but over the past couple of years. And I would say for us it comes back to the need for Congress to fully fund, fully pass the President’s supplemental request. And it goes directly to this question you asked me about the situation on the battlefield where we have seen Ukrainian armed forces having to ration artillery shells, having to ration ammunition. And of course that has an effect on their ability to fight the war and an effect on their ability to repel Russian troops, and it’s why it is so urgent for Congress to act.QUESTION: Is any active restrictions on Ukraine imposed from the U.S., by the U.S., to prevent them from retaliating &#8212;MR MILLER: So &#8212;QUESTION: &#8212; this obvious steps will take it back to Russia.MR MILLER: So two things. We have made clear that we do not encourage strikes outside of Ukraine, and we do not enable those strikes with U.S.-provided weapons and that we don’t want to see U.S.-provided weapons used for strikes outside Ukraine. Ultimately, when it comes to deciding how to prosecute this war, those are Ukrainian decisions, but we do not encourage or enable such strikes.QUESTION: Can I have one more if may on Georgia? So what – as you have learned during the past couple of days since Georgia – Georgia Government – moved forward and submitted the Russian law, I’m just curious, like, what – you made it clear this is taking Georgia away from European path. Do you witness democratic backsliding in Georgia? Is that your analysis?MR MILLER: I don’t want to make any broader assessment than the assessment I made the other day that pertains to this specific law that we believe would harm civil society organizations working to improve the lives of Georgian citizens and would derail Georgia from its European path. It’s still draft legislation, and I’ll leave it at that.QUESTION: Has anyone from this building reached out to Georgia or &#8212;MR MILLER: Let me move on just because we’re running short of time.Michel.QUESTION: On Bahrain, Matt, do you have any comments on the release of more than 1,500 prisoners?MR MILLER: We did see that step by the Government of Bahrain. We welcome very much the decision by the king to pardon over 1,500 prisoners along with the government’s announcement April 9th that they will work to help the recently released find employment.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Yeah, go ahead.Shaun, I’m sorry – well, go ahead, and I’ll come back.QUESTION: That’s all right.MR MILLER: This time I promise I’ll come back to you.QUESTION: Thanks, Matt. In meeting alongside President Biden with President Kishida, did the pending deal between U.S. Steel and Nippon Steel come up?MR MILLER: I will let the White House speak to those comments. In fact, I believe the President addressed them yesterday. Or speak to that question, I should say.QUESTION: And on Wednesday, President Xi held a meeting with former president of Taiwan Ma, who supports closer ties with China. Does the department have any reaction to this meeting?MR MILLER: No, I do not.Shaun, go ahead.QUESTION: Two things, one going back to Ukraine. The Swiss have announced a conference on Ukraine. This is in light of Zelenskyy’s visit in Davos and the peace formula he has. Russia has had some strong words about it, saying that it was part of – it’s part of the Biden re-election campaign, I think; that the U.S. is behind it. Does the U.S have any comment on this – on whether the U.S. will participate or whether it sees utility in the conference?MR MILLER: So I don’t speak to campaign matters &#8212;QUESTION: I realize &#8212;MR MILLER: &#8212; but that doesn’t show a lot of confidence in the Swiss Government’s ability to conduct their own foreign policy matters. I would say obviously that is an absurd allegation by the Russian Government. I can’t preview – I believe that conference is still several weeks away. I can’t preview what the U.S. participation would be, but we have supported Ukraine’s diplomatic efforts. We have supported Ukraine’s peace formula. We have support President Zelenskyy making his case to other countries in the world, and we will – that will continue to be our policy. But we have seen consistently that Russia has not been willing to engage in real diplomacy about a path forward for Ukraine. Ukraine has made clear that at the right time they would welcome that, and they have not had a willing partner in Russia.QUESTION: And just briefly – I mean, do you generally speaking think it’s useful for the Swiss to hold this – your support of – regardless of the participation of &#8212;MR MILLER: Look, so our policy on this has always been nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine. If this is a diplomatic meeting that the Ukrainian Government supports and wants to engage in, we certainly support their right to do so. I don’t have any further comment on the conference itself as it – or how it’s going to shape up.QUESTION: Sure. Just one completely separate issue briefly, Mali. I don’t know if you’ve followed the latest developments there – a ban on activities of political parties and then the ban on media coverage of political parties.MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: Anything to say about that?MR MILLER: We are deeply concerned about the Malian transition government’s decree suspending all political activities until further notice. Freedom of expression and freedom of association are critical to an open society. The transition government has already made a decision not to hold an election in February 2024 to return to a civilian-led, democratic government despite the commitment that it made publicly in 2022 to do so. We call on Mali’s transition government to honor its commitments to its citizens and hold free and fair elections. In Mali and elsewhere, democracy remains the best foundation for stability and prosperity.Simon.QUESTION: I want to ask about another conflict which is often getting forgotten, which is in Myanmar – Myanmar or Burma. The rebel – alliance of rebel forces have taken one of the – well, the main border crossing with Thailand recently. The situation is very fluid in this conflict. Wondering – this is right up against, obviously, a U.S. ally. Are you having any – is there any diplomacy going on from the U.S. with Thailand about how they should be dealing with this? They’ve got refugees coming across the border, the junta forces reportedly trying to sort of use Thailand as a – taking flights into Thailand to try to sort of push back the rebels in this case. So I’m wondering if – if the U.S. has any new sort of actions that you’ve been taking as this has been developing.MR MILLER: So we have been incredibly concerned about potential spillover this – of this conflict. It’s something that we have been focused on. With respect to any engagements with Thailand, let me take that back and get you an answer. I don’t have anything to read out.QUESTION: Matt?MR MILLER: Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you, sir. Due to situation in Gaza, there is too much hate spreading all around the world, even here in U.S. as well. Is it a concern?MR MILLER: It’s absolutely a concern. You’ve heard the Secretary speak to this on a number of occasions, including in Israel, when he said that we – the worst thing that can happen is people dehumanizing each other, and that once you see people on either side of this conflict dehumanizing each other, it gives license – not actual license, but gives them – they give themselves license to do any sorts of things that we would oppose and that are not in anyone’s interests. So it’s absolutely one of our concerns.We have unfortunately seen a rise in antisemitism. We have seen a rise in anti-Muslim summit, and the President has spoken to this. It’s something we’ve been incredibly concerned about both here at home and around the world.QUESTION: Sir, many religious scholars and others trying to portray this situation as a war between Muslims and Jews, while many others believe it is just a territorial conflict. What is your position on this? And what are we going to say to those spreading hate in our communities?MR MILLER: So I don’t want to – we would – obviously don’t want to see anyone spreading hate in any form, and I would just say that we are trying to bring an end to this conflict as soon as possible and find a durable solution to this conflict, because it is in the interests of Muslims and Jews and Christians, Israelis, other countries in the region alike. It is in the interest of all parties to see this conflict end, and that’s what we’re trying to accomplish.QUESTION: Sir, one last question, if I may. Sir, you always talk about two-state solution, but whatever is happening right now, it seems impossible. So is United States, partners, and mediators trying to explore other options to bring peace in the region?MR MILLER: So I spoke to this a little bit in response to an earlier question. We think ultimately that is the path forward, and I know it’s incredibly difficult and it looks incredibly bleak, but it is our assessment that at the end of this conflict – it is going to end – that if there is not a path forward, Israel is going to be back with the same security risks it has had since before October 7th. It is going to be in the same position with respect to a lack of relationships with all of its neighbors. And it is in Israel’s broader security interests to find a path forward for reconciliation with the Palestinian people, as difficult as that seems, and so that’s why we’re going to continue to pursue it.Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you very much, Matt. Just three questions. One is – come on, it’s my sixth briefing. Three questions is not too bad.MR MILLER: Oh, just go ahead.QUESTION: So with regard to Iran, please correct me if I am wrong that this administration has basically made Iran more stronger in these past few years till now, this threatening that has started. But can you confirm whether Pakistan and Iran – you have information that Iran is supporting the ISIS in Pakistan right now, these recent terrorist activities? Do you have any information that it’s the Iranian regime that is doing this or no?MR MILLER: So I would obviously disagree with your characterization. I’m not going to get into a long rebuttal about something we’ve spoken to a number of times, but no, I do not have information to suggest that.QUESTION: Okay, sir. My second question is about ex-Prime Minister of Pakistan Shahid Khaqan Abbasi, who is – was prime minister from this ruling family where Shehbaz Sharif is prime minister. He said himself just last week that this current regime has stolen the mandate. Basically, Shehbaz Sharif should not be a prime minister of Pakistan. Do you agree with him on that or no?MR MILLER: Ultimately, as you’ve heard me say once or twice from this podium, decisions about the Pakistani Government are for the Pakistani people to make.QUESTION: Just last one: A few days ago, U.S. officials from Islamabad embassy went to meet this gentleman named Zahir Jaffer, who was convicted on a – murdering his wife. He’s a U.S. citizen. He’s on death row now. The U.S. official went to Adiala Jail to meet him. Just a few blocks down there was Imran Khan in jail as well. Thousands of American – Pakistani Americans have asked to go and meet him as well. Why is the U.S. not going to meet the guy in jail?MR MILLER: I would defer to the – our embassy in Pakistan for – answer that question.Go ahead, Shannon. I’ll come to you next, Ryan.QUESTION: Thanks, Matt. On the State Department’s latest Travel Alert for the U.S. embassy in Israel, it details how American personnel have now been limited from traveling within the country. It says it’s been done out of a, quote, “abundance of caution.” Just wondering if you can say definitively whether this is linked to the threat to Iran &#8212;MR MILLER: So obviously, there – we have seen Iran making public threats against Israel in the past few days. Israel’s in a very tough neighborhood, and we have been monitoring the security situation. You saw us slightly adjust our travel warnings at the beginning of this conflict, and we conduct ongoing assessments all the time about the situation on the ground.So I’m not going to speak to the specific assessments that led to us to restrict our families – employees and family members’ personal travel, but clearly we are monitoring the threat environment in the Middle East, and specifically in Israel, and we – that’s what led us to make – give that warning to our employees and their family members, and to make it public so all U.S. citizens who either live in Israel or are traveling there are aware of it.Ryan.QUESTION: Thanks, Matt. President Biden said this week that the U.S. is considering Australia’s request that it drop its extradition attempt against Julian Assange and instead allow him to go back to Australia. Normally when we ask about Assange you say “refer you to the Department of Justice,” but now that the President has said that there’s a – there are diplomatic talks going on, that seems like it would be squarely in the State Department. So are – is the State Department involved in these conversations with Australia, and what can you tell us about these talks?MR MILLER: That is a good way to try to get me to violate that rule about not commenting on extradition matters, but I am going to refrain from doing so. I don’t have any comment. I would refer to the Justice Department for comment on this.QUESTION: Does it broadly raise concerns for you about free speech and free press? Because you often will see dictators say, why is the U.S. lecturing us about press freedoms when they are trying to extradite a foreign citizen to their own maximum security prison?MR MILLER: So I will let the Justice Department largely speak to this issue. But as you’ve heard me say here before, one of the crimes that Julian Assange is charged with is helping Chelsea Manning hack into government systems – not receiving classified information, but helping her actually break into government systems to retrieve classified information, which as far as I’m aware has never been considered a legitimate journalistic practice, and is not the kind of practice that journalistic organizations typically engage in.QUESTION: Well, technically he offered to help her cloak her identity so that she wouldn’t be discovered. We as journalists do that all the time with sources –MR MILLER: I – you – so &#8212;QUESTION: &#8212; talk with them on Signal and other devices to try to make sure that sources are protected. Is that considered helping steal information?MR MILLER: So I am now a little bit probably further than I ought to go about facts that still are contained, or alleged facts that are contained in a pending indictment.Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you so much. Two questions. Saudi Arabia joined Pakistan in addressing Jammu and Kashmir dispute while engaging with India to dialogue. Will United States encourage any mediation from Saudi Arabia between Pakistan and India? Because from very recent past, we see – we observed that United States encouraged all those engagements that goes according to the regional interest of U.S., including the Houthis and Saudis talks. After October 7th, U.S. stressed Saudi Arabia to halt their talks; before October 7th, U.S. was encouraging that. At first &#8212;MR MILLER: Let me take you that – that one back and get a complete answer.QUESTION: And number second &#8212;MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: National Security Advisor had scheduled visit to Saudi Arabia for talks on Israel normalization. Is it rescheduled, or with the ongoing circumstances in Middle East, there is some policy change expected from United States?MR MILLER: So I will let the White House speak to the National Security Advisor’s travel, but I did see him at the White House podium two days ago saying that he does intend to reschedule that trip.Go ahead, and then we’ll go here, and then wrap up for the day.QUESTION: Thank you. What is the State Department’s position regarding Israel possibly conducting an offensive attack on Iran or Iranian interests, as Netanyahu today – he said they’re ready for a defensive or offensive attacks. Wouldn’t an offensive attack be part of that escalation that you say that we’re trying to prevent?MR MILLER: So I’m not going to speak to hypotheticals, other than to say we don’t want to see this conflict escalated in any way.Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you. The Spain’s prime minister, Pedro Sánchez, said that he will recognize the state of Palestine before this summer, and that he wants other European countries to join him. Do you have any comment on that?MR MILLER: Every country has to make its own decision with respect to when and where it recognizes entities in this regard. I will say on behalf of the United States, we have always believed – we have always strongly supported the creation of an independent Palestinian state, but we believe that that’s something that is best achieved through dialogue and negotiation between the two parties, as well as other countries in the region, and that’s something we’re actively pursuing.And with that, wrap for &#8212;QUESTION: And on &#8212;MR MILLER: Do you have one more? Yeah, go ahead.QUESTION: Yeah, also Mexico asked today to suspend Ecuador’s membership of the United State after their raid on the Mexican embassy. Do you have any answer?MR MILLER: I don’t have anything, other than what we’ve said previously, which is we have asked Ecuador to work with Mexico to find a resolution to this dispute.And with that, wrap for today.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Thanks, everyone.(The briefing was concluded at 3:15 p.m.)# # #						Tags																					Bahrain																								Burma																								Ecuador																								Iran																								Israel																								Mali																								Mexico																								North Korea																								Office of the Spokesperson																								Pakistan																								Palestinian Territories																								Russia																								Sudan																								Ukraine
- Ecuador (24-223) – Agreement Concerning Counter Illicit Transnational Maritime Activity Operations Office of Treaty AffairsMaritime MattersSigned at Washington September 27, 2023; entered into force February 23, 2024.
- Department Press Briefing – April 8, 2024 HomeDepartment Press Briefing – April 8, 2024				hide		if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}																										Department Press Briefing – April 8, 2024																																																					April 8, 2024																																																								1:24 p.m. EDTMR MILLER: Good afternoon, everyone.QUESTION: Hello.MR MILLER: Welcome back, Matt &#8212;QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: &#8212; and those of you who were traveling with the Secretary.QUESTION: Yes.MR MILLER: Just pull up my opening comments here. All right. I’m going to start with an update on humanitarian assistance in Gaza.Following President Biden’s call with Prime Minister Netanyahu last week in which he emphasized that Israel must take immediate action to protect civilians and get more aid into Gaza, we have seen a number of initial positive steps over the past few days.First, the Israeli cabinet has agreed to open a new northern crossing, which could be operational this week and would represent an important step in delivering assistance directly to northern Gaza, where we know the humanitarian situation is most severe.The Israeli cabinet also approved the use of Ashdod as a port of entry for relief, which if implemented could significantly facilitate the flow of assistance.In addition, we have seen the initial implementation of a streamlined process for regular truck convoys moving from Jordan through Israel and into Gaza carrying essential supplies to those in dire need. The Government of Jordan has played an important role in facilitating humanitarian assistance to Gaza, and we commend them for being ready to step up and do even more.Yesterday, 304 aid trucks entered Gaza, the highest number of trucks in any single day since the conflict began. That number represents a significant improvement, but it is important not just that we see the daily number continue to grow, but that it be sustained over time. Our hope is that by later this week, 350 trucks will enter Gaza each day, and we are working hard across the United States Government to make that happen.We also welcome the announcement by the – that the IDF is establishing a coordination unit for deconfliction as a direct contact point with the humanitarian community. More than 200 humanitarian workers have been killed during this conflict, and we have repeatedly pressed the Israeli Government on the need to improve its deconfliction and coordination measures. The creation of this new unit, which Prime Minister – which is something President Biden raised directly with Prime Minister Netanyahu on their call last week and which Secretary Blinken has raised in his meetings with Israeli officials, can contribute to the safety of those who are working tirelessly to bring relief to the Palestinian people. We will be observing closely its establishment to verify that it operates as intended to ensure humanitarian workers can do their jobs as safely as possible.While we welcome these initial steps, it&#8217;s crucial to recognize that much more needs to be done. Many Palestinians in Gaza are at risk of famine, and every single man, woman, and child in Gaza is experiencing food insecurity. So these recent efforts must be just the starting point for a sustained Israeli commitment to ensure that the people of Gaza have their basic needs met. We expect Israel to fully implement its commitments quickly and we will be monitoring that implementation. As Secretary Blinken has said, ultimately it is the results that matter, and we will be judging them on those results.And with that, Matt.QUESTION: Okay, great. So – but it is correct, though, that you guys have not yet come to a determination as to whether the steps that Israel has undertaken now the last couple days, or is undertaking, meet your – I don’t want to say requirements, but your – but meet criteria that you have laid out? It’s not – you haven’t decided that yet?MR MILLER: It’s something that we are going to assess over time because as I was pointing out, it is not just important that they take initial steps to facilitate the increase of humanitarian assistance, but that increased flow of humanitarian assistance be sustained over time. We’ve had these moments before, most notably during the hostage – the pause back in November when we saw humanitarian assistance increase and then come back down, and what we want to see is a sustained increase. So &#8212;QUESTION: All right.MR MILLER: New entries open up and they stay open; more trucks go in and they keep going in.QUESTION: But you guys have been calling for these actions for months now. Why – what – why do you think that they’ve now started – you have – you can’t hazard a guess?MR MILLER: So I can hazard a guess, but I’m not going to speak for the Israeli Government. I’m&nbsp;&#8212;QUESTION: No. But I mean &#8212;MR MILLER: Sure. I’m not &#8212;QUESTION: Since December at least, even before &#8212;MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: &#8212; you guys have been saying, you need to work – open a northern crossing. And then when they did open the one, you said – you kept going on about Erez, and that needs to be done. Ashdod, the Jordanian line – all of that stuff – in January, when we were there in Amman, you guys were talking about how important that was. And now it’s April and it’s just starting to happen now. So why?MR MILLER: So I can’t speak for the Israeli Government, but I can &#8212;QUESTION: Speak for the U.S. Government.MR MILLER: I can – I’m about to. I can – what I can say is we have made clear over time the changes that we wanted to see implemented. We’ve seen some changes over time, but it has not been enough, and there has been an increasing sense of frustration inside the United States Government that they have not taken some of these steps that we have been recommending and urging for some time. And the President last week made clear that ultimately their policy needed changes, change, or ours would.QUESTION: All right. Okay. And in the meantime, since you’ve been calling for all this, what has happened on the ground?MR MILLER: A number of things have happened on the ground, but the most important thing that we have seen is dramatically increased food insecurity inside Gaza.QUESTION: No, I’m talking about – I’m not – no. Between, let’s – let’s just say &#8212;MR MILLER: That’s why I started with “a number of things happened on the ground”; I don’t know which one you’re going for.QUESTION: Let’s just say – let’s just start from January 1st of this year. Between January 1st and now, April whatever it is – 8th – what has changed on the ground in Gaza?MR MILLER: With respect – well, I started to answer with respect to food &#8212;QUESTION: How many more &#8212;MR MILLER: You seem to have an answer in mind.QUESTION: &#8212; dead people are there?MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: How many more starving people are there? How many more civilian or – facilities, infrastructure, how much more of that has been destroyed? How many more aid workers have been killed?MR MILLER: So there have been 200 aid workers total that have been killed.QUESTION: Yeah.MR MILLER: It’s really been a constant since the beginning. And we have been making clear that there need to be better deconfliction and coordination measures, and that – I will tell you that the step that they are taking now is important, but it’s overdue.QUESTION: Okay. All right. So &#8212; MR MILLER: It should have happened months ago. A lot of these steps should have been – happened months ago. We’re happy that they’re happening now, but they need to be increased and they need to be sustained.QUESTION: So I’ll stop after this, but I – and recognizing that often hindsight is 20/20, shouldn’t you have done – put the ultimatum, or shouldn’t the President have done that months ago?MR MILLER: So we have made clear to them for months what we expect them to do, and we have seen &#8212;QUESTION: Back up by &#8212;MR MILLER: And we have seen them take steps at our urging, and some of those steps have been important, but they haven’t been sufficient. And all I can say is that we welcome the initial – that the initial steps they have taken over the past few days, they represent a dramatic improvement if fully implemented, but we’re going to judge them ultimately by the results.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: I wonder if we could come to the hostage negotiations. One of the other things the President said to the – Prime Minister Netanyahu in the call, according to the readout, was that the Israelis should empower – or Netanyahu should empower his negotiators to make a deal. Have you seen any evidence of a change in that regard?MR MILLER: So I am not going to speak in detail with respect to the hostage negotiations other than to say that there is a deal that’s on the table for Hamas, and we hope that they’ll accept it. We do believe that the Israeli Government is ready to make a deal. They want to see their hostages returned. But we have to see Hamas being willing to accept such a deal.QUESTION: So – but the implication of the way that came out in the readout was that so far, those negotiators hadn’t been fully empowered. And there’s been criticism from the Israeli opposition that they haven’t sought a deal as hard as they could have done, right? Is that – is that not the case?MR MILLER: We have seen Israel put a deal on the table in the past. And we wanted to make sure – and that’s what you saw us speak to in that readout – that as these new sets of negotiations unfold, that the negotiators there are fully empowered to make a deal. But it’s not true that Israel hasn’t been willing to make a deal in the past because they have been. There have been deals on the table that Hamas has rejected, and there is now a deal on the table, and we want to – we hope that Hamas will reject it. We believe, as we’ve believed all along, that a ceasefire would be in the interest not just of the hostages, that it – whose release it would enable, but also in the interest of the Palestinian people, who are suffering greatly.QUESTION: So you say now there’s a deal which Hamas – you hope they will accept. What is different about this deal from the previous ones that they’ve rejected?MR MILLER: That I’m not going to get into, just because I don’t think getting into the back and forth of negotiations is helpful from the podium.QUESTION: Sure.MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: Just sticking in the region, the prime minister just said, like, in the last hour or so that a date for the Rafah invasion has been set. Have the Israelis shared that date with the U.S.?MR MILLER: To my knowledge, we have not been briefed on that date.QUESTION: And given what the Israelis have briefed U.S. officials on to date in terms of their plans for the operation, I assume that what you’ve seen thus far would not be something that the U.S. would approve?MR MILLER: So we have not yet seen them present a credible plan for dealing with the 1.4 million civilians who are in Rafah, some of whom have been – have moved more than once, and some of whom have moved more than twice. But even more than that, we have made clear to Israel that we think a full-scale military invasion of Rafah would have an enormously harmful effect on those civilians, and that it would ultimately hurt Israel’s security. So it’s not just a question of Israel presenting a plan to us. We have made clear to them that we think that there is a better way to achieve what is a legitimate goal, which is to degrade and dismantle and defeat the Hamas battalions that still remain in Rafah.So I think as you obviously know, we had a conversation with them about it last week. Secretary Blinken participated in that conversation with leaders from the White House and other agencies of the United States Government. There will be further conversations over the coming days, coming weeks where we can continue to lay out our beliefs about this potential operation and how they could achieve it in a better way. And we’ll go from there.QUESTION: Matt, can I follow up on &#8212;MR MILLER: Yeah, Said.QUESTION: Thank you. Just to follow up on the talks, so you’re saying that there is a deal on the table, and it’s up to Hamas to accept it and so on. Now, would that deal include the withdrawal of all Israeli forces from the whole of Gaza, do you think?MR MILLER: So I am going to maintain my rule of not commenting on potential – on negotiations or what the contours of any deal might look like from this podium.QUESTION: Yeah. I fully understand. But is that something that the United States would consider or would support? I mean, I’m sure there is some sort of conversation in this building.MR MILLER: Are you – you fully understand and continue to ask me to violate that rule, which I am going to refrain from doing.QUESTION: Okay.MR MILLER: Said, I’m not – I only say it with respect. It just – I don’t think it’s helpful for us to talk publicly about what are obviously very sensitive and delicate private negotiations.QUESTION: Okay. Do you feel we’re closer to a deal today than we were, let’s say, a couple days ago?MR MILLER: I’m just not going to comment on the negotiations at all.QUESTION: All right. Let me ask you on Rafah. Now, the United States rejects any kind of plan that does not include the safe movement of 1.4 million Palestinians from Rafah. So &#8212;MR MILLER: That’s not exactly it, Said. That is not exactly it. As I was trying to say in response to Kylie’s question, we don’t think a full-scale operation in Rafah is something that we could support in any event because we think it would, number one, harm all the more than 1.4 million Palestinians that are there. Welcome to the briefing, Hiba.It would harm – it would harm those Palestinians there. It would hinder the delivery of humanitarian assistance. So we have made clear that we don’t want to see that full-scale invasion in any event.QUESTION: Right. But is it feasible to really move 1.4 million Palestinian safely &#8212;MR MILLER: I think it would be very difficult to do, which is why we have made clear that we cannot support that kind of operation.QUESTION: All right, a couple more questions. The secretary-general on – the United Nations secretary-general on Friday expressed concern that Israel is using artificial intelligence to target Palestinians. Are you aware of that report?MR MILLER: I’ve seen the reports; I don’t have any further information on it.QUESTION: And lastly – I promises it’s lastly – on UNRWA, I mean, if the last couple of weeks taught us anything, it taught us that the only people that really can conduct the dispensing of aid and movement and so on are really UNRWA, effectively, simply by virtue of a very long experience. So I know that the United States, at least until next year, will not be funding UNRWA. But would you pressure the Israelis to allow UNRA workers to conduct their operations in Gaza? Would you tell them that there seems to be no one else that can do this job as good as they can?MR MILLER: We have repeatedly made clear to the Israeli Government the importance – the important role that UNRWA plays in delivering humanitarian assistance and said that that work should go on unhindered.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Go ahead.QUESTION: I have two questions. So you – you expressed concern about the fate of 1.4 million civilians who are trapped in Rafah. As you said, these people moved twice or three times at least. Would you accept returning these IDPs to the north, especially women and children? Because the Israelis seem to be opposing that, and by moving people from harm’s way to an area that’s being cleared and declared by Netanyahu as normal military operations there and Hamas is not viable, so why not allowing these people to go back to their original homes – what’s left from them?MR MILLER: So we have made clear – the Secretary has spoken to this on a number of occasions – that we do want to see the Palestinian people be able to return to their homes, whether they be in Khan Younis, whether they be in the north. Now, it needs to be safe for them to do so. They need to be able to return to homes that aren’t in the middle of ongoing military activity. If there is unexploded ordnance, that ordnance needs to be dealt with. If there are booby traps or other IEDs that Hamas has left, those need to be dealt with so people aren’t returning to apartment buildings that are unsafe. But we do support the return of Palestinians to their homes and their neighborhoods and have made that clear on a number of occasions.QUESTION: Just one &#8212;QUESTION: Sorry. How many livable homes in the north do you think that there are, in Khan Younis? How many – how many actually? You talked about it being safe and all these kind of things.MR MILLER: So the &#8212;QUESTION: I mean, the destruction is pretty massive.MR MILLER: It is a great question.QUESTION: So where would they return to?MR MILLER: A huge number of them have been destroyed. That is without a doubt. There are some homes that are still habitable. There are some apartment buildings that are still habitable. It is &#8212;QUESTION: And you know this how?MR MILLER: You can look and see the – that there are buildings that are still habitable. People report on the ground that there are buildings that are still habitable throughout Gaza. Now, a massive number have been destroyed, but they’re – we hear from people who want to return either to their homes or they want to return to their neighborhoods so they can start to rebuild their homes, and we support their right to do so, recognizing that there is a very difficult road ahead of them.Matt, I will note you never apologized for interrupting me. (Laughter.)QUESTION: Well, because you don’t – I’m not sure you deserve an apology.QUESTION: Gentlemen.MR MILLER: Fair. Fair enough. (Laughter.)QUESTION: Okay, that’s fine. He followed up for me. The second question is Mr. Kirby said on Sunday that – and let me quote him so I’ll be accurate. He said the U.S. has not found any evidence of Israel violating international law. He refers to the State Department. He said the State Department have a “normal process” where if there’s an incident reported, they will follow up. And they concluded – you, the State Department concluded – that Israel has not violated international law.So my question to you is: In the face of all the human – or the organization, humanitarian organizations working in Gaza, including MSF yesterday, that they said Israel has targeted not just aid workers but doctors and journalists. And Chef José Andrés said as well that Israel has committed crime against humanity. Why the U.S. is not conducting an investigation regarding – regardless of these incidents for an investigation like you asked for – like you asked to be conducted in Ukraine after the Russian invasion?MR MILLER: So we do have a number of ongoing assessments with respect to this very question. We have not yet &#8212;QUESTION: But assessment is different than investigation, right?MR MILLER: We – they are – that is how we do – that’s how we operate inside the State Department is we have a number of different bureaus, experts from across our bureaus that look at facts, apply them to international law, and make assessments. Those assessments are ongoing and we have not yet at this time concluded that Israel has violated international humanitarian law, but we have ongoing assessments across a number of different fronts.QUESTION: So all these organizations are just wrong? They just see the law differently than you? Or you just cannot find &#8212;MR MILLER: I am telling you that we have ongoing assessments and we have not yet reached that conclusion.Janne, go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. On South Korea &#8212;MR MILLER: I’ll come to you next, yeah.QUESTION: All right. Yes, thank you. On the South Korea’s military satellite launch, how does the United States view the successful launch of South Koreans’ military reconnaissance satellite from the Kennedy Space Center in Florida yesterday?MR MILLER: Let me take that back and get you an answer.QUESTION: Thank you. And second one. Russian Government summoned South Korean ambassador to Russia in retaliation for South Korea’s independent sanctions against Russia. A spokesperson for the Russian foreign ministry denied any treaty, military supplies between North Korea and Russia, and criticized that South Korea should escape from the influence of the United States. What is your reaction on that?MR MILLER: So South Korea has been an important partner not just of the United States but of others in the international community in helping hold Russia accountable for its illegal war of aggression against Ukraine. They have been with the United States and our international partners since the beginning, and we look forward to continue to work with them to hold Russia accountable.Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you.QUESTION: Matt, I want to follow in Matt’s line of questions regarding the steps that have been taken by Israel to elevate and ease these humanitarian situation. And I cannot but think that this because of what’s been reported: the threat of change of U.S. policy toward Israel during the call between President Biden and Prime Minister Netanyahu. But don’t you think – because you’ve been pressed here by press and by humanitarian organizations to do that early, few weeks early, maybe couple of months early. Don’t you think that you were few several steps behind and if you acted this way by the – given this by waving this wand toward Israel, then they took the steps earlier, so many lives would be saved?MR MILLER: I can only answer that by pointing again to how much we have worked on this question. And it hasn’t just been a question of working on it over the last few months – over the last couple months, the last – first few months of 2024. It’s something that we have been engaged in since day one. And if you look at the Secretary’s very first trip to the region just a week after October 7th, one of his top priorities was to open Rafah back then, which was closed, for the delivery of humanitarian assistance. And you saw President Biden on his first trip when he came to Israel pressing Prime Minister Netanyahu to open Rafah to allow humanitarian assistance to get in. We have consistently pushed to do that, and we have delivered results time and again in getting new crossings open and getting an increase in humanitarian assistance.Now, I think what you have heard from a lot of us inside the United States Government is that there has been a growing sense of frustration that Israel hadn’t done enough and that their policy needed to change and that they needed to allow more humanitarian assistance in. So all I can say is when you look at where we are today, we welcome the steps that they have taken. But I guess what I’m trying to get at is with – in response to your question, this is a – is – this is not an end of the process. We’ve seen them take initial steps here over the past few days, but we want to see much more. And so we are going to be watching them over the coming days, the coming weeks, to see that the steps they have announced actually lead to improved results, and we will make assessments and make determinations of our policy based on those results.QUESTION: But my question was: Don’t you think that you – the process is slow? If you push harder by threatening earlier, you will get better results. Because it seems that the Israelis are susceptible to you when you wave this wand.MR MILLER: And what I’m saying is we have pushed them on a number of things over time and seen them take results. We have seen the impact of American diplomacy. We have seen them open crossings – open three crossings before the past few days to get humanitarian assistance in. We have seen them work with Jordan to allow convoys. And ultimately, what we determined is that the steps they had taken didn’t deliver to what we thought they ought to. So we had seen them promise to let more trucks come in, and trucks – the delivery of trucks increases but not enough.And so ultimately, when you look at the past few months where we have seen them make commitments and they deliver on those commitments – maybe partially or maybe because of logistic reasons or bureaucratic reasons – the steps that we thought would be fully implemented end up being partially implemented. Ultimately, that’s where you see this sense of frustration in the United States Government where we tell them that ultimately, if your policy doesn’t change, ours will have to.Now, again, I want to – the point I was trying to make a minute ago when I responded to your question is I don’t want to stand here today and say that everything has been solved, because we’re not ready to say that. We want to – we have seen good initial steps, but we want to see how they’re actually implemented to make sure that there is no Palestinian in Gaza who is going hungry. And until we get to that point, we’re not going to be satisfied.QUESTION: My last question is about the Iranians threatening to retaliate on the airstrike that struck their consulate in Damascus by attacking Israel directly. The Israelis says that they are – put steps to ready themselves for such a strike. Do you – are you worried that this will ignite the whole region if that happened?MR MILLER: We have been concerned about the risk of escalation since October 7th, and one of the things you have seen us consistently engage in is diplomacy to try to lower that risk of escalation. We have made clear directly to the Iranian Government that it should not use this incident as a pretext to attack American troops or American facilities in the region, and we will continue to make clear to them that they should not take any escalatory actions.QUESTION: Can I follow up?QUESTION: So just on that &#8212;MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: &#8212; in reference to the Mexico-Ecuador situation, which you have a problem with the Ecuadorians going into the Mexican embassy. Is it still the U.S. position that what happened in Damascus did not involve a legitimately protected diplomatic facility as covered by the convention?MR MILLER: It is our position that we are still attempting to answer that question, whether it was a consular facility or not.QUESTION: And if it was?MR MILLER: I don’t want to deal with hypotheticals. We’re trying to determine the facts of the situation.QUESTION: Well, I’m not sure – I mean, this is now several days old. What exactly is it that you’re waiting for?MR MILLER: We are waiting on a final determination. It’s something we’re looking into.QUESTION: From whom?MR MILLER: We’re making our own assessment based on the facts and the facts that we continue to gather.QUESTION: From the people that you have on the ground in Damascus?MR MILLER: We have a variety of ways to gather information.QUESTION: Oh? Okay.MR MILLER: Okay.QUESTION: What are they?MR MILLER: I’m not going to get into them here, but we obviously have intelligence capabilities and the ability to &#8212;QUESTION: Well, the Israelis say it wasn’t, that it wasn’t a legitimate diplomatic facility.MR MILLER: I understand that, and we’re gathering our own &#8212;QUESTION: You don’t agree with that, at least not yet?MR MILLER: No, what I said is we’re gathering our own facts and making our own determination.QUESTION: Well, okay. How?MR MILLER: By looking at the facts and making a determination. I’m not going to take you inside the process, but we’re gathering – we’re gathering as much &#8212;QUESTION: Well, I mean, what? You’re looking at satellite imagery or something like that?MR MILLER: We are – we are – I’m not going to get into the exact facts that we are gathering, but I can tell you we are looking &#8212;QUESTION: Well, how are you so sure that the Mexican embassy in Quito is a diplomatic facility?MR MILLER: Because it is a long-established Mexican embassy.QUESTION: And this wasn’t long-established?MR MILLER: That is ultimately the question that we are trying to determine.QUESTION: Even if it was an established, though, diplomatic facility and there were also, like, IRGC folks in there, would that justify an attack?MR MILLER: Again, I’m not going to get into hypotheticals. I want to – we want to answer the factual question before moving on to that second order one.QUESTION: And just one more question on this Iran threat that has been discussed by U.S. officials. There are some reports that the expectation is that the target is expected to be in Israel. Is that accurate?MR MILLER: I am not going to speak for the Iranian Government, obviously. I think we would send a loud and clear message to them that they should not escalate in any event – whether that means inside Israel or elsewhere in the region.QUESTION: But I’m not asking you to speak for the Iranian Government. I’m asking you to speak for what the expectation of where that threat (inaudible).MR MILLER: Right. And I’m not going to – I’m not going to speak to any expectation. Our – to the extent that we have an expectation, it is that Iran not escalate this conflict any further, and we have made that clear to them.QUESTION: Why don’t you want to publicly speak about where that threat is if you guys are saying it’s in the region and obviously the hope is to prevent it from happening?MR MILLER: I think you might understand why I don’t want to speak to intelligence matters from this podium.QUESTION: Matt, follow up?MR MILLER: Stay in the region? Yeah, Guita, go.QUESTION: Thanks. You just said that you have had direct communication with the Iranian Government – yeah – has – have – has there been any communications during the past few days specifically? Since apparently reports out of Tehran are saying that they have set conditions for them not to retaliate, that they’ve sent messages to the U.S. – some reports say via Oman even, and their foreign minister was in Oman on Sunday.MR MILLER: Are you referring to the reports that they wouldn’t retaliate if there was a ceasefire in Gaza?QUESTION: Correct. Yes.MR MILLER: I can tell you that those reports are not true. They have – they have not sent that message, but if Iran wants a ceasefire in Gaza, that ought to be something they can be – they can accomplish, because they have long supported Hamas and they could press Hamas that they should accept the deal that is on the table that would achieve a ceasefire.QUESTION: Okay. Another Iran question.MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: The U.S. has consistently said that it coordinates with the European Union on actions it takes against Iran, specifically – or one example – is sanctions. Now the European Union has lifted its sanctions on a certain company, ArvanCloud, which both the U.S. and, again, EU said that it was complicit in disconnecting people’s access to the internet. Was the administration advised of the EU’s decision to rescind that – those sanctions on this company?MR MILLER: So our position on ArvanCloud is clear. ArvanCloud is a key player in the Iranian regime’s project to cut off the Iranian people from the global internet and surveil them, as we said when we were designated – when we designated them in June. ArvanCloud maintains a close relationship to Iran’s ministry of intelligence and security, and senior managers of ArvanCloud are either current or former affiliates of the ministry of intelligence and security. So ArvanCloud remains sanctioned by the United States. Ultimately, the EU’s decisions are up to the EU, but they will – ArvanCloud will remain sanctioned by the United States for its clear role in facilitating censorship to the detriment of the people of Iran.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Go ahead. Next to – I’ll come to you next, sorry. Next to you.QUESTION: Hi, about Ecuador’s situation. The U.S. already condemned Ecuador’s violation of international law at the embassy of Mexico in Quito, but what’s next? Are you – is the U.S. considering sanctions? And if so, what kind?MR MILLER: Well, let me say that first of all we condemn any violations of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. We take seriously the obligation of &#8212;QUESTION: (Off-mike.)MR MILLER: &#8212; host countries under international law to respect the inviolability of diplomatic missions. Mexico and Ecuador are crucial partners of the United States, and we place a high value on relations with both countries. And then finally, we welcome the convening of the OAS Permanent Council this week to address ongoing developments, and we encourage both countries to resolve their differences cooperatively.QUESTION: Considering sanctions?MR MILLER: I don’t have any announcement with respect to our actions. I think the next step is that – in this matter is for the OAS Permanent Council to meet this week and address the ongoing developments. We’re monitoring that closely, and we’ll look to see what outcomes they produce.Yeah.QUESTION: Could you talk a little bit about how China’s support for Russia’s war effort in Ukraine has evolved, and also the Secretary’s efforts to communicate that and talk about that with allies?MR MILLER: So we have been concerned really since the outset of that conflict about the PRC’s support for Russia’s war against Ukraine and have been especially concerned over recent months about its efforts to help Russia reconstitute its defense industrial base. We have raised that with a number of our allies and partners across the world. We have seen in recent months that the PRC has started to rebuild that industrial base. Essentially, they’ve been backfilling the trade from European partners that was suspended after the invasion and sanctioned, and that they have been helping provide the components that increase Russia’s capabilities to attack Ukraine. That of course has long-term security impacts on Europe as well as the entire world, and so the Secretary has raised in a number of his meetings with allies and partners around the world the need to monitor those results and ultimately take actions to prevent them.Yeah.QUESTION: On Ukraine, last week, the Secretary said Ukraine’s future is in NATO. We’ve heard that before, but was there any discussion while he was there about a timeline for that or is it still dependent on the end of the war?MR MILLER: It – so nothing has changed with respect to a timeline. Obviously, there were discussions while the Secretary was at NATO about Ukraine. Foreign Minister Kuleba was there, and the Secretary met with him, but we have made clear for some time that ultimately that’s a process that moves forward at the end of this conflict.Alex.QUESTION: Matt, thanks so much. I do want to stay on Ukraine, but before that very quickly, to go back to what you just told Guita about Iran, if those reports are not true, your expectations are Iran will not escalate is based on purely your own observation, or &#8212;MR MILLER: I said the report – I was referring to the reports about Iran presenting &#8212;QUESTION: The Iran condition.MR MILLER: &#8212; to us the condition for a ceasefire. Those reports are not true.QUESTION: But &#8212;MR MILLER: I’m not going to speak to what Iran may or may not do.QUESTION: Got it. Thanks so much. Moving to Ukraine, any comment on the – last weekend’s attacks on Europe’s largest nuclear plant? How alarmed are you and what do you know for sure about what’s going on? Because we have seen increasing disinformation campaign launched by Russia.MR MILLER: So we are aware of the reports of a drone attack at Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant. We are continuing to monitor the conditions at the plant, including through official reporting from the IAEA, which fortunately notes that the damage resulting from that drone strike has not compromised nuclear safety. You have heard from us before our belief that Russia is playing a very dangerous game with its military seizure of Ukraine’s nuclear power plant, which is the largest in Europe. It’s dangerous that they’ve done that and we continue to call on Russia to withdraw its military and civilian personnel from the plant, to return full control of the plant to the competent Ukrainian authorities, and refrain from taking any actions that could result in a nuclear incident at the plant.QUESTION: Thanks so much. President Zelenskyy called for increasing defense aid, defense support ahead of his meeting with UK foreign minister. The secretary agreed with – I mean there was a call between the two, Zelenskyy and UK minister – with foreign minister’s article today, in which he called &#8212;MR MILLER: What was the last part?QUESTION: The foreign minister wrote an article and he called for &#8212;MR MILLER: So we absolutely want to see assistance increased to Ukraine, and that starts here in the United States, where you have heard this administration make very clear that we want to see Congress pass the President’s supplemental request, which would provide much-needed defense assistance to Ukraine.QUESTION: Thank you. Want to move to the South Caucasus, if I may. Following last weekend’s – last week’s meetings, we have seen clashes reported between Azerbaijan and Armenia. Is there any active – let’s say process going on in this town in terms of relaunching Washington meetings? You guys had series of meetings last year; you stopped it. (Inaudible.)MR MILLER: We have made very clear that the path forward for resolving this conflict is ultimately at the bargaining table. I don’t want to speak to any upcoming meetings, but we have always made clear that we welcome dialogue. When the Secretary has communicated with the leaders of both Armenia and Azerbaijan, he has made clear that there needs to be dialogue between the two parties. We are happy to play whatever we – role we can to facilitate that dialogue and will continue to do so, but I don’t want to preview any specific upcoming meetings.QUESTION: Any reaction to the clashes itself last &#8212;MR MILLER: Let me take that back and get &#8212;QUESTION: Thank you. And finally, if I may, I know my Georgian colleagues will also press you on that – you guys have put out a statement over the weekend. You said that you reached out to Georgian (inaudible) government, conveyed your concern about the Russian law, yet they moved on. As you know, they submitted a draft today. What is your policy here other than just wait and see?MR MILLER: What is our &#8212;QUESTION: Just policy here other than just wait and see. Last year you guys &#8212;MR MILLER: The policy is the policy that we made clear in the statement that we put out, which is that we are deeply concerned that, if it is enacted, this draft legislation would harm civil society organizations working to improve the lives of Georgian citizens. It would derail Georgia from its European path, and we are concerned that the legislation would impede independent media organizations working to provide access for Georgian citizens to high-quality information.Now, this is still a draft piece of legislation. It has not been enacted into law, so with respect to any potential outcomes or any potential steps that we might take, I certainly wouldn’t want to preview them today.QUESTION: I mean, last year you guys were clear that if any MP votes for that, they would be sanctioned. Why are you not – why are you refraining from conveying the same message?MR MILLER: Right now we are making clear that we are concerned with the – this draft legislation. With respect to what we might do if it moves forward, stay tuned. I don’t have anything to announce today.Yeah, go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you, sir. Secretary Blinken had a phone call with Pakistani Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar on Friday. Could you share some details, like what are the key points?MR MILLER: So the Secretary did speak with the foreign minister of Pakistan on Friday to reaffirm our robust partnership, which advances the prosperity of Pakistan and the United States. The Secretary and Foreign Minister Dar discussed the importance of continued cooperation on counterterrorism, expanding our trade and investment partnership, and advancing women’s economic security and empowerment.QUESTION: Sir, is there any discussion on Pakistan-India tensions? Because Pakistan says that Indian Government assassinated dozens of individuals in Pakistan, while the Indian defense minister appeared to confirm that the Indian Government carried out extrajudicial killings in Pakistan. How do you see this situation?MR MILLER: So we have been following the media reports about this issue. We don’t have any comment on the underlying allegations, but of course, while we’re not going to get in the middle of this situation, we encourage both sides to avoid escalation and find a resolution through dialogue.QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. As you are going to host the Iraqi prime minister next week here in Washington, D.C., do you have any comments on the recent agreements between Erbil and Baghdad and also the meetings between the IKR president with the Iraqi leaders and the U.S. ambassador to Iraq? So – and have you urged the Iraqi prime minister to settle down these disputes with Erbil before coming to Washington, D.C., as some reports suggesting that?MR MILLER: So I’m not going to get into those reports, but I will say that the upcoming U.S.-Iraq Higher Coordinating Committee meeting next week – next Monday – will highlight our shared bilateral priorities and the broad relationship between our two countries, including energy independence, financial reform, services for the Iraqi people, strengthening democracy and the rule of law, and enhancing educational and cultural relations. Representatives from Iraq’s Kurdistan Regional Government will participate in these discussions. The United States supports a strong, resilient Iraqi Kurdistan Region within a sovereign, stable, and secure federal Iraq. And we encourage the Government of Iraq and the KRG to redouble efforts to resolve longstanding issues, bringing economic benefits to all Iraqis.You watching a movie, Matt?QUESTION: No I don’t know what happened.MR MILLER: It’s like the second &#8212;QUESTION: It just started talking.MR MILLER: This is the – this is phone go off in the briefing day.Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you so much, Matt. I just wanted to follow up on Gaza humanitarian aid issue. You said that these steps by Israel should have happened months ago. So I’m wondering if those steps could have been taken months ago but Israel did not take them, does that mean Israel was blocking the aid? Because we had this discussion before in this room, and you said you didn’t think that they were blocking.MR MILLER: No, it says – what it means is that there’s more that they could have done. And so we have seen them – as I said in response to one of the earlier questions, we have seen them take some of these steps. And then what has happened on a number of occasions is that, ultimately, some of the ways that you could increase the delivery of humanitarian assistance break down for a variety of different reasons. And I think that’s why you’ve seen senior officials inside this government get incredibly frustrated that the steps towards improvement we thought were going to be taken ultimately didn’t materialize. And it’s why you heard me say in my opening comments that when it – we look at the actions over the next – the past three days, ultimately we’re going to judge them by the results.So they absolutely could have done more. We’re glad that they’re doing steps now, but I’m not ready to stand here and make a definitive determination because we want to see humanitarian assistance increase, we want to see it sustained, and we don’t want to see any of the problems that have marked the delivery of humanitarian assistance over the past few months reappear. We want to see them resolved, and that’s what we’re going to continue pushing for.Go ahead.QUESTION: Good afternoon, Matthew.MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: Good to see you. So I’d like to ask you about religious – or a question on – my question concerns religious liberty. I want to ask about the State Department’s proposed rules concerning nondiscrimination in foreign assistance. I’m sure you’re familiar with it. The comment period just wrapped up. Catholic leaders recently stated some concerns. One is, quote, “We respectfully urge State” – the State Department – “to ensure that NPRMs,” known as the proposed rulemakings, “honor religious liberty,” end quote. My question: Will the State Department honor religious liberty?MR MILLER: Of course we will honor religious liberty.QUESTION: Moving on – wait, one more here.MR MILLER: Yeah, all right.QUESTION: The NPR – the church – the Catholic leaders also say the NPRMs, the rulemaking, could chill – quote here – “...could chill Catholic entities’ participation in foreign aid programs.” What’s your reaction to those concerns?MR MILLER: So I’m not going to speak with respect to ultimately how we will decide on a specific rulemaking. There’s a process that we go through here when it comes to any rulemaking, and that includes the solicitation of comments from outside groups and outside individuals. We take all of those seriously and ultimately take it into our decision-making process.Yeah. Go ahead, all the way in back.QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. I’m wondering if there is a new dimension emerging in the Indo-Pacific strategy, given United States constructive engagement with Chinese authority and including President Biden’s 105-minutes phone call with the Chinese President Xi in recent days.MR MILLER: So our policy with respect to engagement in the Indo-Pacific has been consistent since the outset of this administration. And that is we make clear when it comes to China specifically, which you raised in that call, that there are areas where we have concern with actions that China has taken, there are areas where we want to work together with China to address mutual concerns – for example, with the traffic of – trafficking of fentanyl, which has impacted millions and millions of Americans. And ultimately, it is our job to manage the relationship responsibly to prevent any unintended escalation.At the same time, we are going to work with our allies and partners throughout the Indo-Pacific region on our broad vision of a region that is safe and secure and democratic.QUESTION: Is that true that U.S. ambassador in Dhaka, Peter Haas, was in hiding just before Bangladesh one-sided election due to alleged Indian pressure? The accusation was reportedly made by a senior Indian diplomat and former ambassador to Bangladesh during a book launching ceremony in New Delhi.MR MILLER: So I haven’t been following every book launch ceremony in New Delhi, but no, that is not accurate. (Laughter.)QUESTION: Why not?MR MILLER: I have a few other things on my plate, as much as I would like to.Go ahead, in the back.QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. Netanyahu said the military is preparing to move more than million Palestinian civilian out of Rafah and then carry out an attack. Would you please clarify – you repeated, many times confirmed that the Palestinian will not be evacuated. Also, how and where will they evacuate? To Cyprus, to Egypt, where?MR MILLER: So I don’t have anything to add to what I said earlier in the briefing about this very question, which is we don’t think that Israel can effectively evacuate 1.4 million people, that a full-scale invasion into Rafah would have an enormously harmful effect or impact on the civilians who are there, that it would hinder the delivery of humanitarian assistance, that it would actually hurt Israel’s national security. And that’s something – it’s the kind of operation that we can’t support, and that’s what we remain in conversation with them about.QUESTION: Regarding – excuse me – regarding the humanitarian assistance, in fact, the Muslim citizens of Gaza and Christian citizens of Gaza are not protected, and even the animals are not protected. How many Palestinian citizens should be killed, whether by fire or starvation, so you can seriously intervene? Why United States could not link the providing of military aid to IDF with the allowing humanitarian aid into Gaza?MR MILLER: We do not want to see a single Palestinian civilian killed. And that is why we have made clear that Israel needs to do more to improve its deconfliction and coordination measures. It’s why we welcome the initial step they took over the weekend to establish a coordination center. Ultimately, that coordination center has to work, it has to have aid groups represented inside it to ensure that incidents like the World Central Kitchen strike and so many previous strikes that killed humanitarian workers are not repeated. And that’s what we’re going to continue to press them for.QUESTION: But you could put conditions to – put conditions in –MR MILLER: I’ve – I have already – I have spoken to that already.Go ahead.QUESTION: Thanks, Matthew. News just broke that Hamas has rejected the latest ceasefire proposal from Israel. Any reaction?MR MILLER: So I have made it a rule since my first day here not to react to things that happen after I walk out to the podium or while I’m out at the podium that I haven’t had a chance to see in full context, and I will largely stick to that rule. But of course, we have seen them reject a number of proposals before that we have thought would deliver incredible benefits to the Palestinian people that they claim to represent – most notably, a cessation of hostilities, but also conditions on the ground that would deliver – that would allow the delivery of much, much more humanitarian assistance.QUESTION: And while the administration has pressed Israel to get humanitarian aid into Gaza, isn’t the famine and food insecurity ultimately Hamas’s fault?MR MILLER: So certainly we have seen Hamas hide behind – hide behind human shields. We have seen Hamas start this conflict in the first place, and we have seen Hamas refuse to agree to a ceasefire that would enable the delivery of increased humanitarian assistance.QUESTION: And finally, with Congress back in session, Ukraine funding is a top agenda item. Reportedly the House version’s going to consist of the REPO Act, which would allow seized Russian assets to be sent as assistance to Ukraine, and it’ll consist of reversing the administration’s LNG ban to non-FTA countries. Does the administration support this?MR MILLER: I would refer you to the White House for a comment on that.And then Hiba.QUESTION: Thank you, Matt.MR MILLER: Hiba, go ahead, and then we’re going to wrap for today.QUESTION: Just I think to follow up on the strike on the Iranian consulate in Damascus. You’ve been saying that you don’t want to – you didn’t want to expand the war, and you conveyed message to the Iranians that they – you don’t want the escalation. But what about your conversation with the Israeli? Did you tell them on whether this is – it was an escalation, or what’s your position with &#8212;MR MILLER: So we have always made clear that we don’t want to see Israel escalate this conflict in any way, either. Now, again, we recognize that Israel is the victim of terrorism that is sponsored by Iran – Hamas principally has been sponsored by Iran; but Hizballah, which sits to the north of Israel, of course, and continues to launch rocket attacks against Israeli civilian targets, is principally sponsored by Iran; and the Houthis, which have been significantly involved in terrorism, especially over the past few months, are sponsored by Iran.So we recognize that Israel is the victim of terrorism, has been the victim of terrorism repeatedly that is sponsored by Iran. But no, of course we don’t want to see this – this conflict escalate in any way.QUESTION: You don’t – you don’t – so you don’t support that? You considered it – this an escalation?MR MILLER: I’m not going to speak to this specific strike, but I’ll say we do not want to see the conflict escalate in any way.And with that –QUESTION: Can you take one more on China?MR MILLER: I’ll take one more, and then we’ll wrap.QUESTION: Thank you. I just wonder if you could shed some lights on Secretary Blinken’s trip to China. What’s the difference between this trip and the one he had last year? Does he have different message and different mission this time?MR MILLER: So we have said that the Secretary will be traveling in the coming weeks. We have not announced an exact date for that trip, let alone who the Secretary will be meeting with. So I think I’ll refrain from comment until we’ve moved a little closer to that trip.And with that, I’ll wrap, because I think a number of you probably want to go out and see the – and see the eclipse.QUESTION: (Off-mike.)MR MILLER: Everyone remember – everyone remember to wear your glasses.(The briefing was concluded at 2:13 p.m.)# # # accept ↑						Tags																					Armenia																								Azerbaijan																								China																								Ecuador																								Georgia																								India																								Iran																								Iraq																								Israel																								Mexico																								Office of the Spokesperson																								Pakistan																								Palestinian Territories																								Russia																								Ukraine
- Events at the Embassy of Mexico in Ecuador Matthew Miller, Department SpokespersonThe United States condemns any violation of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, and takes very seriously the obligation of host countries under international law to respect the inviolability of diplomatic missions.Mexico and Ecuador are crucial partners of the United States, and we place a high value on our relations with both countries.  We encourage the two countries to resolve their differences in accord with international norms.
- International Women of Courage Amplify Young Generation’s Voices Tolu OjoriOffice of Global Women&#8217;s IssuesMy voice is my courage.This March, the U.S. Department of State is celebrating remarkable women from around the world through the 18th annual International Women of Courage Award.  Like Jusic, they have dedicated their lives to reclaiming the voices of women in their communities. “Invest in Women” is the 2024 theme of International Women’s Day, and there is no better investment than the early intervention, engagement, and support of our youth. There are many girls around the world who will grow up to be future global leaders.  Unfortunately, many girls grow up disadvantaged and are stripped of their agency simply because of their gender.  According to a 2023 UNICEF study, one in five young women were married before the age of 18.  UNICEF also has reported that 129 million girls do not have access to education.  However, activists in every nation, including this year’s International Women of Courage, are doing the work to advance progress for women and girls.  For this article, I had the pleasure to interview a few of them.One in ten children worldwide are subject to child labor, with COVID-19 further exacerbating these numbers.  Due to work schedules, child laborers often do not receive an education or have access to healthcare. Girls have a unique experience in the child labor industry.  Many Bangladeshi girls are targeted for domestic labor like working as a housemaid.  Some girls are deceptively offered these jobs but are lured into sex work instead.  In Bangladesh, the unsafe conditions of the garment industry have an even worse impact on the children who unfortunately work in these factories.  These children must operate hazardous machines and are exposed to harmful chemicals. 2024 International Woman of Courage Fawzia Karim Firoze. (Photo courtesy of Meridian Communications)Fawzia Karim Firoze is a lawyer who has played an important role in establishing the Bangladesh Independent Garment Workers Union Federation, a women-led trade union improving labor conditions and providing legal protection for workers in Bangladesh’s garment-making industry.  I asked Firoze how child labor impacts the livelihood of children and their family. Her response, “Children being deprived of basic education and opportunities for personal and professional growth, eventually trap themselves in a vicious cycle which they are unable to break free for the rest of their lives”.  For over 30 years, Firoze has advocated to strengthen the voice of many marginalized people working in abusive and unsafe conditions, including girls and young women. 2024 International Women of Courage Rabha El Haymar (left) with her daughter (right). (Photo courtesy Rabha El Haymar)Moroccan activist Rabha El Haymar was forced into an arranged marriage at only 14 years old. Her marriage was a traditional “Fatiha” marriage, which is not officially recognized under Moroccan law.  After Rabha’s husband abandoned her, their daughter was declared illegitimate because of the lack of legal documentation. Since then, Rabha has dedicated her life and professional career to advocating for children like her daughter, and their mothers.  She spoke to me about her journey for justice. “Confronted with family pressures, especially as my husband was my cousin, and the challenge of raising and financially supporting my daughter alone, I found myself in a relentless struggle. But my determination never wavered. I fought tirelessly for my marriage to be recognized, ensuring my daughter&#8217;s legitimacy in the eyes of the law.” 2024 International Woman of Courage Ajna Jusic. (Photo Courtest Ajna Jusic)Psychologist and feminist activist Ajna Jusic has fought a similar battle in Bosnia and Herzegovina towards the rights of children born from rape during war.  “We are still exposed to social condemnation, including political and legal rejection,” says Jusic.  “Precisely because of this, our mothers try to hide our father&#8217;s identities very wisely, which makes it more difficult to map and gather children born as a result of rape in a certain country.”  In 2015 Jusic founded the Forgotten Child of War Association, championing social and legal recognition of children born of conflict-related sexual violence.  She also helped pass a law granting special rights to these marginalized children such as educational opportunities and psychological support – the first of its kind. 2024 International Woman of Courage Martha Beatriz Roque Cabello. (Photo courtesy Martha Beatriz Roque Cabello )Martha Beatriz Roque Cabello is a former professor turned human rights defender from Cuba, who advocates for the rights of marginalized communities, including Cuban youth.  Her public denouncements of the oppressive Cuban regime have led her to prison on countless occasions, and yet she relentlessly continues to fight for her people.  When asked about the hardships facing Cuba’s youth, Roque stated, “For young people in Cuba, every situation becomes a difficulty.  They cannot think about forming a home, because they have to wait for a grandparent to die and leave an empty room .  That is why they see their future outside of Cuba, particularly in the United States of America.”  Through her activism, Roque aims to build a future for Cuba where younger generations can prosper. 2024 International Woman of Courage Fátima Corozo. (Photo courtesy of Meridian Communications)Feminist action and the protection of the youth are intertwined. It is mostly women who are doing the grassroots work in dangerous situations. Despite being most vulnerable, women put themselves on the frontlines to protect their community. Among these women is Fátima Corozo, another former teacher who is especially committed to elevating Ecuador’s youth. In the wake of the city of Esmeralda’s drug violence, Corozo has provided the children of her community with alternatives to the vicious cycle of crime. With the help of other local educators, she has established several development programs, providing Ecuador’s youth with the skills to succeed into adulthood.All the figures covered in this article are winners of the 2024 International Women of Courage Awards. The U.S. Department of State has platformed these leaders not only to showcase their impactful work, but to show future leaders that they can make a difference in any part of the world. Heroes like our IWOC winners have helped the Department implement programs supporting women and youth across the globe. If we want boys and girls of today prepared for the future, we must continue to invest in women who are giving them the tools to do so.About the author: Tolu Ojori served as an intern in the Secretary’s Office of Global Women’s Issues.
- Joint Statement on U.S.-Ecuador High-Level Dialogue Office of the SpokespersonThe text of the following joint statement was released by the Governments of the United States of America and the Republic of Ecuador on the occasion of the High-Level Dialogue held at the Department of State in Washington, DC, March 13-14, 2024.Begin Text:The United States and Ecuador conducted a High-Level Dialogue at the Department of State in Washington, DC, on March 13 and 14, 2024.​ ​ Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources, Richard Verma; Under Secretary for Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights, Uzra Zeya; and Under Secretary for Economic Growth, Energy, and the Environment, Jose W. Fernandez, met with Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs Isabel Albornoz, and Vice Minister of Finance Daniel Falconí to discuss shared priorities, including refugee protection, lawful migration pathways, civilian security, and economic cooperation.The United States and Ecuador reaffirmed their commitment for the defense of democracy, promotion of human rights, inclusive economic development, and the fight against transnational organized crime. ​ ​Both countries discussed plans to move forward a positive global agenda during Ecuador’s tenure on the UN Security Council and ​promote solutions to regional issues, among others the democratic crisis in Haiti and ​support free and fair elections in Venezuela.Vice Minister Albornoz expressed her appreciation for the United States’ support in the wake of recent violent attacks in Ecuador and for the additional planned investment of $10 million for ​counternarcotics, civilian security, and rule of law programming, subject to completion of congressional notification procedures.​ ​ The United States recognized Ecuador’s achievements in narcotics interdiction and destruction and efforts to improve civilian security. ​ ​This new funding reaffirms the United States’ commitment to support Ecuador as an important regional partner to tackle common challenges under the perspective of shared responsibility.  It expands the robust investments by the United States of over $42 million in capacity building, training, and equipment since 2019.Both countries committed to deepen their cooperation in security and defense and to accelerate the implementation of the recent agreements.Ecuador expressed its appreciation for U​. ​S​.​ government programs that have promoted inclusive economic growth, addressed climate change, and created educational opportunities that address the need for employment, especially among the youth, in order to prevent linkages to illicit economies and irregular migration. ​ ​Both countries ​committed ​to assess new initiatives to strengthen cooperation in these areas.The United States acknowledged the positive results of the regularization process ​for migrants ​developed by Ecuador, as well as Ecuador’s efforts to provide free access to health, education, formal banking, and other programs to integrate ​them into society​. ​ ​The United States complemented Ecuador’s efforts by providing humanitarian funding and technical support to the regularization process through our international organization partners.  The United States also provided support for programs that ​facilitate refugees and migrants’ access to documentation, health services, jobs, and education​.Safe Mobility Offices, operational in Ecuador since October 2023, have helped fulfill our shared commitment to facilitate safe, orderly, humane, and regular migration in line with the Global Compact on Migration and the principles of the Los Ángeles Declaration on Migration and Protection.  Ecuador​ ​​committed ​to extend the Safe Mobility Initiative through the end of 2024.The United States and Ecuador will work together to facilitate access to lawful pathways, such as H2 visas, for Ecuadorian citizens. ​ ​​Through ​​USAID ​​and the State Department, the United States will continue to explore ways to ​​support ​​the efforts of the Ecuadorian government on ​​labor mobility​​​​, including ​​by connecting Ecuadorians to ​​​​training, sharing information,​​ and e​​ngaging with the private sector in Ecuador and abroad​​​​.​The United States confirmed receipt of Ecuador’s request for a Temporary Protected Status benefitting its citizens in the United States and noted the matter is under consideration.​​​​The countries also discussed interest in partnering on anti-corruption, fiscal transparency, ​the energy​ transition and education in Ecuador.​ ​​ ​​The United States announced the intent to provide $ 3 million for cybersecurity assistance for the cyber security incident response team​​,​​ pending congressional approval.​The delegation of Ecuador thanked the United States for hosting their visit and underscored the successful organization of the High-Level Dialogue. Ecuador will host the next High-Level Dialogue in 2025.End text.
- Economic and Health Dialogue of the Americas High-level Meeting Outcomes for 2024 Office of the SpokespersonThe Economic and Health Dialogue of the Americas (EHA) was launched on the margins of the 9th Summit of the Americas in June 2022 by the U.S. Department of State. In 2023, the EHA held its first high-level meeting to establish the governance structure and approve scope of work. Since then, countries have organized 11 technical meetings and a first in person encounter in Uruguay at the end of 2023.On the 11th of March of 2024, the 2nd annual high-level meeting of the EHA was held in the Dominican Republic with representation from 17 countries. Ministers and Vice Ministers from health, finance, economy, foreign affairs, and commerce agencies participated to include Ministerial-level participation from of the United States, Dominican Republic, Uruguay, Mexico, Bahamas, Costa Rica, Guyana, Guatemala, Suriname, Panama, Colombia, and Paraguay, in addition to high-level representatives from Brazil, Chile, Argentina, and Ecuador. In addition to government representatives, leadership from regional technical organizations participated, including IDB Executive Vice President Jordan Schwartz and PAHO Deputy Director Mary Lou Valdez. Representatives from ECLAC, USAID, USTDA, U.S. Department of Commerce, and CDC were also in attendance.What were the main agreements and outcomes of the 2nd Annual EHA High-Level Meeting in the Dominican Republic?Countries reaffirmed EHA’s commitment to strengthen health systems and economic resilience to emergencies in the region. Paraguay, Uruguay, Bahamas, Argentina, Peru, Brazil, and Chile affirmed their commitment to co-lead EHA technical working groups. Panama was praised for their leadership as co-chair of EHA along with United States.PAHO announced the launch of their Public Finance Management tool. The tool will enable countries to conduct analysis of fiscal space for the health sector to support responsible spending as well as sustainable and equitable public health financing. PAHO has committed to the goal of two countries applying the tool in 2024-2025. Several countries expressed interest at the meeting. The work supports the “Smart Spending” workstream.PAHO committed to use the Essential Public Health Functions (EPHF) assessments from 14 countries to produce a policy document that would establish shared priorities and identify institutional capacity gaps across the region that will require future investment to fill, with a sub-regional focus on Caribbean countries. This work will support the workstream on Prioritization of Health Sector Transformation, which is led by the Bahamas. The Bahamas announced the completion of their EPHF assessment at the meeting.Brazil, Dominican Republic, and Chile committed to apply the IDB’s Maturity Assessment Tool (MAT) to measure the capacity of social protection systems to respond to emergencies. Countries like Colombia, Dominican Republic, and Paraguay outlined some of the best practices around social protection during COVID-19, as well as lessons learned from other sectors and emergency response scenarios. The goal for 2024 will be to explore potential regional agreements to coordinate increased preparedness and responsiveness to future crises in the region. This work supports workstream on Responsive Social Protection.EHA countries announced commitment to conduct a pharmaceutical mapping exercise and prepare a regional strategy for nearshoring of critical inputs and consumables. EHA members short-listed mRNA vaccines, monoclonal antibodies, and antimicrobials, including for malaria and tuberculosis, as priority products for the 2024-2025 analysis. The United States committed to support this analysis in coordination with co-leads Argentina and Peru. Argentina affirmed their commitment to conduct a regional Private-Public Partnership analysis. This work supports the Resilient Supply Chain workstream.USAID shared progress on the Americas Health Corps initiative, announcing the training of 120,000 healthcare workers in the region thus far.USAID also announced funding for a market analysis of the current capacity within the Latin America and Caribbean (LAC) region to produce or manufacture vaccine countermeasures for emerging threats, endemic diseases, and local priorities relevant to the regional market. The EHA platform committed to supporting the implementation of recommendations from the analysis.EHA members approved the work plan for 2024-2025 and committed to a mid-year high-level meeting to review progress.EHA members recognized the importance of digital health and utilization of technology in the public health system and proposed establishing a new EHA workstream on technology and health. The EHA Executive Technical Working Group will develop a scope of work for this proposed workstream with the goal of launching it in 2024.For further information, please contact E_Commmunications@state.gov, or visit the EHA website: https://www.iadb.org/en/home/economic-and-health-dialogue-americas .
- Under Secretary Fernandez’s Travel to the Dominican Republic Under Secretary for Economic Growth, Energy, and the Environment Jose W. Fernandez will travel to Punta Cana in the Dominican Republic, March 10-12, to deepen economic cooperation and strengthen strategic partnerships to advance more sustainable and resilient global supply chains and foster preparedness for future pandemics in the Western Hemisphere.The Under Secretary will co-host the second high-level meeting of the Economic and Health Dialogue of the Americas (EHA). The EHA is a regional, multilateral initiative that encourages governments to strengthen health systems and protect economies by assessing gaps in their public health sector, sharing best practices and tools to support sustainable and effective health financing, and build resilience into health supply chains. The meeting will convene ministers and vice ministers from the ministries of health, finance, economy, and foreign affairs across 19countries.  EHA members will be announcing commitments around health systems strengthening and supply chains.During the visit, he will also participate in the U.S.-Alliance for Development in Democracy (ADD) Joint Consultative Dialogue on Supply Chains between the United States, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, and Panama. The dialogue will advance our countries’ work together to strengthen supply chain resiliency in the health sector and deliver concrete action items for implementation.The Under Secretary intends to meet with senior leadership from the Dominican Republic to deepen economic cooperation, advance the Dominican Republic’s leadership in the Americas Partnership for Economic Prosperity, and promote the Dominican Republic’s role in critical supply chains, including medical products, semiconductors, and apparel. He also plans to engage with private sector leaders to learn about opportunities and challenges for U.S. companies.To stay up to date, follow Under Secretary Fernandez on X: @State_E , LinkedIn: @State-E , and Facebook: @StateDeptE .For further media information, please contact E_Communications@state.gov.
- Coordinator on Global Anti-Corruption Nephew’s Travel to Ecuador, Peru, and Paraguay HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases&#8230;Coordinator on Global Anti-Corruption Nephew’s Travel to Ecuador, Peru, and Paraguay				hide		if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}																										Coordinator on Global Anti-Corruption Nephew’s Travel to Ecuador, Peru, and Paraguay																																		Media Note																														February 26, 2024																																							Coordinator on Global Anti-Corruption Richard Nephew will travel to Ecuador and Peru from February 27 – March 4. In both countries, he will discuss progress made, ongoing efforts, and the continuing challenges to address corruption. His visit will reinforce the U.S. commitment to fighting corruption and desire to work to identify areas for further cooperation.&nbsp;In Ecuador from February 27-28, Coordinator Nephew will meet with government officials, including justice sector, law enforcement, legislative representatives, and civil society.&nbsp;In Peru from February 29 – March 1, he will attend the APEC Anti-Corruption and Transparency Experts Working Group. He will meet separately with justice sector actors, and participate in roundtable discussions with government representatives, civil society, and the private sector.On March 4, Coordinator Nephew will travel to Paraguay. He will meet with government representatives and engage with civil society and the private sector to discuss ongoing challenges and identify additional areas for collaboration. His visit will underscore the United States’ commitment to combatting corruption and strengthening the rule of law.Follow @StateCGAC on Twitter to learn more.						Tags																					Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs																																Corruption																															Ecuador																								Office of the Coordinator on Global Anti-Corruption																								Office of the Spokesperson																																Official International Travel																															Paraguay																								Peru