# Canada - United States Department of State

- Diplomacy Lab Fair 2024: Student Research Furthering the State Department’s Mission Office of Global PartnershipsNaila Nicole RicarteThe Return of Diplomacy Lab FairMore than 200 students and faculty representing 26 academic institutions gathered at the George C. Marshall Center within the U.S. Department of State’s headquarters in Washington, D.C., for the Diplomacy Lab Fair, organized by the Office of Global Partnerships.  This April 19, 2024, event, the first of its kind since 2017, was a celebration of students and faculty in the Diplomacy Lab network and an opportunity to share their semester-long research projects with diplomats, policymakers, and peers.  Diplomacy Lab is a partnership between the Department and more than 60 U.S. colleges and universities that enables collaboration on research and tools around a wide-variety of Department-identified topics in priority policy areas.  From countering violent extremism to climate adaptation, the diversity of Diplomacy Lab&#8217;s numerous projects was on full display.Last week marked the long-awaited return of the in-person Diplomacy Lab Fair after 6+ years! Students nationwide gathered in #WashingtonDC, presenting their projects with boundless enthusiasm for diplomacy. Witnessing the future of global relations in action is inspiring! 🤝🌍 pic.twitter.com/4ORZhlaekW&mdash; Special Rep for Global Partnerships McAuliffe (@GPatState) April 23, 2024Modern Diplomacy:  Inspiring the Next Generation of DiplomatsDuring his virtual welcome remarks, Secretary of State Antony Blinken emphasized that &#8220;partnerships like these help us foster ideas, draw on diverse perspectives, and, ultimately, better address the issues affecting the lives of our people and people around the world.&#8221;  Diplomacy Lab exposes students to the work of the Department of State and inspires them to pursue careers in foreign policy.  For example, Salisbury University students partnered with the Foreign Service Institute to research post-conflict nation-building and its potential application to Ukraine&#8217;s reconstruction efforts.  Alison Wright, an aspiring Foreign Service Officer, quoted Secretary Blinken himself to express her commitment to this cause: &#8220;diplomacy is about the last three feet.”No matter their personal or academic background, there is a place for every student in Diplomacy Lab and at the Department of State.  Carter Dills, who is pursuing a Bachelor of Science in Earth Science and Physics from Indiana University, assessed natural hazard risk in the Yukon region of Canada for his research project.  Carter commented: &#8220;In terms of the different backgrounds that can come in and contribute to projects, it is truly unlimited.&#8221;   A Diplomacy Lab participant explains a research project during this year&#8217;s Diplomacy Lab Fair at the State Department. &nbsp;One unique aspect of Diplomacy Lab is its direct engagement with U.S. Embassies and Consulates overseas.  For instance, Nancy Kwang Johnson from the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey, researched transitional justice in Montenegro by conducting interviews with nongovernmental organization (NGO) directors in the Balkans.  This was made possible with the guidance of the Political-Economic Chief at Embassy Podgorica. After their presentations, Diplomacy Lab Fair attendees interested in learning more about careers and fellowships at State met with Diplomat-in-Residence John Dinkelman.  Representatives for the U.S. Foreign Service Internship Program, Paid Student Internship Program, Pickering Fellowship, and Rangel Fellowship were also available to lend their advice.Influence of Student Research on U.S. Foreign PolicyBeyond the practical utility of student research to meet the immediate needs of the Department, the Diplomacy Lab program incorporates the diversity of the American people, most notably, diversity in perspectives within Generation Z.  Diplomacy Lab projects provide an avenue for students to contribute to U.S. foreign policy while studying topics where their work and passions align.  At the Marshall Center students also learned about careers at State. &nbsp;In this context, students from the University of Michigan collaborated with Consular Officers at the U.S. Consulate in Monterrey to protect the rights of seasonal and temporary workers participating in the H-2 visa program.  Their end-of-semester deliverable was a recommendation for engagement with and a comprehensive list of workers centers that have resources to support Mexican H-2 visa holders and protect their rights and wellbeing in the United States.  Consular leadership at the U.S. Embassy in Mexico City will share this information with relevant stakeholders in the Mexican Government and NGOs.Throughout Diplomacy Lab’s eleven-year legacy, this model of mutual exchange has been applauded by Department of State employees.  Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources Richard R. Verma, underscored this in his Diplomacy Lab Fair speech, saying: “It’s clear to me that the future of diplomacy is in good hands because of all of you.  You are our next generation of leaders&#8230;we need your voices to address the problems of today.”
- Repatriation of U.S., Canadian, Dutch and Finnish Citizens from Northeast Syria Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of StateToday the United States repatriated 11 U.S. citizens from northeast Syria, including five minors.  Additionally, we resettled in the United States the nine-year-old non-U.S. citizen sibling of one of the U.S. citizen minors.  This is the largest single repatriation of U.S. citizens from northeast Syria to date.In conducting this complex repatriation and resettlement the Department coordinated closely with our interagency partners.  I would like to thank the Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service, and the Departments of Defense, Justice, and Health and Human Services for their assistance.Approximately 30,000 individuals from more than 60 countries outside Syria remain in the al-Hol and Roj displaced persons camps, the majority of whom are children.  As governments undertake repatriation of their nationals, we urge thoughtfulness and flexibility to ensure that to the maximum extent possible family units remain intact.The only durable solution to the humanitarian and security crisis in the displaced persons camps and detention facilities in northeast Syria is for countries to repatriate, rehabilitate, reintegrate, and where appropriate, ensure accountability for wrongdoing.  The United States remains committed to helping those nations which seek to repatriate their nationals from northeast Syria, and to finding solutions, including resettlement, for those who are unable to return to their communities or countries of origin.As a part of this operation the United States also facilitated the repatriation of six Canadian citizens, four Dutch citizens, and one Finnish citizen, among them eight children.  We thank these governments for their partnership and applaud their demonstration of leadership by bringing their nationals home.  We thank the Government of Kuwait for its support, and also the Syrian Democratic Forces for its assistance.
- Department Press Briefing – May 6, 2024 HomeDepartment Press Briefing – May 6, 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 – May 6, 2024																																																					May 6, 2024																																																								1:47 p.m. EDTMR MILLER: Good afternoon, everyone.QUESTION: Good afternoon.MR MILLER: Don’t have any opening comments, so to you, Matt.QUESTION: You have nothing to say?MR MILLER: I think I &#8212;QUESTION: Nothing is going on in the world?MR MILLER: I think I imagine what your first question is going to be, so –QUESTION: Well, I figure &#8212;MR MILLER: So go ahead.QUESTION: You know what? I’m going to surprise you, because I don’t want – before we get into the long back and forth about Rafah and the ceasefire, I want to ask you if you can just answer this straight and – simply and straight about the Israeli closure of Al Jazeera. What is – what is your response?MR MILLER: So we have seen the announcement from the Government of Israel about closing Al Jazeera. We have made quite clear that we support media freedom all around the world, including in Israel, and that we are quite concerned about this action.QUESTION: You’re quite concerned about this action? Are you – are you asking the Israelis to do anything?MR MILLER: So as the President said on May 3rd, journalists and media workers are an essential part of any democracy &#8212;QUESTION: I know.MR MILLER: &#8212; because well-informed dissent is critical to building stronger and more successful societies, and we will continue to support and advocate for free and independent media around the world. We think Al Jazeera ought to be able to operate in Israel, as they operate in other countries in the region.QUESTION: Okay. So you oppose?MR MILLER: We do.QUESTION: You oppose this?MR MILLER: We do.QUESTION: Okay. All right. Then getting on to – so you’ve seen these reports in the last hour about Hamas accepting a ceasefire, but also the Israelis ordering or telling people in Rafah to get out. What’s your take on that?MR MILLER: So I can confirm that Hamas has issued a response. We are reviewing that response now and discussing it with our partners in the region. As you know, Director Burns is in the region working on this in real time. We will be discussing this response with our partners over the coming hours. We continue to believe that a hostage deal is in the best interests of the Israeli people. It’s in the best interests of the Palestinian people. It would bring an immediate ceasefire. It would allow increased movement of humanitarian assistance. And so we’re going to continue to work to try to reach one.QUESTION: And so – but you haven’t made any – yet made any determination about whether this is – whether they’re accepting what is on the table or they’re accepting something that is different?MR MILLER: We have only received the response in the last hour, 90 minutes, and as I said, are going through it now and discussing with it – discussing it with partners in the region. So I don’t want to characterize the nature of that response just yet.QUESTION: Okay. Thanks.MR MILLER: Okay. Shannon.QUESTION: Can I follow up on Al Jazeera?MR MILLER: Wait. Shannon, go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you. There have been some reports that – from Israel that perhaps Hamas agreed to a proposal that was put together by Egypt and Qatar that was softer than the initial framework that was in the works last week. Is it possible that there has been a different proposal that the U.S. is not involved with tracking?MR MILLER: So I’ve seen those suggestions; I’ve seen some of those reports. And I think you’ll – I hope you’ll understand that because we are still reviewing the response that has come in and because we are working on this in real time and trying to reach an agreement, I’m just going to decline to comment in detail about any of those reports. We are going to be discussing this response with our partners in the region in the hours ahead. It remains our top priority to try to reach a ceasefire agreement that will lead to the release of hostages, that will allow a surge of humanitarian assistance both into Gaza and allow it to move around inside Gaza. But I don’t want to comment on any of the various reports about what they might have been responding to until we’ve been able to go through it in detail and come to a full understanding and discuss it with our partners.QUESTION: And can you say at this point – maybe you can’t – but Hamas’s political wing and their militant wing, are they on the same page here? Do you feel like this is a response that at least indicates where the entire group is?MR MILLER: I am just not going to – I am just not going to speak for Hamas at all. As we have said for some time, there has been a significant offer on the table. The ball has been in Hamas’s court. We have made clear that they should accept that offer, that Israel made significant compromises, showed that they wanted to reach an agreement that would lead to the release of hostages, that would bring an immediate ceasefire. And we have hoped that Hamas would take the deal that was on the table. Now, as to what’s in their response, what it looks like, we’re going to review that and withhold judgment until we’ve had a chance to conduct a full review.Shaun.QUESTION: Could I ask about the – this – the threatened Israeli offensive in Rafah? In the hours before this, there were lots of reports about evacuations – not just a report, but Israel is talking about evacuations from Rafah. How does this – what’s the U.S. message to this now? Do you think that Israel should hold off on the – on any operations in Rafah as we discuss this response from Hamas?MR MILLER: Of course we do. We’ve made quite clear our position on Rafah for some time, which is that we cannot support an operation in Rafah as it is currently envisioned. We have made clear – the Secretary made this clear in his conversations with Prime Minister Netanyahu and other members of the Israeli Government last week – that we have not seen a humanitarian plan that is credible and that is implementable. And we believe a military operation in Rafah right now would dramatically increase the suffering of the Palestinian people, would lead to an increase in loss of civilian life, would dramatically disrupt the delivery of humanitarian assistance, all of which is coming through – I shouldn’t say “all,” but the great majority of which is coming through Kerem Shalom or Rafah and is being distributed inside the Rafah area. If you think about what it would do when you have people moving north to places where internal distribution lines are not currently set up and you’re going to have to try to re-establish those in the middle of conflict in Rafah, we think that would be very difficult, if not impossible, to do.So even absent this latest response, we have made clear that we do not support Israel launching a full-scale military operation in Rafah.QUESTION: Sure. I mean, you just said that in terms of – that’s the standard U.S. position on this. But has there been any communication with the Israelis about – I mean, in the past hours or so – about the response from Hamas and how this affects the situation in Rafah? Is there a message &#8212;MR MILLER: I’m just not going to get into our – those conversations. As I said, we just literally in the past hour, 90 minutes received that response from Hamas in the first place. Of course, we will be discussing it with Egypt, with Qatar, with Israel – the three countries with whom we have been working throughout this negotiation process. But I don’t want to get into the timing of those, but obviously, if we have – if those conversations had not already started, they will be ongoing in the next several hours.Humeyra.QUESTION: Matt, under the current circumstances, do you still think a ceasefire is achievable, based on what you know coming here?MR MILLER: I – what do you mean, is a ceasefire achievable?QUESTION: Like &#8212;MR MILLER: A ceasefire is what we are trying to achieve.QUESTION: Yes, but I mean, it has &#8212;MR MILLER: There is – there is &#8212;QUESTION: &#8212; over the weekend there was, like, there was a quiet impasse, and right now Hamas has accepted it. But from Israel, we’re hearing that that’s not the proposal that we’ve sent; that’s a softened version. That throws into – the whole thing into doubt.MR MILLER: Yeah. And I think I answered &#8212;QUESTION: So I’m just wondering, like, what’s your sense here?MR MILLER: A ceasefire is absolutely achievable. There has been a deal on the table – a proposal on the table – that would achieve an immediate ceasefire and the release of hostages. Now, as for Hamas’s response, which I think gets to your question, again, I don’t want to characterize it in any sort of detail until we’ve had a chance to review it in depth and talk with our partners in the region about it.QUESTION: And one thing on the humanitarian aid. Last week, when the Secretary was in Israel, there was an increased emphasis on – in his – during his trip on the delivery of humanitarian aid. We visited Kerem Shalom, which got shut down over the weekend after the Hamas attack. But can you give us, like, a sense of what a Rafah offensive – how that would impact all of Gaza? Because there are issues with distribution in the north. If we have a Rafah offensive in the south, could there be any meaningful humanitarian aid delivery in the north?MR MILLER: So let me just speak broadly to all of Gaza first, and then I’ll come to the north. So certainly a Rafah operation in – a Rafah operation would make it incredibly difficult to sustain the increases in humanitarian assistance that we have been able to deliver over the past few weeks since the President’s call with Prime Minister Netanyahu on April 4th. You have seen an increase in the number of trucks going in through Kerem Shalom; you have seen an increase in the distribution inside of Gaza, including inside southern Gaza. All of that would be put in jeopardy by a Rafah offensive because obviously, just look at what happened in the past 24 hours when you saw Hamas rocket attacks on Kerem Shalom that led to the death of three IDF soldiers and led to the closure of Kerem Shalom.If you had an ongoing kinetic military operation, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out the impact that that would have on the delivery of humanitarian assistance – not just through Kerem Shalom, not just through Rafah gate, but of course inside all of Rafah and all of southern Gaza.Now, separate from that, we have been working on standing up additional delivery mechanisms to get aid directly in to northern Gaza without having to go through Kerem Shalom – not because we anticipated an upcoming Rafah operation, but because it’s so difficult to get aid through Kerem Shalom and then move it all the way to the north of Gaza. So that’s why you saw the opening of Erez crossing, which is something that the President insisted on and something that we achieved last week when the Secretary was there, first in Jordan and then in Israel. So you can have trucks move directly from Jordan, through Erez crossing in the north, not have to go all the way to Kerem Shalom and come back up north. You saw Ashdod Port opening so goods can come directly from Ashdod and go in through a northern crossing, and it’s why we’re standing up the maritime operation.So there will be ways to get humanitarian assistance in to northern Gaza directly; we have been working on those because it’s important to do so because we’ve seen how difficult it is to get aid from southern Gaza into northern Gaza. It’s hard to speculate what the impact of a Rafah operation would have on the delivery of that aid to northern Gaza, but certainly you can say without a doubt that it would dramatically impact the delivery of humanitarian assistance in southern Gaza.Yeah, go ahead.QUESTION: Just going off of that for a second, you said earlier – reiterated that the U.S. doesn’t support a full-scale invasion into Rafah. What about a limited invasion into Rafah?MR MILLER: So I’m not going to speculate on the types of military operation. We &#8212;QUESTION: It’s not speculating &#8212;MR MILLER: No – so – no, I’m &#8212;QUESTION: &#8212; the Israeli Government has said limited &#8212;MR MILLER: I’m about to answer, Kylie. So there are proposals that we have put on the table – and this is why I’m not going to talk about some of this publicly &#8212; there are proposals that we have put on the table to the Israeli Government that we have discussed with them, that we think would be a much more limited, much more targeted, much more effective way of achieving their legitimate military – their legitimate military objectives, which is taking on the Hamas battalions that are remaining in Rafah. Those look very different than the types of operations that we have seen proposed publicly by the Israeli Government, and I think I’ll leave it at that.QUESTION: So just to be clear, what you have proposed to them isn’t your understanding of what they are planning to go ahead with in the near future?MR MILLER: I’m not going to speak to what they might be planning to go ahead with; I’ll let them speak to that. We’ve seen the announcement they made today about evacuation orders for not the entire – not entire southern Gaza, not entire – the entire Rafah area, but for a significant portion of it, 100,000 people. And I – of course we have concerns that any evacuation at all in such a crowded area, if you see 100,000 people move, you’re going to see other people in the next area move as well – which, of course, is something that you want to see happen if there is a military operation. But the problem now is there’s such limited places for them to go inside Gaza, and there is no effective way to distribute them – distribute aid to them and make sure they have access to shelter, access to sanitation, in the places that they would go if, say, you had hundreds of thousands of people moving from Rafah.QUESTION: And then without characterizing the Hamas response, given you guys are still reviewing it, would you say it’s a hopeful sign that they have given a response here?MR MILLER: I think that would be characterizing it, so I’m going to decline to do so until we have completed that review.QUESTION: And when do you think you will be able to complete that review? When should we expect an assessment from the administration?MR MILLER: The – Director Burns, as I said, is in the region literally working on this right now. I don’t want to put a timetable on it, but it is something that is a top priority for everyone in this administration from the President on down. You saw that the President had a phone call with Prime Minister Netanyahu today. Achieving a ceasefire deal that would lead to the release of hostages was one of the top priorities of the Secretary’s trip when he was in the region last week. So everyone is focused on this. Everyone is trying to get a deal over the line.QUESTION: Thank you. Last week there was some reporting that the Biden administration had put a hold on a shipment of U.S.-made ammunition to Israel. Have you seen that report? Can you comment on its accuracy?MR MILLER: I have seen that report. As is usually the case, we don’t comment on specific cases of arms transfers, and I’m not going to do so here.QUESTION: (Off-mike.)MR MILLER: Yeah, Said.QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. Just to clarify on the offer, the offer that you said was generous and on the table and what seems to be accepted now. Does that mean that the ball is no longer in Hamas’s court?MR MILLER: Said, it’s impossible for me to answer that question without characterizing the response that Hamas has given, which I’m not yet willing to do.QUESTION: Okay, all right. On Al Jazeera, now we know that Israel is accusing the correspondents of Al Jazeera, our colleagues who are Israeli citizens by the way, accusing them of incitement that goes back many years and all these things, a crime that is punishable by imprisonment. Are you worried that these correspondents might actually be imprisoned by the Israelis? And if they are, what would the Government of the United States do?MR MILLER: So I’m not going to speak to those specific allegations. It’s not something that we’ve reviewed in detail. We would have to do that. I’m certainly not going to speculate about what we might do in response to an action that has not yet been taken. I will just reiterate that when it comes to the decision to shutter Al Jazeera’s operations in Israel, it’s something that we are concerned by. We support the work that journalists and media do.We have had – and I don’t think it’s any secret that we have had our differences with Al Jazeera &#8212;QUESTION: Right, of course.MR MILLER: &#8212; over the years, including in some of the ways in which they – that they cover this conflict. But we support the free media &#8212;QUESTION: Right.MR MILLER: &#8212; conducting their operations everywhere in the world.QUESTION: Yeah, I think most countries have had an issue with Al Jazeera. Let me ask you about Rafah. Now the movement, 100,000 people and so on, now how many would need to move before Israel can go in and legitimately go after Hamas’s position? I mean, the area is so small – al-Mawasi, where they are moving and so on – just meters – kilometers away.MR MILLER: It’s not &#8212;QUESTION: What – would prevent, let’s say a Hamas fighter or Hamas leaders and so on to actually move to another place? They allegedly have a network of tunnels that would allow them to do that and so on. And then we have the same kind of situation. We see the Israelis saying we want to go after them in that area. I mean, how do you read this whole situation?MR MILLER: So that is not really a question I can answer. I will just make clear, as I have already and as others in the administration including the President, including the Secretary have on a number of occasions, that an operation – a major operation in Rafah – is not something that we can support.QUESTION: Yeah. And finally, I asked on Thursday about Dr. Adnan Al-Bursh. I was wrong. He wasn’t shot. He was – apparently he died and some say under torture and so on. I know that your colleague at the White House said what she said, that she was saddened and all these things, but have you followed up on this issue? How do you follow up on it? Because apparently they are keeping his corpse. I mean, they are not turning it to his family or others and so on for proper burial.MR MILLER: It is one that we have raised with the Government of Israel. I don’t have a response to read out. We have made clear with Israel, as we have made clear publicly, that they must treat all detainees humanely and with dignity in accordance with international humanitarian law and that they must respect detainees’ human rights and also that they must ensure accountability for any abuses or violations.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: Hi, Matt. Since they took all the Al Jazeera questions, I’ll skip mine.MR MILLER: No problem.QUESTION: I just want to &#8212;MR MILLER: Alex, did you have something?QUESTION: No, no, no, no.QUESTION: I just want to – because I’m a little bit confused, if you can clarify. So the Hamas response is not on the general’s proposal? It’s not – it’s not accepting this proposal?MR MILLER: I think I made clear I am not going to characterize their response one way or the other until we’ve had a chance to fully review it, digest it, discuss it with our partners.QUESTION: All right. My second question is about the pier that the United States is conducting. We believe we have, in our reporting, that it is close to being operational. Can you just tell us how this pier will operate? I mean, who will have the upper hand in all – in making this &#8212;MR MILLER: So it is something that we have been trying to complete as soon as possible. And when I say we, I mean largely our colleagues at the Pentagon who are constructing the pier. We have been involved in liaising with humanitarian groups that will be involved in the distribution of humanitarian assistance once it comes in to Gaza, but with the actual timeline for the launch of the pier and its operation, any details I’m going to defer to the Pentagon to comment on those in any detail.QUESTION: By the way, on the pier itself, it was – it was said over the weekend that it was moved to (inaudible) because of some high winds and waves and so on. Do you have any comment on that?MR MILLER: I’m going to defer to the Pentagon for any of those operational kind of details.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: They’re the ones that are responsible for constructing and moving it and ultimately launching it.Michel, go ahead, and we’ll do a few more in the Middle East before we &#8212;QUESTION: Did you ask Qatar to expel Hamas leaders from Doha – from Doha, and is it the time for these leaders to leave?MR MILLER: I am not going to speak to private diplomatic conversations. As we have said a number of times, the Secretary in his conversations has made clear with a number of partners in the region that any relationship they have with Hamas, any influence they have with Hamas, they should use to make clear to Hamas that it – to Hamas that it needs to accept a ceasefire deal that includes the release of hostages. And he has also made clear publicly that at the end of this process there can be – there can no longer be business as usual with Hamas, as existed in too many places before October 7th. And I think I’ll decline to comment for any further.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Any more on the region? Yeah, go ahead.QUESTION: In the region on &#8212;MR MILLER: Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you. For World Press Freedom Day last week, the Secretary did put out a statement about that. I’m just curious as to why that was a decision not to mention the Gaza war, granted that many journalists have been affected by a lack of press freedom around the world and that – and also being killed in various conflicts, but there was a substantial number of journalists that were killed in Israel and Gaza at the end of last year. Was there a reason why that wasn’t mentioned?MR MILLER: No. The Secretary has spoken to that a number of times, including in the region, including speaking directly to the colleagues of journalists in some instances who have lost their life tragically. We mourn the death of every journalist. You’ve heard the Secretary speak to the fact that it is because of journalists in Gaza that we see what’s happening, that the world knows what’s happening. And so we support their work. We want to see it continued. And we mourn the loss of every journalist, and I’ve spoken to that many times since the outbreak of this conflict.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Go ahead.QUESTION: Well, just one more on the &#8212;MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: Or just on Kerem Shalom.MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: Is it your understanding that the Israelis have agreed to reopen it after the attack that happened on Sunday?MR MILLER: So, yes, that was a – if you looked at the readout from the President’s call &#8212;QUESTION: Yeah, but &#8212;MR MILLER: &#8212; it noted that the prime minister had agreed to open it in that conversation.QUESTION: Okay. Because the Secretary was just there on Wednesday, and you believed that Kerem Shalom was critical &#8212;MR MILLER: It is &#8212;QUESTION: &#8212; with or without a Rafah &#8212;MR MILLER: It is &#8212;QUESTION: operation.MR MILLER: Kerem Shalom is absolutely critical to the delivery of humanitarian assistance in Gaza, especially in southern Gaza now that we’ve stood up operations in the north. But &#8212;QUESTION: Right. So is it open now, do you know?MR MILLER: I do not know if it’s been reopened. I’ll say it was an incredibly cynical act for Hamas to attack Kerem Shalom yesterday knowing that Kerem Shalom is the linchpin to the delivery of humanitarian assistance in Gaza. It goes to this point we’ve made on a number of occasions that Hamas claims that they represent the interests of the Palestinian people, but when you see some of their actions – and we talk about them hiding behind humans, using them as human shields all the time. When you see them attacking the gate that serves as the delivery point – as we saw if you were there last week, as we saw with our own eyes – the delivery point for humanitarian assistance into Gaza, it really does undermine any claim that they have to acting on the people of Gaza’s behalf.QUESTION: Thank you.QUESTION: Can I switch regions?MR MILLER: Let me – I’ll come back to you. Go ahead.QUESTION: Thanks, Matthew. What action would the U.S. take if Israel were to invade Rafah?MR MILLER: We have made clear that we cannot support an operation, and I don’t want to speculate on what actions we might take if one should proceed.QUESTION: Okay. And what’s the department’s reaction to Türkiye suspending trade ties with Israel?MR MILLER: I don’t have any comment on that. They are both allies of ours, and we would encourage them to work through their differences, but I don’t have any specific comment.QUESTION: And finally, what is the department doing to hold the CCP accountable for continued Chinese assistance to Russia’s defense sector?MR MILLER: So you heard the Secretary speak to this when he was in China and made clear that China can’t have it both ways. They can’t claim to be a partner of Europe on the one hand and then continue to fund the greatest threat to European security since the end of the Cold War on the other hand. He raised this directly with President Xi. He raised it with Director and Foreign Minister Wang Yi. And he made clear in those meetings that if China didn’t act, we would. And a couple of updates to that. You saw us roll out additional sanctions on Chinese entities who have supported Russia’s defense industrial base last week.And then I want to note that we’ve made clear that it is not just the United States that is concerned about China’s activities, but it is also our partners in – and allies in Europe. And you know President Xi is in Europe today meeting with President Macron, meeting with the president of the EU. And if you noted the comments from the Government of France, they very much intended to press this same case with President Xi and make clear what a threat they see – that they see it the way we see it, which is that it is a threat not just to Ukraine but is a threat to European security. And we think it’s important that our allies and partners stand strong in sending that message as well.QUESTION: And just one more?MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: And what is the department’s message today given it’s Yom HaShoah, Israel’s Holocaust Remembrance Day, especially with Israel having suffered several months ago the largest single-day massacre of Jews since the Holocaust? And I note the Secretary’s step-father &#8212;MR MILLER: Yeah, the Secretary put out a statement on that yesterday &#8212;QUESTION: Oh, okay.MR MILLER: &#8212; where he reiterated what has been our continuing message, which is never again. And I think you’ll see this President speak to this further.QUESTION: Matt, can I piggyback off &#8212;MR MILLER: (Inaudible) go ahead.QUESTION: Matt, you said you (inaudible) &#8212;QUESTION: Thank you.QUESTION: &#8212; for a limited – more limited operation in Rafah. And you’re working – you are working on a ceasefire with your partners. What comes first? I mean, you share the objective, you said, with the Israelis that they have to defeat Hamas in Rafah. But since you are working on a ceasefire, it’s a little bit confusing what you support. What’s the priority here?MR MILLER: Our immediate objective is to achieve a ceasefire that alleviates the suffering of Palestinian people, that secures the release of hostages, and then we want to build that ceasefire, as we have made clear, into something more sustained and something longer lasting. I’m – a little bit of a bind here because I can’t really speak to the options that we have proposed to Israel – you can see why we would want to keep those confidential – but we have proposed options that we believe are more effective and would be more effective in dealing with the threat that Hamas poses. And those are options that they could pursue, and I think I’ll leave it – I’m – unfortunately, I have to leave it at that.QUESTION: One more question. In case these negotiations fail, are you preparing for a worst-case scenario that the Israeli went into Rafah – goes into Rafah and this lasts until the fall?MR MILLER: Of course we are prepared for every scenario, but I don’t think I want to read out what actions we might take.QUESTION: For every scenario?MR MILLER: Well, that’s a fair point, Matt – every scenario that you can reasonably predict we prepare for.QUESTION: Well, what happens if, like, aliens come down?MR MILLER: That’s why I said every scenario you can reasonably predict.QUESTION: Are you prepared for that one too?MR MILLER: If that happens, I’ll run to the hills with – right behind you, probably.Nike, go ahead.QUESTION: Yeah. Are we ready to move on to different region?QUESTION: Could I just do one more?MR MILLER: Shaun – yeah, Shaun, go ahead.QUESTION: I know you &#8212;MR MILLER: Sorry, Nike. I tried. Let the record reflect I called on you, and Shaun, the head of the State Department Correspondent Association, stepped on your question.QUESTION: Yes, I – exactly. Well, I’ll gladly defer to Nike – gladly defer to Nike after this, as – I figure you’re not – probably not going to answer this, but the – just &#8212;MR MILLER: For a question I’m not even going to answer, too.QUESTION: Exactly.MR MILLER: Sorry. Go ahead.QUESTION: But just a couple of – on a serious note – just a couple of moments ago, the Israeli army saying that the evacuation orders that it issued earlier – confirming that this is preparation for a ground invasion. I know they’ve been speaking about a ground invasion in – a ground operation in general for some time. Do you have any further comment on that? I mean the – this – whether – do you have signs that the Israelis are actually going ahead imminently with a ground operation?MR MILLER: I’m just not going to speak to their military activities. We have made quite clear that we oppose a military operation there and I’m going to leave it at that.Nike, go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you. On Russia, Russia President Vladimir Putin will be set to start another six-year term on Tuesday. Do you have anything on that? I understand U.S. Ambassador Tracy is currently out of the country. My question is: Is anyone from the U.S. embassy attending his inauguration ceremony, or is the U.S. joining other countries to boycott?MR MILLER: No, we will not have a representative at his inauguration.QUESTION: U.S. is boycotting?MR MILLER: We will not have a representative there. You can draw your own conclusions.Alex, go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. Does that mean that you don’t consider Putin a legitimate president?MR MILLER: He – we certainly did not consider that election free and fair, but he is the president of Russia and is going to continue in that capacity.QUESTION: Let me get your immediate reaction to reports about Russia’s planned nuclear drills. How much it will complicate the situation, and what kind of response will that invite from the United States?MR MILLER: So Russia’s rhetoric – their nuclear rhetoric – has been reckless and irresponsible throughout this conflict. That said, we have not seen any reason to adjust our own nuclear posture in response to these announcements, nor any indications that Russia is preparing to use a nuclear weapon in Ukraine.QUESTION: Thank you. I have two more on South Caucasus, if I may. On Georgia, we had a protest in front of this building on Saturday. Georgian Americans were asking the State Department to impose sanctions on Ivanishvili and the GD MPs – not for actions that they might or might not take, but the actions they have taken already. So are you considering any measure?MR MILLER: I’m just not going to make any sanctions announcements, whether that relates to what we might do or what we are considering, as is typically our practice here.QUESTION: We heard from senior officials, this building – it feels like you guys are – you guys expecting some U-turn in this case or some offramp by suggesting that Ivanishvili might be misinformed, so all the statements we have heard from him are not his or his – or reflecting his viewpoints. Is that a reflection of what we have heard from them?MR MILLER: I’m not going to characterize at all. We are going to keep pressing our case, which is we believe that the law that they are considering would put Georgia on a precarious trajectory. It would jeopardize Georgia’s Euro-Atlantic path and undermine the U.S.-Georgia relationship, and we will continue to make that clear, and they will make their own decisions.QUESTION: And thank you. On – finally, on Armenia-Azerbaijan, ambassador to Baku today for the first time visited Karabakh. Let me get your sense of significance of it and where in – this week there will be ministerial in Kazakhstan. What are your expectations &#8212;MR MILLER: I don’t have any comment on that or any expectations.Go ahead.QUESTION: Yeah. Thank you, Matt. A question on Iran. As you may be aware, the IKR president, Nechervan Barzani, he’s in Iran with an official visit with a purpose finding solutions to the disputes between Iraq, Iran, and Kurdistan region. How does the U.S. view this visit and efforts? Do you have any comments on that?MR MILLER: So we have consistently encouraged de-escalation in the region, but we don’t have any comment about the specifics of that trip. I would leave it to the Kurdistan Regional Government to comment more in detail on President Barzani’s travel.QUESTION: And one more question: Do you think that having these kinds of discussion with Iran could help and lift any impacts on the Iraqi stability? Because we witnessed they attacked the Iraqi Kurdistan and there were a lot of tensions between these two capitals.MR MILLER: So I don’t want to speak to these specific conversations, but of course we have always encouraged any conversations that would lead to de-escalation and would lead to further stability in the region, including vis-a-vis Iran, which of course has been one of the greatest contributors to instability in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East.QUESTION: And last question, as we are speaking of Iran. Minutes ago, the Iranian foreign minister put a post on X and he said that we sent Hamas response to the plan proposed by Egypt and Qatar. What he says that – he said that to stop the attacks by Israel, and second, exchange prisoners, and thirdly, the human blockades. And now the ball in the opposite court, we are honest with – in our intentions. This is what he posted. So how do you see the Iranian role in bringing that Gaza the conflict into the end and &#8212;MR MILLER: Bringing a Gaza conflict to an end? I see no Iranian role in bringing a Gaza conflict to an end. You’ve seen Iran be one of the greatest instigators of this conflict in the first place, from financing Hamas and supporting Hamas to financing and supporting Hizballah and other groups that have contributed dramatically to instability, not just when it comes to attacks on Israel but when you look at the – their proxy, the Houthis, and attacking international shipping, and greatly destabilizing the region. So no, I don’t see Iran playing any kind of productive role.QUESTION: And they are not the &#8212;MR MILLER: That would be – that would be completely out of character for them.QUESTION: They are not honest with their intentions, what he said on his post?MR MILLER: They’re not what?QUESTION: Honest with their intentions?MR MILLER: With their – Iran’s honest with their intentions? No, I would not characterize them as honest with their intentions. When it comes to the specific comments that they made about Hamas’s response, I’m not going to comment on those, because as I said, we’re reviewing their response, so I don’t want to confirm what may or may not have been in it.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. So can I just get your reaction to this? Over the weekend, a Moscow court sentenced a Russian Falun Gong practitioner to two months in detention for her beliefs. It’s the only other country outside of communist China to incarcerate a citizen for the meditation practice. Jake Sullivan said that he wasn’t surprised by this, as China’s – Russia relies on China’s economic and technological support. So given these circumstances, what’s the State Department doing to address the broader implications of the spread of China’s persecution of Falun Gong into Russia, possibly in exchange for support?MR MILLER: Let me take that back and get you a specific response, since it relates to this one case that you mentioned.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Yeah. Go ahead.QUESTION: A little over a week ago, China held unification, unity talks between Hamas leaders and Fatah. Sir – and they – I think it resulted in them just saying that they’re agreeing to &#8212;MR MILLER: Keep talking, yeah.QUESTION: Keep talking? What’s your reaction to China being involved in unity talks between these &#8212;MR MILLER: So I don’t have any reaction to them playing a role in these talks. We saw previous talks take place between Hamas and Fatah in Moscow. They’ve held talks in other locations. Leaving that aside, we have long said that if China wanted to play a productive role in bringing this conflict to an end, that it’s something that we would welcome. If they wanted to play a productive role in helping prevent escalation in the region, that is something we would also welcome. The Secretary has spoken to his counterpart, Director Wang Yi, six times since October 7th to press this case, to press China to use all of its influence in the region. And we will continue to press them to do that.We think there certainly are countries that they have a relationship – with whom they have a relationship in the region, including countries, most notably Iran, with whom we don’t really have a relationship. So if China can bring its influence to bear, that would be a productive step for it – it would be a productive step that it could take that would benefit the region and benefit the entire world.QUESTION: One more on Saudi Arabia.MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: The other day, you had said that in order for normalization to take place between Saudi Arabia and Israel, that Saudi Arabia is looking for calm in Gaza &#8212;MR MILLER: Correct.QUESTION: &#8212; as well as a path to peace. That path to peace, is that the Oslo Accords? Is that something different than Oslo? Is that expanding on Oslo or &#8212;MR MILLER: So I don’t want to get into the details, because it’s something that we still continue to talk with Saudi Arabia about, but it is a path to the establishment of an independent Palestinian state with security guarantees for Israel. And the details of what that would look like is something that we’re continuing to discuss with them.QUESTION: So would that make Oslo irrelevant? MR MILLER: I just – I don’t want to – it’s a – it is a negotiation and a discussion that is ongoing right now; I don’t want to characterize it in any way with respect to how it would interact with past agreements.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Yeah, go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: A ceasefire deal doesn’t end the war in Gaza. It means returning to fighting again and more Palestinian civilian victims, as it’s happened daily – ten of thousands have already murdered due to the bombing and the famine imposed by Israel, most of them children and women. My question: Why the U.S. doesn’t intervene to stop the war completely – I mean, permanent ceasefire – especially that the Palestinian civilian killed with the American weapon?MR MILLER: So we have been working incredibly hard – it has been the focus of most of this briefing – to achieve an immediate ceasefire that would stop the fighting in Gaza and would alleviate the suffering of the Palestinian people, those who have died as a result of the conflict and also those who are suffering as a result of lack of humanitarian aid or inability to access humanitarian aid.Now, that’s the first step. We want to get an immediate ceasefire and then we do want to see it turn into something more durable. We’re going to try to work to bring this conflict to an end as soon as possible. That said – and I know I’ve – hammer on this – have hammered on this in the past and the Secretary hammers it on the past – has hammered it in the past – Hamas could achieve an immediate ceasefire right now. Hamas, the entity that started this conflict by murdering civilians – innocent civilians – could lay down their arms, could surrender and stop putting the Palestinian people in harm’s way.So it – when people ask questions about Israel that are legitimate questions, and when they ask questions about us that are legitimate questions, I hope people will also realize that Hamas plays – played the instigator role in beginning this conflict and could end it today if they wanted to.QUESTION: But it’s not permanent. It’s temporary.MR MILLER: We are – as I – I just spoke to that in my answer.QUESTION: Yes. Excuse me, I want a question.MR MILLER: Yeah, go ahead.QUESTION: That IDF already requested the people in Rafah to evacuate. I wonder if the evacuation for Palestinian in Rafah across the Egyptian border is being considered.MR MILLER: So Egypt has made quite clear that they do not want to see the displacement of the Palestinian people. It’s not just Egypt. We have heard that from virtually every country in the region: that they do not want to see Palestinians displaced because of the very unfortunate history in that regard. And we have made clear to the Israeli Government that Palestinian – the Palestinian people shouldn’t be replaced – or displaced.Now, one of the major risks of a full-scale Rafah operation is that it would destabilize that border between Gaza and Egypt and would lead to that sort of displacement, which would destabilize the Sinai Peninsula, of course. It’s another reason why we believe such an operation is a bad idea in the first place.QUESTION: Okay.MR MILLER: Yeah, go ahead in the back.QUESTION: Thank you very much. U.S. House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries said on Sunday that the United States will have to send troops to Ukraine if Ukraine is defeated in conflict with Russia. Any chances that is a real option for &#8212;MR MILLER: I’m just not going to comment on statements made by members of Congress. The President has made clear that he will not send U.S. troops to fight in Ukraine.QUESTION: Okay. And one more question. Can you explain why is it okay for the United States to have a law on foreign agents and it’s not okay for Georgia, Russia to have one?MR MILLER: So the difference is in the nature of those laws. When you see the United States Foreign Agents Registration Act, it is to people who are acting on behalf of a foreign government, not people who are doing legitimate nongovernment organization work, who are doing humanitarian work, who are doing civil society work. It’s a very different type of thing. I’ve seen those false equivalencies drawn in the past. And when you look at the text of the proposal in Georgia and the text of the proposal that has been passed due to Kremlin influence in other countries, they are very different than the type of law that we have on the books here in the United States.Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you very much. Question is regarding the ministers’ priorities on the normalization talks regarding Saudi Arabia and Israel. As National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan mentioned, insisted, in an interview that the administration will enter in any defense pact with Saudi Arabia if only they normalize ties with Israel. So question is: Is it diplomacy of United States for integration of Israel in the Middle East or it’s another defense pact by the United States to counter Iranian-backed movements in future from the Middle East?MR MILLER: I’m not sure I completely understand the question. But I will say I don’t want to get too much into the details of our negotiations with Saudi Arabia and the ongoing discussions, but that we continue to work to finalize both the bilateral pieces of such an agreement as well as what the pathway to an independent Palestinian state would look like.QUESTION: Secondly, Canadian authorities arrested three individuals linked with the killing of Sikh leader Hardeep Singh Nijjar. The United States have many findings on the connections of Indian foreign operations at U.S. soil, as Wall Street Journal reported last week regarding the connection of Indian Government with some targets here in the United States. So with this recent development, what do United States have more to take up with the Indian administration?MR MILLER: So I would refer you to the Canadian authorities to speak to the details of the investigation there. With respect to the indictment that was returned in the United States, I’ll let the Department of Justice speak on behalf of that in detail. And then the only thing further I’d say: When it comes to the State Department, we made clear when these allegations were first made public that it’s something we think India should take very seriously and investigate. They opened a Committee of Enquiry to look into the matter, and that work is ongoing, and we’ll wait to see the results. But we made very clear that it’s something that we take seriously and we think it’s something they should take seriously as well. Hudson.QUESTION: Matt, apologies for not asking in the Israel section, but I have nosebleed seats today so I didn’t get it. But &#8212;MR MILLER: I’m just – I’m just happy to see you here in the briefing.QUESTION: Great to be here. In response to the Axios report that the U.S. is withholding an ammunition shipment to Israel, the Biden administration has told several reporters around town that the U.S. has surged weapons into Israel since October 7th. I’m kind of curious about this response because for much of the conflict, the administration has downplayed reports about the near-constant approval and shipment of arms to Israel. I’m just wondering if you could clarify, what’s the case? Has the U.S. been surging weapons to Israel since October 7th or not?MR MILLER: So we have provided weapons to Israel since October 7th. We have always made clear that we are committed to Israel’s defense. That commitment to Israel’s security remains ironclad, and that includes providing security assistance to Israel since October 7th to ensure that the attacks of October 7th can never be repeated.QUESTION: Thanks.MR MILLER: Kylie, and then I’ll come to Humeyra.QUESTION: Can you just provide us an update on the NSM-20 report and if it’ll go to Congress on time, when it’s due on Wednesday?MR MILLER: The only update I have is that we continue to work on it, and we’ll have more to say about it later in the week.QUESTION: You can’t say that it’s on track to be delivered on time?MR MILLER: It’s on track. We’re working on it. I just don’t have any updates. It is our intention to provide it on time, and we’ll have more updates as we get closer to the deadline.QUESTION: And just two quick questions on it. I know you don’t want to get into it, but I still have two questions. There are concerns among lawmakers that the Political-Military Bureau in this building is leading the drafting of the report, and I wonder how you respond to that.MR MILLER: So I’m not going to get into the internal mechanisms that we go through to develop such a report, but I will say that a broad spectrum of the department will contribute to this report. People will have a chance to make their views known. People will have a chance to offer their assessments of what they’ve seen. It’s important that different bureaus inside the department which bring different skills to bear and different points of view and different capabilities have the chance to review both of the section – both of the tasks that we were given in the report, both when it comes to compliance with international humanitarian law and the delivery of humanitarian assistance, and we expect all of them to speak candidly about what they’ve seen and make their recommendations and make their honest assessments, and we’ll deliver a report that reflects that.QUESTION: And one more question. The memorandum requires all recipients of U.S. weaponry, including Israel, to make assurances that they’re using those weapons, quote, “in a manner consistent with all applicable international and domestic law and policy, including international humanitarian law and international human rights law.” Will U.S. officials at the department be probing those assurances that they get from Israeli officials if there’s reason to believe that they aren’t credible assurances?MR MILLER: So we are taking very seriously the task that we were giving – that was given to us in this national security memorandum, and it pertains not just with respect to Israel but with other countries as well that receive U.S.-provided security assistance. So the initial step was to get assurances from those seven countries that they were complying with international humanitarian law and that they were not impeding the delivery of humanitarian assistance. We’ve received those assurances I think probably 43 days ago, somewhere around that, and now we are going through and looking at compliance with international humanitarian law and the delivery of humanitarian assistance. I don’t want to get into – too much in detail because we are close to when a report will be delivered and I should wait and let the report speak for itself, but it is – I can tell you it is something that we take incredibly seriously and there is a lot of work going on at the department to make sure we fulfill that obligation and we fulfill it thoroughly.QUESTION: So you’re not taking those assurances on face value?MR MILLER: I – let me just let the report speak for itself when it comes out, but it is something that we are absolutely taking seriously, and we are looking at a whole host of activities and actions when it comes to any one of the governments – the relevant governments in this case, and we’ll be making our own assessments not just based on what those governments have told us but based on what we have seen in our review here at the State Department.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Humeyra, go ahead.QUESTION: Just one thing on that, actually, Matt. So when the report is produced, we have reported that there are people – there are some U.S. officials at the State Department who have raised serious concerns about Israel’s possible noncompliance with international humanitarian law, and what they say is its arbitrary restrictions on humanitarian aid. So when you produce that report, you’re basically weighing in on whether the assurances are credible or not. Is there going to be a section where you address those countering, let’s say, opinions from different bureaus, or is it just going to be we found that credible or not?MR MILLER: You – this is going to be a very unsatisfying answer, but you are just going to have to wait until &#8212;QUESTION: I’m used to that.MR MILLER: Yeah, sorry about that – until the report is complete. But I will say that one of the strengths of this department is that we have people with a rich diversity of experiences, a rich diversity of expertise, and a rich diversity of views, and the Secretary takes all of those seriously. He takes all of their points of view seriously, and the entire senior leadership of the department looks at the entire landscape when compiling – when going through an exercise and compiling a report like the one we are doing here.QUESTION: Right. But really, from a format point of view, it’s just going to have, like, one assessment?MR MILLER: I know, and I’m just – that I’m not – and that I’m just not going to speak to today.QUESTION: Okay. And will there be a – because you said – in your answer to Kylie you said we collect recommendations. Can you confirm there is going to be a recommendation one way or the other from the legal department?MR MILLER: I’m just not going to speak to the internal mechanisms of a report that is still being compiled.QUESTION: Okay, thank you.QUESTION: Can I just follow up on that?MR MILLER: Go ahead, Said, and then Shaun, and then we’ll wrap for the day.QUESTION: Yeah, very quickly, but on breaking international law and so on, is the threatening of the ICC by Israel or even by members of Congress itself a violation of international law, the threat itself?MR MILLER: I am not enough of an expert in international humanitarian law to speak to that.QUESTION: Okay. But this department &#8212;MR MILLER: We have made clear that we do not believe the ICC has jurisdiction in this case and oppose their investigation.QUESTION: Yeah, yeah. I’m just saying the threatening of the ICC by Israel.MR MILLER: I see. You should take it up with an international humanitarian lawyer.Go ahead, Shaun.QUESTION: Sure. On two things – two different topics. Rwanda – the Rwandan Government didn’t really like a statement that you issued last week saying that the Rwandan Defence Forces were involved in the attack near Goma on the east of the DRC, saying that the statement’s ridiculous and that the Rwandan forces weren’t involved in that. Do you stand by that? Has there been any communication with Rwanda?MR MILLER: We absolutely do. The attack in question came from the Rwandan Defence Forces and M23 positions on the Mugunga IDP camp. The Government of Rwanda must investigate this heinous act and hold all of those responsible accountable, and we have made that clear to them.QUESTION: Has there been any communication directly with the Rwandans themselves?MR MILLER: I’m not going to speak to diplomatic conversations, but we have made quite clear what we think about this act and the fact it ought to be investigated.QUESTION: Great. And then a completely different topic, Mexico. The three surfers who were killed, one of them an American – I don’t know if you – do you have any lines, any communications with the U.S. on that?MR MILLER: Yeah. So we can confirm the death of a U.S. citizen, Carter Rhoad, near Ensenada, Mexico, and are closely monitoring the situation. We offer our sincere condolences to the family on their loss. We are coordinating with local law enforcement on their investigation into the matter, and out of respect for the privacy of the family, we will decline to comment further at this time.And with that, we’ll wrap for today. Thanks, everyone.QUESTION: Thank you.(The briefing was concluded at 2:35 p.m.)# # #						Tags																					Armenia																								Azerbaijan																								Canada																								China																								Democratic Republic of the Congo																								Georgia																								India																								Iran																								Iraq																								Israel																								Mexico																								Office of the Spokesperson																								Palestinian Territories																								Russia																								Rwanda																								Saudi Arabia																								Ukraine
- Resettlement Diplomacy Network Senior Officials Meeting Office of the SpokespersonFrom April 29 to May 1, 2024, Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM) Julieta Valls Noyes convened the third Senior Officials Meeting of the Resettlement Diplomacy Network (RDN) in Washington, DC.  Under the chairship of the United States, senior government officials from Australia, Brazil, Canada, Germany, Italy, New Zealand, Spain, and the United Kingdom, along with representatives of the European Commission, participated in the exchange.The meeting provided an opportunity for participating states to review the impact of the RDN’s work since its inaugural ministerial meeting in September 2023 and to assess priorities for continued collective action on refugee resettlement and complementary pathways that help strengthen the global protection system.Participants discussed the use of the Emergency Coordination Platform established within the RDN (also known as the “Red Phone” mechanism) to facilitate rapid collaboration on situations of shared concern, including continued focus on providing safety to Afghan refugees in need of protection.  In addition, participants reflected on lessons from previous emergency responses to large-scale displacement and discussed opportunities to work together to strengthen the global resettlement and complementary protection pathways system, including by strengthening existing emergency transit infrastructure, using innovative refugee resettlement referral mechanisms, and leveraging community-driven sponsorship models.  Finally, participants discussed the Safe Mobility initiative and further opportunities for coordination on infrastructure to support pathways to resettlement.The United States launched the RDN in September 2022.  Pathways International and the Migration Policy Institute support the U.S. chairship of the RDN as the RDN secretariat.
- Remarks at Greenland Day at PDAC Mining Conference Jose W. Fernandez, Under Secretary for Economic Growth, Energy, and the EnvironmentToronto, CanadaAs PreparedGood afternoon. It’s a pleasure to be here with you at Greenland day. I would like to thank Minister Nathanielsen and the Greenland Business Association’s Christian Keldsen for the opportunity to speak about U.S. efforts to build secure, reliable, critical mineral supply chains. The U.S. government and the partners in the Minerals Security Partnership (MSP) are eager to discuss options to help mining companies in Greenland make connections to advance projects that support the global energy transition.In February 2021, President Biden signed an executive order that fundamentally changed the way the United States approaches global critical minerals supply chain security. We have conducted first-of-their kind supply chain assessments, supported new investment in U.S. mining and processing infrastructure, and created global alliances and networks to build innovative supply chains.We took this to the next in June 2022, as a group of partner countries announced the MSP. The partnership facilitates government and industry cooperation on targeted financial and diplomatic support to produce concrete, project-level results of strategic importance to global supply chains.Current MSP partners include 14 of the world’s leading consuming countries and the European Union (EU). These partners believe in the imperative of creating a “race to the top” on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) standards so that the rapid growth of supply chains brings about real and lasting benefits for all countries involved.And just yesterday, the MSP partners announced the creation of the MSP Forum, which cements our partnership with select mineral producing countries committed to advancing and accelerating individual projects with high ESG standards. In addition, the MSP Forum maximizes the positive impact of EU President Von der Leyen’s goal of increasing policy-level engagement with critical minerals producing countries.The MSP Forum gives producing countries a stronger connection to the MSP partners – where they can request assistance, seek connections with private sector actors, propose projects, and discuss policy. The MSP Forum will provide opportunities for project information sharing among MSP partners, forum members, and the private sector; and for presentations on critical minerals opportunities.Recognizing the important role the private sector must play in meeting the critical minerals challenge, late last year, we launched the minerals investment network for vital energy security and transition (MINVEST). This new partnership will promote public-private dialogue and spur investment in strategic mining, processing, and recycling opportunities that adhere to the highest ESG standards.Greenland can play a key role in supporting the diversified supply chains needed to advance global energy needs and economic security. And Greenland has found itself in this role before. The Ivittuut Mine – the largest and longest operating mine in Greenland’s history – was the world’s only source of cryolite, which supplied the solvent needed for aluminum refining for U.S. aircraft manufacturing during World War II.Now, more than 80 years later, Greenland is poised to play a leading role through the development of its rare earth, graphite, nickel, zinc, and other critical minerals projects to support the global clean energy supply chain.We all recognize the challenges you – the exploration and mining companies here today – face in proving up these resources, making the financing connections needed, closing offtake deals, and moving projects into development and production.With all these challenges, the MSP and the United States can help. The United States, through its financing and trade promotion agencies, can offer a wide range of support for companies with strategic projects that will support reliable critical mineral supply chain development.The U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) offers equity investments, debt financing, political risk insurance, feasibility studies, and other technical assistance that support critical minerals production and processing as well as related transportation links.The U.S. Trade Development Agency (USTDA) funds early-stage infrastructure planning and design through feasibility studies, technical assistance, and pilot projects to help partners move from concept to financing and implementation.Our Department of Energy’s loan programs office can finance projects in the United States that support critical mineral extraction, manufacturing, mining, processing, recovery, and recycling.Fortunately, we have the U.S. Export-Import Bank (EXIM) here to describe next what it can offer to companies operating in Greenland. EXIM can provide solutions such as working capital loan guarantees, export credit insurance, and other financial tools.In closing, we know Greenland has a number of other minerals projects in the exploration and development pipeline, and that the process for obtaining financing and support is not easy. I ask you to let us start or continue our conversations. The U.S., the MSP and our partners seek the same objectives of supporting responsible mining in Greenland, the use of the highest ESG standards possible, and promoting the Greenlandic government’s interest in developing its economy and maximizing the benefits of mining for the Greenlandic people.Greenland, as a part of the kingdom of Denmark, is an inherently important partner for the United States. We have a common arctic identity, history, and heritage. We look forward to continuing to build on our ongoing partnership and cooperation in the mineral resource sector to meet our shared interests.Thank you very much.						Tags																					Canada																																														Economic Prosperity and Trade Policy																															Under Secretary for Economic Growth, Energy, and the Environment
- Remarks at Canada’s Partnerships Day HomeUnder Secretary for Economic Growth, Energy, and the Environment Remarks &amp; Releases&#8230;Remarks at Canada&#8217;s Partnerships Day				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();			}		});	}																										Remarks at Canada&#8217;s Partnerships Day																																		Remarks																														April 22, 2024																																							Good morning. I’m honored to be here on Earth Day to discuss one of the most important issues of our time – plastic pollution. First, I want to thank the government of Canada for hosting INC-4  and organizing this event, along with the world wildlife foundation.Plastic pollution is a global problem that requires a global solution. The United States is here today because we know we are part of the problem, and we see it as our obligation to be part of the solution. For the United States, and similar to many other governments, plastics is not just a product &#8211; but a material that is woven into our healthcare systems, economies, trade, and domestic, and foreign policy. To eliminate plastic pollution, we must look at ways to reduce use, improve recycling, and apply alternative materials and processes in order to reduce the demand for it and transition to a circular approach.U.S. Government PositionThe United States recognizes the urgency and importance of a global solution. And thus, we support a global agreement on plastic pollution that meets 3 conditions:Sets effective universal obligations throughout the lifecycle of plastics,Allows each country to implement the actions the agreement calls for by enabling countries to develop and prioritize their actions on plastic pollution, and,Enables universal membership from all countries, including the major producers and consumers of plastic. &nbsp;Some may say this is not enough. Some may say we need to ban plastics completely. But the ambition of this agreement will be limited if only a small percentage of the polluters and consumers in the world are able to implement it. We urge the world to work towards an agreement we can all start implementing immediately, while committing to strengthen over time.&nbsp;We aim to be an honest broker in this process. That starts with being honest about our own limitations – which include federal authorities, complex and varying subnational governmental approaches, and the fact that the science is not yet there in developing sustainable alternatives to plastic materials.&nbsp;Although the challenges are many, the United States is addressing them through two major actions:&nbsp; (1) advancing international negotiations around the global agreement to align countries on a common approach and (2) establishing a multistakeholder forum to support projects to address pollution at all stages of the plastic lifecycle.&nbsp;One of the biggest obstacles from our perspective will be to ensure we bridge differences between countries to keep the negotiations constructive and on track to reach consensus on an impactful agreement. &nbsp;Goal of INC-4This brings me to what we hope we can all achieve this week.&nbsp;For INC-4, I hope we can work together to start converging on key elements in the agreement to stay on track to conclude these negotiations in 2024. We need to work during the inter-sessional on drafting the potential compromises.&nbsp;I hope we begin building the foundations for an agreement that will evolve and strengthen over time to support the just transition to circularity. Other multilateral environmental agreements, like the Montreal Protocol, have continuously expanded their ambition after they came into force.&nbsp;We acknowledge the need to have a cohesive global approach and therefore the United States supports an agreement on plastic pollution with universal obligations throughout the lifecycle of plastic, including on polymers, and chemicals.We hope we can reach an agreement that most countries can implement, especially those who carry the most responsibility such as the United States. &nbsp;Of course, resources and financing will be important for the effective implementation of any agreement. Countries like the United States are ready to bring innovative solutions and resources to the table to develop a strong financial mechanism. Without it then the words in this agreement will remain only words.EPPICBeyond the negotiations, the United States is spearheading the End Plastic Pollution International Collaborative (EPPIC), which convenes public and private sector partners to spur global action to tackle plastic pollution head on. EPPIC partners include the International Union for Conservation of Nature, the Aspen Institute, the Ocean Foundation, Searious Business, WWF , and Kimberly Clark, as well as other governments.&nbsp; EPPIC supports innovative approaches to reduce plastic waste and creates a forum to exchange knowledge, information, and best practices. We urge you to join us in this effort.In summary, I want to re-emphasize the United States’s commitment to work towards a solution in these negotiations. We are here to be innovative. We are ready to get to work and we hope you will join us. Thank you for your time, and I look forward to the negotiations this week and working together towards a solution.						Tags																					Canada																																														Climate and Environment																																							Pollution																															Under Secretary for Economic Growth, Energy, and the Environment
- Assistant Secretary Stewart Travels to New York Office of the SpokespersonAssistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of Arms Control, Deterrence, and Stability, Mallory Stewart, will travel to New York, New York, April 22-23.She will participate in the Western Hemisphere Nuclear Risk Reduction Workshop, co-hosted by the United States and Mexico. The workshop will focus on regional perspectives on nuclear risk reduction and its role in nuclear arms control.Assistant Secretary Stewart will also participate in the North American Trilateral Risk Reduction and Disarmament Dialogue, alongside counterparts from the governments of Canada and Mexico. The discussion will focus on nuclear arms control, responsible military use of artificial intelligence and autonomy, space security, and other security-related issues.
- Under Secretary Fernandez to Lead U.S. Delegation to Plastic Pollution Negotiations in Canada Office of the SpokespersonUnder Secretary for Economic Growth, Energy, and the Environment Jose W. Fernandez will travel to Ottawa, Canada to lead the U.S. delegation to the fourth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-4) on April 23-29.Under Secretary Fernandez will be joined by Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environment John Thompson, Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs negotiators, and U.S. interagency partners.  INC-4 brings together representatives from approximately 180 countries to make progress towards a strong, inclusive global agreement on plastic pollution.Plastic pollution is a global problem affecting our environment, biodiversity, health, food security, and economies.  The United States is working with other nations to develop a global agreement that will set the world on a course to end plastic pollution.  The fourth session of the INC is a critical opportunity to achieve meaningful progress to meet the goal set by the UN Environmental Assembly to have a final text of the agreement by the end of 2024.  U.S. delegation members have consulted with a wide set of stakeholders, including environmental nongovernmental organizations, industry, the scientific community, state and local governments, and Tribal nations in order to negotiate an agreement that is inclusive and effective.  While in Ottawa, Under Secretary Fernandez will meet with government leaders, civil society, and other stakeholders to foster cooperation and exchange ideas on addressing pollution throughout the plastic lifecycle.For media inquiries, please contact oes-press@state.gov. To stay up to date, follow Under Secretary Fernandez on X: @State_E, LinkedIn: @State-E, and Facebook: @StateDeptE.
- G7 Italy 2024 Foreign Ministers’ Statement on Steadfast Support for Ukraine Office of the SpokespersonThe text of the following statement was released by the G7 foreign ministers of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States of America and the High Representative of the European Union.We, the G7 Foreign Ministers of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States of America, and the High Representative of the European Union, strongly condemn Russia’s ongoing war of aggression against Ukraine. We reaffirm our unwavering determination to support democratic Ukraine as it defends its freedom, sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity, within its internationally recognized borders.  We pay tribute to the bravery and resilience of the Ukrainian people, fighting for their freedom and democratic future.Ten years on since Russia’s illegal occupation of Crimea and its setting up of unrecognized proxy regimes in parts of the Donbas and into the third year of its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, we demand that the Russian Federation immediately, completely, and unconditionally withdraws all of its military forces and equipment from the internationally recognized territory of Ukraine. Russia can end this war today.We call on all countries to uphold international law and in no way to validate or condone Russia’s attempts to acquire territory by force, in violation of the basic tenets of the UN Charter. We will never recognize the legitimacy of so-called “referenda” or “elections”, past or future, held by Russia in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine, nor their results. Illegally holding Russian Presidential elections in Ukraine’s sovereign territories was an outrageous violation of international law.We will continue to support Ukraine’s right of self-defense and reiterate our commitment to Ukraine’s long-term security. Based on the Joint Declaration of Support for Ukraine we endorsed in Vilnius in July 2023, we are fully engaged on finalizing and implementing specific, bilateral, long-term security commitments and arrangements with Ukraine, which several G7 countries and other partners have already signed. We are stepping up our defense and security assistance to Ukraine and are increasing our production and delivery capabilities to assist the country. We also support efforts to assist Ukraine building a future force capable of self-defense and deterrence against all aggression.We express our resolve in particular to bolster Ukraine’s air defense capabilities to save lives and protect critical infrastructure. We will also work with partners towards this end. In this context we appreciate the Immediate Action for Air Defense Initiative (IAAD) proposed by Germany.Together with international partners, we are determined to continue to provide military, financial, political, humanitarian, economic, and development support to Ukraine and its people. We welcome the EU’s adoption of the Ukraine facility of EUR 50 billion, the EU “Ukraine Assistance Fund” of EUR 5 billion. We also welcome additional support G7 countries have approved, as well as the swift delivery of budget support in the first quarter of 2024 by Canada and Japan. We urge the approval of further support from other international partners.We will continue to help Ukraine repair and restore its critical energy and environmental infrastructure and we re-emphasize our strong support for Ukraine’s energy security, including through the G7+ Ukraine Energy Coordination Group. We express our deepest concern about the reported use of chemical agents by Russia, as a method of warfare.Russia must pay for the damage and devastation it is causing. We condemn Russia’s recent missile and drone strikes against Ukraine’s energy infrastructure and cities across Ukraine. We are determined to ensure full accountability and we support Ukraine in obtaining compensation for the loss, injury and damage resulting from Russia’s aggression. We welcome the launch of the Register of Damage caused by the aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine. Russia’s sovereign assets in our jurisdictions will remain immobilized until Russia ceases its aggression and pays for the damage it has caused.We welcome the adoption by the EU of the legal acts concerning extraordinary revenues held by private entities stemming directly from Russia’s immobilized sovereign assets also in view to exploring ways to maximize the benefit for Ukraine that can be obtained from these revenues.We will continue to explore all possible avenues to aid Ukraine in obtaining compensation from Russia, consistent with our respective legal systems and international law. As requested by Leaders, we will continue our work and advise ahead of the Apulia Summit on all possible avenues and feasible options by which immobilized Russian sovereign assets could be made use of to support Ukraine, consistent with our respective legal systems and international law.Ukraine’s reconstruction, starting with early recovery measures and addressing the current energy emergency, remains key priorities. We will continue to work with the Ukrainian authorities and International Financial Institutions through the Multi-agency Donor Coordination Platform and by leveraging private investments. We welcome the Steering Committee of the enlarged MDCP which took place for the first time in Kyiv on 10 April. We highlight the importance of gender-responsive recovery and the need to address the different needs of women, children and disabled persons as well as other population groups who have been disproportionately affected by Russia’s war of aggression. The reintegration of disabled combatants and civilians remains a priority. Further to the successful Japan-Ukraine Conference for the Promotion of Economic Growth and Reconstruction, we look forward to the Ukraine Recovery Conferences, to be hosted in Berlin in 2024 and in Rome in 2025.We welcome the European Council’s decision in December 2023 to open negotiations for Ukraine’s accession to the European Union. We praise Ukraine’s progress in its reform efforts, especially to reinforce the justice system and the rule of law and to fight corruption. These endeavors are in line with the Euro-Atlantic path Ukraine has embraced. We will continue to support Ukraine as it works to implement further reforms to strengthen its democracy.We reiterate our support for Ukraine’s efforts to promote a comprehensive, just and lasting peace, consistent with international law, including the UN Charter, with respect for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. We will continue to work to achieve the widest possible international support for the key principles and objectives of Ukraine’s Peace Formula, also in view of the high-level international conference planned in Switzerland in mid-June. Russia’s irresponsible nuclear rhetoric and its posture of strategic intimidation, including its announced deployment of nuclear weapons in Belarus are unacceptable. We reaffirm that any use of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons by Russia would be met with severe consequences. In this context, threats by Russia of nuclear weapons use, let alone any use of nuclear weapons by Russia, in the context of its war of aggression against Ukraine are inadmissible.We condemn Russia’s seizure and continued control and militarization of Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant, which poses severe risks for nuclear safety and security, with implications for the broader international community. We support the International Atomic Energy Agency’s efforts directed at mitigating such risks, including through the continuous presence of IAEA experts and its focus on ensuring nuclear safety and security at the site.Despite Russia’s attempts to undermine global food security, Ukraine’s success in securing a corridor through the Black Sea has significantly expanded food exports and continues to help feed the world. We pledge our enduring support to those efforts, including through the EU solidarity lanes and other appropriate mechanisms.We remain committed to fully implementing and enforcing our sanctions on Russia and adopting new measures as necessary. We will continue to counter, in close cooperation with third countries, any attempts to evade and circumvent our sanctions and export restrictions. We call on financial institutions to refrain from supporting Russia’s defense industrial base and we will take appropriate steps, consistent with our legal systems, to disrupt and deter this behavior. We will impose additional sanctions on companies and individuals in third countries who help Russia acquire tools and other equipment that aid Russian weapons production or military-industrial development.We will continue to apply significant pressure on Russian revenues from energy and other sectors. We call on all countries to reduce their imports from Russia which are supporting its war. We will continue to take steps to tighten compliance and enforcement of the oil price cap. While working to maintain supply stability, we will respond to price cap violations, including by imposing additional sanctions measures on those engaged in deceptive practices while transporting Russian oil and against the networks Russia has developed to extract additional revenue from price cap violations. We will continue taking steps to limit Russia’s future energy revenues. We will continue to impede Russia’s development of future energy projects and disrupt its development of alternatives for energy shipping and other services. We also welcome the steps taken by the UK and U.S. to stop the trade of new Russian base metals on their global metal exchanges. We will continue efforts to reduce Russia’s revenues from metals.We condemn in the strongest possible terms North Korea’s unlawful export of arms to Russia and for use in Ukraine. In particular, we condemn North Korea’s exports and Russia’s procurement of North Korea’s ballistic missiles in direct violation of relevant UN Security Council Resolutions and call upon them to immediately cease such activities.We call upon Iran to stop assisting Russia’s war effort in Ukraine. Any steps by Iran to transfer ballistic missiles and related technology to Russia, would represent a substantive, material escalation, and t we would respond swiftly and in a coordinated manner, including with new and significant measures against Iran. We call on all countries to prevent the supply of components or other items to Iran’s UAV programmes, which support Russia’s war effort.We express our strong concern about transfers to Russia from businesses in the People’s Republic of China of dual-use materials and weapons components that Russia is using to advance its military production. This is enabling Russia to reconstitute and revitalize its defense industrial base, posing a threat both to Ukraine and to international peace and security. China should ensure that this support stops, as it will only prolong this illegal war of aggression in violation of the UN Charter and increase the threat that Russia poses to its neighbors.We reiterate our condemnation of the Belarusian regime’s complicity in Russia’s war against Ukraine. We express our continued concern over the regime’s continuing repression of independent media, civil society, and of opposition and citizens that peacefully express their views. We also condemn the ill-treatment of political prisoners and ask for their immediate and unconditional release.There can be no impunity for war crimes such as attacks against civilians and critical civilian infrastructure, humanitarian workers, deportation of Ukrainians, including forcible transfer and deportation of Ukrainian children, or grave and serious violations of children’s rights and conflict-related sexual violence. Those responsible for crimes, which are of concern to the international community, will be held to account consistent with international law. We welcome initiatives to address Russia’s   unlawful deportation of Ukrainian children.We firmly reject the Russian authorities’ baseless attempts to blame Ukraine for the tragic terrorist attack near Moscow on March 22, which was claimed by ISIS. We call on Russia to stop using this tragedy in its disinformation efforts against Ukraine. We remain steadfast in our fight against terrorism, as illustrated by several G7 countries continuing to share information with Russia on this issue.We will not relent from holding those responsible for Alexei Navalny’s death accountable, including by continuing to impose restrictive measures and other appropriate actions in response to human rights violations and abuses in Russia. We condemn the Kremlin’s systematic repression of dissenting voices, and we call on Russia to release all political prisoners.
- G7 Italy 2024 Foreign Ministers’ Statement on the Situation in the Middle East Office of the SpokespersonThe text of the following statement was released by the G7 foreign ministers of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States of America and the High Representative of the European Union. Iran We, the G7 Foreign Ministers of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States of America, and the High Representative of the European Union, condemn in the strongest terms Iran’s direct and unprecedented attack against Israel of April 13-14, which Israel defeated with the help of its partners. This was a dangerous escalation, as Iran fired hundreds of ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and drones.We also condemn the Iranian boarding and seizure, in breach of international law, of the Portuguese flagged merchant vessel MSC Aries by armed personnel, which occurred while the merchant vessel was sailing near the Strait of Hormuz. We call for the immediate release of the vessel, its crews and cargo.Israel and its people have our full solidarity and support and we reaffirm our commitment towards Israel’s security. Iran’s actions mark an unacceptable step towards the destabilization of the region and a further escalation, which must be avoided. In light of reports of strikes on April 19th, we urge all parties to work to prevent further escalation. The G7 will continue to work to this end.We call on all parties, both in the region and beyond, to offer their positive contribution to this collective effort.We call on Iran to refrain from providing support to Hamas and taking further actions that destabilize the Middle East, including support for Lebanese Hezbollah and other non-state actors.  Iran’s continued provision of arms and related materiel to the Houthis in violation of UNSCR 2216 and to other non-state actors in the region are dangerously increasing tensions. We call on all countries to prevent the supply of components or other items to Iran’s UAV and missile programmes.We demand that Iran and its affiliated groups cease their attacks. We will hold the Iranian government accountable for its malicious and destabilizing actions and we stand ready to adopt further sanctions or take other measures, now and in response to further destabilizing initiatives.We reiterate our determination that Iran must never develop or acquire a nuclear weapon. We urge Iran to cease and reverse nuclear escalations and to stop the continuing uranium enrichment activities reported by IAEA in the framework provided by UNSCR 2231 that have no credible civil justification and pose significant proliferative risks. Tehran must reverse this trend and engage in serious dialogue, returning to full cooperation with the IAEA to enable it to provide assurances that Iran’s nuclear program is exclusively peaceful. We support IAEA’s monitoring and verification role regarding Iran’s nuclear-related obligation and commitments and express strong concern about Iran’s current lack of cooperation with the Agency.We are extremely concerned by reports that Iran is considering transferring ballistic missiles and related technology to Russia.  We call on Iran not to do so, as it would represent a substantive material escalation in its support for Russia’s war in Ukraine. Were Iran to proceed with providing ballistic missiles or related technology to Russia, we are prepared to respond in a swift and coordinated manner, including with new and significant measures against Iran.We reiterate our deep concern over Iran’s human rights violations and abuses, especially against women, girls and minority groups, and in light of the first report issued on March 8 by the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission established by the Human Rights Council, which said that certain violations against “Women, Life, Freedom” protestors amounted to crimes against humanity.We strongly reject Iran’s targeting and arbitrary arrest of dual and foreign citizens and call on Iran’s leadership to end all unjust and arbitrary detentions. We condemn Iran’s harassment, intimidation and plots to kill perceived dissidents and opponents of the regime overseas, including journalists and religious figures, as well as the targeting of Jewish individuals and institutions.Conflict in Gaza We condemn in the strongest terms the brutal terrorist attacks conducted by Hamas and other terrorist groups against Israel that began on October 7, 2023. In exerting its right to defend itself, Israel must fully comply with international law, including international humanitarian law. Hamas must release all hostages immediately and unconditionally. We continue to press for the full investigation of the horrific reports of sexual violence committed by Hamas and other terrorist groups and for perpetrators to be held accountable.We deplore all losses of civilian lives and note with great concern the unacceptable number of civilians, including thousands of women, children and persons in vulnerable situations who have been killed in Gaza. We call for urgent action to address the devastating and growing humanitarian crisis in Gaza, particularly the plight of civilians throughout the territory. We reiterate our opposition to a full scale military operation in Rafah that would have catastrophic consequences on the civilian population. We reiterate our call for a credible and actionable plan to protect the civilian population there and address their humanitarian needs. We are deeply concerned by the internal displacement within Gaza and the risk of forcible displacement from Gaza. Israel must act in compliance with its obligations under international law and treat individuals humanely and with dignity, and should thoroughly and transparently investigate credible allegations of wrongdoing and ensure accountability for any abuses or violations.We underscore the urgent need for specific, concrete, and measurable steps to significantly increase the flow of aid into Gaza in light of imminent risk of famine for a majority of Gaza’s population.  We urge the rapid implementation of steps announced by the Government of Israel including the commitment to expand flow of aid through existing land crossings, opening new land crossings, and facilitating aid to northern Gaza where humanitarian needs are most acute, including by opening more routes into Gaza.  We welcome efforts to establish a maritime corridor to further increase the flow of much-needed humanitarian assistance into Gaza, in coordination with the United Nations. We reiterate that such corridors must complement and not be a substitute to expanded and sustained assistance flows by land.Securing full, rapid, safe, and unhindered humanitarian access in all its forms remains an absolute priority. We call on Israel to do more to ensure protection of international and local humanitarian aid workers, journalists, and Palestinian civilians, to improve humanitarian deconfliction, including communications, and to pursue full accountability, as appropriate, for incidents of harm against aid workers and civilians.  We call on all parties to allow the unimpeded delivery of aid, including food, water, medical care, electricity, fuel, shelter, as well as facilitate the restoration of basic services and ensure access for humanitarian workers. All parties must protect civilians, especially those most vulnerable, particularly women, children, and people with disabilities, consistent with international humanitarian law.Since the onset of the crisis, the G7 has been among the largest providers of assistance to the affected population in Gaza. We reiterate our intention to continue doing so and we call on all our partners to strengthen their efforts. We welcome the initiative “Food for Gaza” launched by Italy together with FAO, WFP and IFRC (International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Society), aimed at better meeting the urgent demand for food security and primary health of the population.We recognize the crucial role played by UN agencies and other humanitarian actors in delivering assistance. UNRWA has a vital role in the Gaza humanitarian response. We welcome the swift decision by the UN Secretary General to initiate an immediate investigation on UNRWA to provide full transparency on the serious allegations against its staff and to appoint an independent review group also in view of the implementation of the needed reforms. We agreed it is critical that UNRWA and other UN organizations and agencies’ distribution networks be fully able to deliver aid to those who need it most, fulfilling their mandate effectively.We call for an immediate release of hostages and a sustainable ceasefire that allows for a surge of the urgently needed humanitarian assistance to be delivered safely throughout Gaza. In this context, we strongly support the ongoing mediation efforts undertaken by the United States and regional partners to that aim, respected by all parties, leading to a sustainable cessation of hostilities, in order to facilitate the immediate return of all hostages, a surge of assistance and for the urgent implementation of UNSC resolutions 2712, 2720, and 2728. Hamas’ refusal to release hostages is only prolonging the conflict and the suffering of civilians.We welcome the new Palestinian Authority cabinet and remain ready to support the Palestinian Authority as it undertakes the reforms that are indispensable to enable it to take up its responsibilities in the aftermath of the conflict, in both Gaza and the West Bank.We are also working, including by imposing sanctions and other measures, to deny Hamas the ability to raise funds to carry out further atrocities. Likewise, we will also continue our work to fight against the dissemination of terrorist content online.All parties must refrain from unilateral actions that undermine the prospect of a two-state solution. We are concerned by rising levels of settlers’ violence. Extremist settlers responsible for violent acts against Palestinian communities must be brought to account.A viable solution to the conflict can only be the result of a coordinated regional effort. We remain committed to a lasting and sustainable peace based on a two-State solution and the establishment of an independent Palestinian state with security guarantees for Israel and the Palestinians. We call for upholding unchanged the historic status quo at the holy sites in Jerusalem. We concur that the final territory of a Palestinian state should be defined through negotiations based on 1967-lines. We note that the recognition of a Palestinian state, at the appropriate time, would be a crucial component of that political process.We are working intensively – along with partners in the region – to prevent the conflict from escalating further. We are particularly concerned by the situation along the Blue Line. We recognize the essential stabilizing role played by the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) and the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) in mitigating that risk. We urge all involved to exercise restraint and to work toward de-escalation.We oppose all discrimination and violence based on religion or belief and we call for effective protection of all members of religious minority groups. We strongly reject all forms of antisemitism and anti-Muslim hatred.Freedom of Navigation in the Red Sea We condemn the attacks perpetrated by the Houthis against commercial vessels transiting the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden and the navy ships protecting them. We are greatly concerned by the deaths of three innocent mariners aboard the True Confidence and the sinking of the Rubymar, which created a navigational hazard and a serious environmental threat. We call for the immediate release by the Houthis of the Galaxy Leader and its crew, seized on 19th November 2023. In line with UNSCR 2722, we reiterate our support for countries that exercise the right to defend their vessels from attacks, in accordance with international law. We also call for continued international involvement in close cooperation with the United Nations and coastal states, as well as with regional and sub-regional organizations to prevent further escalation with possible multidimensional consequences.We welcome the continued efforts of the EU maritime operation “Aspides” and of the U.S.-led operation “Prosperity Guardian” along with UK and 10 other countries to protect these crucial shipping lanes.We are concerned by the hindrance to the transit of energy supplies, raw materials and other commodities through the Red Sea. The countries most negatively affected by the Houthis’ attacks include those in the region. Maritime security and navigational rights and freedoms are critical to ensuring free movement of essential commodities to destinations and populations all over the world. This includes delivery of life-saving humanitarian assistance to more than half the population of Yemen and to Sudan and Ethiopia.Yemen We express great concern for the situation in Yemen, notably for the humanitarian conditions of the Yemeni civilian population. Yemeni parties must allow safe, rapid, and unimpeded access to all those in need, halt requirements that restrict women’s freedom of movement and impede delivery of humanitarian aid, and remove obstacles to the delivery of assistance, notably to the most vulnerable. All parties must comply with their obligations under international humanitarian law.We reiterate our strong support to the United Nations and to UN Special Envoy Hans Grundberg for his efforts to resolve the conflict in Yemen.We welcome the understanding reached in December 2023 between the Presidential Leadership Council and the Houthis that included a commitment on a set of measures to implement a nation-wide ceasefire and to improve living conditions in the country. We urge all involved parties and in particular the Houthis to engage in good faith in preparations for an inclusive political process in consultation with civil society and under UN auspices.We call for accountability for human rights violations, including grave violations of children’s rights, and abuses and violations of international humanitarian law.Syria   We remain committed to a Syrian-led and Syrian-owned political process, in line with UN Security Council resolution 2254, and we fully support the mandate of the UN Special Envoy, Geir O. Pedersen. We call on the Syrian regime to engage meaningfully with the UN-facilitated political process to achieve a peaceful solution to the crisis and national reconciliation. Normalization, reconstruction and lifting of sanctions would only be considered in the framework of a credible inclusive and enduring political process consistent with UNSC resolution 2254. Stability and peace in Syria cannot be achieved without the enduring defeat of Daesh. As members of the Global Coalition against Daesh we are committed to ending Daesh’s presence in Syria.We remain committed to advancing justice for victims and accountability for all actors responsible for violations of international law in Syria, including international humanitarian law and international human rights law. We reiterate our condemnation of the use that the Syrian régime has made of chemical weapons in Syria. We continue to urge the Syrian regime to comply with its obligations under UNSCR 2118 and the Chemical Weapons Convention and to eliminate its chemical weapons programme completely and verifiably.We continue to call for the immediate release of all civilians arbitrarily detained and to clarify the fate of those forcibly disappeared. We support the work of organizations such as the Commission of Inquiry and the International Independent and Impartial Mechanism, which document the crimes perpetrated in Syria. We stand ready to support the newly established UN Independent Institution for Missing Persons in Syria.We will continue to support the Syrian people through humanitarian assistance to meet their needs, including early recovery assistance and measures fostering resilience, and demand that the regime facilitate unhindered humanitarian access to all Syrians, including through UN cross-border humanitarian assistance, for which there is no alternative. We remain grateful to regional countries for continuing to host Syrian refugees, and we call upon the Syrian regime to create the conditions for voluntary, safe, and dignified refugee returns.The upcoming Eighth Brussels Conference on the Future of Syria and the Region is important in maintaining a high level of engagement and mobilisation of the international community in this regard.