# Hungary - United States Department of State

- Hungary HomeReportsBureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices&#8230;Hungary				hide	document.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded", function(event) {	if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}});																							2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Hungary																																					Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor																																																																																							Download Report																																																							Translations																																																																 In this section										/																							EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																																													EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																															Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person																																																									a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings																																																																											b. Disappearance																																																																											c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses																																																																			Prison and Detention Center Conditions																																																																																																																		d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention																																																																			Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees																																																																																																																		e. Denial of Fair Public Trial																																																																			Trial Procedures																																																								Political Prisoners and Detainees																																																								f. Transnational Repression																																																																																																																		g. Property Seizure and Restitution																																																																											h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence																																																																																	Section 2. Respect for Civil Liberties																																																									a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media																																																																			Internet Freedom																																																																																																																		b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association																																																																			Freedom of Peaceful Assembly																																																								Freedom of Association																																																																																																																		c. Freedom of Religion																																																																											d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country																																																																											e. Protection of Refugees																																																																																	Section 3. Freedom to Participate in the Political Process																																																									Elections and Political Participation																																																																																	Section 4. Corruption in Government																															Section 5. Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights																															Section 6. Discrimination and Societal Abuses																																																									Women																																																																											Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination																																																																											Children																																																																											Antisemitism																																																																											Trafficking in Persons																																																																											Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics																																																																											Persons with Disabilities																																																																											Other Societal Violence or Discrimination																																																																																	Section 7. Worker Rights																																																									a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining																																																																											b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor																																																																											c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment																																																																											d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																																																											e. Acceptable Conditions of Work																																																																																																							EXECUTIVE SUMMARY				The human rights situation in Hungary deteriorated during the year. Authorities began enforcing the 2021 “child protection” law, restricting access to written materials on lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex themes and dismissed a museum director for failing to restrict access to an exhibit that included a single photograph depicting such individuals. The government began to use intelligence services and government-controlled media to investigate civil society organizations and independent media outlets that received foreign funding, depicting them as potential threats to the country’s sovereignty. This laid the groundwork for the introduction in December of a bill dubbed the “sovereignty protection bill,” which would give the government vast additional powers to investigate and subpoena civil society organizations and others deemed to be “influencing democratic debate and the decision-making process.”Significant human rights issues included credible reports of: serious problems with the independence of the judiciary; arbitrary or unlawful interference with privacy; serious restrictions on freedom of expression and media freedom, including censorship; substantial interference with the freedom of peaceful assembly and freedom of association (including overly restrictive laws on the organization, funding, or operation of nongovernmental and civil society organizations); serious government corruption; serious government harassment of domestic and international human rights organizations; crimes involving threats of violence targeting Roma; crimes, violence, or threats of violence motivated by antisemitism; and crimes involving violence or threats of violence targeting lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or intersex persons.The government took credible steps to identify and punish officials who may have committed human rights abuses, although action against high-level, politically connected corruption was negligible.																														Section 1.													 Respect for the Integrity of the Person												    																																																a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings										There were no reports the government or its agents committed arbitrary or unlawful killings, including extrajudicial killings, during the year.																																				b. Disappearance										There were no reports of disappearances by or on behalf of government authorities.																																				c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses										The constitution and law prohibited such practices, but there were reports inhuman and degrading treatment and abuse sometimes occurred.Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) noted the investigation of cases of mistreatment was often inefficient, the success rate of holding officials accountable for alleged mistreatment through indictments and prosecutions was low, and in some cases law enforcement officials (such as police officers and penitentiary staff) were permitted to continue working even though they were sentenced to suspended imprisonment for committing criminal offenses involving the mistreatment of detainees. The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) determined there was a lack of thorough and effective domestic investigation into claims of mistreatment and violation of the prohibition of torture in at least three judgments in 2020, 2021, and 2023.In a January decision, the ECtHR ruled the country’s Prosecutor’s Office failed to investigate the 2017 case of police officers who broke the shoulder of a woman while handcuffing her. The woman had a mental condition for which she received treatment, but relatives called an ambulance after suspecting her condition had worsened. When she refused to open the door, police forced their way in and handcuffed her even though she showed no resistance, as evidenced by a video recorded by the woman’s friend. Authorities reportedly did not question the officers involved in the incident.																Prison and Detention Center Conditions						Official statistics and NGOs reported an increase in prison overcrowding, while physical conditions in the prison system varied.Abusive Physical Conditions: The Hungarian Helsinki Committee (HHC) reported government austerity measures had a detrimental effect on material conditions within penitentiaries. The HHC received regular complaints of extreme weather conditions from detainees due to a lack of adequate insulation and heating. NGOs noted deficiencies in relation to detainees’ access to independent and adequate medical examination, presence of police officers at medical examinations, and lack of recording devices in police vehicles and police detention facilities.Administration: NGOs reported authorities occasionally failed to investigate credible allegations of mistreatment, and the investigation of cases of mistreatment (when undertaken) was often inefficient.There was no separate ombudsperson for prisons, but the Ombudsperson’s Office handled complaints of police misconduct and mistreatment that did not reach the level of a criminal offense. NGO statistics showed less than 5 percent of investigations resulted in indictment for alleged mistreatment in official proceedings, while more than 70 percent of investigations of “violence against an official person” resulted in indictment.Independent Monitoring: Authorities allowed the Council of Europe’s Committee for the Prevention of Torture and the UN Subcommittee on the Prevention of Torture to conduct periodic and ad hoc visits to prisons and detention centers for both citizens and foreign nationals. In May a delegation of the Committee for the Prevention of Torture carried out a periodic visit, but as of December, a report on the visit was not shared publicly. The national preventive mechanism under the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture undertook 21 visits to the country (13 prisons, one hospital, three police detention centers, and four social institutions).In 2017 authorities terminated monitoring agreements with NGOs.																										d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention										The constitution and law prohibited arbitrary arrest and detention and provided for the right of any person to challenge the lawfulness of their arrest or detention in court. The government generally observed these requirements.																Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees						Police were obligated to take into “short-term arrest” individuals apprehended while committing a crime or subject to an arrest warrant. Police could take individuals suspected of a crime or a petty offense into short-term arrest if they were unable or unwilling to identify themselves or were unaccompanied children suspected of having run away. Short-term arrests generally lasted up to eight hours but could last up to 12 hours in exceptional cases. Police could hold persons under “detention for the purposes of public safety” for 24 hours. Persons who absconded from probation could be detained for up to 72 hours, and police, a prosecutor, or a judge could order detention of suspects for 72 hours if there was a well-founded suspicion of an offense punishable by imprisonment. A pretrial detention motion had to be filed with a court prior to the lapse of the 72-hour period. A defendant could appeal a pretrial detention order.Police were required to inform suspects of the charges against them at the beginning of the first interrogation, which needed to occur within 24 hours of detention. Authorities generally respected this right.There was a functioning bail system. Representation by defense counsel was mandatory in the investigative phase if suspects faced a charge punishable by more than five years’ imprisonment; had restricted personal liberty; were deaf, blind, unable to speak, or had a mental disability; were unfamiliar with the Hungarian language or language of the procedure; were unable to defend themselves in person for any reason; were juveniles; or were indigent and requested appointment of a defense counsel. The court, prosecution, or investigating authority (police) could also order a defense counsel in certain cases. Local bar chambers assigned legal counsel to defendants who lacked legal representation.Police had to inform suspects of their right to counsel before questioning them. The law required police or the prosecutor to suspend interrogation and wait for up to two hours for an attorney to arrive if a suspect invoked this right. Some attorneys reported the right to an effective defense was violated in several cases. For example, in some instances detainees and their defense counsels were required to meet where security cameras could monitor them. If bar chamber-appointed attorneys refused the case or did not respond within one hour of appointment, authorities assigned the defense counsel. Investigative authorities had to notify relatives of a detainee’s short-term detention and location within eight hours, and the law permitted short-term detainees to notify relatives or others of their detention within eight hours unless the notification would jeopardize the investigation.																										e. Denial of Fair Public Trial										The constitution and law provided for an independent judiciary. Experts and legal scholars expressed concern regarding systemic threats to the country’s judicial independence.According to the European Commission’s 2023 Rule of Law Report, judicial reforms parliament adopted in May addressed several justice-related recommendations from the 2022 report, including strengthening the role of the National Judicial Council to counterbalance the powers of the president of the National Office for the Judiciary (OBH) and increasing the transparency of the functioning of the Curia (supreme court equivalent). Under the legislation, the National Judicial Council had access to all documents, information, and data connected to court administration, and legislators needed to consult the council on proposals affecting the judicial system. The law provided the council with legal capacity and resources and authorized the council to issue a binding opinion regarding the point system for evaluating applications for judicial positions, as well as on a series of individual decisions made by the OBH president, including annulment of appointment procedures for judicial and court executive positions, transfer of judges to another court, and removal of judges without their consent from the pool of judges that heard special cases.The OBH president, however, retained the ability to appoint transferred judges to a judicial leadership position, which circumvented the normal application process and bypassed the merit-based criteria for promotion of judges.Police investigated the high-profile corruption case of Gyorgy Schadl, former president of the Hungarian Association of Judicial Officers. The investigation revealed several irregularities in the operation of the association, including Schadl and former Ministry of Justice State Secretary Pal Volner arranging to open a special exam time slot to accommodate a former deputy state secretary of the Ministry of the Interior. Prosecutor General Peter Polt appointed the former deputy state secretary as a prosecutor in December 2022. An opposition political party submitted a public interest data request in April for the results of a classified internal investigation into Schadl’s influence within the OBH, but the OBH president denied the request.The adopted judicial reforms barred Constitutional Court judges (who were not required to serve as courtroom judges) from being appointed as members of the ordinary court system, which circumvented the obligatory application procedure. While Constitutional Court judges appointed under the previous rules could not be appointed to the Curia, they could still opt for a transfer to any court of appeal, the second highest court instance in the country. Rule of law watchdogs noted the reforms did not fully address all concerns regarding the independence of the Curia, including lack of transparency regarding case allocation, unjustifiably limiting the pool of potential Curia presidential candidates, and keeping legislative provisions allowing the Curia president to continue serving beyond the mandated term. The Curia president was an ex officio member of the National Judicial Council, and the judicial reforms allowed the Curia president to be elected as president of the National Judicial Council, against the recommendations of judicial independence advocates.Legal watchdogs criticized the legal procedure “complaint for the unification of jurisprudence,” which granted the Curia president power to appoint judges to panels conducting unification procedures, in the adjudication of individual cases, and in shaping the mandatory interpretation of the law. The 2023 judicial reforms cemented the Curia president’s rules regarding the composition of uniformity complaint chambers.																Trial Procedures						The constitution and law provided for the right to a fair public trial, and the judiciary generally enforced this right.Some observers and legal experts asserted the country’s system for assigning defense attorneys (available at no cost for indigent defendants under conditions set out in law) and the low compensation provided to those attorneys could hinder criminal defendants’ access to adequate legal representation and, consequently, to a fair trial.						Political Prisoners and Detainees						There were no reports of political prisoners or detainees.						f. Transnational Repression						Not applicable.																										g. Property Seizure and Restitution										As in previous years, the government did not make significant progress on resolving Holocaust-era claims, including for foreign citizens, even though it had laws and mechanisms in place, and it had not agreed with the World Jewish Restitution Organization on a plan for negotiations on resolving Holocaust-era heirless property restitution and compensation.The Department of State’s Justice for Uncompensated Survivors Today (JUST) Act Report to Congress, released publicly in July 2020, can be found on the Department’s website:  https://www.state.gov/reports/just-act-report-to-congress/.																																				h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence										The constitution and law prohibited such actions, but there were reports the government used advanced spyware (Pegasus) to surveil or compromise the privacy of journalists, lawyers, businesspersons, and politicians. There was no requirement for the Counterterrorism Center, or in certain cases the national intelligence services, to obtain prior judicial authorization for surveillance in national security cases involving terrorism. In such cases, the justice minister could permit covert intelligence action for 90 days, with the possibility of extension. Such intelligence collection could involve secret house searches, surveillance with recording devices, opening letters and parcels, and checking and recording electronic or computerized communications without the consent or knowledge of the persons under investigation. A decision to approve a covert intelligence action was not subject to appeal.In 2021 an international team of investigative journalists, including a domestic media outlet, reported that spyware manufactured by a foreign cybersecurity firm, NSO Group (Pegasus), was used to surveil investigative journalists and media owners, as well as lawyers and politicians. In May the European Parliament Committee of Inquiry to Investigate the Use of Pegasus and Equivalent Surveillance Spyware determined that an “illegitimate use of spyware” had taken place and stated the system existed “in blatant violation of European requirements and standards set for the surveillance of citizens” by the ECtHR. The committee described it as “complete and total” political control over the use of surveillance in the country, where the government could “target lawyers, journalists, political opponents and civil society organizations with ease and without fear of recourse.” The report found that the use of surveillance programs was part of a “calculated and strategic campaign to destroy media freedom and freedom of expression by the government.” Former Minister of Justice Judit Varga refused to meet the delegation of committee members, maintaining that national security was the exclusive competence of member states.The country’s criminal procedure code established a regime for covert policing and intelligence gathering. The law gave prosecutors unrestricted access to information obtained through covert investigations.																																					Section 2.													 Respect for Civil Liberties												    																																																a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media										The constitution provided for freedom of expression, including for members of the press and other media, but the public service and majority of private media were under direct control or took instruction from the ruling party, and market conditions favored them to the detriment of independent media. There were some formal restrictions on content related to “hate speech” and content viewed as depicting lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or intersex (LGBTQI+) topics, including fines against bookstores that did not wrap books determined to be objectionable.The 2023 Media Plurality Monitor noted “the governing party had a very strong influence over content production and editorial decision making” in public service and private media. The country’s public service media was “completely under the control of governing parties” and was “considered a government mouthpiece that amplified the government’s narratives.” The country report pointed out that many newsrooms were under the direct control of the government’s proxies, publishing content heavily biased towards the government. The European Commission’s 2023 Rule of Law Report saw no significant legislative or policy changes in terms of improvements to the governance and funding of public service media.Freedom of Expression: Criminal law provided that any person who incited hatred against any national, ethnic, racial, religious, or certain other designated groups of the population could be prosecuted and convicted of a felony punishable by imprisonment for up to three years. The constitution included hate speech provisions to “protect the dignity of the Hungarian nation or of any national, ethnic, racial, or religious community.” The law prohibited public denial of, expression of doubt regarding, or minimization of the Holocaust, genocide, and other crimes of the National Socialist (Nazi) and communist regimes; such crimes were punishable by up to three years in prison. The law also prohibited, as a misdemeanor, the wearing, exhibiting, or promoting of the swastika, the logo of the Nazi SS, the symbols of the Arrow Cross, the hammer and sickle, or the five-pointed red star in a way that harmed human dignity or the memory of the victims of dictatorships. The media law also prohibited media content intended to incite hatred or violence against specific minority or majority communities and their members. The law included a provision prohibiting media content that could instigate an act of terrorism.The law imposed a 25 percent tax on civil entities that aided or promoted immigration. There were no reports of any entity paying any tax during the year under the law and no reports of any tax office investigation or audit conducted to that effect. The 2023 Rule of Law Report explicitly recommended the government repeal the law.Independent media were active and expressed a wide variety of views despite government harassment and shrinking operating space, with some legislative restriction on LGBTQI+ content. In July the Hungarian Media Council ruled that, under the 2021 “child protection law,” a television commercial for Budapest Pride did not qualify as a public service advertisement, but because it “promoted homosexuality,” it could only be broadcast between 10 p.m. and 5 a.m. and was to be labeled as not recommended for viewers younger than 18.The 2023 Media Pluralism Monitor rated transparency of media ownership, media concentration, and state advertising in the country as high risk. The 2022 Election Observation Mission Final Report from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe’s Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (OSCE ODIHR) noted distribution of government advertising funds to media outlets mainly benefited outlets supporting the government, at times becoming their main source of revenue. Many independent journalists faced difficulties accessing members of government and events and press conferences of government and government-linked entities, thus depriving them of free and fair access to public officials. Parliamentary press regulations restricted the movement and work of journalists in parliament to a small cordoned off area. Since 2021, the area surrounding the Office of the Prime Minister where reporters could access cabinet members was closed, and government officials confirmed in August this was for “facility protection purposes” rather than construction works, as previously claimed. Opposition politicians repeatedly dismantled the fence in front of the Prime Minister’s Office, prompting police to initiate administrative proceedings and at times use force against them.Four independent weeklies – Magyar Narancs, Elet es Irodalom, Jelen, and Magyar Hang – announced in March they would take legal action against the government because of media market distortions and an unequal distribution of state advertisements. The outlets, represented by the HHC, also planned to initiate proceedings with the European Competition Office and the Hungarian Competition Office.The National Media and Info-Communications Authority (NMHH), subordinate to parliament, was the central state administrative body for regulating media. The mandate of the NMHH included overseeing the operation of broadcast and media markets, as well as “contributing to the execution of the government’s policy in the areas of frequency management and telecommunications.” The NMHH president, nominated by the prime minister, served as chair of the five-member Media Council, the decision-making body of the NMHH that supervised broadcast, cable, online, and print media content and spectrum management. The 2023 Media Pluralism Monitor registered the independence and effectiveness of the NMHH as high risk.The Media Council consisted exclusively of persons named by the governing parties. Some experts criticized the Media Council’s radio-frequency-awarding practices for allegedly penalizing radio stations that were critical of the government. In 2020 the Media Council refused to renew the broadcasting license of independent radio station Klubradio based on its alleged failure to comply with certain administrative obligations. Following the denial of Klubradio’s license, all independent radio stations moved their operations to online only, with none holding a traditional broadcast license.The state news agency, MTI, which offered its services free of charge, was mandated by law to provide balanced, objective, nonpartisan coverage. Media watchdogs and independent outlets criticized state media for concealing facts and opinions unfavorable to the government. There were also concerns as to public service media’s editorial independence and role in amplifying disinformation by third parties. Following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, government-affiliated personalities frequently repeated pro-Russian talking points and disinformation in Hungarian media. A June government video calling for peace in Ukraine and framing the war as one between the United States and Russia showed Crimea as part of Russia on a map that appeared briefly. The video also blurred Russian insignia on a firing tank. Following public backlash, the government quietly corrected the video but made no official comment.Violence and Harassment: There were no reports of violence against journalists or of physical harassment. Nevertheless, government officials and government-aligned media routinely conflated independence with opposition, portraying journalists asking challenging questions as “political actors” spreading “fake news” in service of the political opposition. The government portrayed Hungarian-American businessman and philanthropist George Soros as the mastermind behind numerous purported plots against the country, claiming certain media outlets were under his influence. The anti-Soros campaign had antisemitic overtones, as the prime minister and others linked Soros and the purported plots to “shadowy globalist forces,” a common antisemitic trope. In his weekly radio interviews, Prime Minister Orban regularly referenced Soros, accusing him of encouraging illegal migration, being a warmonger, and seeking access to Russia’s natural resources. Government-controlled media labeled independent outlets as the “dollar media,” accusing them of being under western influence in exchange for financial support. For more than a year, one of the government’s flagship media outlets kept a tab at the top of its website linking to stories promoting conspiracy theories and falsehoods regarding western support for the political opposition and independent media outlets. Several independent journalists were targets of intensive financial audits by the national tax authority as retaliation for their critical reporting on senior-level corruption and other improprieties.Censorship or Content Restrictions for Members of the Press and Other Media, Including Online Media: The law provided content regulations and standards for journalistic rights, ethics, and norms that were applicable to all media, including news portals and online publications. It prohibited inciting hatred against nations; communities; ethnic, linguistic, or other minorities; majority groups; and churches or religious groups. It provided for maintaining the confidentiality of sources with respect to procedures conducted by courts or government authorities.The law mandated that public service media providers pursue balanced, accurate, detailed, objective, and responsible news and information services. These requirements were often disregarded. Independent media reported in June that after a teacher on strike gave an interview to a local station regarding unfair wages and how he and his colleagues were considering teaching abroad, public media manipulated footage to distort the speaker’s words and change his message. Journalists also reported a high degree of self-censorship by some editorial boards – particularly by outlets reliant on government advertising revenue – sometimes refraining from reporting critically on issues they knew would make them targets of government retaliation. In May independent media acquired leaked unedited footage of the state television’s news program revealing that editors manipulated interviews to reflect the government’s position.The Media Council could impose fines for violations of content regulations, including on media services that violated prohibitions on inciting hatred or violating human dignity or regulations governing the protection of children. The council could impose fines of up to 200 million Hungarian forints ($520,000), depending on the nature of the infringement, type of media service, and audience size. It could also suspend the right to broadcast for up to one week. Defendants could appeal Media Council decisions but needed to appeal separately to prevent implementation of fines while the parties litigated the substantive appeal.In February state media censored Prime Minister Orban’s name in a musical performance critical of the government by rapper Beton.Hofi. In August far-right National Legal Service filed a public complaint against YouTube’s service provider, Google Ireland, for a Sziget Festival advertisement featuring same-sex individuals kissing. The group claimed the advertisement violated the constitution and the “child protection law” by depicting homosexuality on a platform available to children.Libel/Slander Laws: Journalists reporting on an event could be judged criminally responsible for making or reporting false statements. Both individuals and media outlets could be sued for libel for their published statements or for publicizing libelous statements made by others. Plaintiffs could litigate in both civil and criminal courts. In May parliament passed an amendment to the criminal code regarding libel and slander, decriminalizing defamatory statements made in the course of free discussion of public affairs in media, as long as the statements were not intended to deny the human dignity of the target. According to a freedom of information request published in February, government-aligned media lost 29 libel lawsuits and independent media lost six lawsuits in 2022.Government-friendly television channel TV2 was fined 500,000 forints ($1,300) in April after failing to comply with a court decision ordering the network to issue corrections for spreading falsehoods 16 times regarding former opposition politician Peter Juhasz. TV2 refused to read the full text of the correction due to “time constraints.”																Internet Freedom						The government did not restrict or disrupt access to the internet and generally did not censor online content. There were no reports the government monitored private online communications without appropriate legal authority. Experts pointed out, however, that formal approvals of secret surveillance activities against citizens were relatively easy to obtain.Freedom House’s 2023 Freedom of the Net Report classified the country as “partly free” in terms of internet freedom. According to the report, threats to the country’s internet freedom increased with the consolidation of the telecommunications market and independent media outlets facing cyberattacks.In cooperation with internet service providers, the NMHH maintained a nonpublic database to store and cooperate in the implementation of court rulings and tax authority resolutions to block websites that violated the law, including content-related legislation.In accordance with the so-called child protection law, websites containing any form of LGBTQI+ content (for example, photographs of families participating in the Budapest Pride march) required users to verify they were 18 or older with warnings concerning “adult content.”																										b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association										The constitution and law provided for the freedoms of peaceful assembly and association, and the government generally respected these rights, with some exceptions to freedom of association.																Freedom of Peaceful Assembly						The constitution included a provision on the protection of privacy, which stipulated that freedom of expression and the exercise of the right to assembly should not harm others’ private and family life and their homes, potentially restricting protests in public spaces near politicians’ homes and protests in other public spaces with nearby apartments. The law also permitted the government to regulate public demonstrations, including holding organizers liable for damages caused by their events, and to ban protests in advance. Under the law authorities could ban or dissolve gatherings that unnecessarily or disproportionately harmed the “dignity of the Hungarian nation or of any national, ethnic, or religious community.” The law also criminalized the nonviolent disturbance or impediment of a demonstration.The criminal code provided that harassment of “official persons” (including members of parliament, judges, and prosecutors) when they were not performing public duties was a crime punishable by up to three years’ imprisonment.In February 2022 the government issued a decree effectively banning teachers’ strikes. Hundreds of teachers took part in “civil disobedience,” and as of December 2022, more than a dozen teachers had been dismissed from their jobs for their participation. The Constitutional Court upheld the limitations on teachers’ right to strike.On multiple occasions during the year, police fired tear gas to disperse crowds in front of the prime minister’s office, which the Hungarian Civil Liberties Union argued was unjustified, claiming video recordings showed police used tear gas on peaceful protesters without prior warning and did so disproportionately. Authorities denied the allegations, and government officials commended the police response to the demonstrators.						Freedom of Association						A 2021 law mandated that the State Audit Office report annually on NGOs with an annual budget greater than 20 million forints ($52,000) that were “capable of influencing public life.” Sports, religious, and national minority organizations were exempted.																										c. Freedom of Religion										See the Department of State’s International Religious Freedom Report at  https://www.state.gov/religiousfreedomreport/.																																				d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country										The constitution and law provided for freedom of internal movement, foreign travel, emigration, and repatriation, and the government generally respected these rights.																																				e. Protection of Refugees										The government cooperated with the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and provided it access to refugees and asylum seekers, apart from those held in detention under the aliens policing procedure.Access to Asylum: The law provided for the granting of asylum and established a procedure for asylum seekers outside the country to apply for asylum. International and domestic organizations, however, stated the legal framework undermined effective access to territory and asylum for those fleeing wars and persecution.Since 2020 asylum seekers had to first make a declaration of intent to apply for asylum at a Hungarian embassy in Serbia or Ukraine and be issued a special entry permit for the purpose of applying for international protection. The country’s asylum authority had 60 days to examine the statement of intent and make a proposal to the embassy whether to issue the asylum seekers a special single-entry travel permit. If a permit was issued, asylum seekers needed to arrive at the border within 30 days of issuance and, upon arrival, immediately identify themselves to border guards, who were required to present the asylum seekers to the asylum authority within 24 hours. Those not granted a special single-entry permit at one of the country’s embassies could not request asylum. During this process, the asylum seeker was not entitled to accommodation, support services, or legal protection.According to information acquired by the HHC through freedom of information requests, there were 19 asylum applications between January and June. In June the European Court of Justice (ECJ) found that not allowing asylum seekers in the country violated EU law. Under the judgment, the government needed to abolish the “embassy procedure” and ensure fair treatment for asylum seekers.As a matter of policy, all third country nationals who did not have the right to remain in the country (e.g., through a valid visa or residence permit), regardless of where they were located, were “escorted” by police to the other side of the fence along the border with Serbia, despite a 2020 declaration by the ECJ that this system, known as pushbacks, violated EU law.In September the government extended by another six months the “crisis situation due to mass migration,” which authorized police to automatically push back any third country national intercepted for unlawfully entering or staying in the country. The “crisis situation due to mass migration” was first declared in certain counties near the Serbian border in 2015 and broadened to the whole country in 2016; it also authorized armed forces to assist police at the borders to prevent entry of migrants and asylum seekers. The European Commission launched an infringement procedure in 2020 for the country’s suspension of the application of EU public procurement rules related to migration during the “crisis situation.”Abuse of Refugees and Asylum Seekers: Testimonies from patients and corroborating 2022 medical data from Doctors Without Borders indicated use of violence, allegedly committed by Hungarian authorities, against persons crossing the border between Serbia and Hungary. Beatings with belts and batons, kicking, punching, various forms of humiliation, and use of pepper spray and tear gas were reported to be common deterrence practices, prior to pushbacks and denial of assistance. During the HHC’s March visit to northern Serbia, victims of violence claimed they were severely beaten by members of the Hungarian Defense Forces and gave detailed descriptions of uniforms of “field guards,” a special law enforcement unit from nearby Ásotthalom.Based on data from the national police website, between January and November, 99,975 pushback measures were implemented, and there were 70,927 cases of prevented entry. In 2021, the ECtHR issued a judgment in the first case involving a pushback. The court ruled that pushbacks carried out by the country under a domestic regulation were in breach of the prohibition of collective expulsions.The ECtHR ruled in February that the 2016 drowning of a Syrian man attempting to enter the country from Serbia was the result of brutality and violent coercion by Hungarian border police. The HHC stated police forced the man back into the Tisza River, and authorities did not substantively investigate the circumstances of the incident. In response to the ruling, the Interior Ministry released a statement asserting that “the attack on Hungary by the Soros network in connection with a death in Hungary is nothing more than another attempt to exert pressure and discredit our country and Hungarian border defense,” noting the country likely would file an appeal against the nonbinding verdict.In May the ECtHR ruled against the country in three cases for its treatment of asylum seekers represented by the HHC. In two cases, the ECtHR ruled the country violated asylum seekers’ right to liberty and security. In a third case, the court ruled the country violated the fundamental rights of a boy, age 14, by using collective expulsion against him and failing to provide effective legal remedies for the authorities’ violations of his rights as an unaccompanied child.Freedom of Movement: The asylum provisions prescribed “placement of the applicant in a closed facility” for four weeks at the discretion of the asylum authority following registration of an asylum request, without any remedy to challenge the placement. After four weeks, the applicant could either be placed in an open facility or in detention, with a legal remedy available against a detention decision. There were no reports of the legal remedy being exercised. The law permitted the detention of rejected asylum seekers under an aliens policing procedure for a maximum of 12 months, or for eight months under asylum detention in certain cases of pending asylum applications. The detention of individuals accused of immigration offenses generally took place in designated immigration detention centers.Access to Basic Services: The National Directorate-General for Aliens Policing (the asylum authority) had 60 days to make a proposal to the Hungarian embassy in Serbia or Ukraine on whether to grant an asylum seeker a single-entry permit. During this time, the asylum seeker was not entitled to accommodation, support services, or legal protection.The law limited benefits and assistance to persons given international protection on the grounds they should not have more advantages than citizens. Authorities did not provide housing allowances, educational allowances, or monthly cash allowances to asylum seekers, refugees, or beneficiaries of subsidiary protection. Asylum seekers had the right to work nine months after the asylum procedure began, but a work permit, which was good for one year and could be renewed, needed to be requested by an employer and could only be obtained from the local employment office. Asylum seekers could apply only for jobs that could not be taken by citizens or nationals from the European Economic Area. The government granted temporary benefits and assistance to Afghan individuals airlifted by the country’s forces in 2021, and individuals remaining in the country received residence cards; however, their temporary benefits expired in May, and most left the country.In 2021 the ECJ ruled legislation that criminalized assistance to asylum seekers infringed on EU law. In January an amendment to the legislation entered into force, but in the opinion of human rights defenders, it still did not comply with the ECJ’s judgment, as it replaced the general criminalization of assistance with a vaguely defined criminal activity that could jeopardize attorney-client privilege, and in the case of nonattorney helpers, it forced them to sacrifice the applicant’s best interests to protect themselves from potential prosecution.Durable Solutions: Refugees were allowed to naturalize, but according to civil society organizations, the applications of refugees and stateless persons were approved at a lower rate than those of other naturalization seekers. There were no reported cases of onward refugee resettlement from the country to other states.Temporary Protection: The law provided for a specific temporary protected status for situations of mass influx. Under the law all forms of international protection (refugee status, subsidiary protection, tolerated stay, stateless status, etc.) were temporary by nature, with periodic review of the entitlement to protection.Following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the government issued a decree granting temporary protection to Ukrainian citizens and persons who were living in Ukraine as recognized refugees. Starting in February, third-country national family members of Ukrainian citizens could enter Hungary without a visa only if they had not left Ukraine before the invasion. The status provided residency rights, access to housing, social welfare assistance, medical care, access to jobs (with some restrictions), education for children younger than age 18, and legal guardianship and safe care for unaccompanied children younger than 18.																																					Section 3.													 Freedom to Participate in the Political Process												    																						The constitution and law provided citizens the ability to choose their government in periodic elections held by secret ballot and based on universal suffrage.																										Elections and Political Participation										Abuses or Irregularities in Recent Elections: In the country’s 2022 elections the president was elected to a five-year term by parliament, and under a single-round national system, 199 members of parliament were elected, with the ruling parties gaining a fourth consecutive two-thirds supermajority. The ODIHR observed that a “pervasive overlap between the ruling coalition and the government” blurred the line between state and party, and unequal voter distribution amongst the constituencies, “challenges the principle of equality of the vote.” No review of constituency boundaries was performed during the year.Political Parties and Political Participation: The ODIHR report on the 2022 elections noted several problems with media influence that “significantly limited” campaign opportunities for groups other than the ruling parties, with “extensive government advertising campaigns and biased news coverage in the public and many private media” resulting in a “pervasive campaign platform for the ruling party.”The National Information Center, an intelligence agency under the oversight of the cabinet office of the prime minister, produced a series of reports alleging foreign actors had been interfering in the country’s elections since 2014. Observers criticized the reports as politically biased and noted declassified documents contained few specifics.Permanent resident citizens living abroad were required to appear in person at embassies or consulates to vote in the country’s general elections, while citizens residing abroad could vote by mail for party lists. ODIHR election observers noted that applying different procedures to vote “challenged the principle of equal suffrage.”In May 2022 parliament amended the constitution to allow the cabinet to declare a state of emergency under which it could rule by decree, which it did following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The state of emergency granted the government authorities to bypass normal legislative processes, including on issues unrelated to the state of emergency such as budgetary decisions.																																					Section 4.													 Corruption in Government												    																						While the law provided criminal penalties for corruption by officials, and there were numerous reports of government corruption during the year, few such cases were filed or prosecuted. The European Commission and NGOs contended officials and those with close government connections often engaged in corrupt practices with impunity and the government did not implement or apply these laws effectively.In its 2023 Rule of Law Report, the European Commission determined that although the government introduced a number of anti-corruption reforms in response to the EU budget conditionality mechanism, there were concerns regarding the “lack of a robust track record of investigations of corruption allegations concerning high-level officials and their immediate circle,” noting the government did not sufficiently address clientelism, nepotism, and favoritism. The report also stressed “deficient independent oversight mechanisms and close interconnections between politics and certain national businesses are conducive to corruption,” and despite some measures taken by the government, concerns outlined in the OSCE ODIHR recommendations were not addressed.Transparency watchdogs noted concern regarding state capture and subsequent transfer of billions of dollars of state assets in 2021 to 32 “public interest asset management foundations” charged with managing universities.Corruption: Anti-corruption NGOs alleged government corruption and favoritism in the distribution of government and EU funds. In a September 2022 study, the Corruption Research Center Budapest reported that during the 2016-2021 period, more than 30 percent of EU-funded public contracts were won by companies owned by 12 entrepreneurs closely affiliated with the government.In January anti-corruption NGOs criticized a deal under which Hungarian information technology company 4iG and government-owned Corvinus Plc. acquired 100 percent of Vodafone Hungary from its parent company Vodafone Europe. The watchdogs assessed the deal enriched a private entrepreneur using taxpayers’ money, as the state provided a $465 million credit to 4iG via state-owned Hungarian Development Bank.In a study published in June, Transparency International Hungary reported that in the 2018-2020 period, a construction entrepreneur closely affiliated with the government won the highest share – 10 percent – of public contracts, amounting to $2.6 billion.On June 6, the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) released its 2022 annual report, which recorded 15 cases of potential fraud associated with EU development funds received in the country between 2018 and 2022. Observers noted OLAF’s limited resources allowed it to review only a fraction of the tens of thousands of cases in which EU funds were disbursed to member states.According to a July investigative press report, between 2019 and 2022, a real estate company owned by Prime Minister Orban’s son-in-law Istvan Tiborcz received $80 million in dividends from a top Hungarian entrepreneur through an intermediary firm owned by Tiborcz’s former schoolmate. The press report also found the exact same percentage of dividends was transferred to Tiborcz’s company from three other companies: Geraldton (owned by a billionaire Hungarian oligarch), Fagales (owned by Tiborcz’s high school friend Aron Hornung), and BDPST (owned by Tiborcz).In August the Integrity Authority confirmed it started monitoring a $135 million railway renovation project run by an entrepreneur who, for the last 10 years, was among the largest beneficiaries of EU-funded government contracts. The organization lacked key access to data and authorities that would allow it to adequately investigate or force prosecution of cases.For additional information about corruption in the country, please see the Department of State’s Investment Climate Statement for the country, and the Department of State’s International Narcotics Control Strategy Report, which includes information on financial crimes.																											Section 5.													 Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights												    																						Domestic and international human rights groups operated with some government restrictions affecting their funding. Government officials were generally uncooperative and unresponsive to their views.The government mandated the State Audit Office to report annually on NGOs with an annual budget of more than 20 million forints ($52,000) and “capable of influencing public life.” According to civil society groups, the State Audit Office audited privately funded NGOs and requested information regarding accounting and management practices and internal rules. Sports, religious, and national minority organizations were exempted.Independent NGOs were often labeled as “political” and “agents” not serving national interests. In February government-aligned media launched a campaign against an HHC staff member for an interview in 2009 at a Budapest Pride Parade with a teaching assistant who was investigated for child pornography.The European Commission noted in the 2023 Rule of Law Report that almost 47 percent of civil society’s resources came from public funding; according to stakeholders, this was politically biased against independent organizations.Government Human Rights Bodies: The constitution and law established a unified system for the Office of the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights (ombudsperson). The ombudsperson had two deputies, one responsible for the rights of national minorities and the other responsible for the interests of “future generations” (environmental protection). The ombudsperson was nominated by the president and elected by a two-thirds majority of parliament. The ombudsperson was solely accountable to parliament and had the authority to initiate proceedings to defend the rights of citizens from abuse by authorities and entities providing public services. The constitution provided for the ombudsperson to request the Constitutional Court to review laws. The ombudsperson also operated the national preventive mechanism against torture and was responsible for collecting electronically submitted reports of public benefit, e.g., whistleblower reports on public corruption. Ombudsperson recommendations were not binding.In May 2022 following a probationary period, the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions downgraded the ombudsperson to observer status without the right to vote because the ombudsperson failed to demonstrate independence and adequately address human rights, press freedom, and judiciary problems, or to refer these matters to the Constitutional Court.																											Section 6.													 Discrimination and Societal Abuses												    																																																Women										Rape and Domestic Violence: Although there was no crime defined as rape, there were two equivalent crimes – sexual coercion and sexual violence. As defined through these equivalent crimes, rape of a person, regardless of gender, including spousal rape, was illegal. These crimes included exploitation of person unable to express their will. Penalties for sexual coercion and sexual violence ranged from one year in prison to 15 years’ imprisonment in aggravated cases.The criminal code included “violence within partnership” (domestic violence) as a separate category of offense. Regulations extended prison sentences for assault (“light bodily harm”) to three years, while grievous bodily harm, violation of personal freedom, or coercion could be punishable by one to five years in prison, if committed against domestic persons.By law police called to the scene of domestic violence could issue an emergency restraining order valid for three days in lieu of immediately filing charges, while courts could issue up to 60-day “preventive restraining orders” in civil cases, without the option to extend.Women’s rights groups argued that prevention, survivor protection, and prosecution efforts by the state in domestic violence cases were not sufficient.In June authorities apprehended an Albertirsa man after he killed his wife and their child and attempted suicide. According to the woman’s sister and neighbors, the woman previously complained regarding her husband’s abusive behavior, and media reported she previously asked for help from local civil guards. A restraining order against the man expired shortly before the killing. Women’s rights organizations criticized authorities for failing to protect survivors of domestic violence, sometimes resulting in further violence, even when evidence of previous abusive behavior existed.Discrimination: The law provided the same legal status and rights for women as for men. There was no mandate for equal pay for equal work. Women’s rights groups criticized the lack of a comprehensive national strategy and public action plan for the promotion of equality between women and men.Reproductive Rights: There were no reports of coerced abortion or involuntary sterilization on the part of government authorities.Contraceptives were available but were not covered by the state health-care system, which limited access of marginalized groups living in poverty, including Romani women. Emergency contraceptives were available by prescription following a medical examination, but costs were not covered by the health-care system. Postexposure prophylaxis was not available as part of the clinical management of rape. Sterilization for family planning reasons was limited to persons older than 40 or with three biological children.Private clinics were barred by law from performing assisted reproductive or fertility treatments; however, all fertility clinics in the country were run by the government, whose stated reason for running the centers was to increase the country’s fertility rate. The state-subsidized assisted reproductive treatments (artificial insemination and in vitro fertilization) were primarily tailored to support heterosexual married couples who experienced difficulty conceiving naturally. LGBTQI+ NGOs characterized access to assisted reproductive technologies as discriminatory against same-sex couples, as women in a same-sex relationship were not allowed to take part in in vitro fertilization treatments.The government operated state-funded shelters and a hotline for survivors of crime, including sexual violence against women, but these did not provide specialized assistance and sexual and reproductive health services for survivors.In 2022 the government adopted a so-called heartbeat decree requiring women to view fetal vital signs before undergoing an abortion. In June media reported the decree did not achieve its intended effect, as the number of abortions increased for four consecutive months in the second half of 2022, making it the first period in more than a decade in which the number of abortions per thousand women had not decreased.																																				Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination										The law prohibited discrimination based on ethnicity and criminalized offensive behavior and real or perceived threats towards members of racial, ethnic, or other groups. The Office of the Ombudsperson was responsible for monitoring discrimination. Hate crime was a separate type of crime. NGOs reported authorities were reluctant to classify incidents as hate crimes.Roma was the country’s largest ethnic minority group. There were approximately 1,300 de facto segregated settlements in the country where Roma constituted the majority of the population, and Roma civil society groups reported school segregation of Romani children was a problem, despite legal prohibitions against it.In a July press conference, Prime Minister’s Office Minister Gergely Gulyas stated Hungarian students’ reading comprehension fell short of expectations in a 2023 competency assessment because scores were worse where there were more Romani children. Romani politicians, civil society organizations, and teachers’ unions criticized the minister for his statement.In August the far-right Our Homeland party and affiliated extremist organizations staged an anti-Roma protest in front of a Budapest prison against what they called “Gypsy crime,” with speakers demanding harsher punishment of criminals and condemning the government for allowing guest workers into the country. In August the government fined one of the speakers, Member of Parliament Elod Novak, for his repeated use of the term “Gypsy crime” during parliamentary sessions.The law established cultural autonomy for nationalities and recognized the right to foster and enrich historic traditions, language, culture, and educational rights.																																				Children										Birth Registration: NGOs asserted the law provided only partial safeguards against statelessness at birth because all children of foreign parents born in the country were registered on birth certificates as being of unknown nationality. In addition, NGOs claimed children born to stateless parents, or to noncitizen parents who could not pass on their nationality to their children, were in some cases stateless.Education: Although the law provided for free and compulsory education for children between ages three and 16 and prohibited school segregation, NGOs reported segregation of Romani children in schools and their frequent misdiagnosis as having a mental disability. The European Commission initiated infringement procedures due to concerns regarding the disproportionate overrepresentation of Romani children in segregated schools for children with intellectual disabilities, a considerable degree of segregated education in mainstream schools, and because “its national legislation does not fully comply with EU rules prohibiting discrimination on the grounds of racial or ethnic origin.”Child Abuse: There were laws against child abuse with a “child protection signaling system” in place to detect and prevent the endangerment of children; law enforcement and judicial measures; restraining orders; shelters for mothers and their children; and removal of children from homes deemed unsafe. According to the law, failure of a parent to “cooperate” with doctors, district nurses, teachers, or family supporters in the signaling system automatically constituted gross endangerment, even without any other signs of negligence or endangerment. Experts were generally critical of the system’s implementation and functioning, highlighting deficiencies in detecting abuse and identifying abusive foster parents.A February report by the ombudsperson revealed serious abuses in foster care networks and found that children placed with foster parents were often living in poor conditions and abused by their foster parents, and their contact with others was obstructed.Media reported in March a boy age two died after falling down the stairs, but authorities revealed the boy’s foster mother beat him to death. The foster mother later retracted her confession.In April, two children were found in the trunk of a car parked next to a police station; a boy age two was dead, and a girl age 18 months was injured. The boy’s foster parents parked the car and reported the incident days later to police. Authorities charged the foster mother with failure to render aid, as it was determined the boy died of suffocation.Child, Early, and Forced Marriage: The legal minimum age of marriage was 18 and it was effectively enforced by the government. The Social and Guardianship Office could authorize marriage for persons between ages 16 and 18; the guardianship authorities considered whether a girl was pregnant in making their determination. Data regarding the prevalence of child marriage in the country was limited, including in the Romani community.Sexual Exploitation of Children: The law prohibited child pornography. The statute of limitations did not apply to sex crimes against children. The government generally enforced the law. The minimum age for consensual sex was 12, provided the older partner was 18 or younger. Persons older than 18 convicted of engaging in sexual relations with a child ages 12 to 14 could be sentenced to one to five years’ imprisonment. By law, statutory rape was punishable by five to 10 years’ imprisonment if the survivor was younger than 12. The law prohibited the criminal prosecution of children exploited in commercial sex. Procuring children for and exploitation of children in commercial sex were punishable by two to eight years’ imprisonment.																																				Antisemitism										According to the 2022 census, 7,635 persons identified their religion as Judaism. According to estimates from the World Jewish Congress, the Jewish population numbered between 35,000 and 120,000 persons. A survey of 10 European countries released in May by the Anti-Defamation League showed 37 percent of the country’s citizens held antisemitic views. A regional antisemitism survey released by Budapest-based NGO Tom Lantos Institute in 2022 concluded 49 percent of 1,849 respondents ages 18-74 could be classified as moderately or strongly antisemitic.In February extreme-right and neo-Nazi groups commemorated the February 11, 1945, break-out attempt by Hungarian and German troops during the Soviet Red Army’s siege of Budapest.In February media reported the owner of the burial plot of the wife of former head of state and leader of the Arrow Cross Party Ferenc Szalasi turned the grave into a memorial for Szalasi. In March police launched an investigation for the use of symbols of despotism, and the grave was vandalized several times to cover up antisemitic symbols.In September following an event commemorating the anniversary of interwar regent Miklos Horthy’s reburial in his home village, Minister of Transport and Construction Janos Lazar praised Horthy as “an exceptional head of state, a real Hungarian patriot, and a heroic soldier,” adding that Horthy’s achievements were “unquestionable to this day.” The diplomatic community and Jewish leaders criticized Lazar’s statement and called attention to Horthy’s alliance with Nazi Germany and his complicity in the deportation and killing of Hungarian Jews in the Holocaust. The Federation of Hungarian Jewish Communities declared in a statement, “History cannot be changed, but omitting the reality and glorifying mass murderers is unacceptable.”In April President Katalin Novak pardoned far-right activist Gyorgy Budahazy, who was in prison on terrorism charges for inciting tensions against the socialist government in 2006 and launching Molotov cocktail attacks on the homes of left-wing members of parliament and bars frequented by LGBTQI+ persons. In a 2008 rally, Budahazy said, “if we have enough fighters there will be no mercy for the liberal-Bolshevik-Zionist groups who destroyed our country.” The pardon was celebrated by Our Homeland party president Laszlo Toroczkai, who wrote “all patriots are free at last.”																																				Trafficking in Persons										See the Department of State’s Trafficking in Persons Report at  https://www.state.gov/trafficking-in-persons-report/.																																				Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics										Criminalization: No laws criminalized consensual same-sex sexual conduct between adults, cross-dressing, or other sexual or gender characteristic-related behaviors.Violence and Harassment: The state did not officially perpetrate or tolerate violence against LGBTQI+ persons or those reporting such abuse and generally prosecuted and punished state and nonstate actors complicit in abuses.Throughout the year, Prime Minister Orban and other government leaders frequently used the mantra, “No Migration, No Gender, No War,” referring to Fidesz’s “no gender ideology” policy. In his state of the nation speech, the prime minister called “gender propaganda...the greatest threat stalking our children.” In the same speech Orban said, “a despicable thing happened in one of our schools,” an apparent reference to a teaching assistant who released a TikTok video days earlier in which he defended his relationship with a boy age 15 because the age of consent was 14. Government-controlled media outlets and research group Szazadveg used the story in a campaign targeting the LGBTQI+ community, as well as human rights defenders and individuals with loose ties to the teaching assistant.In July soccer hooligans and other far-right groups repeatedly vandalized a bench that Amnesty International Hungary painted in rainbow colors for Pride Month with approval from the Budapest District IX municipal government. The bench received widespread media attention, but the District IX government removed it after eight days.Discrimination: The law prohibited discrimination based on sexual orientation. In addition, the law prohibited certain forms of hate speech and prescribed increased punishment for violence against LGBTQI+ persons. The civil court procedure allowed for the awarding of pecuniary and nonpecuniary damages. The Constitutional Court also offered possibilities to challenge allegedly discriminatory legislation. Observers asserted some employers discriminated against LGBTQI+ persons.Availability of Legal Gender Recognition: The law prohibited transgender or intersex individuals from changing their assigned sex or gender at birth on legal and identification documents, and there was therefore no mechanism for legal gender recognition.In June the ECtHR ruled Hungary violated the European Convention on Human Rights by not providing legal options for transgender individuals to change their gender and name. The court determined that after the government in 2020 repealed legislation allowing the change of “sex/gender markers” in birth certificates, legislative deficiencies and serious irregularities left transgender claimants in “distressing uncertainty” concerning their private life and recognition of their personal identity. The ECtHR ruled the government should pay one applicant €12,700 ($13,400) in damages and legal fees.In July the Veszprem County Regional Court ruled transgender women were eligible to receive the “Women 40” pension benefit, a government program allowing women to retire after 40 years of service. A claimant who legally changed her name and gender in 2013 – before a 2020 law eliminated the possibility – was ineligible because the pension provider categorized her as a man. The government subsequently initiated action to close “the loophole” for transgender women that was “opened by the court.”Involuntary or Coercive Medical or Psychological Practices: According to research on conversion therapy in the country by the Global Interfaith Commission on LGBT+ Lives, 10 percent of respondents said they either went through “conversion therapy” or believed they had gone through it. Respondents who experienced religious “conversion therapy” reported forms ranging from private prayer and pleading with God to fasting and exorcisms. The most common form of therapeutic, psychological, or psychiatric “conversion therapy” intervention was individual psychological or psychiatric treatment, but participants reported aversion therapy, medication, and electroconvulsive therapy as well.There were no reports of medically unnecessary and irreversible “normalization” surgeries performed on children or on nonconsenting adult intersex persons. Medical interventions carried out without consent could give rise to a civil action for the violation of personality rights.Restrictions of Freedom of Expression, Association, or Peaceful Assembly: There were no laws or restrictions on speaking or media reporting on LGBTQI+ matters, on association or freedom of assembly, or on the ability of LGBTQI+ organizations to legally register or convene events.In April the European Parliament and 15 member states joined with the ECJ in a court case against the country’s “child protection” law, which argued that restricting access to LGBTQI+ content for children and imposing a disclaimer on a children’s book with LGBTQI+ content were discriminatory and violated human dignity and freedom of expression.The Budapest Metropolitan Government Office imposed a 12 million forints ($31,000) consumer protection fine in July on the Lira bookstore chain because it sold the young adult graphic novel series Heartstopper among books for children and young adults without sealed packaging. Independent media reported bookstore chain Libri also received a one million forints ($2,600) fine for selling a book depicting homosexuality without the required sealed packaging and not separating it from other products.																																				Persons with Disabilities										The constitution and the law prohibited discrimination against persons with physical, sensory, intellectual, communicational, and psychosocial disabilities in employment, education, air travel and other transportation, access to health care, or the provision of other state services. In general, the government enforced the law effectively. The constitution provided that a court could deprive persons with disabilities who were under guardianship of the right to vote in its adjudication of the individual’s limited mental capacity.Most children with disabilities were excluded from mainstream education and were either homeschooled or provided education in institutions.Institutionalized Children: In 2020 the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child expressed concern regarding the high number of children living in institutional settings, including 300 children younger than age three. According to UNICEF Hungary, approximately 23,000 children were living in state care institutions. Pro-Roma NGOs noted institutionalized children living in state care were especially vulnerable to human trafficking for commercial sexual exploitation and criticized the lack of special assistance for child victims of trafficking. Experts also noted the high rate of institutionalization of children with disabilities, who often faced segregation from society and were put at risk of mistreatment and abuse.																																				Other Societal Violence or Discrimination										The prime minister, other government leaders, and government-aligned media regularly used language in defense of “Christian Europe” that many viewed as anti-Muslim, particularly toward Muslim migrants and refugees. A 2022 study by political research institute Policy Solutions indicated 55 percent of respondents would feel “bad” or “very bad” if they had a Muslim neighbor. Muslim organizations did not collect data regarding anti-Muslim hatred but reported verbal insults were frequent and claimed the majority of the population regarded Muslims with suspicion.																																					Section 7.													 Worker Rights												    																																																a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining										The labor code provided for the right of workers to form and join independent unions without previous authorization and conduct their activities without interference, although unions alleged requirements for trade union registration were excessive. The labor code prohibited any worker conduct that could jeopardize the employer’s reputation or legitimate economic and organizational interests and explicitly provided for the possibility of restricting the workers’ personal rights in this regard, including their right to express an opinion during or outside of working hours.Except for law enforcement and military personnel, prison guards, border guards, health-care workers, and firefighters, workers had the right to strike. In other spheres of the public sector, including education or government services, “minimum service” had to be maintained. The law permitted military and police unions to seek resolution of grievances in court. The law provided for collective bargaining; however, there were excessive requirements in respect to trade unions’ representativity or the minimum number of members required to bargain collectively. The law prohibited antiunion discrimination and provided for reinstatement of workers fired for union activity.Workers performing activities determined by authorities to be essential to the public interest, such as schools, public transport, telecommunications, water, and power, could not strike unless an agreement was reached on provision of “sufficient services” or “minimum services” during a strike. Minimum services requirements were a disincentive to strike, and thus employees needed to resort to other types of collective actions, such as rolling strikes (strikes lasting a few hours on consecutive days). Courts determined the definition of sufficient services. National trade unions opposed the law on the basis that courts lacked expertise to rule on minimum service levels and generally refused to rule on such cases, effectively inhibiting the right to strike. The government passed legislation in 2020 seriously undermining health-care workers’ right to strike, as it prescribed that trade unions and the government needed to conclude an agreement for each planned strike. Numerous trade unions decided to escalate the matter to the International Labor Organization (ILO) and sent a petition to the government requesting it negotiate with air traffic controllers. In May 2022 President Novak signed legislation requiring children in schools be supervised if teachers went on strike, effectively limiting strikes by teachers. In September 2022, with the help of the HHC, teachers’ unions initiated a challenge with the ECtHR on the legality of limitations on their right to strike.The government effectively enforced laws providing for freedom of association and collective bargaining in the business sphere, whereas in the public sphere, legislation limited exercising the right to strike. Penalties for violations were generally commensurate with those under other laws involving denials of civil rights. Penalties were sometimes applied against violators. In the public sector, administrative and judicial procedures to determine adequate services were sometimes subject to lengthy delays and appeals.Authorities and employers mostly respected freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining. Trade unions alleged national prosecutors restricted trade union activities. In some cases, unions reported antiunion dismissals and union busting by employers. There were also reports of unilateral termination of collective agreements, which employers in some cases attributed to financial difficulties or minor infringements of work requirements. In these cases, trade unions initiated court procedures to seek remedy. Unions reported the government attempted to influence their independent operation.While the law provided for reinstatement of workers fired for union activity, court proceedings on unfair dismissal cases sometimes took longer than one year to complete, and authorities did not always enforce court decisions. In June the ILO noted with concern the significant compliance gaps in law and practice regarding the protection against antiunion discrimination, the scope of collective bargaining permitted under the law, and interference in free and voluntary collective bargaining.																																				b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor										See the Department of State’s annual Trafficking in Persons Report at  https://www.state.gov/trafficking-in-persons-report/.																																				c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment										The constitution prohibited all of the worst forms of child labor. The law prohibited children younger than 16 from working, with the exception that children ages 15 or 16 could work under certain circumstances as temporary workers during school vacations or could be employed to perform in cultural, artistic, sports, or advertising activities with parental consent. Children could not work night shifts or overtime or perform hard physical labor. The government performed spot checks and effectively enforced applicable laws; penalties were commensurate with those for analogous serious crimes. The Ministry of National Economy uncovered cases of child labor, and it applied penalties against violators.																																				d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																														e. Acceptable Conditions of Work										Wage and Hour Laws: The law provided for a minimum wage, but during the year, the national minimum wage was below the poverty level. The law set the official workday at eight hours, although it could vary depending on industry. A 48-hour rest period was required during any seven-day work period. The regular workweek was 40 hours with premium pay for overtime. The labor code limited overtime to 400 hours per year. The code also provided for 10 paid annual national holidays. Overtime was calculated based on a three-year period, i.e., employees had a right to overtime pay only if, during a three-year period, they worked an average of more than 40 hours per week. Observers noted this provision could allow employers to avoid paying overtime for work in one year by requiring employees to work less than full time during both or one of the two other years if it lowered their average workweek during the entire three-year period to 40 hours or less.During the COVID-19 pandemic, the government passed regulations allowing employers and employees to not apply the prescriptions of the labor code in contracts and work schedules. Following the ILO recommendation in 2021 to engage in dialogue with workers’ and employers’ organizations to limit the impact of such measures and fully use collective bargaining, the government eliminated the decree in 2022. Nevertheless, air traffic controllers’ right to strike was limited.Occupational Safety and Health: Occupational safety and health (OSH) standards were appropriate in the main industries, and OSH experts actively identified unsafe conditions and responded to complaints. In 2020 the government rewrote OSH standards to include pandemic protection measures. Workers had the right to remove themselves from situations endangering their health or safety without jeopardy to their employment, and authorities effectively protected employees in such situations.Most injuries occurred in the processing, manufacturing, transport and warehousing, retail, administration and education, health and social care, and construction sectors, in this order. Most deaths occurred in the construction, agriculture, transport, retail, processing, and manufacturing sectors. In-depth inspections were announced, whereas other inspections based on an annual plan, reports of irregularities, spot checks or follow-up inspections were unannounced. Measures taken against violators included penalties, suspensions, bans, and prescriptions to eliminate irregularities.Wage, Hour, and OSH Enforcement: The government effectively enforced wage, hour, and OSH laws, and penalties for violations were commensurate with those for other similar violations, such as fraud or negligence. Penalties were regularly applied against violators.The Labor and Employment Supervision Directorate of the Ministry for Economic Development was responsible for the enforcement of wage, hour, and OSH laws. The number of inspectors was sufficient to enforce compliance. According to the Ministry’s Labor Protection Directorate, the number of inspectors corresponded to that in other industrial market economies. The inspectors had the authority to make unannounced inspections and initiate sanctions. Labor inspectors regularly provided consultations to employers and employees on safety and health standards. Labor laws also applied to foreign workers with work permits.The government’s last estimate of the size of the informal economy was 30 percent in 2010; an estimate in 2022 by an independent institute placed the size of the informal sector between 26 and 35 percent. Labor and work safety standards applied to the informal economy, but they were not enforced.																																				    							View report by:																				Afghanistan											Albania											Algeria											Andorra											Angola											Antigua and Barbuda											Argentina											Armenia											Australia											Austria											Azerbaijan											Bahrain											Bangladesh											Barbados											Belarus											Belgium											Belize											Benin											Bhutan											Bolivia											Bosnia and Herzegovina											Botswana											Brazil											Brunei											Bulgaria											Burkina Faso											Burma											Burundi											Cabo Verde											Cambodia											Cameroon											Canada											Central African Republic											Chad											Chile											China (Includes Hong Kong, Macau, and Tibet)											Colombia											Comoros											Costa Rica											Côte d&#8217;Ivoire											Croatia											Cuba											Cyprus											Czech Republic											Democratic Republic of the Congo											Denmark											Djibouti											Dominica											Dominican Republic											Ecuador											Egypt											El Salvador											Equatorial Guinea											Eritrea											Estonia											Eswatini											Ethiopia											Fiji											Finland											France											Gabon											Georgia											Germany											Ghana											Greece											Grenada											Guatemala											Guinea											Guinea-Bissau											Guyana											Haiti											Honduras											Hungary											Iceland											India											Indonesia											Iran											Iraq											Ireland											Israel, West Bank and Gaza											Italy											Jamaica											Japan											Jordan											Kazakhstan											Kenya											Kiribati											Kosovo											Kuwait											Kyrgyz Republic											Laos											Latvia											Lebanon											Lesotho											Liberia											Libya											Liechtenstein											Lithuania											Luxembourg											Madagascar											Malawi											Malaysia											Maldives											Mali											Malta											Marshall Islands											Mauritania											Mauritius											Mexico											Micronesia											Moldova											Monaco											Mongolia											Montenegro											Morocco											Mozambique											Namibia											Nauru											Nepal											New Zealand											Nicaragua											Niger											Nigeria											North Korea											North Macedonia											Norway											Oman											Pakistan											Palau											Panama											Papua New Guinea											Paraguay											Peru											Philippines											Poland											Portugal											Qatar											Republic of the Congo											Romania											Russia											Rwanda											Saint Kitts and Nevis											Saint Lucia											Saint Vincent and the Grenadines											Samoa											San Marino											Sao Tome and Principe											Saudi Arabia											Senegal											Serbia											Seychelles											Sierra Leone											Singapore											Slovakia											Slovenia											Solomon Islands											Somalia											South Africa											South Korea											South Sudan											Spain											Sri Lanka											Sudan											Suriname											Sweden											Switzerland											Syria											Taiwan											Tajikistan											Tanzania											Thailand											The Gambia											The Netherlands											Timor-Leste											Togo											The Bahamas											Tonga											Trinidad and Tobago											Tunisia											Turkey (Türkiye)											Turkmenistan											Tuvalu											Uganda											Ukraine											United Arab Emirates											United Kingdom											Uruguay											Uzbekistan											Vanuatu											Venezuela											Vietnam											Yemen											Zambia											Zimbabwe															Build A Custom Report																						On This Page				search													>																										EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person																																							a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings																																																						b. Disappearance																																																						c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses																																																				Prison and Detention Center Conditions																																																																																				d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention																																																				Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees																																																																																				e. Denial of Fair Public Trial																																																				Trial Procedures																																												Political Prisoners and Detainees																																												f. Transnational Repression																																																																																				g. Property Seizure and Restitution																																																						h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence																																																			Section 2. Respect for Civil Liberties																																							a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media																																																				Internet Freedom																																																																																				b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association																																																				Freedom of Peaceful Assembly																																												Freedom of Association																																																																																				c. Freedom of Religion																																																						d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country																																																						e. Protection of Refugees																																																			Section 3. Freedom to Participate in the Political Process																																							Elections and Political Participation																																																			Section 4. Corruption in Government																Section 5. Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights																Section 6. Discrimination and Societal Abuses																																							Women																																																						Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination																																																						Children																																																						Antisemitism																																																						Trafficking in Persons																																																						Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics																																																						Persons with Disabilities																																																						Other Societal Violence or Discrimination																																																			Section 7. Worker Rights																																							a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining																																																						b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor																																																						c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment																																																						d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																																						e. Acceptable Conditions of Work																																																									Tags																					Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor																								Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs																								Hungary
- NATO Accession Anniversary for Czechia, Hungary, and Poland Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of StateOn behalf of the United States, I want to congratulate Czechia, Hungary, and Poland on the 25th anniversary of your accession to NATO.As then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright said to mark your accession in 1999, “NATO is joined by three proud democracies – countries that have proven their ability to meet Alliance responsibilities, uphold Alliance values, and defend Alliance interests.”For 25 years, we have stood together as Allies – united and fully committed to our collective security.  Today, NATO stands as the most successful and enduring alliance in history.  As we adapt to address the evolving challenges of the future and uphold our ironclad commitment to defend every inch of NATO territory, our Alliance is stronger than ever.
- Department Press Briefing – March 5, 2024 HomeDepartment Press Briefing &#8211; March 5, 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 &#8211; March 5, 2024																																																					March 5, 2024																																																								1:12 p.m. ESTMR MILLER: Good afternoon. Let me start with a readout of the Secretary’s meeting earlier today with Israeli War Cabinet Minister Benny Gantz. The Secretary and Minister Gantz discussed the ongoing conflict in Gaza, and the Secretary reiterated that the United States continues to support Israel’s right to ensure that the terrorist attacks of October 7th can never be repeated. The Secretary also emphasized the need for Israel to act urgently to enable the delivery of humanitarian assistance to Gaza and to improve the distribution of that aid inside Gaza.As you heard the Secretary say this morning before his meeting with Prime Minister Al Thani of Qatar, the current situation is unacceptable and unsustainable. And while the United States is doing everything it can to increase deliveries into Gaza, Israel must take additional steps as well.Secretary Blinken and Minister Gantz also discussed efforts to reach an agreement for a six-week ceasefire that would secure the release of all hostages and help alleviate the suffering of the Palestinian people. As the Secretary said earlier today, we have an opportunity to achieve an immediate ceasefire, and it is on Hamas to make the decisions about whether it is willing to agree to one. The talks to secure a temporary ceasefire and achieve the release of all hostages are ongoing, and we will continue to push to reach an agreement. And then I wanted to say a few words about Under Secretary Toria Nuland who the Secretary announced earlier today will be stepping down from her position in the coming weeks. As the Secretary said in his statement, Toria has an unmatched capacity to wield the full toolkit of American diplomacy to advance our interests and values. She’s had almost every job in this department. I shouldn’t say almost every job – but most jobs in this department, including this very job here. And I will say just speaking personally, I first got to know Toria during – at the early days of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. And the thing that struck me about her from day one was her clarity purpose and clarity of voice, which I know all of you probably remember well from her – or at least Matt remembers well from her time at this podium.QUESTION: (Off-mike.)MR MILLER: So I know I speak for everyone in the department in saying we will miss her greatly, but we congratulate her on an extraordinary career.With that, Matt.QUESTION: Okay. Well, maybe you could get her down here to give us a farewell.MR MILLER: One last briefing for old times’ sake?QUESTION: Yes. Exactly.MR MILLER: I’m sure she would love to argue with you for &#8212;QUESTION: Yeah, I’m &#8212;MR MILLER: &#8212; an extended &#8212;QUESTION: Probably not, but still it would be interesting to hear her thoughts on leaving. Anyways, on the meetings this morning with both the Qataris and Benny Gantz, when you say that you continue to support Israel’s right to ensure that the events of October 7th can never happen again – when you say that, do – does that mean that you agree with the Israeli idea that Hamas has to be completely eliminated, eradicated, killed?MR MILLER: So we support Israel in defeating Hamas. And to unpack that a little bit – I’ve said a little bit about this from the podium before – there are military objectives that Israel is trying to accomplish when it comes to defeating Hamas, and it supports – we support those military objectives. But then we’re also going to have to defeat the ideology behind Hamas and that is not something that can be accomplished on the battlefield. It’s something that we have learned in the United States in our long history with counterterrorism, that you cannot defeat an idea on the battlefield. You can defeat a terrorist group on the battlefield, but ultimately you have to beat that idea with a better idea. So we support their campaign to defeat Hamas, but we also support a broader political resolution that will address the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people.QUESTION: Well, do you think at the moment that the Israeli strategy is actually helping to defeat the ideology or is it not?MR MILLER: I think we are in the middle of a military campaign, and it’s not the right time to offer assessments about the broader struggle. But we do – we have spoken out many times to say that Israel has to be careful that, in achieving a tactical victory, it doesn’t endure a strategic defeat. And it remains our advice to them not to do that.QUESTION: Okay. And then in – just in terms of the negotiations that are going on – and I don’t know if Minister Gantz is completely up-to-date on the latest of it, but presumably Sheikh Mohammed is since his country is brokering them. What sense did you get other than the ball is in Hamas’s court? Are there – are the differences that still exist surmountable or are they impossible?MR MILLER: So the Secretary did discuss those ongoing negotiations both with Prime Minister Al Thani and with Minister Gantz. And I’m not going to get into the – this won’t surprise you because I’ve said it many times. I’m not going to get into the underlying details of the conversation, the negotiations. In our view, the obstacles are not surmountable.QUESTION: Not what?MR MILLER: In our – not insurmountable – are not insurmountable. Excuse me. In our view, it should be possible to reach an agreement. We think the proposal that Israel put on the table in consultation with the United States and with Qatar and Egypt is one that Hamas should agree to, and it’s one that would alleviate the suffering of the Palestinian people and bring about an immediate ceasefire for six weeks. And so we think that agreement can be reached. But as I said and as you heard the Secretary say, ultimately Hamas has to make decisions as well.QUESTION: Okay. And then this is my – this will be my last one. But when you say the obstacles – in your view the obstacles are not insurmountable, one of the things that you have said repeatedly over and over again is that Hamas could end this right now by just surrendering, laying down all their weapons. Clearly that’s not going to happen, so is that not an obstacle that you are putting into the calculus now?MR MILLER: I think we’re a little bit conflating two things. They could end this entire conflict, right. We don’t need a temporary ceasefire. If Hamas would lay down their weapons and stop fighting, you could have a permanent ceasefire because Israel would have accomplished its military objectives. With respect to the temporary ceasefire that we are trying to achieve, we very much think that an agreement is reachable (inaudible).QUESTION: So you don’t think that Hamas has to lay down its weapons and surrender in order to get a temporary ceasefire?MR MILLER: To get a temporary ceasefire, no.QUESTION: Okay.MR MILLER: Obviously, we would support them laying down their weapons and reaching – ending – ending this &#8212;QUESTION: Well, I’m sure you would support them – I’m &#8212;MR MILLER: Ending this conflict, but that is not what we’re – that is not &#8212;QUESTION: You would support a lot of things. I’m sure.MR MILLER: That is not what we’re discussing with respect to a six-week ceasefire.QUESTION: Okay. All right, thank you.MR MILLER: Yeah, Shaun, go ahead.QUESTION: Could I just follow up on that? Just some comments in the past couple of hours, one by Hamas saying that negotiations can’t last indefinitely. And then the President, the – President Biden’s saying that it’s dangerous not to have a ceasefire in place by Ramadan. Is there a sense that the clock is ticking for this, that – I know you say that’s – as soon as possible. But is there a sense that it’s basically not necessarily now or never but that we really need to get it before Ramadan?MR MILLER: I would not put it that way. The clock is always ticking, but the clock is not ticking because of the – in my view because of Ramadan coming up. The clock is ticking because every day people are suffering. Innocent Palestinians are suffering and the hostages are suffering, so the clock is always ticking because we want to end that suffering of both hostages and innocent Palestinians as soon as possible. And so we would like to have gotten an agreement last week; we would like to get an agreement today; we would like to get an agreement by Ramadan or even before that. So the clock is really not related to Ramadan but related to the ongoing suffering that we are trying to bring to a close.Yeah.QUESTION: Come to the humanitarian situation, which you described as unacceptable and unsustainable. Your colleague John Kirby, yesterday in a briefing, talked about – he was asked about what’s preventing more aid from getting into Gaza, talked about – there have been some inorganic obstacles thrown up &#8212;MR MILLER: Excuse me.QUESTION: Inorganic obstacles thrown up in some cases by members of the Israeli cabinet that have made it hard to get aid in. What are those – like what are the obstacles specifically that he’s talking about that there?MR MILLER: So I’m not going to – I will let him speak to what he was speaking to. But I will say some of the obstacles that we have seen from the Israeli political establishment: you have seen ministers in the Israeli Government block the release of flour from the port at Ashdod; you have seen ministers of the Israeli Government supporting protests that blocked aid from going in to Kerem Shalom. So all of those things are obstacles coming from ministers inside the Israeli Government that we have called out, that we have said are unacceptable, and that we have said should end.QUESTION: Does that include the refusal to open the Erez crossing or another crossing in the north?MR MILLER: We want to see another crossing open and it’s something we’re engaged with quite directly with the Israeli Government, and that includes in the conversation that the Secretary had with Minister Gantz today. He was quite direct and quite frank about the seriousness of the situation on the ground and the fact that it is incumbent on everyone involved to do more to get aid in urgently, as soon as possible.QUESTION: I want to ask about how this relates to the Foreign Assistance Act – 1961, I believe. It has a part of the act that basically says no foreign – no assistance shall be furnished to countries that prohibit or otherwise restrict the transport delivery of U.S. humanitarian assistance. Is Israel in breach of that?MR MILLER: I will have to go back and look at the language of that text. It’s not something that I’ve spent a lot of time looking at. But we are always engaged with Israel, as we are with all countries, about their need to fulfill all U.S. statutory requirements, and we have not made an assessment that Israel is in breach of any such statutory requirements at this time.QUESTION: Is this building working on an assessment that would determine whether that’s happening or not?MR MILLER: I don’t have any such assessment to read out at this time.QUESTION: Yeah. Thank you.MR MILLER: Yeah, go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you. Thank you, Matt. On the questions raised by Matt and Shaun and Simon on the stated goals by Israel. When this war began, they were asking for decapitation of Hamas, hunting the leadership, freeing the hostages, and changing the regime. Those were the ones that were stated. Now 150 days later, how far along have the Israelis gotten? I mean, they’ve probably degraded Hamas by and large. But do you have an assessment on how much of Hamas has been degraded?MR MILLER: I will leave it to Israel to offer those types of assessments.QUESTION: So – but certainly, I mean, you support their goals. You just said that you support their pursuit of these goals, which means that if you are going to continue with the same kind of support that we have seen thus far, it means that this will continue to go on.MR MILLER: I cannot tell you how long &#8212;QUESTION: You presume &#8212;MR MILLER: Sorry. I cannot tell you how long that this war will continue to go on. But if Israel were to stop the war today &#8212;QUESTION: Right.MR MILLER: &#8212; let’s remember about what would happen, which is the same terrorist organization that launched the attacks of October 7th would still be in place, would still have the ability to plot attacks against Israel, would still have the ability to carry out attacks against Israel, and remember, have said still possess the intent to carry out attacks on Israel.QUESTION: Yeah. But you also said you cannot so easily defeat an idea, basically. And this idea was spawned by the occupation, by repression. I mean, it could happen in the West Bank, where we see very heavy-handed Israeli occupation. It could happen elsewhere. So I mean, how could you overcome that without offering the Palestinians something tangible that they can hang on to?MR MILLER: So a few things. One, obviously, the conflict and the dispute between Israel and the Palestinian people goes back decades. Two, there’s nothing in that conflict – nothing in the months, years, decades leading up to October 7th – that justified the violence of October 7th. And then three, I think you are well aware that we believe the ultimate way to resolve the longstanding conflict between Israel and the Palestinian people is the establishment of an independent Palestinian state with real security guarantees for Israel, and that’s what we’re working to try to achieve.QUESTION: If you’ll allow me just a couple more. By the way, on the aid, can you update us on the whereabouts of Mr. David Satterfield, and what is he doing?MR MILLER: I don’t know where he is today. I haven’t talked to him today.QUESTION: Okay. All right. I wanted to ask you about UNRWA. I mean, I asked yesterday, but if – I know that the U.S. is trying to encourage other donors to be generous and so on, but thus far there is no – has there been any clarification on where you stand as far as the investigation in – that is ongoing, or when is it – when are you likely to resume the aid?MR MILLER: So there has been no change in this, our status, since you asked me the same question yesterday –QUESTION: Yesterday, that’s right. Right.MR MILLER: &#8212; which is the – both of the investigations that the United Nations are conducting are ongoing, and we are not able to make a change in our status. We’re not able to make either an underlying factual assessment or determine how that factual assessment would affect our status until those investigations are completed, which they, as of yet, are not.QUESTION: Because you know – I know I asked about this yesterday, but millions of Palestinians depend on UNRWA aid daily, every day. I mean, they don’t wait for policies to be investigated and so on and so on. They still need it, and these people are – by and large, they are in dire need.MR MILLER: And we fully agree with that. As you’ve said – as you’ve heard me say many times, you’ve heard the Secretary say, we support the work of UNRWA. And while we are exploring other options to get food assistance in to the Palestinian people while our funding of UNRWA is paused, we are also in conversations with other international partners about the ways that they can fill gaps. Remember, our funding that we suspended – we weren’t due for another large payment until June. That’s still several months away. So we are working to do everything we can to make sure that the delivery of humanitarian assistance into Gaza and then the really important role that UNRWA plays in ensuring that that aid is distributed inside Gaza can continue and, in fact, not just continue but be improved.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you. A couple questions. Hungary finally signed the ratification of Sweden’s membership. Do you expect depositing the instrument of ratification this week?MR MILLER: So we have not yet received the instrument. They were – it was just signed this morning. We do expect it to be delivered to Washington in the coming days, and for Sweden’s accession to NATO to be completed, but I don’t have an exact timing to provide today.QUESTION: On that line there, there are reports that Prime Minister Orbán will meet with former President Trump in Mar-a-Lago this week. Is there any concern about &#8212;MR MILLER: I don’t have any comment on the prime minister’s reported meetings.QUESTION: Thank you. Moving to Ukraine, if I may. May I get your thoughts on the ICC arrest warrant today for Russian military commanders?MR MILLER: Yeah. So we have seen the news that the ICC issued arrest warrants for Sergei Kobylash and Viktor Sokolov for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity. The United States supports a range of international investigations into Russia’s atrocities in Ukraine, including the one conducted by the ICC, but we do not weigh in on each decision and development as part of those investigations.QUESTION: And separately, have you seen so-called Medvedev map on social media? What do you make of it?MR MILLER: I’ve – I think I saw a tweet related to it. I didn’t look at the map, so I’m not – I don’t have a comment on it, unless you’d like to enlighten me about what it shows. I can imagine.QUESTION: And finally, you started out with Secretary Toria. I just wanted to remind you that she – last month she was in Kyiv, and she made a statement saying that 2024 will bring certain solid successes on the battlefield. And she said – I’m quoting – “Putin is going to get some nice surprises on the battlefield.” Do you share that sentiment?MR MILLER: I do. I do. We believe that Ukraine has a plan that they can execute to achieve victories on the battlefield. We’ve seen them making – having victories on the battlefield, most recently in the Black Sea, where in the last 24 hours they sunk another Russian ship. So we do believe that they have some surprises in store. We look forward to seeing the results.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Go ahead.QUESTION: On the Benny Gantz visit, the Israeli press, Israel Hayom, Israel Today, their diplomatic correspondent writing about the visit, saying that Mr. Gantz explained to government officials that in order to remove from Hamas the civilian capabilities in Gaza it is better that there be a certain period of chaos in the Gaza Strip. First of all, has Mr. Gantz said that to American officials?MR MILLER: I’m not going to – I, as per general rule, will not speak to what other officials said in &#8212;QUESTION: What’s your assessment, though, of that contention, that – because the Israelis have made it clear they want the complete elimination of Hamas. That includes its role in the civilian administration of Gaza. We’re seeing chaos and a complete inability to secure Gaza, which is a disaster for people on the ground. If that is – and it seems to be, judging by the military activity – the position of the Israeli Government and the military, what’s your assessment of that as a tactic and strategy?MR MILLER: So two things. Number one, as you heard me say a moment ago, I think in response to Said’s question and to Matt’s question, we do support Israel’s objective of defeating Hamas militarily. With respect to the civil administration of Gaza post-conflict, Hamas is a terrorist organization, dedicated – designated a terrorist organization by the United States, but even apart from legal designations, you just have to look at their actions on October 7th to realize that they’re a terrorist organization that carries out brutal, intentional attacks on civilians. And we do not believe that a terrorist organization can or should play a role in civilian governance of Gaza going forward.QUESTION: So what happens? Because this is no longer a day-after issue; this is a now issue, as we’ve talked about. It’s happening now. There’s nobody to run Gaza. So who should do it? I mean, who’s – what are you saying to the Israelis about who’s going to – who’s securing it? I mean, without security you can’t do anything else. There’s no security there at the moment.MR MILLER: So the ultimate &#8212;QUESTION: So who is responsible?MR MILLER: So right now, Israel is the power that has brought a military that is ultimately in charge of the security situation on the ground. We believe that there needs to be a transition, ultimately, to governance led by the Palestinian Authority, and that would include security and other government functions led by the Palestinian Authority, and with respect to both the West Bank and Gaza.QUESTION: And that’s exactly what Israel says it won’t accept, is a PA-run Gaza Strip.MR MILLER: And we continue to push for it.Yeah, go ahead.QUESTION: Thanks, Matt. Staying on the region, also on Benny Gantz’s visit – as we all know, he spent several hours at the White House yesterday; he’s met with the Secretary this morning. There’s been some reporting that Gantz was surprised at the strength of criticism that he faced about the humanitarian situation when speaking to the Biden administration, and I was wondering if you are able to comment at all on whether that seems accurate, given that he’s met with the Secretary this morning. And then I had another question about Hamas also.MR MILLER: I will not speak to the minister’s impressions, just as I would never speak to the impressions of another foreign government official coming out of one of our meetings. But I can say the Secretary was quite direct and quite frank in his conversations today about the urgency of addressing the humanitarian crisis in Gaza – both in south and central Gaza, and also in northern Gaza, as was brought to light so vividly and tragically last week with that terrible incident in northern Gaza.QUESTION: And is there any reason why he would seem surprised, given that this department and the administration have repeatedly brought up humanitarian &#8212;MR MILLER: Again, I just don’t want to speak to his impressions.QUESTION: Okay. And on Hamas: A Hamas spokesperson had spoken to the BBC, I think yesterday, and had brought up this issue of not being able to pull together a list of hostages for Israel. And given that Israel is saying that one of their – that they would – they require a list of hostages as part of a ceasefire agreement, how do you square the two? It’s a chicken-or-egg situation. Do you have any comment on Hamas saying that that’s their sticking point?MR MILLER: So I don’t want to speak – I kind of don’t want to speak to it in detail, just because I think it gets perilously close to talking about the underlying negotiations. But I will just say, speaking generally, if you are Israel and you are in discussions about an agreement where you would see the return of a certain number of hostages, it is a fair question to Hamas to show you that they can actually deliver on that deal, and show you who those hostages are, and confirm that they are alive, and confirm their status. And so we think that is very much a legitimate request by the state of Israel, to know what exactly Hamas can deliver, and what is the status of the hostages that they are holding, the hostages they have held for well over a hundred days now, and are they actually prepared to deliver them over as part of any agreement.Janne.QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. Two questions. The United States’s ultimate goal is the complete and verifiable denuclearization on North Korea. White House Senior Advisor for Asia Rapp-Hooper recently mentioned on consideration of intermediate toward North Korean denuclearization. Does this mean a change in the Biden – President Biden’s administration’s North Korean policy?MR MILLER: It does not indicate a change in policy, and I would refer you to the White House for further elaboration on those remarks.QUESTION: But it still remain this same policy?MR MILLER: Correct.QUESTION: All right. Thank you. And then secondly, regarding the ongoing U.S. and ROK joint military exercises, Kim Jong-un warned that the U.S. and South Korea will pay the price. What is your reaction?MR MILLER: It is obviously not the first time we’ve seen inflammatory rhetoric by North Korean officials. Not at all surprising, even though it is unfortunate. I will say that we – the only thing I will say is that we will continue to stand with our South Korean ally.Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Yeah, go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you. We know that Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan will be in Washington tomorrow. And the U.S. Army is building three 155mm projectile metal part lines in Texas. And the contract was awarded to General Dynamics, whose subcontractors include Turkish defense industry corporations, according to Pentagon.My question is on a very technical legal angle, actually: Does any agreement with Turks allow the U.S. to pass on these rounds to third-party countries such as Israel? Did or can Turks place a condition to prevent such a transfer of this artillery once they are in the U.S. stocks? Is any discussion on this matter expected tomorrow?MR MILLER: I would defer that question to my colleagues at the Pentagon.QUESTION: I did that, actually.MR MILLER: As it relates to a U.S. military contract. It’s just not something we would speak to from here.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Go ahead.QUESTION: Yeah. Did – me?MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: Okay. Did you get any promising answer from Israel regarding opening more crossing points?MR MILLER: It continues to be a matter that we have pressed to them is important, and important that be – that these crossings be opened urgently, immediately. But I’m not going to speak to the conversations in any detail.QUESTION: Did you request open all the crossing points, or some of them?MR MILLER: We have requested additional crossings that be opened in the north, and I don’t want to get any more specific on that.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Go ahead. I’ll come to you next.QUESTION: Pakistan’s new prime minister, Shehbaz Sharif directed authorities to fast-track negotiations with the IMF as the nation’s $3 billion bailout program is set to end next month. Is U.S. assisting or helping Pakistan in these negotiations?MR MILLER: Let me take that back and get you an answer.QUESTION: And sir, the freedom of speech has been under assault in Pakistan in – for the last many, many months. Recently a member of Pakistan’s senate submitted a resolution demanding the ban of popular social media platforms. Do you have any comment on that?MR MILLER: So we – we support the – we support freedom of expression in Pakistan, as we do around the world. You’ve heard me in the past say from here that we condemn the partial or complete government-imposed shutdowns of internet platforms, including Twitter or X, and so we have and we will continue to emphasize the importance of respecting these fundamental freedoms during our engagements with Pakistani officials.Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you so much. Last two weeks, Saudi Arabia hosted very high-level engagements, hosted Russian State Duma chairman and then Ukrainian President Zelenskyy for the – possibly for a ceasefire or hostages’ release. So the U.S. was on board at any level in these talks, or it is something – Ukraine is looking at Saudi Arabia as it is OPEC member and having more influence with Russia?And a couple of days ago, we also see that OPEC announced another energy cut, like oil production cut. So what is U.S. observation on this?MR MILLER: So I don’t have any comment on the question with respect to OPEC. With respect to the meetings between Ukraine and Saudi Arabia, we have supported Ukraine’s push to garner international support for its peace formula and have been encouraged by the discussions between Ukraine and Saudi Arabia in that respect.QUESTION: And secondly &#8212;MR MILLER: Wait. Go ahead.QUESTION: Secondly, Congressman Greg Casar and, like, 30 U.S. congressmen wrote a letter to President Biden and State Department, mentioning Secretary Blinken, to uphold the recognition of a new government in Pakistan as irregularities – with the demand of irregularities investigations. So from our very last interview, Congressman Greg Casar said that U.S. Department of State is due to respond. So last day we see that United States Embassy in Pakistan, they congratulated new government, and then State Department also issued a statement, and there is still the investigations that U.S. demanded before are due from the Pakistani side. So what is your response specifically for the Congressman Greg Casar letter? Do State Department have prepared it to respond? What is the position?MR MILLER: So a few things. Number one, there was a competitive election in Pakistan. Millions and millions of people made their voices heard. A new government has been formed and we will of course work with that government. At the same time, there were reported irregularities. There have been challenges brought by political parties to the results and we want to see those challenges and those irregularities fully investigated.Shaun, go ahead.QUESTION: Can I stay in South Asia, Maldives? Maldives has announced a defense agreement with China. This, of course, is after they asked the Indian troops to leave. Does the United States have anything to say about this, have any concerns about Maldives’ tilt and what a potential Chinese military presence &#8212;MR MILLER: I’ll have to take that one back and get you a (inaudible). I hadn’t seen that.QUESTION: Can we stick with island nations for 800?MR MILLER: I don’t know. Shaun, yield the floor?QUESTION: Haiti?QUESTION: Yes.MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: Okay. I was going to go – well, go ahead.QUESTION: Well, half an island, at least. Part of an island.MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: On Hispaniola, on the western side of &#8212;MR MILLER: He thundered. Right.QUESTION: Western side of Hispaniola – the situation in Haiti seems to be getting worse. And I’m wondering what your current understanding of things are there and where the prime minister is and if he can get back.MR MILLER: So as I said yesterday, we are monitoring Haiti’s rapidly deteriorating security situation with grave concern. We are working with international partners and Congress to provide immediate support to the Haitian National Police and expedite the deployment of the multinational security support mission that will help restore security urgently. And I’ll just reiterate what we said previously: We urge all actors to put the people of Haiti first, stop the violence, and make the necessary concessions to allow for inclusive governance, free and fair elections, and the restoration of democracy. And with respect to the whereabouts of Prime Minister Henry, I will let prime – the prime minister speak to those.QUESTION: Well, he seems somewhat indisposed at the moment.MR MILLER: So &#8212;QUESTION: Is he in the United States?MR MILLER: So we have remained in close contact with senior Haitian Government officials, and I &#8212;QUESTION: Okay. So then you know where he is. Is he in the United States?MR MILLER: And I will – but I – I will let the prime minister speak to his own whereabouts.QUESTION: Can I follow up?MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: Just taking that, there’s – some of the gang leaders, one of them nicknamed Barbeque – I forget his – anyways, he’s saying that basically the prime minister should be out, that there should be – there shouldn’t – there should be a change of leadership in Haiti. What does the United States feel about this? Does it still have confidence in Prime Minister Henry’s ability to lead? What about the election call in Haiti? Do you have a comment on the timeline?MR MILLER: So I’ll just reiterate what I said a moment ago, which is that we all – urge all actors to put the people of Haiti first, stop the violence – that would of course include these gangs that are responsible for the recent violence – and make the necessary concessions to allow for inclusive governance, free and fair elections, and the restoration of democracy.Go ahead.QUESTION: Another island?MR MILLER: Oh yeah. Go ahead.QUESTION: An archipelago.MR MILLER: Archipelago. I’m searching my mind.QUESTION: Hawaii. Hawaii.MR MILLER: Yeah. I don’t comment on domestic matters, Matt.QUESTION: The tensions between the Philippines and China over the South China Sea – Philippines summoned China’s deputy chief of mission in Manila to protest what it called aggressive actions by Chinese naval forces. Are you in discussions with the Philippines about this? Is there a possibility that these kind of actions could trigger the U.S. Mutual Defense Treaty with the Philippines?MR MILLER: So we are in discussions with the Philippines about this matter. The latest actions, which are just the most recent in a series of provocative actions by the PRC, demonstrate once again a reckless disregard by the PRC for the safety of Filipinos and also for international law. By impeding the safe operation of Philippine vessels carrying provisions to Filipino servicemembers stationed at Second Thomas Shoal, the PRC interfered in lawful Philippine maritime operations and in Philippine vessels’ exercise of high-speed – of high-seas freedom of navigation. And I will just say that the United States stands with our Philippine allies in the face of these dangerous and unlawful actions.And with respect to your question, Article IV of the 1951 U.S.-Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty extends to armed attacks on Philippine armed forces, public vessels, or aircraft, including those of its coast guard, anywhere in the South China Sea.QUESTION: Does this constitute – do these constitute armed attacks? I think it was &#8212;MR MILLER: I &#8212;QUESTION: &#8212; with water cannon and collisions of boats, but &#8212;MR MILLER: I’m not going to speculate or get out ahead of any discussions with – in this regard.Go ahead.QUESTION: Thanks, Matt. I have a question, actually, about a statement from a group of UN experts today. Among the things that they said are that 15 children have died of starvation at Kamal Adwan Hospital in northern Gaza, appearing to corroborate earlier reporting from the Gaza-based health ministry. Does the administration hold Israel responsible for these deaths? And I’ll have a follow-up.MR MILLER: So the situation – thank you for announcing your follow-up at the beginning. The situation is clearly horrific in Gaza. I spoke to this somewhat yesterday where – when I said that there are far too many families – and you can see it when you looked at this video last week of these people running out at 4:30 in the morning to try to storm a convoy because they don’t know where their next meal is going to come from. And I think there are far too many families, parents – I feel this acutely, as I’m sure a number of people in this room who are parents do – parents don’t know if they’re going to feed – be able to feed their children, or when they’re going to feed their children. And I’m sure there are many parents who were skipping meals to take what limited food they have and give it to their children.So the deaths of any children are unacceptable, and we have made that clear to the Government of Israel. And when it comes to responsibility, look, Hamas obviously is responsible for starting this war and hiding behind human shields and using civilians as a tool in this conflict, but Israel needs to do more to ensure that food gets in to address the very real, dire humanitarian needs of the Palestinian people.QUESTION: Well, those same experts in that statement said – and I’m going to quote here – “Israel systematically denies and restricts the entry of humanitarian aid into Gaza by intercepting deliveries at checkpoints, bombing humanitarian convoys and shooting at civilians seeking humanitarian assistance.” Is that an assessment with which you agree?MR MILLER: So they – clearly they – Israel is letting humanitarian assistance go in through checkpoints. I don’t think anyone would dispute that. Do they need to let more go in? Yes, absolutely they do. Do they need to do more to deconflict to ensure that people who are trying to get access to food and water – yes, of course they do, and that’s something we continue to be in conversations with them about.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Go ahead.QUESTION: I have two questions. The main goal it seems, like, that eliminating Hamas from Gaza and destroying their ability to continue existing there. And as my colleague indicated, after five months we have famine and starvation, 30,000 killed, most of them kids and women. Do you believe that is a fair price for eliminating Hamas? This is my first question.MR MILLER: No, and we do not want to see any civilian killed. We have made that absolutely clear. We want to see Israel do more to protect civilians, we want to do – see Israel do more to keep civilians out of harm’s way, and we want to see them do more to allow humanitarian assistance to come in.QUESTION: So it’s not fair price?MR MILLER: So I think you look at the – I mean, you’re looking at it the wrong way. There is no level of civilian deaths that are acceptable. Now, Israel’s facing a difficult military situation because, as I said, Hamas continues to hide behind human shields, and Hamas launched this war knowing full-scale the response that it would provoke and that humans would be put in the crossfire, and they did it anyway.Now, that doesn’t alleviate Israel’s burden. We don’t want to see a single civilian killed, and Hamas not only could end this war by laying down its arms; Hamas could agree to a ceasefire today that would alleviate this suffering, and they have not agreed to do that.QUESTION: Okay, this leads to the second question.MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: Have you ever considered to let civilian people move from Gaza to Israel and have citizenship – like indigenous people, like same scenario in the U.S.A. – indigenous people move to the – their former occupied land and have a citizenship like indigenous people in the U.S. historically, and they have a full citizenship?MR MILLER: So &#8212;QUESTION: They are civilian. You care about civilian. You are – you have a very good, kind heart toward these kids and women and other civilian people. Why you don’t let them move to the Israel and have a full citizenship and live as a &#8212;MR MILLER: So what we have heard over and over again from leaders in the region, including from leaders of the Palestinian people, is that they do not want to see the forced displacement of Palestinian people from their homes.Go ahead.QUESTION: I want to go back to the hostage deal. You mentioned that the list that Israel is asking for is legitimate and Hamas should provide that list for hostages. The question is: Is this then the sticking point that is preventing the hostage deal from moving forward and getting finalized?MR MILLER: I’m not – I’m not going to get into underlying conversations and negotiations.QUESTION: But you agree with Israel that this list has to be provided?MR MILLER: I – we agree that it’s a legitimate request when you’re in negotiation about the return of hostages to actually see a list of what hostages would return. Absolutely.QUESTION: But how can Hamas possibly provide that kind of list without having some sort of a ceasefire? Because those hostages are not with Hamas, not all of them at least. Some of them are with other factions.MR MILLER: So &#8212;QUESTION: And there is a need for some sort of truce so that Hamas can &#8212;MR MILLER: So &#8212;QUESTION: &#8212; basically search for them and find them.MR MILLER: I think that is a question for Hamas, not for the United States. They took these hostages.QUESTION: No, but I mean &#8212;MR MILLER: They can – hold on. They took these hostages; they continue to hold them. And if they continue to hold them, they must know where they are.QUESTION: Not all of them. This is clear. I mean, they’re a big group &#8212;MR MILLER: I have heard Hamas – I have heard Hamas say that. But look, if they are going to be &#8212;QUESTION: So you don’t believe what Hamas &#8212;MR MILLER: If they are – no, I’m not saying – if they are going to be &#8212;QUESTION: Okay.MR MILLER: If they are going to agree to a deal that would include the release of hostages, it is certainly a legitimate question for Israel to ask which hostages are they agreeing to turn over.Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you. Russian President Vladimir Putin last week said that it’s hypocritical the United States to call on Russia to resume the Strategic Stability Dialogue, while Washington is doing everything possible to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia on the battlefield in Ukraine. Do you actually believe that it’s time for a strategic dialogue?MR MILLER: So I don’t have any update to the – to the statements that we have already made with respect to strategic dialogue. But when it comes to the strategic failure that Russia has achieved in Ukraine, there are two reasons for that. Number one are the costs that – let me say reasons – number one, the cost that the Ukrainian military has imposed through their dedication and their bravery to repel Russian aggression; number two, to the international coalition that the United States has assembled to support Ukraine and hold Russia accountable; and number three, it’s Vladimir Putin’s own miscalculations and own callousness to the tens of thousands of Russian soldiers that he sent to an early grave by launching this war in the first place.QUESTION: And U.S. Ambassador to Russia Lynne Tracy said today that the U.S. Embassy is discussing with Russian – with the Russian Government the possibility of resuming some consular services at the – at the U.S. Embassy in Moscow, including issuing visas to Russian citizens. Can you confirm that?MR MILLER: I don’t have any update on her comments. Go here and then we’ll wrap up for today.QUESTION: (Off-mike.)MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: Can you give us at least other highlights of the Turkish foreign minister visit in terms of U.S.-Türkiye Strategic Mechanism meetings? And does the U.S. anticipate the exclusion of Türkiye from the CAATSA sanctions? And when will we know the approximate delivery length of the F-16s?MR MILLER: I do not want to get into any of those matters in advance – I’ll just say as a general rule we would prefer to wait until after a meeting – have the private conversation first, and then talk about matters that were discussed after the fact. With that, we’ll wrap for today.Thanks everyone.QUESTION: Thank you.(The briefing was concluded at 1:52 p.m.)						Tags																					China																								Haiti																								Hungary																								Israel																								North Korea																								Office of the Spokesperson																								Pakistan																								Palestinian Territories																								Philippines																								Russia																								Saudi Arabia																								South Korea																								Sweden																								Turkey																								Ukraine
- Department Press Briefing – February 26, 2024 HomeDepartment Press Briefing &#8211; February 26, 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 &#8211; February 26, 2024																																																					February 26, 2024																																																								1:20 p.m. ESTMR MILLER: Good afternoon, everyone. Thanks for being here. Happy Monday. Matt, you want to start us off?QUESTION: You have nothing to say at the top?MR MILLER: Do you want me to step – do you want me to &#8212;QUESTION: You don’t want to say anything about NATO expansion?MR MILLER: Do you want me to step out for a minute to give you a second to start your recording, which is what I think you’re doing? Stalling for time?QUESTION: Well, no. I was just wondering if you don’t have anything to say about Sweden and Hungary and &#8212;MR MILLER: We certainly welcome the – we certainly do welcome the vote in the Hungarian parliament today and look forward to it being finalized, and are ready to receive the instruments here in Washington and welcome Sweden as the 32nd member of NATO.QUESTION: Okay. But so you’re waiting for the formal &#8212;MR MILLER: Yeah. We’ll wait for the formal process to conclude. The Hungarian parliament voted, but that’s not the end of the process. They have to formally – as I think you remember with the Turkish vote a few weeks ago, they have to formally present the instrument here, and then we deposit it in our vault for it to be final.QUESTION: Right. And of course you know that that has not yet &#8212;MR MILLER: Has – it has not yet been finalized, and certainly hasn’t been presented to us.QUESTION: And do you know if that’s going to happen today?MR MILLER: I do not anticipate it happening today.QUESTION: Okay.MR MILLER: I think there are still a couple of formalities that need to take place inside Hungary before they can be presented to us.QUESTION: Okay. And then just one other one, which is kind of way off – way off-topic. But you’ve – I’m sure you’ve seen the reports about this guy, Alexander Smirnov, Israeli-U.S. dual citizen, who’s the guy who is an FBI informant and he has just been ordered jailed.MR MILLER: Oh, yeah, right.QUESTION: The only reason I’m asking about it here is that he is a dual citizen, so I’m just wondering if there’s been any contact, but with the – between the Israelis and you about consular access or anything like that.MR MILLER: I’m not aware of any. I’ll have to check and see. I don’t know.QUESTION: Okay. Thanks.MR MILLER: Humeyra.QUESTION: Hi, Matt. So I just want to ask about this thing about Navalny. One of his – a close ally of him basically said he was close to being freed in a prisoner swap. I mean, is there anything you can tell us about that? The U.S. did put forward a substantial proposal; I think it was – you made it public in early December. Was he part of that?MR MILLER: We put forward a proposal in early December to secure the release of Paul Whelan and Evan Gershkovich, as we said at the time. I have always made it a practice from this podium – and I think you’ve seen it across the United States Government – not to comment on the details of our negotiations or the details of our work to try to secure the release of prisoners in Russia or in other countries. All I will say about this matter is that we have long called for the release of Aleksey Navalny, and that was our position on the matter.QUESTION: Do you also – does the U.S. Government also agree with the assessment of this ally that he was killed because he was close to being freed in a prisoner swap?MR MILLER: I think – so I do not have any assessment on that – I don’t have any comment on that specific assessment. As we have said, we believe that Vladimir Putin and the Russian Government are responsible for his death. But I couldn’t comment beyond that.QUESTION: I have other questions, but if anybody else &#8212;MR MILLER: Do other people want to do Navalny? Yeah, yeah, go ahead.QUESTION: If I could follow up on that. Just to understand how this works, is it at all possible for the U.S. Government to discuss a prisoner swap on his behalf without designating him wrongfully detained?MR MILLER: I don’t want to try to get into a hypothetical that’s going to, by necessity, implicate me commenting on a specific situation. As I said, I’m not going to do so. I’m going to refrain from – I’m just going to refrain from commenting on any aspect of negotiations to secure the release of anyone around the world.QUESTION: I’m sorry. Can I – this is – the question &#8212;MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: &#8212; contains a premise that I don’t think is accurate. Is there any authority under which the U.S. can make a determination that a &#8212;MR MILLER: No.QUESTION: &#8212; non-U.S. citizen is wrongfully detained?MR MILLER: No, but I took Alex’s question to be can we try to secure the release of people who are non-U.S. citizens, which of course – well, maybe I misunderstood – which of course we can. But we – the wrongful detention statute only applies to U.S. citizens and other U.S. nationals.QUESTION: I mean, there’s – as you know, there’s Levinson Act that actually expands beyond the U.S. citizens (inaudible) &#8212;MR MILLER: To U.S. nationals, right, of which he was not.QUESTION: Please come back to me.QUESTION: Can I &#8212;MR MILLER: Go ahead, yeah.QUESTION: I understand there were some early discussions on this front involving a potential swap for Navalny and U.S. citizens. Is there anything you can say about that &#8212;MR MILLER: I’m just not going to speak &#8212;QUESTION: &#8212; and when these conversations were happening?MR MILLER: I’m not going to speak to either internal deliberations or our work to secure the release of people held overseas. As I said, we had long called for Aleksey Navalny’s release.QUESTION: And were there any conversations with the Germans on a &#8212;MR MILLER: I’m just not going to speak to our conversations with any of our diplomatic partners about the work that we do to try to secure the release of wrongfully detained Americans or others held around the world.QUESTION: But you don’t deny it, that there – I mean &#8212;MR MILLER: I did not deny it, but I didn’t confirm it. I didn’t comment on it one way or the other. And you can read or not read whatever you want; sometimes people read things into that, mistakenly. But no, I didn’t comment on it at all.QUESTION: Have you put forward any additional proposals to the Russians for the release of the Americans since that initial one you spoke about a couple of months or so ago?MR MILLER: Our work to try to secure the release of Evan Gershkovich and Paul Whelan continues. It’s something we are working on every day, trying to figure out the best way to secure their release. As it pertains to any further proposals or any further conversations, I just don’t have anything to announce today. As I said, there are times when we feel it’s in our interest to make public – or in the interest of the work we’re trying to do to make public – certain details. But beyond that, we typically try not to comment at all because we don’t want to jeopardize the status of what are very – the very sensitive work that we’re doing to try to secure their release.QUESTION: Can I follow up on this?QUESTION: Staying on Navalny &#8212;MR MILLER: Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Is this – let me – is this Navalny?QUESTION: Ukraine.MR MILLER: Let me go – let me just close out on Navalny and I’ll come to you next.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Go ahead.QUESTION: It’s not related to the hostages but it’s related to Navalny, the question being: Has the U.S. come to a determination at all as to whether the death of Navalny was coincidental or a concerted effort by the Kremlin?MR MILLER: I don’t have any assessment to offer on the circumstances surrounding his death other than that the Russian Government is responsible for it.QUESTION: Is the U.S. seeking to independently come to a conclusion as to whether his death was &#8212;MR MILLER: We are always seeking more information about incidents of this nature. That’s certainly true in this – with respect to this incident, but I don’t have any assessment to offer.QUESTION: Has there been diplomatic engagement with the Russian Government to seek answers about Navalny specifically?MR MILLER: I don’t have any comment – any conversations to read out.QUESTION: Okay. Relatedly, there was – there were reports from U.S. officials that the U.S. had engaged diplomatically on the matter of the anti-satellite capability that Russia has been developing. Can you provide any update as to whether the Russians have responded to that outreach?MR MILLER: I’m not going to speak to those conversations. We do have the ability to deliver messages to Russia. We did engage in diplomatic outreach to Russia to make clear our concerns about their pursuit of an anti-satellite capability. We’ve also had concerns with allies and partners of the United States as well as – conversations with allies and partners of the United States, as well as conversations with other countries around the world who think we ought to be concerned about Russia’s pursuit of this specific capability.QUESTION: Well, does the U.S. believe that it’s making progress in altering the likely trajectory of what Russia may or may not do with this capability, either via the Russian Government or with its partners?MR MILLER: So all I will say about that – because, again, there are limits to what I can say; there’s a very limited amount of information that’s been declassified because of concerns that the Intelligence Community has about making more information public – we have had what we feel to be very productive conversations with a range of countries around the world. We think it is incumbent on other countries who share our concern to make those concerns known. We expect that they will, and I will leave it at that.QUESTION: I know Michele had a question on Navalny.MR MILLER: Yeah, go ahead.QUESTION: I just wanted to &#8212;MR MILLER: You guys are confusing me sitting far – at the back.QUESTION: I just wanted to get back to this &#8212;QUESTION: There was no room.MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: &#8212; back to this (inaudible) &#8212;MR MILLER: There’s a seat. You can come sit up front, walk and – (laughter) – go ahead. Sorry. Two – three seats up front.QUESTION: I just wanted to go back to, like, the video itself, because you say you don’t like to have – you don’t like to publicize some of these negotiations. But these guys went out very publicly today and said that there was a deal. Are they wrong?MR MILLER: Again, I don’t want to comment to any extent on this beyond what I already have. So &#8212;QUESTION: Matt, also just on this.MR MILLER: Go – I told Janne I would come to her next, so go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you. Thank you, Matt. Ukraine and Russia and North Korea – first question. Regarding Ukraine’s defense industry corruptions, has the U.S. confirmed anything about Ukraine’s internal defense industry corruption, including artillery shells?MR MILLER: So I’m not sure what specific report you’re referring to.QUESTION: Because there are reports that Ukraine is involved with the – in defense industry corruption worth tens of billions of dollars, including the – I’m sorry, including the embezzlement of hundred thousand artillery shells.MR MILLER: So I haven’t – I haven’t seen that specific report to which you’re referring. But we have long engaged in conversations with the Ukrainian Government about the need to take anti-corruption measures. We’ve seen them take a range of measures to crack down on corruption over the last couple of years. We think there’s more that we can – that they can do and we’re engaged in ongoing dialogue with them about that topic.QUESTION: Secondly, Russia is using North Korean ballistic missiles against Ukraine, as you know that. But China’s role – what role does the U.S. seek from China, which is tolerating arms trade between North Korea and Russia? And will you impose additional sanctions on China?MR MILLER: So we have made it clear to a number of countries that we think that the increased relationship when it comes to weapon-sharing between North Korea and Russia ought to be a topic of concern, that North Korea’s providing weapons to Russia for use on the battlefield in Ukraine ought to be a topic of concern, and we’ll continue to do that.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Go ahead, Humeyra, and then, Leon, I’ll come to you next, and then &#8212;QUESTION: So I’ll go to Israel. I have a couple of questions, Matt, on what Secretary said in Buenos Aires on Friday. He said the Israeli settlements are inconsistent with international law. So I’m wondering why the administration – why it took the administration three years to sort of make that point? Was that something that you guys believed at the beginning of the administration and somehow decided to wait, or you landed at this decision just last week?MR MILLER: So I’ll say two things. From a policy point of view, we have always been clear that we believe settlements are a barrier to peace and that they weaken, not strengthen, Israel’s security and position in the region. As a legal question, it is – excuse me, I still have this cough I’ve had for a week or so now – as a legal question, it is something that had been under review here at the department for some time. And as you know, the Secretary over the last several months has embarked on a process to try to ensure lasting peace in the region, to establish an independent Palestinian state, and we thought, as we were engaged in that important process, it was important to avoid any ambiguity about the U.S. position on this matter. And so that’s why he made the announcement he did on Friday.QUESTION: Right. You said that there was a review that’s been underway. Can you – can you say when that started?MR MILLER: No, we &#8212;QUESTION: Was that at the &#8212;MR MILLER: Only that we had been looking at this question for some time.QUESTION: Right. And this is – I mean, I understand what you’re saying in terms of you have said that it is an impediment to peace before. But saying that it is inconsistent with international law is like a step sort of ahead of that, beyond that. What are you trying to achieve with this? Are you expecting that this would put some additional pressure on Israel about the settlements? Because this has been an ongoing conflict, dispute between you and the Israeli Government that you just can’t seem to agree.MR MILLER: So what we are trying to achieve is the establishment of an independent Palestinian state with security guarantees for Israel. That is the ultimate policy objective that we are trying to achieve. You’ve seen the Secretary focus his diplomatic efforts on it. You’ve obviously heard me speak to that a number of times from this podium. And so we thought, as we go about that process, it was important that we be clear and avoid any ambiguity about this particular legal question.QUESTION: Would you have not said this the way Secretary said it if you have seen Israeli Government not unveil or like not have any plans to sort of add new housing units? Could this have gone in a different way?MR MILLER: It’s hard to speak to a counterfactual, but we have seen the Israeli Government announce and explore new housing settlements, and we’ve had deep concerns about those. And as you heard the Secretary say on Friday, we think the settlements that they’ve announced prior to this date, the settlements that they announced they were exploring last week, are fundamentally a barrier to peace.QUESTION: Have you given them a heads-up before? Have you spoken to them privately since then?MR MILLER: I’m sure that we’ve engaged in conversations about them. As you know, we engage in conversations with the Israeli Government at a number of different levels, but I’m not aware of any specific conversation around this.QUESTION: Matt, can I just ask you &#8212;QUESTION: Can I follow up?MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: You say that this removes ambiguity in this – but actually what it does is restores ambiguity, the ambiguity that was in the original Hansell memorandum, which doesn’t say that settlements are illegal. It says that they are inconsistent &#8212;MR MILLER: Inconsistent.QUESTION: &#8212; or illegitimate. It doesn’t use the word illegal. So I’m not sure I understand how this removes the – it restores the previous ambiguity that had existed. Why don’t you guys just come out and take a position once and for all – are settlements okay, or are they actually quote/unquote “illegal” under international law?MR MILLER: So I don’t think you should hear me saying that settlements are okay. You should see us – hear loud and clear – well, let me – hear loud and clear me saying from a policy perspective we believe they are a barrier to peace. From a legal perspective, we believe they’re inconsistent with international law.QUESTION: Yeah, but you don’t believe that they’re illegal.MR MILLER: I will let the lawyers, of which I am not, speak to the difference between those two terms if any, but on behalf of the United States, we &#8212;QUESTION: (Inaudible.)MR MILLER: &#8212; if any – we do not believe they are consistent with international law.QUESTION: Because this is the entire – the entire point of the whole – the entire point of the Hansell memorandum when it was written in 1978 – believe me, I’ve done a lot of looking into this – was that it was ambiguous; that it did not put the United States down as having a position that settlements were illegal or not illegal or totally fine, but that it was intended to show unhappiness or your disagreement with settlement policy. But the fact of the matter is, is that when you say that this announcement on Friday removes the ambiguity, I just – that doesn’t – it restores the ambiguity. Because &#8212;MR MILLER: So – I’m sorry.QUESTION: &#8212; what the previous administration did, what the previous secretary of state did, was to say that the U.S. no longer regards settlement activity, quote/unquote “per se” &#8212;MR MILLER: Per se.QUESTION: &#8212; as being inconsistent or illegitimate. That seemed to remove ambiguity. This restores the previous ambiguity. How am I wrong?MR MILLER: So I don’t find anything ambiguous about a statement from the United States that we believe the Israeli Government settlement program is inconsistent with federal law. I find that to be a very clear &#8212;QUESTION: Not federal, international &#8212;MR MILLER: &#8212; excuse me, international law, of course – a very clear, unambiguous statement. I cannot speak to the reasoning behind a memo that was written in 1978. Obviously, I was not here, but I can tell you our intention now is to be very clear about what we believe.QUESTION: Yeah, so can I &#8212;MR MILLER: Said, go ahead.QUESTION: I’m glad you mentioned 1978 because there was a lawyerly or a legal definition that was established then and so on. Plus, you guys are signatories to all the UN resolutions – 242 and so on – that basically say that settlements are illegal. So I don’t know why we – you – every so many years you feel that you have to reassert or dispel the ambiguity and so on. Let me ask you a couple &#8212;MR MILLER: You would rather we hadn’t made this statement?QUESTION: No, I’m saying you make these statements &#8212;MR MILLER: Okay. Fair.QUESTION: &#8212; all the time, especially &#8212;MR MILLER: Fair enough. I’m just &#8212;QUESTION: No, no, no. No, the statement is &#8212;MR MILLER: I’m just being clear.QUESTION: The statement is important because the previous administration basically sought to undo that.MR MILLER: Mm-hmm.QUESTION: And that’s why it is timely and it is important. I’m not saying it’s not important.I want to ask you a couple questions, but also I want to say for the record, Matt, with all sympathies with Navalny and so on, but a Palestinian prisoner has died in Israeli jails almost on weekly basis under torture. It would be – it would be great for the United States of America to say this should be unacceptable as well.MR MILLER: We – so just to be very clear, we want every prisoner, every detainee anywhere &#8212;QUESTION: Right.MR MILLER: &#8212; in the world to be treated humanely, to be treated in accordance with international law. That is not just true in Russia. It is true &#8212;QUESTION: Including – including in Israeli prison?MR MILLER: Hold on, Said, just let me finish. And I will say what I – what I have to say. As I was going to say, is that’s true in Russia, it’s true in Israel, it’s true everywhere in the world.QUESTION: Okay, excellent. Let me ask you about Samaher Esmail, the Palestinian American woman that was arrested early in February. Can you update us to any new development of this case?MR MILLER: So I will say that we have obtained consular access and have – officials from our embassy have met with her. We are in contact with her and her family. We are providing all appropriate consular assistance, as we always do in these cases. There’s not a lot I can say about the case. It remains a legal matter, but we are in contact with her – her and her family.QUESTION: Yeah, but she was apparently arrested for a Facebook post, I mean, nothing else. Let me ask you about the humanitarian situation in Gaza. It seems that Israel is doing everything possible to hinder the entry of the humanitarian assistance into Gaza by denying visas for humanitarian workers, by shooting policemen that try to organize these things and so on. So – so what are you doing to facilitate these human – human assistance shipments and so on? I mean, kids are coming out and saying we want a piece of bread. I mean, it’s really – it’s hard to imagine this is happening in the 21st century.MR MILLER: So let me say a few things about that. First, as I’ve said a number of times, we continue to be at the forefront of advocating for increased, sustained humanitarian assistance to benefit innocent Palestinian in Gaza. We continue to be the largest humanitarian donor to the Palestinian people.With respect to two specific points you raise there, first the delivery of humanitarian assistance inside Gaza, which right now is a difficult situation – so you have had this situation where the – the problem right now is not just getting humanitarian assistance into Gaza through either Rafah or Kerem Shalom, but getting it distributed inside Gaza, because of a lack of ability to secure shipments. There is a problem in that the police that were providing security to those shipments inside Gaza, some of them are members of Hamas; some of them are not. And so Israel does have a legitimate right to try to hold members of Hamas accountable as part of the ongoing military operation that they’re conducting.But at the same time, we want to see the ability of shipments to be safely delivered inside Gaza and not looted by criminal gangs and others. So that’s a matter that we are in ongoing conversation with both the Government of Israel and our humanitarian partners on the ground about how to solve. It is a live question that we are dealing with every day. We haven’t reached a solution yet, but it’s something we’re actively engaged on – because it’s important not just that the humanitarian assistance get into Gaza, but that it get to the people that need it.With respect to the second question that you raised, as it pertains to visa, so our position is clear: it’s that all regional governments must do what is necessary to enable this humanitarian response. That includes allowing international staff the freedom of movement to ramp up and help the response, and we hope all governments in the region will rapidly approve all requested visas for UN and INGO workers in an expeditious fashion.QUESTION: Lastly, yesterday the Israeli prime minister told Face the Nation that any deal or any pause would only delay entry into Rafah. Do you have any comment on that?MR MILLER: So I don’t want to speak to a hypothetical. Because right now, we are trying to secure a pause that would get hostages out, that would get humanitarian assistance in, and would greatly alleviate the suffering of the Palestinian people. What happens after that? I think it’s too early to say. We are focused right now on trying to achieve that pause. We’ve had various officials from the United States Government engage in conversations last week and over the weekend to try to secure it. We think a deal is possible. We think a deal can be reached, and ultimately that’s where we’re focusing our efforts.QUESTION: Can I follow on that (inaudible) &#8212;MR MILLER: Leon. I told Leon I’d come to him.QUESTION: Yeah.QUESTION: (Off-mike.)MR MILLER: I’ll come to you next.QUESTION: I’m just – I’m interested to hear what your take is – your reaction on the government of the Palestinian Authority which has resigned. That resignation has been accepted by President Abbas. How do you see that? Do you welcome that? Do you think it’s a first step to – towards a reform? And who would you support as a future government?MR MILLER: So with respect to both the resignation and a future government, ultimately the leadership of the Palestinian Authority is a question for the Palestinians themselves to decide. It’s not a matter that I’m going to comment on from here. But we do welcome steps for the PA to reform and revitalize itself. The Secretary has encouraged the PA to take those steps in – when he’s been in conversations with President Abbas and others when we’ve traveled to Ramallah. That’s something you’ve heard this President speak to, and it’s something that we will continue to pursue. We think those steps are positive; we think they’re important – an important step to achieving a reunited Gaza and West Bank under the Palestinian Authority, so we will continue to encourage them to take those steps.QUESTION: So you think they’re – the actual resignation is a step in that direction?MR MILLER: Again, I don’t want to speak to the actual resignation, because when it comes to personnel matters, those are questions that should be left to the Palestinians. But we have been engaged with them on the need to reform and revitalize the government, and we have seen them start to take steps in that direction, and we welcome them.QUESTION: But again, you say you don’t want to comment on specific resignations, but then you – but then you welcome it.MR MILLER: I – we are welcoming steps towards PA reform. There have been a &#8212;QUESTION: Okay, so they – are the resignations part of the steps towards – toward reform?MR MILLER: The – so I – I suspected you might ask &#8212;QUESTION: I mean, come on. What’s &#8212;MR MILLER: I just don’t want to speak &#8212;QUESTION: We’re not idiots here.MR MILLER: I just don’t want to speak to – I’m well aware of that, Matt. (Laughter.) I don’t want to speak to a personnel matter. But I think you have seen &#8212;QUESTION: It’s not just the personnel.QUESTION: It’s not a personnel (inaudible) &#8212;MR MILLER: I understand, a government matter. When it comes to the personnel who are leading the government, it’s not something we have ever wanted to speak to. But &#8212;QUESTION: Well, I know.MR MILLER: But – but &#8212;QUESTION: But then – then you say that, and then you come out and say &#8212;MR MILLER: Let me finish.QUESTION: &#8212; well, this is a good thing.MR MILLER: President Abbas has said he is going to take steps towards reforming and revitalizing the Palestinian Authority. He has said that directly to the Secretary, and we welcome him taking those steps.QUESTION: So you welcome him bringing in fresh blood?MR MILLER: We certainly would welcome a revitalized, reformed Palestinian Authority.Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you.QUESTION: But not to comment on the actual resignation in any way. (Laughter.)MR MILLER: Go ahead, Nadiya.QUESTION: Allow me just &#8212;MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: &#8212; one last thing on this. You think it was necessary for the government to resign in order to move forward?MR MILLER: That I am not – that I am not going to comment on. I will let the Palestinian Authority speak to that. I don’t think it’s appropriate for me to comment on that from here.Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. Two questions, one to follow up on Said’s question. So you’re aware that the UN humanitarian organizations in Gaza said that 85,000 Gazans could die as a result of starvation, disease, or bombing. So what practically can the administration do to alter this reality? So you want to be seen as literally repeating rhetoric when you said we asked the Israelis to allow human aid organization to expedite the visas, to allow trucks to come, et cetera, so that these things on the ground does not happen?MR MILLER: So &#8212;QUESTION: So can we make sure that these people won’t face this death either by starvation or by disease?MR MILLER: So there are two incredibly important things we are trying to pursue to alleviate the suffering of the  people. One is, as I said, to increase the flow of humanitarian assistance into Gaza, to make sure it’s sustained, and to break down any obstacles to it actually being delivered to those who are in need. But there is a second – and that work ongoing. It’s something we’ve been working on for some time. And there – as you know, we are involved at a really kind of granular, technical level with the Government of Egypt, the Government of Israel, and international partners in the region, and have been engaged with it really since the immediate days after October 7th.But there is another way that we could help alleviate the suffering of the Palestinian people, and that is to achieve a humanitarian pause that would allow more humanitarian assistance to come into Gaza and would allow more humanitarian assistance to get to those who need. It would allow people better freedom of movement to move around Gaza and get to humanitarian assistance. And we have worked with the governments of Egypt and Israel and Qatar to achieve such a proposal, and we need Hamas to say yes. And so if Hamas wants to alleviate the suffering of the Palestinian people, they could agree to the proposal that we have put forward to achieve a humanitarian pause and get more humanitarian assistance in.So when I see people calling for more to be done to allow humanitarian assistance in, we fundamentally agree with that. And everyone in the United States Government that is responsible for this brief is working on it, but Hamas plays a role too. And they &#8212;QUESTION: So Hamas is &#8212;MR MILLER: Hamas – I’d say Hamas plays a role too, and the people that are calling for us to do more should be calling for Hamas to get out of the way and allow more humanitarian assistance to come in as well.QUESTION: You think the Netanyahu government is fine with all the conditions that will allow the humanitarian aid to come in?MR MILLER: There are issues that we have to work through with the Government of Israel all the time, and we’ve been quite clear. I’ve spoken to them from this podium a number of times. The Secretary has spoken to them. I’m just saying that’s not the only impediment to humanitarian assistance getting in. If Hamas would agree to a humanitarian pause, a temporary ceasefire, that would go a long ways to alleviating the immediate suffering of the Palestinian people.QUESTION: Okay. My second question is the Secretary was asked during the trip to comment about the Netanyahu plan for Gaza, and he said he’s not going to comment because he haven’t seen it. So the U.S. Government has not seen it officially. The White House dismissed it somehow as disagreement among friends. This plan – I’m sure you’ve seen it; not officially, but you read about it – fundamentally clashes with everything that administration calling, including just now when you talk about two-state solution. So is really the two-state solution a mirage, considering Netanyahu himself and his government don’t believe in it at all? So who are you going to implement it with?MR MILLER: So with respect to the plan, first of all, again, we have not – you’re right that we have not engaged with the Government of Israel. We’ve seen press reporting, but we haven’t sat down to have a detailed – had a detailed conversation with the Government of Israel about this plan yet, so I will refrain from a specific comment until we have had the chance to do so.But we have been very clear about what our position is with respect to the governance of Gaza moving forward, when it comes to questions about the reoccupation of Gaza and the reduction or potential reduction of any territory of Gaza. And we’ll continue to be very clear about that publicly and privately.And when it comes to this question of the two – of two states, all we can do – and you’ve heard me say this before – is present our vision for peace and security in the Middle East, and make clear to the Government of Israel and make clear to the people of Israel that there is a path forward for lasting security, for better relations with Israel’s neighbors, and they have to take it. And if they are ready to do it, we are ready to work with them on how to achieve that vision.QUESTION: But you have so many – you have so many tools – just the last – my last follow-up, sorry.MR MILLER: Go – yeah.QUESTION: But you have so much leverage over the Israelis, and this is fundamental vision of the President. So you can use all the leverage you want, including weapons that you sell to Israel &#8212;MR MILLER: So &#8212;QUESTION: &#8212; to make sure that this plan is on the – at least on the right path for implementation, considering we have, like, short time between now and November.MR MILLER: So one thing I will say about that that people often tend to forget is that Israel, like other countries in the region, is a sovereign country that makes its own decisions. The United States does not dictate to Israel what it must do, just as we don’t dictate to any country what it must do. We present what we believe are the &#8212;QUESTION: Unless you invade them.MR MILLER: We present what we believe are the – (laughter). Good one, Matt.QUESTION: Well, sorry &#8212;MR MILLER: No, I mean – but come on. Yeah. We present standup hour at the – in the briefing room. We present what we believe are the best proposals to achieve peace and security, and we will continue to do that. But Israel has to make its own decisions, just as every sovereign independent country has to make its own decisions.QUESTION: Can I just ask what did you say – what did you mean you mean when you just said to – that they have to take it?MR MILLER: They have to – it doesn’t mean that they have to take it in that we can dictate to them. What I meant by “they have to take it” is we can present all the options in the world; we can’t control whether they take it or not.QUESTION: Okay.MR MILLER: Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. A question about today’s meeting between Secretary Blinken and the KRG prime minister. Why this meeting has happened at this time? Is there any connection between this invitation to the KRG prime minister and your discussion with the Iraqi Government about the evolution and the future of your forces in Iraq?MR MILLER: So with respect to that meeting, the Secretary and the prime minister today underscored the importance of the U.S. partnership with the Iraqi Kurdistan Region in the context of their mutual enduring commitment to regional security and their shared values, including good governance and respect for human rights. Secretary Blinken expressed support for constructive collaboration between the Iraqi Government and the KRG as well as greater unity within the IKR to advance stability and economic prosperity for all of Iraq’s people.This is not the first time the Secretary has met with the prime minister; we have done so in other contexts. With respect to the timing of the meeting, there’s nothing more about it than that we wanted to continue the conversations we’ve had.QUESTION: And you talked about the unity among the Kurds, and Secretary Blinken in his remarks said at the beginning of the meeting he touched that issue too. What concerns do you have about the unity among the Kurds?MR MILLER: I don’t want to speak to that beyond what the Secretary said in his remarks.Go ahead.QUESTION: Thanks, Matt. Appreciate it. I wanted to circle back to the question that Said asked about the American woman detained in the West Bank and as well as the two brothers in Gaza. I know you are constantly doing assessments. Are you entertaining the possibility that these three or – and any other Americans detained by Israel post October 7th may be detained unlawfully or wrongfully detained?MR MILLER: I don’t have – I don’t have any ability to offer that assessment at this point. We did meet with the two brothers today. We received consular access to them. Officials from our embassy in Jerusalem met with these two brothers at a detention facility inside Israel. We had been in contact with their family. This was our first time to speak directly to the two brothers, and so I don’t have any assessment to offer about their case other than that, as is true for all Americans in Israel or anywhere around the world, their safety and security is our first priority.QUESTION: But like you often say when Americans are detained, say in Russia, I mean, that it’s something – I know – is there – there’s a process that you go through to establish that?MR MILLER: There is a process that we go through, but we are just at the beginning stages of gathering information about these individual cases. We just met with the first detainee you mentioned last week. We just met with the two brothers today. So we’re nowhere near making that determination.Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you. My question is on Mexico. Has there been any engagement with the Mexican Government about the president of Mexico’s decision to publicly broadcast the cell phone number of a New York Times reporter? In the end she’s an American citizen, and U.S. press groups have called this action as dangerous.MR MILLER: So I don’t have any diplomatic conversations to read out, but you might have heard the White House press secretary speak to this question on Friday. We support the independent free press when it does its work around the world. That includes in Mexico, includes any country in the world, and we wouldn’t want to see any action taken that would jeopardize any individual or any reporter’s safety.Alex, go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. Going back – going back to &#8212;MR MILLER: Then I’m come to Jen and then Guita.QUESTION: Thank you. Going back to Russia, does the department have any position on Russia’s forthcoming presidential election given the events of past couple weeks – not only murdering of Navalny but also they didn’t let the main challenger, Nadezhdin &#8212;MR MILLER: Well, I don’t think it should be a surprise to anyone in the world that this will not be a free and fair election.QUESTION: And on hostages, if I may, do you have any reaction to criticism that – coming from different corners – from the Hill, from other branches of government – saying that your approach towards dual citizens actually does embolden folks like Putin to go after more dual citizens. When the Secretary last year promised that the State Department will consider Kara-Murza designation as wrongfully detained, it was a year ago. Now you have more and more U.S. and dual citizens who have been arrested in Russia. Do you see any connection there? Because the criticism that your &#8212;MR MILLER: I do not. All I’ll say – sometimes I get this question about dual citizens – we don’t see – we don’t look at dual citizens differently than any other citizen. An American is an American, and we try to do what we can to ensure the safety and security of every American overseas.Jen and then Guita and then Olivia. Go ahead.QUESTION: Matt, I know you don’t typically comment on hostage negotiations, but any comment on the discussions in Qatar today? We understand there has been some movement on the Hamas position that’s positive. Do you have anything on this?MR MILLER: I don’t want to offer any comment other than what I said a moment ago, which is we did make progress in these conversations over the weekend and in the last few days. We continue to believe that a deal is possible and we are going to continue to pursue it.QUESTION: And do you have any updates on the Americans who are believed to be hostages? Is it still your assessment that there are six?MR MILLER: It’s still our assessment that it’s six, and I don’t have any information about their condition, unfortunately.QUESTION: And then separately, there is an IAEA report that just came out saying that the Iranian of near-bomb-grade uranium has fallen. Do you have any comment or confirmation on this?MR MILLER: So my understanding is that report has not been made public, and so I don’t have any comments on reports that have not been made public. But we remain seriously concerned about Iran’s continued expansion of its nuclear program in ways that have no credible civilian purpose, including its continued production of highly enriched uranium. And we appreciate the IAEA’s extensive efforts to engage Iran on longstanding questions to – related to Iran’s safeguard obligations.Guita, go ahead.QUESTION: Syrian Observatory has reported that there was a missile attack on the U.S. base in the – in Syria’s Koniko gas field yesterday, and then today there was an attack on a fuel tanker of the Syrian Democratic Forces and, it says, likely by ISIS. Now, the U.S. forces are in Syria in that area to control the resurgence of ISIS. I was wondering if the administration has seen any kind of a collaboration between ISIS and the Iranian-backed forces over there, the militia, post October 7th attack on Israel.MR MILLER: So I’m not aware of any reports or assessments of such collaboration. I’m happy to take that back and get you a more detailed answer. And with respect to the attack, I would refer to my colleagues at the Pentagon.Olivia.QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. Just to clarify, has the U.S. received any update on the military or humanitarian plan for Rafah from the Israeli Government?MR MILLER: We have not.QUESTION: Okay. So &#8212;MR MILLER: We have not. We’ve seen the comments from the prime minister that he only received them I think last night. We have not yet been briefed on them, unless there have been some preliminary conversations at the embassy level in Jerusalem I’m not aware of. But we have not received any kind of detailed briefing at this point.QUESTION: The prime minister mentioned as part of that plan the potential of moving citizens from Rafah north, north of Rafah. Understanding you haven’t seen the plan, even in the abstract, does that sound like a conceivable plan for 1.4 million people?MR MILLER: I don’t think I should comment on the abstract before we see a detailed plan.QUESTION: And sorry, just to revisit something that Said raised, which is the prime minister publicly saying that Rafah – an operation in Rafah will continue whether or not a hostage deal is reached, doesn’t that disincentivize Hamas from signing on to something that is predicated on a sustained ceasefire?MR MILLER: I think Hamas should want to sign on to this deal because they want to see a humanitarian pause that allows more humanitarian assistance to move in to people in Gaza so ‐-QUESTION: Do they?MR MILLER: They should. I said they should. I said they ought to want to see that. So when it comes to Hamas’s incentives, I – far be it from me to offer assessments about what incentivize them and – incentivizes them and what doesn’t, but I would think if they truly cared about the Palestinian people, they should agree to the deal that is on the table because it will greatly alleviate the suffering of those Palestinian people.QUESTION: Last one.MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: Just on the prime minister’s comments, he said that after the Rafah operation, total victory would be weeks away, not months away. Based on the military updates that the U.S. has been receiving from the Israeli Government, does that seem conceivable?MR MILLER: I just don’t want to offer any assessments on the military campaign. I’ve always tried to keep from doing so here.Humeyra, go ahead.QUESTION: Just want to clarify one thing you said. You said we’ve had progress over the weekend. You mean like this very last couple of days, right?MR MILLER: I mean we had progress with the conversations we’ve had between Egypt, Israel, the United States, and Qatar, yes.QUESTION: Right. And based on the progress there, you’re still – are you hopeful or like not hopeful that – do you see a deal more likely after this weekend before Ramadan?MR MILLER: I can’t make that assessment because it depends on Hamas. We believe a deal is possible and we hope Hamas will agree to one.Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. In light of – and I know that there’s been denial that there’s illegal settlements, but there’s a Jerusalem Post article, February 24th, stating that the Biden administration has declared Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria as illegal. What is your response to previous Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s comments February 23rd that he made on Twitter, and I quote, “Judea and Samaria are rightful parts of the Jewish homeland and Israelis have a right to live there. President Biden’s decision to overturn our policy and call Israeli settlements illegal will not further the cause of peace. It rewards Hamas for its brutal attacks on October 7th and punishes Israel instead. These Israeli communities,” he said, “are not standing in the way of peace, militant Palestinian terrorism is,” and a follow-up.MR MILLER: Well, I don’t think you will be surprised to hear that I disagree with those comments. And I should reiterate again that it has been the long-standing U.S. position across both Democratic and Republican administrations – not just the Biden administration, not just the Obama administration, but Republican administrations as well – that settlements are a barrier to peace, they’re an obstacle to peace. We believe they weaken, not strengthen, Israel’s security.QUESTION: Okay. If President Biden and Secretary Blinken think – if they don’t – if you don’t agree that it’s illegal – if you believe that it’s a barrier, as you said, to peace, so would your response for Israelis to live in their old land of Judea and Samaria – where is the justice, the question is, in allowing illegal immigrants coming across our southern border to settle wherever they want, causing havoc here in the United States, murdering our citizens, and robbing the American taxpayer?MR MILLER: Well, I think I would say with respect to that you have seen this administration put forward a deal to further secure the southern border, and unfortunately Republicans in Congress have not taken it up.Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you, sir. Sir, Pakistan is moving ahead to build a pipeline that will transport natural gas from Iran, a move it says is needed to meet the country’s energy needs. U.S. expressed concerns on this project in the past. You still have those concerns?MR MILLER: I’ll have to take that one back and get you an answer.QUESTION: Sir, two major political parties in Pakistan are forming a new government, and still there are massive reports of rigging. So do you welcome the formation of the new government or do you believe that investigation should be done first before the forming of a government?MR MILLER: So with respect to the formation of a new government, that’s a Pakistani process led by Pakistanis. We’re not a party to it and it’s not something that I would comment on. We want to see a government move forward in a way that reflects the will of the Pakistani people.With respect to investigations into reported irregularities, we want to see those investigations proceed. We want to see them wrapped up as soon as possible.QUESTION: Sir, Indian security forces have responded to the farmers’ protest by firing iron pellets and using drones to drop tear gas shells on the civilian protesters. We have seen some horrible images. What are your concerns on the barbaric – on this barbaric treatment of the civilian farmers?MR MILLER: I haven’t seen those reports. I’ll have to take it back.Go ahead here and then we’ll wrap up for today.QUESTION: Thank you so much. The question is regarding a January 31st incident in which two Navy Seals lost their lives at coast of Somalia. So a U.S. district court in Richmond charged four individuals who were allegedly carrying Pakistani identification cards, and it is said that these individuals were transporting suspected Iranian-made weapons to Houthis in Yemen. So do United States raise this murder with the concerned authorities? And also I want to know, do you have any details from Department of Treasury or from Justice Department what will be the further procedure as United States has done the sanction on the individuals and entities who are linked with Iranian weapons transfer?MR MILLER: So the Justice – with regard to this case, the – I don’t have any updates with regard to the second question, but with regard to this case, the Justice Department released a very detailed statement about this, I believe in connection to an unsealed indictment on Friday. It’s an ongoing legal matter, and because of that, I’m not going to comment further.And with that, got to wrap for today. Thanks, everyone.(The briefing was concluded at 2:04 p.m.)						Tags																					China																								Hungary																								Iraq																								Israel																								Mexico																								North Korea																								Office of the Spokesperson																								Pakistan																								Palestinian Territories																								Qatar																								Russia																								Sweden																								Syria																								Ukraine
- Department Press Briefing – February 5, 2024 HomeDepartment Press Briefing &#8211; February 5, 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 &#8211; February 5, 2024																																																					February 5, 2024																																																								MR PATEL:&nbsp; Wow, packed house today.&nbsp; Jeez.&nbsp; Good afternoon, everybody.&nbsp; I don’t have anything off the top.&nbsp; Simon, would you care to kick us off?QUESTION:&nbsp; Sure.&nbsp; The supplemental that came out from the Senate, some senators yesterday, included a line saying that the funding can’t go to the UN agency UNRWA.&nbsp; And you’ve obviously suspended new aid to UNRWA, but does the administration support sort of putting the language in the legislation so that funding can’t be sent to this agency?MR PATEL:&nbsp; So look, broadly as it relates to the draft legislation, I think you saw the statement from the President over the weekend about the overall package and the administration’s support for it.&nbsp; I am not going to get into sort of the back and forth or the internal deliberations of how we got to what version of the text or not.&nbsp;&nbsp;But I think to take a step back, Simon, the United States is pushing for an immediate and serious investigation into the allegations at UNRWA.&nbsp; We’ve been talking about those for a couple of weeks now.&nbsp; As you know, the United Nations has already launched an investigation.&nbsp; The secretary general this morning just announced an independent review led by former French Foreign Minister Colonna on UNRWA policies and procedures with recommendations.&nbsp; All of those things will be under review, I imagine.From the U.S.’s perspective, we want to see concrete results for these approaches.&nbsp; And meanwhile, we’re going to continue to consult closely with other donors on how to continue to meet urgent humanitarian needs in Gaza.&nbsp; We also simultaneously – as you heard Matt talk about, we of course want to be able to continue supporting the important work that is happening in Gaza and the region, and we are looking at what options exist for supporting civilians in Gaza through partners like the World Food Programme, UNICEF, and other NGOs.When it comes to the supplemental, all of this of course is public information.&nbsp; The bill includes $10 billion in humanitarian assistance that the President requested.&nbsp; That 10 billion is for global needs, including those impacted by the war in Ukraine as well as the conflict in Gaza.&nbsp; Of that 10 billion, we expect 1.4 billion to be planned for Gaza.&nbsp; This is tangible money that we believe will save lives and have a direct impact on Palestinian civilians.&nbsp; And we will redirect funding for UNRWA to other partners to provide assistance in Gaza, some of those examples I gave – the World Food Programme, UNICEF, and other NGOs.&nbsp;&nbsp;This is a process we’re going to continue to work through with appropriate regional interlocutors and other donor countries as well.QUESTION:&nbsp; In terms of the importance of UNRWA itself, yeah, you can divert aid through other agencies.&nbsp; But do you accept that doing so potentially – if UNRWA, as officials in UNRWA are saying, is really short of money and potentially unable to continue its operations, that’s going to reduce the impact of any other money you send to Gaza in other ways, right, in terms of &#8212;&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; We have not been naïve about how critical we think UNRWA is both in Gaza but also the regional broadly, and the critical work that they do to aid and get aid to Palestinian civilians.&nbsp; And that’s why this is something, one, as it relates to the allegations we took so seriously and appreciate the seriousness at which the United Nations is taking this; and two, as it relates to the supplemental, we believe that we can continue to do important work through other NGOs and other partners, and simultaneously we’ll continue to have conversations with donor countries about supporting UNRWA and ways that they can continue doing their important work in the region.QUESTION:&nbsp; And just to clarify, you referenced this new independent – the assessment that’s going to happen, the review of UNRWA.&nbsp; Does – is the U.S. going to wait until the outcome of that?&nbsp; That seems like that might take you a little – quite a while before you make a decision on renewing the UNRWA funding.&nbsp;&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; I don’t have – I’m not going to preview a timeline from here.&nbsp; I think we just want to at first see a process play out, and then we’ll go from there and take it step by step.QUESTION:&nbsp; Can I follow up on that?MR PATEL:&nbsp; Sure, Said.QUESTION:&nbsp; Thank you.&nbsp;&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; Yeah.QUESTION:&nbsp; I mean, let’s face it.&nbsp; UNRWA is a political issue.&nbsp; It’s being pushed by pro-Israelis and spin and think tanks that actually sprung for this purpose, because they believe that cutting off aid to Palestinian refugees will simply liquidate the Palestinian issue, that the right of return that the Palestinians hang on would just simply disappear.&nbsp; So I want to ask you:&nbsp; Is the United States of America committed to continued funding of UNRWA?MR PATEL:&nbsp; Well, Said, that the – (sound).&nbsp; Whoa, I wonder what that was.&nbsp;&nbsp;Said, obviously there is text in this pending legislation that would preclude us from doing so.&nbsp; We are an administration that follows the law.&nbsp; That being said, in this pending legislation there is $10 billion for humanitarian assistance, of which 1.4 billion is for humanitarian aid for Gaza.&nbsp; This is an issue we take very seriously.&nbsp;&nbsp;We also believe, even prior to this conversation about the supplemental, we have, as I told Simon, been unambiguous, in my opinion, about the critical work that UNRWA does, not just in Gaza but in other parts of the region as well.&nbsp; We think that the work they do is critical.&nbsp; They are an important vehicle for getting humanitarian aid to those who need it.&nbsp; And we’re going to continue to work with donor countries and UNRWA, as well as – as they work through this investigation and work through this internal matter that they’re dealing with, but also broadly to ensure that the Palestinian civilians that rely on this kind of work are able to get it.&nbsp;&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; Can I have a follow-up?QUESTION: This whole investigation seems to have been launched because there’s allegedly 12 members of those who attacked on October 7th who are actually working with UNRWA – out of an employee population of 13,000.&nbsp;&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; Said, it doesn’t matter &#8212;&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; 13 – no, I’m – but &#8212;&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; It doesn’t matter if it’s two or 12.&nbsp;&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; That’s fine.&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; People participating in terrorism &#8212;&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; Right.&nbsp; That’s fine.&nbsp;&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; &#8212; in a terrorist attack in which 1,200 individuals were murdered is unacceptable to us.&nbsp;&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; The point – the point &#8212;&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; And that is why we’ve called for these investigations.&nbsp;&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; I understand.&nbsp; I understand your point.&nbsp;&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; And we’ve called for – we’ve temporarily put UNRWA funding on pause.&nbsp; But we also have said how important this issue is, and we want to see it worked through because we know how vital their work is.&nbsp;&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; So how are you responding to Lazzarini and Guterres, who stated very clearly that UNRWA has funding only till the end of this month – only till the end of this month, which is a very short month?&nbsp;&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; Well, that is why it is our hope that this internal investigation and review is done so expeditiously and done so as quickly as possible so that there is – as Matt has spoken to previously, there is obligated funding that the United States had not transferred yet.&nbsp; Simultaneously, we’re going to continue to work with donor countries to ensure that they can continue supporting UNRWA so this work can continue.&nbsp;&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; So lastly on this point, so what would be satisfactory to you in terms of how this investigation – where does it – where is it leading to, or where should it lead to?&nbsp;&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; Said, we’ve spoken to this &#8212;&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; Arresting these people – arresting 12 people and so on, and that would be – we put the page behind us and that – is that &#8212;&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; There of course needs to be accountability.&nbsp; We’ve spoken to this before.&nbsp; It’s not for us to be prescriptive here.&nbsp; We of course are going to look at the assessments made from this internal investigation and go from there.&nbsp; One, we of course want to see accountability.&nbsp; We want to see steps taken and measures implemented so something like this can’t happen again.&nbsp; And we want to see just an internal review of policies and procedures to double make sure that something like this isn’t repeated.&nbsp;&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; And on UNRWA, we heard that the Israeli minister of defense just issued a threat or whatever you want to call it just a few minutes ago that they are going into Rafah.&nbsp; You have any comment on that?&nbsp; You have any comment on what might happen next in Rafah, where you have such a concentration of those who have been displaced?&nbsp;&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; So Said, I’ve not seen those comments.&nbsp; And certainly, I’m not going to comment or opine on every military strategy or tactic that we hear discussed or floated or is reported on, as it relates to the Israelis conducting this operation.&nbsp; What I will just say is that we have been pretty clear that Rafah is an important conduit for the flow of humanitarian aid into Gaza.&nbsp; It is an important conduit for foreign nationals, including American citizens and LPRs, to be able to safely leave Gaza.&nbsp; It is also – it is also somewhere where more than a million people are sheltering.&nbsp; And so we of course would want any operation to be – being conducted in that in that region to take that into mind.&nbsp; But of course I am not going to opine on it more specifically than that.Let me go to Leon.&nbsp; Nadia, I’ll come to you right after that.&nbsp; Leon, go ahead.&nbsp;&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; I just wanted to come back to the UNRWA issue.&nbsp; I mean, obviously I think the – well, the legislation doesn’t look like it’s going to go anywhere.&nbsp; But aside from that, the administration has approved language to prohibit funding of UNRWA.&nbsp; So I don’t know – how do you reconcile saying on the one hand that it’s doing a critical job, which you have said publicly, on the other – also saying that you’re checking with other donors, basically washing your hands financially of it and leaving it to other donors.&nbsp; How do you reconcile that and accepting the language to prohibit funding, when you had announced a month ago or a couple of weeks ago that you were suspending funding?&nbsp;&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; Well, Leon, in the American system Congress is a co-equal and a separate branch of government, and all of these things are discussions, negotiations, deliberations.&nbsp; Again, as I said to Simon, I’m not going to get into the specifics of how we got to the text that we got.&nbsp; I’m sure our colleagues at the White House might be happy to walk you through some of that.&nbsp; But we’re not the only ones that have a say here.&nbsp;&nbsp;And so when it comes to using the dollar of the American taxpayer and where it goes and the things that it funds and the things that it supports, it is not only up to the Executive Branch.&nbsp; And so these are conversations that we have and policies that we move forward in close coordination with our partners in Congress.&nbsp; I would point you no further than the transcripts of the past I don’t know how many daily press briefings, where myself, Matt, Secretary Blinken, have talked about the vital role that UNRWA plays in the region.&nbsp; And that is incredibly indicative of this administration’s point of view when it comes to their work.&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; Precisely.MR PATEL:&nbsp; Now the text of this legislation is – where it landed is, of course, a deliberation with Congress.&nbsp; And so simultaneously we’re going to take steps to ensure that aid can flow through other appropriate partners who do work in the region like the World Food Programme, like UNICEF, like other NGOs.&nbsp; And we’ll continue to have this conversation not just with Congress but with donor countries as well.And we also – I think it’s important to take a step back.&nbsp; We also still need to see UNRWA work through its own investigation and work through its process before the United States is ready to unpause the funding that we have put on pause.&nbsp; This is still very much an active process.&nbsp; We have – while we certainly welcome the developments that are coming from the United Nations and UNRWA, we’re not ready to announce or share any change in policy at this time.Nadia, go ahead.QUESTION:&nbsp; Thank you, Vedant.&nbsp; Two questions.&nbsp; Since the ICJ ruling on January 26th which clearly called on Israel to avoid civilian casualties, 900 Palestinians have been killed, including women and children.&nbsp; So is Israel heeding the message that you sent to them in terms of the casualties?&nbsp; And what kind of, like, pressure are you putting on them trying to avoid – I mean, 900 in 10 days is a huge number.&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; Any number above zero, Nadia, is heartbreaking.&nbsp; We strongly believe that far too many civilians have lost their lives in this conflict.&nbsp; Not just far too many civilians; far too many women and children have lost their lives over the course of this conflict.&nbsp; And so at every step and at every turn, we will continue to make clear with the Israelis that international humanitarian law needs to be respected, steps need to be taken to minimize civilian casualties, additional steps need to be taken to minimize civilian casualties.&nbsp; And I have no doubt that these are the very kinds of things you are going to hear Secretary Blinken raise with his counterparts on his travels in the region right now.QUESTION:&nbsp; Okay.&nbsp; You were alarmed by the settlers’ violence in the West Bank, to the degree that you put sanction on them.&nbsp; Are you equally alarmed and disturbed by the Israeli army torture of Palestinians?&nbsp; There is emerging pictures that’s horrifying.&nbsp; I am sure you’ve seen this picture, but one of them is basically an Israeli soldier – and this is what we know of through the social media.&nbsp; You must have seen this picture.&nbsp; This soldier has been identified as his name is Yosee&nbsp;Gamzoo, and he is from the Nahal Brigade.&nbsp; This is an – this is a clear violation of international law, of the Geneva Convention, et cetera.&nbsp;&nbsp;So just equally as much as the violence of the settlers, this is the violence of an Israeli soldier.&nbsp; This is an Israeli army that’s an allied of the United States.&nbsp; Are this is acceptable to you?&nbsp; And what do you do to hold these people accountable?&nbsp; This is what we know from the social media.&nbsp; This – the guy himself published this picture.&nbsp; Imagine the things that we don’t know.MR PATEL:&nbsp; Thanks – thanks for your question, Nadia.&nbsp; So first, as it relates to our sanctions, you’re absolutely right.&nbsp; Peace, stability, and security in the West Bank is of utmost importance to us, and those participating in activities or actions that detract from that, that make the West Bank more destabilizing and risk the security situation, that is of course of great concern to us, and that’s why you saw the United States take appropriate action last week.In relation to the image that you shared, I’ve not seen that image specifically.&nbsp; But obviously, it is – it’s deeply troubling.&nbsp; I have no knowledge or information as it relates to the circumstances surrounding that incident, and I will leave it to the IDF to speak to those specific situations.&nbsp; But we have been clear to them that the respect for basic human rights, the respect for humanitarian law needs to be respected.&nbsp; And those who do not comply with that need to be held accountable.QUESTION:&nbsp; Vedant.&nbsp;&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; So if I share this information with you, would you raise it with the Israelis?&nbsp;&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; We &#8212;QUESTION:&nbsp; I’m happy to share it with you.&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; I’m not going to – I’m not going to get into specific situations here, Nadia.&nbsp; This is not a operation that the United States is conducting.&nbsp; But when it comes to the impact on civilians, the treatment of civilians, the things that we see – not just in social media but elsewhere in our conversations with people on the ground, in our assessments with things on the ground – we raise those issues with the Israelis, and we’ll continue to do so.&nbsp;&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; Can I just follow up &#8212;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; Thank you.&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; &#8212; on sanctions?&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; Go ahead.&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; You’ve sanctioned these four individuals.&nbsp; The ideological leadership of these individuals and of all of those people to harness – basically who want the forcible expulsion of Palestinians sit at the highest levels of the Israeli Government: the finance minister, the national security minister.&nbsp; There’s a fundamental contradiction, isn’t there, in your policy, because you’re sanctioning the followers, but you’re backing the leaders?MR PATEL:&nbsp; We don’t back any leader, or don’t back the leader of any government.&nbsp; That’s not our approach to this.&nbsp; This is an Israeli Government that we are working with.&nbsp; And the makeup of any cabinet and any government is a sovereign decision for that government to do.&nbsp; That’s not something that the United States has a say or a sway in.&nbsp; And when we have seen rhetoric from some of these ministers, from some of these individuals that make up this cabinet, when we see rhetoric from any member of this particular Israeli cabinet that we think is not just a distraction but an incitement or something that brings us further away from a two-state solution or brings us further away from peace and stability in the region, we’ve not hesitated to say so.QUESTION:&nbsp; But it’s not – it’s not just rhetoric, because arms transfers go, for example, to the Israeli border police.&nbsp; That is a department controlled by the national security minister.&nbsp; Those border forces operate in East Jerusalem, in the West Bank often – rights groups will say – hand-in-glove with these people that are smashing up Palestinian property.&nbsp; So there is an arms transfer to the very department, funded by the U.S. taxpayer, of one of these leaders in terms of the national security minister who controls the border police.&nbsp;&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; And with every transfer of any U.S. asset, we, of course, have been clear that any end user needs to comply with humanitarian law, and those who are not should be held accountable.QUESTION:&nbsp; But are you checking that in each case?&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; We are having &#8212;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; You’re being &#8212;&nbsp;&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; We – there are a number of vectors and lines of work that lead into the work we do to assess situations and circumstances on the ground to make sure that basic humanitarian rights are being protected and followed.&nbsp;Willy, go ahead.&nbsp;&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; Thanks, Vedant.&nbsp; Appreciate it.&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; Yeah.&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; I was just wondering, Secretary Blinken’s trip to the region comes on the heels of the French foreign – the new French Foreign Minister Stéphane Séjourné.&nbsp; I was wondering if there was any sort of coordination between the two countries?&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; Well, look, the French, of course, have been incredible partners, not just as it relates to this conflict but much when it comes to the United States’s approach to a number of other areas.&nbsp; I don’t have any specific engagements or meetings to read out, but throughout all of this you have seen the Secretary engage quite regularly and with partner countries, allies, as it relates to the broader situation.&nbsp; And that’s something that we’re going to continue to do.&nbsp;&nbsp;Janne, go ahead.&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; Thank you, Vedant.&nbsp; Two questions.&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; Yeah.&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; North Korea launched cruise missiles four times this year at three days’ intervals.&nbsp; Isn’t North Korea cruise missile launch a violation of the UN Security Council resolutions?&nbsp; Is there any response from the U.S. itself?MR PATEL:&nbsp; These kinds of actions by the DPRK are deeply destabilizing, and they are unhelpful and they contribute to greater risk in – and risk in the region.&nbsp; And so we’ll continue to coordinate closely trilaterally with the ROK and Japan when it comes to pushing back on some of these malign and destabilizing actions.&nbsp;&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; On Russia, the Russian ministry of foreign affairs defended North Korea and criticized the South Korea, saying the South Korean Government had biased reporting on North Korea’s nuclear preemptive strikes.&nbsp; And Russia denied North Korea and Russians’ trade and warned South Korea about such report.&nbsp; How can you comment on &#8212;MR PATEL:&nbsp; Well, Janne, I’m not aware of this specific report that you’re mentioning, but what we do know is that there is a deepening relationship between the DPRK and Russia.&nbsp; We have seen that.&nbsp; We’ve seen that over the past many months, including the transfer of munitions from the DPRK to Russia.&nbsp; And we believe that these kinds of actions and activities are deeply concerning and destabilizing.&nbsp; And we’ll continue to work in close coordination to fend off against those.Jenny has had her hand up patiently, and then we’ll make sure to get to the room.&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; Thanks, Vedant.MR PATEL:&nbsp; Go ahead.&nbsp;&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; Prime Minister Netanyahu said earlier today that he will not end his offensive in Gaza until the leadership of Hamas is destroyed.&nbsp; He said this could take months.&nbsp; We’ve seen this timeline shift over and over and over again.&nbsp; I just wonder what the U.S.’s comment is on the prospect of this taking many more months.MR PATEL:&nbsp; Our hope and one of the things that the Secretary is continuing to work towards and work on is ending this conflict as soon as we can.&nbsp; There is a convergence amongst all of us in wanting to see that happen, including many and all in the Israeli system, and we’ll continue to work in close coordination with them to that goal.&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; So it would be acceptable to the U.S. if this continues for months longer?MR PATEL:&nbsp; I’m not going to prescribe – I’m not going to prescribe a timeline and I’m not saying that any prescription of a timeline would be acceptable to us or not.&nbsp; What I am saying is that we’re going to continue to work with the Israelis to end this conflict as soon as possible, and over the course of its duration, continue to push for the flow of humanitarian aid into Gaza, continue to work tirelessly so that the hostages can be released, and continuing to allow for conditions so that foreign nationals who may be interested in departing Gaza can doing – can do so while simultaneously working towards some kind of longer-term solution here that gets us out of a endless cycle of violence.&nbsp; You’ve heard the Secretary talk about that before, and we continue to feel strongly that a two-state solution is that solution forward.&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; And you spoke a little earlier to the importance of Rafah.&nbsp; Do you have any updates on the amount of aid getting in &#8212;&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; Yeah.&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; &#8212; the number of Americans who are leaving through that passage?&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; I have a couple of things.&nbsp; So first, since October 7th, the State Department has assisted nearly 600 individuals, including U.S. citizens, lawful permanent residents, and their family members with entry to Egypt from Gaza at the Rafah border crossing.&nbsp; We feel that the vast majority of U.S. citizens who are seeking our assistance have reached out to us already, yet – but we’ll continue to engage appropriately through consular channels to any American citizen who might be interested in departing.&nbsp;On some of the metrics on the humanitarian questions that you raised, on February 4th, 207 trucks with food, medicine, and other supplies entered the Gaza Strip through the Rafah and Kerem Shalom crossings.&nbsp; As of February 4th, more than 10,500 trucks with humanitarian aid entered Gaza since October 21st.&nbsp; Again, you’ve heard me say this before:&nbsp; This, of course, is not nearly enough, but we’re continuing to work with regional actors, including the Government of Israel and the Government of Egypt, to do what we can to increase flow, and that’s one of the things I expect the Secretary will continue to press on in his travels.Nick.&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; A couple of China-related questions.&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; Can I see if anybody else has anything else in the region &#8212;&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; Yeah, absolutely.&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; &#8212; before I come back to you?&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; Following Jenny’s?MR PATEL:&nbsp; Okay, go ahead.&nbsp; Yeah.QUESTION:&nbsp; Following Jenny’s, you said that you’re helping – you believe all the American citizens have reached out already.&nbsp; At one point the embassy and the Americans were helping non-U.S. citizen Gazans who worked for U.S. media or U.S. NGOs, et cetera, and you stopped that.&nbsp; Is there a reason that you stopped that, and any chance of restarting it?&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; Look, our priority in these circumstances, of course, are American citizens, legal permanent residents, and their eligible family members.&nbsp; But I’m happy to look into if there’s anything around that circumstance that we can share.&nbsp; Happy to follow back up with you.&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; Can I follow up on that?&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; On the region?&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; Yes, on the region.&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; (Off-mike.)MR PATEL:&nbsp; Okay.&nbsp; All right, hold on, everybody.&nbsp; We’ll get to you.&nbsp;&nbsp;Guita.&nbsp;&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; Thank you, Vedant.&nbsp; You just referenced the two-state solution.&nbsp; The Secretary has been following that up during his trips.&nbsp; The Islamic Republic of Iran says that they also want peace and security in the region.&nbsp; They want a country for the Palestinians.&nbsp; How do you see this claim by them?&nbsp; Is there common ground here?&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; If the Iranian regime is interested in peace and stability, they could stop being the world’s largest exporter of terrorism.&nbsp; That would be a great starting point.&nbsp;&nbsp;Alex.&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; To follow up on that &#8212;&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; Yeah.&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; &#8212; what can you tell us about the impact of the weekend strikes, particularly about the – there’s a growing criticism that if the aim is to stop Iran, then why going after two other nations instead of Iran while simultaneously saying that you are not seeking to expand these tensions in the region?&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; Alex, it is of course about holding these Iran-aligned malign proxy groups accountable.&nbsp; And so what these strikes were on Friday, you saw the United States conduct strikes on more than 85 locations at 75 facilities in Iraq and Syria.&nbsp; Three were in Iraq and four were in Syria, and these locations were used by the IRGC and affiliated militias to attack U.S. forces.&nbsp; These locations were carefully selected, and there is clear and irrefutable evidence that the facilities targeted were used by groups and individuals directly involved in the attacks on the Americans.&nbsp; They included command and control centers, rocket, missile, and drone storage facilities, and other things of that nature and which we have credible information to believe that they were directly involved in the attacks on American personnel.&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; Follow-up to &#8212;&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; Can you just come back to me on Russia later?&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; Okay.&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; Related follow-on to that?&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; Okay.&nbsp;&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; Follow-up.&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; Diyar, and then I’ll come to you, Guita.&nbsp; Go ahead.&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; Thank you, Vedant.&nbsp; On the same topic.MR PATEL:&nbsp; Yeah.&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; The Iraqi Government says that we have been not informed by the U.S. Government, but after the attack I was attending the press call by John Kirby and he said we did inform the Iraqi Government.&nbsp; So have you informed the Iraqi Government prior to the attacks?&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; So Iraq, like every country in the region, understood that there would be a response after the deaths of our soldiers.&nbsp; As for the specific response on Friday, there was not a pre-notification.&nbsp; We informed the Iraqis immediately after the strikes occurred.&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; All right.&nbsp; And one follow-up.&nbsp; And how do you see the Iraqi reaction to that attack?&nbsp; They summoned your chargé d’affaires, the U.S. embassy chargé d’affaires, and also they said this is an attack on the Iraqi Security Forces and on the civilian residential buildings and citizens.&nbsp; Then how do you see that reaction?&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; So let me say a couple of things.&nbsp; First, our colleagues at the Pentagon are continuing to do their battle damage assessment.&nbsp; But again, these targets were carefully selected, and as I said, they included command and control centers; rocket, missile, drone storage facilities.&nbsp; We believe that these were credible targets and picked in a way to minimize and avoid civilian casualties.&nbsp; I’ve seen some of those allegations; allegations of casualties among Iraqi Security Forces because of these strikes on these terrorist-operated facilities are concerning.&nbsp; It would mean that these rogue Iran-aligned militia groups are working in proximity to official Iraqi Security Forces.&nbsp; But again, these battle damage assessments are still ongoing and I don’t have anything conclusive to offer from up here, and I’m sure my colleagues at the Pentagon would be able to speak more to that.&nbsp;Go ahead, Guita.&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; Thank you.&nbsp; Reportedly there’s – there has been another drone attack on a U.S. base in Syria today.&nbsp; There have been no U.S. casualties reported yet, but six or seven Kurdish fighters have been reportedly killed.&nbsp; Now, the retaliation against the Islamic Republic of Iran is in relation to killing of American troops.&nbsp; What about allies?&nbsp; Would the administration take any action when it comes to killing of allies?&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; I’m certainly not going to preview any actions from up here.&nbsp; But look, we believe that all of these kinds of activities are dangerous, they’re reckless, they’re incredibly destabilizing, and they are unsafe.&nbsp; And so we’ll take appropriate steps to hold those accountable.&nbsp; I don’t have any assessment to offer on this specific circumstance, but I think you heard National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan pretty clearly this weekend talk about how these initial strikes were – would be just the start.&nbsp; So – but again, I’m not going to preview anything from here.&nbsp;&nbsp;Michel, go ahead.&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; Vedant &#8212;QUESTION:&nbsp; Yeah &#8212;MR PATEL:&nbsp; I’m going to work the room a little bit, Guita, because a lot of people have their hands up.&nbsp; Michel, go ahead.&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; Yeah, on Iraq, do you have any comments on the assassination of Naji al-Kaabi, one of the Asaib Ahl al-Haq leader, in Iraq?&nbsp; And reports say that the U.S. was involved in this assassination.&nbsp; Can you confirm that?&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; I don’t have anything to offer on that.&nbsp; I’m happy to look at that.&nbsp; I don’t believe it to be true, Michel, but I will double-check.&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; And do you have any reaction to the drone attack on a base housing U.S. troops in eastern Syria that killed six SDF fighters?&nbsp; And do you consider this attack an attack on the U.S.?&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; I think Guita just asked that question right before.&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; But do you consider it as an attack on the U.S., or you’re not &#8212;MR PATEL:&nbsp; Michel, again, these kinds of actions are incredibly destabilizing, they are unsafe, they are – increase risk and they put civilians, servicemembers, including servicemembers of other partner forces, in harm’s way.&nbsp; And so we will take appropriate action, but I don’t have anything to preview from up here.&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; And what about the timing of this attack?&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; I don’t – I’m not going to speculate on the timing.&nbsp;I’m going to go back to Nick, who’s patiently been waiting.&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; Thank you.&nbsp; Thanks very much.&nbsp;&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; Yeah.&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; A couple of China questions.&nbsp; A report last night bringing some renewed attention to the fact that Chinese nationals are the largest-growing ethnic group trying to illegally cross the southern border.&nbsp; A major driver of that is because of the scaleback of visas issued to Chinese nationals.&nbsp; What can you say about bilateral discussions and increasing those visa numbers?&nbsp;And then separately, there are reports that students, Chinese students with legal visas, have been getting harassed and interrogated at airports coming back from the holidays, and some not being admitted.&nbsp; And the PRC ambassador called it absolutely unacceptable.&nbsp; Have you had any discussions with PRC counterparts about this or any comment?&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; Let me say a couple things.&nbsp; I think, Nick, for – on both of those questions, I think the operational and technical details of that would be better answered by our colleagues at the Department of Homeland Security.&nbsp;&nbsp;On the People’s Republic of China broadly, look, people-to-people ties continues to be a topic of discussion in our continued bilateral engagements, and candidly, it’s an area where we believe there is opportunity for shared cooperation.&nbsp; I believe the number – and someone will have to fact-check me on this – we have about 300,000 Chinese students studying in the United States.&nbsp; And so there is of course opportunity for greater collaboration and cooperation in these spaces.&nbsp;As it relates to visas, our visa process is quite rigorous and quite solid, and of course we’re not going to – it is done so – without speaking to anybody’s specific visa circumstance, the process is adjudicated in the utmost strict, rigorous, and legal manner, and so don’t really have anything else to offer on that.&nbsp;Go ahead.&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; Thank you.&nbsp; Two questions, India-related.MR PATEL:&nbsp; Sure.&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; One, Assistant Secretaries of State for South and Central Asia Donald Lu was in India and Maldives last week.&nbsp; I wanted to check with you – do you have a readout of his trip to Maldives?&nbsp; And what is the U.S. assessment of the situation in Maldives right now?MR PATEL:&nbsp; I don’t have any readout from here but let me check with the team and see if we can get back to you on that.QUESTION:&nbsp; And second question:&nbsp; A day after the State Department notified the Congress about a decision to sell MQ-9B drones to India, Senator Ben Cardin, chairman of Senate Foreign Relations Committee, issued a statement saying that he had long negotiations with the State Department on that issue.&nbsp; Can you give us a sense what his main concerns were, and have all these concerns been addressed?MR PATEL:&nbsp; I’m not going to characterize Senator Cardin’s comments.&nbsp; I would refer you to our colleagues at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to speak to that.&nbsp; But what I can say is that this sale, we believe, will provide India with an enhanced maritime security and maritime domain awareness capability.&nbsp; It offers India outright ownership of these aircraft, and this is something that we’ll continue to deepen our cooperation with our Indian partners on.Go ahead.QUESTION:&nbsp; Thank you.&nbsp; Thank you.MR PATEL:&nbsp; Yeah.QUESTION:&nbsp; Just a few days, sir, remain in the Pakistani elections.&nbsp; There is a question mark on the fairness of the electoral process as former prime minister and a popular leader Imran Khan behind bars, not even allowed to contest elections.&nbsp; His political party symbol, a cricket bat, is also banned.&nbsp; United States always stood up for the democratic values and freedom of speech.&nbsp; What is your take on the scenario?MR PATEL:&nbsp; We’re continuing to monitor Pakistan’s electoral process quite closely, and as we have said, we want to see that process take place in a way that facilitates broad participation with respect for freedom of expression, assembly, and associations.&nbsp; We have concerns of the – all incidents of violence and restrictions on media freedom; freedom of expression, including internet freedom; and peaceful and – peaceful assembly and association.&nbsp; We’re concerned by some of the infringements that we’ve seen in that space.&nbsp; Pakistanis deserve to exercise their fundamental right to choose their future leaders through free and fair elections without fear, violence, or intimidation, and it is ultimately for the people of Pakistan to decide their political future.Go ahead.&nbsp; Yeah, go ahead.QUESTION:&nbsp; The UN secretary-general is convening a conference this month to discuss about international and regional approach to Afghanistan.MR PATEL:&nbsp; Sure.QUESTION:&nbsp; Meanwhile Taliban have refused to work with the new UN envoy in Afghanistan.&nbsp; Do you support this initiative?&nbsp; And what the U.S. is doing to support the role of the new UN envoy for Afghanistan?MR PATEL:&nbsp; Look, we believe it is important to be very clear about our State Department position is that we have no near-term plans to return any diplomatic functions to Kabul.&nbsp; We engage with many Afghans, including the Taliban, both inside and outside the country, but human rights and the return to school for women and girls are at the forefront of our engagement.&nbsp; And working with our allies and partners – which, of course, the UN is a key partner – we’ll continue to press the Taliban to reverse these discriminatory edicts, particularly those that disproportionately affect women and girls and those that we believe will affect any normalization of relations.&nbsp; And it’s contingent on the respect for the rights of all Afghans.Go ahead, in the back.&nbsp; Yeah.QUESTION:&nbsp; Thank you.&nbsp; On Russia, last week Russia presented evidence that Ukraine used a Patriot missile system to shoot down a Russian plane with 65 Ukrainian prisoners of war on board.&nbsp; Are you aware of this?&nbsp; Are you going to look into this incident and ask questions – Ukrainian partners?MR PATEL:&nbsp; Is it the same level of credible evidence that makes Russia claim that they have Crimea or that all the territory that they took from Ukraine is theirs?QUESTION:&nbsp; So you don’t believe Russian claims that &#8212;MR PATEL:&nbsp; No, I’m just following up with a question, is if it’s the same level of credible evidence that the Russians have showed when it comes to their track record on telling the truth about other things.QUESTION:&nbsp; Russia published pictures of the Patriot missile system.MR PATEL:&nbsp; As it relates to the specific incident that you’re referring to, I will let our partners in Ukraine speak to that.&nbsp; But when it comes to credible information coming from Russia, they don’t really have a lot of legs to stand on given their immense track record of disinformation, not just in the region but also broadly.QUESTION:&nbsp; One more question.MR PATEL:&nbsp; Go ahead, yeah.QUESTION:&nbsp; So the United Nations secretary-general today condemned another Ukrainian attack that killed 28 people the other day, including one child.&nbsp; An American-made HIMARS rocket was used for this attack.&nbsp; Are you aware of this?&nbsp; Are you planning to condemn it or anything else?MR PATEL:&nbsp; I’ve seen those reports.&nbsp; But again, given the track record that Russia has, we have no way of independently verifying that information, so – go ahead.QUESTION:&nbsp; Okay.MR PATEL:&nbsp; Yeah.QUESTION:&nbsp; Thank you, sir.MR PATEL:&nbsp; Yeah.QUESTION:&nbsp; Every day, the United States emphasized the necessity of protecting civilians in Gaza and ensuring they receive their necessity stuff.&nbsp; However, the commitment does not seem to translate in action, especially after United States suspended funding UNRWA based on suspicions only.&nbsp; This situation raised questions &#8212;MR PATEL:&nbsp; It wasn’t based on suspicions.&nbsp; I just want to be very clear.&nbsp; There were credible allegations, so – I don’t mean to interrupt you, but I think – I take issue with the premise of your question.QUESTION:&nbsp; Even few member &#8212;MR PATEL:&nbsp; It doesn’t – as I said to Said, it doesn’t matter if it’s two or 12.&nbsp; We think any participation in terrorism is incredibly troubling and problematic.&nbsp; It needs to be held accountable, and that’s why we were glad to see UNRWA take these steps to internally investigate into what happened.QUESTION:&nbsp; Isn’t United States truly – and I couldn’t imagine incapable to provide people with their necessary stuff, their essential needs, and to protect them.&nbsp; Every day until now civilian bomb, the majority of them children; yesterday, today, before.&nbsp; And also I have friends and cousins in Gaza; they don’t have – there is huge shortage.&nbsp; They don’t have their essential needs.&nbsp; I can’t imagine that United States incapable to do that &#8212;MR PATEL:&nbsp; So &#8212;QUESTION:&nbsp; &#8212; if it seriously or sincerely wants to help civilian people in Gaza.&nbsp;&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; &#8212; since October 7th, we have been unambiguous about the importance of getting increased, regular flow of humanitarian aid into Gaza.&nbsp; And candidly, it is because of American diplomacy that we have been able to see aid trucks flow into Gaza helping the Palestinian people.&nbsp; And as I was telling Jenny, on February 4th, 207 trucks with food, medicine, and other supplies entered Gaza.&nbsp; We are looking at a total of 10,500 trucks since October 21st.&nbsp; I’m not at all saying that this is enough, by any means.&nbsp; We need more and we will always continue to push for more.&nbsp; But this is at the forefront of the Secretary’s mind, it’s at the forefront of our mind, and we continue to believe that UNRWA does vital, integral, and important work in the region.&nbsp; And that is why we’re going to continue to engage closely with donor countries, but also we look forward to seeing UNRWA work through its – this investigation, through the UN as well.QUESTION:&nbsp; Look, my second question is:&nbsp; What human rights violation will Israel commit before America stop funding the IDF?&nbsp; Everything is targeting in Gaza, even the dead people.MR PATEL:&nbsp; I spoke a little bit to this when answering Jenny’s question.&nbsp; We believe that every possible step needs to be taken to minimize civilian casualties.&nbsp; That’s something we’ll continue to press the Israeli Government, and we continue to believe that when international humanitarian law isn’t complied with that there needs to be accountability.Jackson, go ahead.QUESTION:&nbsp; Thanks, Vedant.&nbsp; What’s your reaction to Speaker Johnson and House GOP leadership saying the supplemental is dead on arrival in the House?&nbsp; What message does it send to the rest of the world?And Buckingham Palace just announced that King Charles has been diagnosed with cancer.&nbsp; Any reaction to this news surrounding his majesty?MR PATEL:&nbsp; I just – I didn’t see that report before coming out.&nbsp; So certainly first and foremost, our thoughts are with the king.&nbsp; That’s really – with the king and his family.&nbsp; That’s incredibly sad news, and hope that – actually, that’s just – that’s very sad, and I’m very sorry for the king and his family.On your first question, I think to quote Secretary Blinken, there is no magic pot of money.&nbsp; There is no alternative path here.&nbsp; This funding is critical not just – it’s funding for a number of areas.&nbsp; It’s – it’s critical for continuing to support Ukraine as it fights for its sovereignty and territorial integrity against Russia.&nbsp; It is critical to our partners in Israel as they continue to work to hold the Hamas terrorists accountable for these October 7th terrorist attacks.&nbsp; And as I said a little bit at the beginning, it is critical to humanitarian aid that we believe is needed in all corners of the world, including those impacted by the war in Ukraine as well as the conflict that’s ongoing in Gaza as well.So we’ll continue to work with our partners in Congress.&nbsp; We believe that it’s necessary.&nbsp; And as the Secretary said, there is no – there is no magic pot of money.Go ahead.QUESTION:&nbsp; Thank you, Vedant.&nbsp; Two quick question, if I may.MR PATEL:&nbsp; Sure.QUESTION:&nbsp; May I know the – may I know the status of implementing visa restrictions under 3C visa policy for those who undermining elections, given the concern that the recent election in Bangladesh did not reflect the will of the people of Bangladesh?MR PATEL:&nbsp; So I don’t have any updates or changes to offer when it comes to policy.&nbsp; My understanding is that these policies don’t sunset just because the election is over, but I don’t have any updates to offer.QUESTION:&nbsp; Still that policies exist?MR PATEL:&nbsp; That is – yes.&nbsp; There is no change in policy.QUESTION:&nbsp; Yeah.&nbsp; One more on the ruling regime in Bangladesh has filed a fresh corruption charge against Nobel laureate Professor Muhammad Yunus.&nbsp; The government is restricting his ability to travel abroad through another court order.&nbsp; A coalition of 243 global leaders, including 125 Nobel laureates, expresses concern over the judicial harassment of Professor Muhammad Yunus; 12 bipartisan U.S. senators, led by Senator Dick Durbin, call for an halt to all harassment.&nbsp; How does the State Department view the prime minister political vendetta against Professor Muhammad Yunus?MR PATEL:&nbsp; Look, we share concerns voiced by other international observers that these cases may represent a misuse of Bangladesh’s labor laws to – as a way to intimidate Doctor Yunus.&nbsp; And our hope is that we would encourage the Bangladeshi Government to ensure a fair and transparent legal process for Doctor Yunus as the appeals process continues.Alex.QUESTION:&nbsp; Thank you, Vedant.&nbsp; Do you have anything on this debate in Hungarian parliament about Sweden’s NATO bid?&nbsp; Orban’s MPs didn’t show up.&nbsp; What do you think why Orban is doing what he is doing?MR PATEL:&nbsp; Hungary is the last NATO Ally to ratify NATO’s membership, and we are glad that Hungary’s parliament held that session today.&nbsp; At the same time, we are disappointed that the ruling party blocked the opportunity for a vote by boycotting the session.&nbsp; Hungary has said that it supports Sweden’s NATO accession, and it has also said that Sweden has fulfilled its commitments and is ready to become a NATO Ally.&nbsp; We believe the matter of Sweden’s NATO accession has been settled, and our hope is that we can work through this final process expeditiously.QUESTION:&nbsp; Thank you.&nbsp; And going back to Russia, if I may &#8212;&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; Uh-huh.QUESTION:&nbsp; Putin is expected to visit NATO member Türkiye next week, and according to Turkish officials President Erdogan is planning to focus on a new way, quote/unquote, to allow Ukrainian grain exports through the Black Sea.&nbsp; What is the department’s view on the trip and the topic?MR PATEL:&nbsp; So first, I will leave it to our Turkish partners to speak to their own engagements and their own foreign policy.&nbsp; If any country is able to play a meaningful role in stopping Russia from some of its malign behavior, we certainly would welcome it.&nbsp;&nbsp;And then the topic of Ukrainian grain, Alex – you know, as someone who has followed this the whole time, that Türkiye was instrumental in the – in getting the Black Sea Grain Initiative accomplished when it was in existence, and so we continue to feel that it’s critical that Ukrainian grain get to the places that it needs to go.&nbsp; And if there is credible progress that can be made in that space, it certainly would be a welcome one.Ryan, you had your hand up.&nbsp;&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; One more question on &#8212;&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; I’m going to work the room, Alex.&nbsp; You’ve gotten a couple questions already.&nbsp;&nbsp;Ryan, go ahead.QUESTION:&nbsp; Quick question on sanctions.&nbsp; When you guys implemented sanctions on Yemen, you announced kind of extraordinary carveouts to make sure that you didn’t exacerbate the humanitarian crisis there.&nbsp; When you warned that Venezuela may soon be getting hit with sanctions on its oil industry, there was no kind of – there was no application of those same carveouts.&nbsp; That includes the recent sanctions that were applied to Venezuela.So if the goal is to make sure the humanitarian situation doesn’t deteriorate in any country, why not make the carveouts from Yemen kind of universal to sanctions applications?MR PATEL:&nbsp; So I’d have to check the technical specifics, Ryan.&nbsp; But just broadly speaking, when it come to our approach to sanctions, export controls, things like that, we have been very clear to try and leave carveouts so that humanitarian aid, lifesaving aid, is not impeded.&nbsp; That’s just not the case in Yemen – it’s also the case in Russia, other places as well.&nbsp; But I am happy to check into the technical specifics of this circumstance and see what we might have to offer on this?Jalil, and then let’s close it out.&nbsp; Or – then we’ll come back to Simon, then we’ll wrap.&nbsp; Go ahead.QUESTION:&nbsp; Thank you very much, Vedant.MR PATEL:&nbsp; A quick one, my friend.QUESTION:&nbsp; A little different interesting question for you.&nbsp; Today – today AFP reported that ElevenLab created this voiceover of President Biden, and today Wall Street has reported that a Twitter big financer is a LSD and some other drugs user.&nbsp; So as big social media platforms are playing a big role in the electioneering in the U.S. and internationally, how difficult is it making your job, this whole social media influencing and the money that is spent there behind promoting and downplaying leaders?&nbsp; And the same thing just happened with President Biden just recently, so how is the State Department handling this whole issue?MR PATEL:&nbsp; So as it relates to your second question, I really don’t have any comment for you.&nbsp; But look, when it comes to social media, especially the dis- and misinformation that can exist on social media in foreign countries, that of course is something of grave concern to us.&nbsp; And that is exactly why we have the Global Engagement Center.&nbsp; It’s something Special Envoy Rubin is immensely focused on.&nbsp; Under Secretary Liz Allen is working immensely on this as well.&nbsp; And we have a number of lines of efforts across the department, including through the Secretary, in which we’re working to combat mis- and disinformation in places around the world.Simon.&nbsp;&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; Just one follow-up, please.&nbsp;&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; All right.QUESTION:&nbsp; Recently, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu had an interview with French TV and he made this two comments.&nbsp; I see that the U.S. and Israel of course are very close partners.&nbsp; He made these two comments.&nbsp; One was that this is a battle of civilization.&nbsp; Doesn’t this sound very extremist from a leader like &#8212;&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; I’ve not seen the prime minister’s interview, and I will leave it to his office to clarify his comments.Simon, go ahead.QUESTION:&nbsp; Yeah, I want to ask about events in Senegal.MR PATEL:&nbsp; Sure.QUESTION:&nbsp; Do you have any response to the events that happened over the weekend there?&nbsp; And I wonder, and more broadly, the Secretary just came back from a trip to that region.&nbsp; I know the U.S. has been pretty concerned about the sort of spate of both coups and undemocratic things.&nbsp; Do you classify this as a coup, as I think some people have?&nbsp; And how does this speak to your broader strategy for that region when countries kind of keep going down this path?MR PATEL:&nbsp; Sure.&nbsp; So first, we are deeply concerned about the situation in Senegal and are closely monitoring developments.&nbsp; Senegal has a strong tradition of democracy and peaceful transitions of power.&nbsp; And while we acknowledge allegations of irregularities, we are concerned about the disruption of the presidential election calendar, and we urge all participants in Senegal’s political process to engage in – peacefully, to engage peacefully in the important effort to hold free, fair, and timely elections.&nbsp; We also call on Senegalese authorities to restore internet access immediately and to respect freedom of expression, including for members of the press.&nbsp;&nbsp;I will also just add, since you asked, Simon, in terms of how the U.S. supports the Senegalese people’s commitment to democracy in a number of ways, we’ve got lines of effort through technical and financial support as well as working directly with election authorities and civil society.&nbsp;&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; And too early to say whether – whether it’s a coup or not?&nbsp;&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; I don’t have any assessment to offer for you on that.QUESTION:&nbsp; (Off-mike.)&nbsp;MR PATEL:&nbsp; All right, thanks, everybody.&nbsp; Thanks, everybody.&nbsp;&nbsp;QUESTION:&nbsp; Thank you.&nbsp;&nbsp;(The briefing was concluded at 1:44 p.m.)# # #						Tags																					Afghanistan																								Bangladesh																								China																								Hungary																								India																								Iran																								Iraq																								Israel																								North Korea																								Office of the Spokesperson																								Pakistan																								Palestinian Territories																								Russia																								Senegal																								Sweden																								Syria																								Turkey																								Ukraine																								United Kingdom																								Yemen
- Department Press Briefing – January 22, 2024 Vedant Patel, Principal Deputy Spokesperson12:39 p.m. ESTMR PATEL:  Good afternoon, everybody.  Just one very brief thing before I dive right in.  We have special guests in the back.  Mr. and Mrs. Williams, welcome to the daily press briefing.  I’d be remiss not to take this opportunity to just talk about how much we love and adore your daughter, how she’s the glue that keeps the daily press briefing and the press team together.  So thank you for lending her to us and to the Foreign Service.  So with that, I’m not sure where our friend is, but Simon, you want to kick us off?  QUESTION:  Thanks.  I just wanted to ask about the – a couple of different sanctions that were announced earlier today.  Could you sort of say a bit about how exactly you think these sanctions are going to impact – they seem to be aimed at Iran-linked proxies.  So what is the impact that you see those having, given that – I guess we don’t assume that these groups have assets in the United States.  They’re generally able to use intermediaries to route their transactions around, so what impact would we see from this? MR PATEL:  Sure.  So are you – we announced to – any specific you – or would like me to start with?  Or &#8212;   QUESTION:  Well, I guess – well, is – more of talking about the Iran-linked proxies.  MR PATEL:  Sure.  Sure.  So just to take a step back for those who might not be tracking, earlier today the Treasury Department’s OFAC designated one Iraqi airline and its CEO for supporting the IRGC Qods Force and Iran-aligned militia groups in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon.  We’re taking this action now because the IRGC Qods Force and the network of group it supports, they pose a significant threat to the Mideast region; for example, KH has claimed credit for a series of drone and missile attacks against U.S. personnel in Iraq, in Syria since Hamas’s horrific attack on Israel on October 7th.  We are committed to exposing and taking actions against individuals and groups that abuse their local economies and engage in illegal activities and support terrorist groups destabilizing the regions.  Specifically, though, Simon, you know that sanctions are just one of the many levers at our disposal when it comes to holding Iran and some of its proxies accountable for its activities.  QUESTION:  Do you have any specific information that these groups that are being targeted do have assets that would be affected?  Or is it largely symbolic, to say we’re doing something? MR PATEL:  I would not say that it’s symbolic.  As you know, all around the world our sanctions have – excuse me – our sanctions have legitimate and tangible impacts.  For example, the Iraqi airline Fly Baghdad has supported the operations of the IRGC Qods Force and Iran-aligned militia groups by delivering materiel and personnel through the region.  Fly Baghdad flights have delivered shipments of weapons to Damascus International Airport in Syria for transfer to members of the IRGC Qods Force and Iran militia groups on the ground.  So this is just an example of just some of the tangible things that are happening that we hope to be able to disrupt with some of our actions like this.  Matt, come back to you.  QUESTION:  No, I was late so I’ll wait.  MR PATEL:  Okay. QUESTION:  Sorry. MR PATEL:  Leon.QUESTION:  I’m wondering – the Turkish parliament is – has set up a vote tomorrow, I think, unless I’m mistaken – yeah, I think it’s tomorrow – on the Sweden transition to NATO.  Do you have a reaction to that?  MR PATEL:  I don’t.  We will, of course, let Türkiye’s legislative processes play out before getting ahead of that process, but if you recall, we have not parsed words about how ready we are for Sweden to formally join the Alliance.  We have long felt that it has met its commitments, and we look forward to this process moving forward.  Alex.  QUESTION:  Thanks, Vedant.  Back to the sanctions, and then I have Russia-related questions.  One of the networks that were sanctioned today – Shamlakh Network – is also operating in Türkiye.  Have you reached out to Turkish counterparts and asked them to follow suit?MR PATEL:  We engage with partners regularly, including an important NATO Ally like Türkiye, but I am just not going to get into the specifics of our communications and deliberations around our &#8212;    QUESTION:  Thank you.  MR PATEL:  &#8212; sanctions measures.  QUESTION:  Thank you.  On Iran, given the fact that Iran’s foreign minister has been active card-carrying member of the IRGC, given to those sanctions and also last week’s events, will he be allowed to come to the United States this week to attend the UN?  MR PATEL:  Alex, as you know, visa records are confidential, so I’m certainly not going to be able to speak to that, but the – I believe what you’re referring to is a convening of the UN Security Council.  And as you so note, the United States has a responsibility as its – as the host country for the United Nations to allow and facilitate legitimate travel to the United Nations for legitimate business for ministers and members of government that may have business in front of the UN.  So I’ll just leave it at that.QUESTION:  Again, move to Russia if I may.  Putin apparently today signed an order declaring a 1983 sale of Alaska to the United States as “illegitimate,” quote/unquote.  Do you have a response to that?MR PATEL:  So let me just understand, that he signed something today that said the sale of Alaska is illegitimate?QUESTION:  Right.MR PATEL:  Well, I think I can – I speak for all of us in the U.S. Government to say that certainly he is not getting it back.  So – (laughter).  QUESTION:  Are you speaking for Secretary Seward as well?  (Laughter.)MR PATEL:  Said.QUESTION:  Please come back to me later.MR PATEL:  I’ll come back to you later.  Said, go ahead.QUESTION:  Go to the Palestinian issue?MR PATEL:  Sure.QUESTION:  Are you aware of a Palestinian American teen that was killed by the Israelis, 17-year-old Tawfic Abdel Jabbar?  And if you are, are you doing anything about that?MR PATEL:  Thanks for your question, Said.  So we are aware, and we are devastated about the killing of 17-year-old U.S. citizen Tawfic Abdel Jabbar in the West Bank.  We continue to engage closely with the Government of Israel to ascertain as much information as possible, and we have called for an urgent investigation to determine the circumstance of his death and accountability be met as appropriate as well.  We also have been clear for quite some time over the tragic escalation in violence in the West Bank, and call on all parties to avoid escalations.I will also just note, Chief of the Office of Palestinian Affairs George Noll had the opportunity to visit with the family and offer condolences, and will plan to continue to stay in touch with them over the course of this process over this tragic loss.  Our embassy in Jerusalem also has been in touch with the family and is providing all appropriate consular services.QUESTION:  But you don’t know under which circumstances he was killed at this point?MR PATEL:  I’m not able to – I’m not able to speak to the circumstances around his death at this time.  But we have asked for the Government of Israel for any and all relevant and pertinent information, and we have asked that they conduct an investigation into what transpired as well.QUESTION:  A couple of other things.  The U.S. News &amp; World Report is reporting that 16,000 children – women and children have been killed in Gaza.  Does that – have anything to say about that?  Does that really – it doesn’t hold you back and it doesn’t stagger your perceptions of what’s going on in this war?MR PATEL:  Of course, Said.  Of course – don’t take my word for it; take the Secretary’s word for it, who has quite clearly spoken about the sheer impact on Palestinian civilians that this conflict has had, not to mention the impact that it has had on the most vulnerable in those circumstances, including women and children.  We – I will say again that we believe Israel has a moral and strategic imperative to take all possible precautions to avoid civilian harm as it conducts this operation.  I will leave it at that.QUESTION:  Well, Israel has been using dumb bombs, 2,000 pounds that were supplied by the United States of America.  That is not exactly being surgical and so on.  As long as they use this kind of munitions, civilians will die, day in and day out.  Are you currently reconciled to the fact that 150 or more Palestinian civilian men, women, and children die every day now?MR PATEL:  On the specifics of the military operations, Said, I’m just not going to speak to those, as this is not an American operation.  But in every engagement that we have had with our Israeli counterparts and in every engagement we will continue to have, we have reiterated the moral and strategic imperative that steps need to be taken, more needs to be done to minimize the impact on civilians.But simultaneously, Said, it is also important to remember that while we have this conversation, no one is calling for Hamas to lay down its arms; no one has been condemning Hamas for the irresponsible attacks that &#8212;   QUESTION:  Well, you have.MR PATEL:  &#8212; no one aside from us has been, for the irresponsible tactics that Hamas has been taking to co-locate itself within civilian infrastructure, its targeting of Israeli civilians on October 7th and beyond, its continued attacks on Israel’s sovereignty, and its stated intent of recreating October 7th over again and again and again and again.  And of course, Said, I am not saying that there is any moral equivalency between Hamas and Israel.  But we’ll continue to reiterate again that steps need to be taken for civilian casualties to be minimized.QUESTION:  Although it’s the Israeli forces that are really now occupying Hamas and inside – I mean, occupying Gaza and inside the territory.  Correct? MR PATEL:  That is &#8212;QUESTION:  So, I mean, they could call this off, too.  I mean, they could probably pursue a much more – a course that might be much more successful, like negotiating with Hamas to release the hostage.  And wouldn’t that be &#8212; MR PATEL:  I’m not &#8212;QUESTION:  – a good idea at this stage?MR PATEL:  I’m not going to speak to the specifics surrounding the military operation.  Of course we want to see hostages released as swiftly as possible.  But we also believe that it is important that steps be taken to not just hold Hamas accountable but degrade it in such a way that October 7th cannot be repeated. QUESTION:  And one – my last question.  Palestinians are reporting that the Israeli army executed 19 civilians in a summary execution.  I wonder if you are aware of the report and if you have any comment on that. MR PATEL:  I’ve seen that article, Said, and we’ve not been able to independently confirm these reports. QUESTION:  But if you can confirm that this has happened, this would be a war crime, wouldn’t it? MR PATEL:  Said, I’m just not going to get ahead of hypotheticals. QUESTION:  Okay. MR PATEL:  We’ve been clear that Israel must comply with international humanitarian law, but the article that you pointed out we have not been able to independently confirm. QUESTION:  I understand.  But if it did happen, that would constituent a war crime? MR PATEL:  I’m just not going to offer a prescriptive opinion from up here. Matt, go ahead. QUESTION:  Vedant, last week when we were discussing the destruction of the university in Gaza, Matt said that the U.S. is always troubled by – or is troubled by the degradation of civilian infrastructure in Gaza.  He also said that you guys had asked Israel questions about this specific incident.  I’m wondering, if you’ve heard back from them, if the Israelis are saying that this building, which appeared by – appeared to be empty and appeared to be occupied by or at least had been occupied by the IDF so that they could get the explosives in to do a controlled demolition, if the Israelis have come back to you and said that that’s a threat or it was a threat, and that’s why it was destroyed. MR PATEL:  I don’t have any updates on that.  It is correct we have asked for some updates and operational information specifically on that, but I don’t have any updates to read out for you.  I’m happy to check if we’ve got more to share and circle back. QUESTION:  Okay.  In your experience, does it generally take them longer than four or five days to get back to you with a &#8212;MR PATEL:  I’m just not going to prescribe something to that one way or the other. QUESTION:  So right now, you’re no more or less concerned than you were last week? MR PATEL:  We continue to be concerned when civilian infrastructure, civilian buildings like that, are targeted.  Again, this is an armed military operation to speak to.  It’s not one that we are conducting.  But to echo Matt, we are – have sought out additional information and context, and I don’t have an update for you at this time.  But I’m happy to check. QUESTION:  Okay.  And is it your opinion or your position or is the U.S. – the administration’s position that this constituted a quote/unquote “degradation” of civilian infrastructure?  I mean, whether it was justified or not, it is – understanding that the Israelis haven’t come back to you yet with the answers to your no doubt probing questions, this – you believe that, rightly or wrongly, this was degradation, it was a degradation of civilian infrastructure?MR PATEL:  Matt, of course – it was a civilian facility.  The circumstances around the operation I just don’t have additional context to offer.  So I will leave it at that. QUESTION:  Okay.  And I just wanted to ask you about this word “degradation” because this wasn’t degradation.  This was complete destruction.  You still think that it’s &#8212;MR PATEL:  I would not take issue with the way that you characterize it.  When I was referring to degradation in Said’s question, I was speaking about the degradation of Hamas. QUESTION:  Well, no, no.  I mean, Matt was the one who referred to degradation last week.  No, he referred to this – that you were troubled by incidents of the degradation of civilian infrastructure in Gaza.  MR PATEL:  Correct, which we are. QUESTION:  But this – and this counts as degradation?  It doesn’t count as complete destruction?MR PATEL:  Matt, we can quibble about the specific words for the entirety of the briefing.  QUESTION:  Well, words matter.  But &#8212;  MR PATEL:  But of course &#8212;QUESTION:  So if that’s degradation, then &#8212;MR PATEL:  Of course words matter.  But the point that we have always made is that when civilian – that civilian infrastructure and civilians broadly, steps need to be taken to ensure that those are not impacted.  But I don’t have specifics to offer on this. QUESTION:  But this was a case that steps were – not only were steps not taken to protect civilian infrastructure, steps were taken to completely demolish civilian infrastructure.  And if you look at pictures from other parts of Gaza – and I won’t get into that because we’re talking about this one specific case, this one specific instance – it wasn’t that the Israelis didn’t take steps to avoid damage to this building.  It was that they intentionally took steps to completely destroy it. MR PATEL:  Again, Matt, I am just not going to speak to the specifics of this operation.  We have asked for additional information, and if we have any, I’ll be sure to convey that. QUESTION:  Can I just very quick &#8212; MR PATEL:  Abbie, go ahead.QUESTION:  &#8212; let me finish on this point?MR PATEL:  Okay.QUESTION:  They also – the Israeli army apparently stole 3,000 artifacts from the university’s museum.  Do you have any – any information on that?MR PATEL:  I’ve not seen anything about that, Said, so I’m going to refrain from commenting.QUESTION:  Is that something that the United States would ask the Israelis whether they did?  And if they did, could they return them?MR PATEL:  I’m just – I just don’t have anything for you on that, Said.  I’ve not seen that reporting.  Abbie, go ahead.QUESTION:  Going back to the death of the Palestinian-American teenager, on what level has the U.S. communicated with Israel regarding the urgent need for investigation?  Has the Secretary spoken with his counterpart?MR PATEL:  We engage with the Israelis regularly at all levels.  I don’t have any calls from the Secretary to read out.  As I said, George Noll, the chief of the Office of Palestinian Affairs in Jerusalem, had the opportunity to visit the family as well as the members from the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem have been in touch with the family, and we of course will continue to remain in touch with the Government of Israel about this, as I said.QUESTION:  And on a separate question, do you have any update on the amount of Americans who have – number of Americans who’ve been killed in Gaza and the number who have been injured?MR PATEL:  Sure.  So I don’t have an update on the numbers that have been injured.  But as a result of continued violence after October 7th, we can share that – confirm the deaths of 23 American citizens, 21 who have served in the IDF, one who served in the Israeli National Police, as well as the recently reported death of Mr. Jabbar as well.  QUESTION:  And in the course of Americans who have left Gaza and gone into Egypt, can you say how many of them have – you’ve seen be injured as a result of what’s taking place in Gaza?MR PATEL:  I don’t have – I don’t have any metrics to offer on that. QUESTION:  Are you aware of any Americans who are on – or any Americans who are on the list trying to get across into Egypt who are injured and awaiting hospital treatment?MR PATEL:  I would not be able to speak to such specificity about individual circumstances, given privacy.  What I can say is that since the conflict we have been able to aid 1,400 American citizens, LPRs, and eligible family members be able to safely depart Gaza.  And this is something we of course will continue to work around the clock towards.Camille. QUESTION:  Thanks, Vedant.  Just going to what President Biden told reporters last week after his conversation with the Israeli prime minister, he said that there are a number of types of two-state solutions.  There’s a number of countries that are members of the UN that don’t have their own militaries.  I’m just seeking clarification on whether this is – this is the U.S., like, saying that it is willing to accept a Palestinian state that doesn’t have sovereign control over its own military, de facto its own security and its own borders.  Is that – is that the case?MR PATEL:  So look, Camille, in the conversation around our ongoing work for a two-state solution for the creation of a Palestinian state, the specifics around what that looks like is to be determined by the direct parties involved.  It’s not for the United States to be prescriptive at this time about what those conditions could look like.The President is absolutely right; there are a number of scenarios that exist out there.  But again, right now what we’re focused on is ensuring that steps are being taken to get us towards that conversation for when this conflict in Gaza ultimately ends.And regardless, we believe and we know that there is convergence with us and many in the Arab world that a two-state solution, specifically the creation of a Palestinian state, is key to regional security, regional prosperity, in a long-term sense – something that we believe will help get us out of this constant cycle of violence. QUESTION:  And also just to follow on that?MR PATEL:  Yeah.QUESTION:  The Israeli prime minister put out a statement this weekend after the President’s comments saying – and this is translated from the Hebrew:  “My insistence is what has prevented over the years the establishment of a Palestinian state that would have constituted an existential danger to Israel.  As long as I am prime minister, I will continue to strongly insist on this.”  Would you agree that that sounds a lot like an Israeli leader who is not willing to work with the – with anyone on the establishment of a Palestinian state?MR PATEL:  I’m just not going to characterize the prime minister remarks and will use this opportunity to echo what you’ve heard Matt and the Secretary say as well, which – that there exists a historic opportunity for Israel to deal with the challenges it has faced since its founding and an opportunity to take steps that we believe will ultimately lead to greater peace, greater stability, greater integration in the region, something that we believe can address the needs of the Palestinian people while also addressing the very legitimate security concerns that Israel has grappled with since its founding.  Nick, go ahead. QUESTION:  Different topic.MR PATEL:  Yeah. QUESTION:  There are allegations Senator Menendez took bribes from Qatar.  Over the weekend, separately, new reports the Qataris led a campaign to discredit Republican senators trying to designate the Muslim Brotherhood.  Does State have any concerns about these allegations against the Qataris?  Have they been relayed to the Qataris in any way? MR PATEL:  I’m just not going to comment on this as this involves an active Department of Justice matter. QUESTION:  Do these allegations in any way cause State to question the reliability of Qatar as an ally considering they’re playing such a key role in the hostage crisis in Israel?  MR PATEL:  I don’t have anything to offer on the circumstances surrounding Senator Menendez, but to take a step back, Qatar is an important partner, a key regional partner, one that is playing an immeasurable role in the ongoing work to not just address the ongoing conflict between Israel and Gaza, and Hamas, but also work that’s ongoing for – towards hostage release.  So don’t have anything else to offer on that. Go ahead. QUESTION:  U.S. Government is sending every day eight &#8212; MR PATEL:  I’m sorry, you’re going to need to speak up.  I’m having a hard time hearing.QUESTION:  U.S. Government is sending every day $8 million to Afghanistan.  Meanwhile, based on the recent report by the UN mission in Afghanistan, Taliban have detained woman in Afghanistan based on the ethnicity, mostly Hazara and Tajik women.  Doesn’t this money help the Taliban to imposing harder restriction on the Afghan women? MR PATEL:  Let me say a couple of things.  First and foremost, as it relates to Afghanistan and the Taliban, its treatment of women and girls, its lack of human rights, basic human rights in everyday society, continues to be something of great concern to us and something that we have continued to make clear to the Taliban is unacceptable to us as it goes about its own desired journey for legitimacy.  Separately, though, there are a number of steps and measures that are in place to ensure that U.S. humanitarian aid does not end up in the hands of the Taliban.  We work closely with trusted NGOs and other entities who we’ve had long-established relationships with, and there are measures and vetting and other processes in place to ensure that the hard-earned money from the American taxpayer does not end up in the hands of the Taliban.  Go ahead, right behind her. QUESTION:  Thank you so much, Vedant.  MR PATEL:  Yeah. QUESTION:  After the last general election in Bangladesh, in the State Department press statement it is outlined that U.S. is looking ahead to partnering with Bangladesh to advance shared vision, also a free and open Indo-Pacific area, region.  What specific action is the U.S. considering to deepen its partnership with Bangladesh?  MR PATEL:  There are a number of steps that we have and will continue to take when it comes to deepening our partnership with Bangladesh.  You’ve heard me say it here before that last year was the anniversary of our diplomatic relations with Bangladesh, and there continue to be a number of areas – specifically in addressing climate cooperation, security cooperation – where we believe that there is opportunity.  Of course, through that there – we have the opportunity to also engage with nongovernment actors as well, which we believe is also key and critical to deepening this relationship also. QUESTION:  Thank you, sir. MR PATEL:  Diyar, go ahead. QUESTION:  Thank you, Vedant.  MR PATEL:  Yeah. QUESTION:  Going back to the – these sanctions on Fly Baghdad.  MR PATEL:  Yeah. QUESTION:  In terms of time, when did the Iran use that airline to send weapons, fighters, and &#8212; MR PATEL:  I’m just not going to speak more specifically about some of these efforts from up here given operational security.  QUESTION:  The U.S. ambassador to Iraq says that the Iran use of an Iraqi airline for weapons, fighters, and the U.S. dollar smuggling.  So I’m talking about the U.S. dollars.  You know that the dollars in the Iraq is coming from New York and then they – the United States puts a lot of sanctions on the Iraqi banks.  So how did these Iranian get these dollars from the Iraqi Government?  What have you discussed with them?  MR PATEL:  So in terms of the specific – the specific ins and outs of the transactions and the financial history, I have no doubt our colleagues at the Treasury Department and OFAC may be able to speak to you a little bit more in detail about the sanctions and background here. QUESTION:  One last question.MR PATEL:  Uh-huh. QUESTION:  National Defense Authorization Act, which signed by President Biden late December, requests this administration to provide the Kurdistan region of Iraq a defense system, and last week there were meetings between the Kurdistan Regional Government and the U.S. officials, and you showed your support to the Kurdistan region in terms of security and diplomacy.  So does that administration provide the anti-missile defense to Iraqi Kurdistan?  Are you open to discuss that with your partners in Kurdistan region? MR PATEL:  I will just note, Diyar, that the Secretary, Secretary Blinken, had the opportunity to chat briefly with the prime minister of the Kurdistan region in Switzerland last week.  Continued cooperation in the security space was certainly a topic of discussion, but I just don’t have anything to announce, and I don’t have anything more specific to get into right now.QUESTION:  And last question:  So what do you have for the Iranian media outlets?  They are trying to mislead and distorting the very facts and information about their attacks on Erbil and on the region.  They’re using fake images, fake videos just to tell the public that they are doing this and they are pretexting for their acts in the region.  Then what do you have for that?MR PATEL:  We have not – we have not parsed our words about some of these kinds of misleading tactics that the Iranian regime and some of its proxies have undertaken, but again, we believe quite strongly that the sovereignty of countries – Iraq, in this situation – needs to be respected and the protection of civilians, the protection of U.S. personnel, is tantamount.  And we will take appropriate steps to hold these malign actors accountable should we need to.QUESTION:  Thank you.MR PATEL:  Rabia, go ahead.QUESTION:  Thank you, Vedant.  I’ll go back on the two-state solution.  The EU’s foreign policy chief, Josep Borrell, today said that Israel’s plan to destroy Hamas is not working and the European Union must pursue efforts to create a two-state solution despite Israeli operation.  And there were also some reports that the EU is seeking to impose consequences on Israel for its opposition to Palestinian statehood.  What is your response to that?  Do you believe that there should be consequences on Israel’s opposition to a two-state solution?MR PATEL:  So as it relates to the meetings and talks on this that are ongoing in the European Union, I would refer you to member-states and staff from those member-states to speak at greater specificity about this.  We’re obviously not – have not been party to those conversations.But to take a step back, we believe that it is in the best interest not only for the Israeli people but also the Palestinian people, as well as for the region.  We think that a two-state solution, a creation of a Palestinian state, is the only path that gets us out of this endless cycle of violence and onto a path that provides peace and security for all.  We will continue to work towards that goal, of course, in close coordination with our EU partners and other partners in the region.QUESTION:  Do you have anything to share on your engagements with Israelis in this regard, in the – on the two-state solution?MR PATEL:  We have been urging the creation of a Palestinian state and a two-state solution at every engagement that we’ve had with Israeli officials as well as Palestinian officials even prior to October 7th, and this is something that we’ll continue to do because we truly believe it is something that can offer longstanding, enduring peace and stability for the region and something that, again, will get us out of this endless cycle for violence.Go ahead.QUESTION:  Thank you.  The Russian embassy said that it sent a note to the State Department with a request to strengthen security measures around its diplomatic missions and consulates amid a surge of provocative actions.  Did you receive it?  Did you respond to it?MR PATEL:  I wouldn’t speak to internal diplomatic deliberations publicly, but I will just say that we take our responsibilities of foreign missions that we host in our country quite seriously, including the safety and security of relevant diplomats from foreign nations who may work and operate outside of the United States.QUESTION:  One more, one more.MR PATEL:  Yeah.QUESTION:  As you probably know, Gonzalo Lira died in a Ukrainian prison.  Do you intend to investigate this case?  And on a side note, Putin didn’t cite any orders claiming that the sale of Alaska was illegitimate, just to clarify.MR PATEL:  Maybe you and Alex can talk after class.QUESTION:  Yeah, yeah, absolutely.MR PATEL:  Hash this out.I’m not aware of that case.  I really would refer to Ukrainian authorities to speak to that.Ksenija, go ahead.QUESTION:  Thank you.  Turning to Serbia, Aleksandar Vucic said today that he spoke to Assistant Secretary of State James O’Brien concerning Kosovo central bank decision to eliminate the Serbian dinar in Kosovo.  What steps, if any, is the United States going to take to prevent the Kosovo central bank from suspending the Serbian dinar on February 1st?MR PATEL:  Ksenija, I’m going to have to check back on that.  Let me check with the team and I’ll get back to you.All right, go ahead, in the back.  Yeah, you.QUESTION:  Hello.  The first question regarding to the Qatar.  Like, we have, like, been reading and listening comments from Israeli leaders that Qataris are involved with the – like, Qatar’s leaders and Qatar’s state is, like, involved with Hamas, allied with Hamas, and, like, they must be punished.  Like, how much, like, U.S. agree or disagree that is Qatar involved with Hamas, not just like in October 7th, like – but in the – like, all the process of Hamas operations.  This is first question.  Second question is:  Why the U.S.A. disagree with this international court trial?  Like, if you are assured that Israeli are, like, very innocent, like, they are very moral, they don’t do something wrong over, like, ten hundreds – they is, like, they are amazing, like they don’t do anything wrong.  So why you are afraid that you go to this trial if you are assured that they are innocent, like, can you justify or explain, like, why are – why you are worried or afraid that Israel subject to the trial?The last question is related to the Houthi.  Do we expect that U.S.A. could escalate, like, their operation against the Houthi until, like, invading Yemen or, like, do – like do, like, an escalation in terms of bombing Yemen or, like, they are just going to do some small operation?  Even the Houthi – like, doesn’t care about what are you doing.MR PATEL:  Okay.  Let me work backwards.  QUESTION:  Three questions.  Yeah, three. MR PATEL:  Thank you.  I heard you.  Let me work backwards.  First, as it relates to the Houthis, the United States is not interested in any escalation, but it is never acceptable for malign actors to target international vessels, to target legitimate commerce that is flowing through the Red Sea.  We’re talking about international waters that allow 30 percent of global container shipping to flow through those waters – 15 percent of seaborne trade.  This is a waterway that is vital.  And we will always take appropriate steps to hold those accountable that put things like legitimate commerce, civilians, U.S. personnel, in harm’s way.  QUESTION:  But no invasion?                         MR PATEL:  No, no.  Number two, as it relates to your question on the ICJ, I think you are taking our comments a little bit out of context.  What we have been clear about is that the accusation that Israel is committing genocide, we believe that accusation is unfounded.  That being said, we have not hesitated to make clear – and I did so at the beginning of this press briefing, which, I will add, you were a little late to – that Israel has a moral and strategic imperative to take additional steps to ensure that impacts on civilians are minimized.  QUESTION:  But the &#8212; MR PATEL:  We have been very clear that more steps need to be taken, and that the toll on Palestinian civilians and the lives that have already been lost are far too many.  And then what was your first question?  QUESTION:  First question related to Qatar, like I wish to – if you can make clear &#8212; MR PATEL:  Ah, yes, yes.  On &#8212; QUESTION:  And like – because Ben-Gvir and his &#8212; MR PATEL:  I will just say that as it relates to Qatar, they are a key regional partner and an important relationship that the United States has in the region.  And they have been an important conduit to a lot of the work that we are – that we are doing as it relates to the conflict in Gaza as well as other regional priorities as well.Go ahead.  QUESTION:  Thank you.  So new Polish Prime Minister Tusk is in Kyiv today.  He pledged further assistance in the form of financing to purchase weapons and announced a reset of relations.  Do you have a reaction to that given the halt of U.S. assistance and – the Europeans sides, at least, there’s no sign of stopping that.  And also, while in Kyiv, Tusk also suggested that the – that Hungary’s prime minister is quietly supporting Russia and said that – that he’s betraying the West.  I wonder if that’s – if you agree with that statement.  MR PATEL:  On the second one, I don’t have anything to offer on that.  Hungary is an important NATO Ally.  As it relates to the first part of your question, we of course welcome our Polish allies taking steps – and really any country taking whatever steps that is feasible within their systems – to continue to support our Ukrainian partners.  As it relates to the United States, you heard the Secretary talk about this last week.  It is so imperative that Congress act as swiftly as possible so that we can continue to advance our own national security interests by supporting our Ukrainian partners.  And to echo Secretary Blinken, there is no secret pot of money here.  We need to work with Congress to get this done.  But the point that you raised about Poland is an important one because not only of course is the United States – has the United States taken intense steps over the past two years to support our Ukrainian partners – but other countries – a part of the Alliance, even outside of the Alliance – have taken appropriate steps to do so as well.  And we welcome any country that’s able to do it.  Alex, go ahead.QUESTION:  Thanks, Vedant.  And two separate topics.  Can you please fill us in on the administration’s current policy of confiscation of Russian state assets?  Any progress on that front?  MR PATEL:  This is something that we are just continuing to work towards with our G7 and other likeminded partners.  There’s of course, Alex, a lot of complexity when you look at – through the varying different government systems and international laws that exist, and so we’re continuing to have those conversations.  We have no doubt, though, that this could be an important conduit to hold the – continue to hold the Russian Federation accountable, but I don’t have anything to announce for you today.QUESTION:  Thank you.  And second topic on the South Caucasus.  MR PATEL:  Yeah.  Yeah.  QUESTION:  The Secretary in December invited Azeri and Armenian foreign ministers to Washington to discuss Karabakh conflict.  Is the invitation still pending?  Was it rejected or &#8212;   MR PATEL:  I don’t have any – I don’t have any scheduling updates to offer, Alex, but we look forward to talking more about this soon. QUESTION:  Russia – Lavrov said that Azerbaijan’s Aliyev is willing to go to Moscow to discuss Karabakh conflict.  Do you feel same appetite to Washington talks?  MR PATEL:  You know that we have the same appetite, Alex.  As someone who has covered this and worked and asked questions about this for at least as long as I’ve been here, you know firsthand that this is something that the United States and that the Secretary is interested in and that this is something that we’re going to work very hard to get across the finish line in close coordination with Armenia and Azerbaijan and the others who are working on this issue, including Coordinator Bono.In the back.  QUESTION:  Thank you.  United States daily expresses its regret for the killing of the civilians in Gaza.  And they still kill – now more than 24 killed, civilians, and there is under the rubble.  At the same time, United States refused the ceasefire in Gaza.  So – and also the only state to use – last time – vetoes to ceasefire.  You don’t think this is a conflict of the position?MR PATEL:  It’s not because a ceasefire is not a policy that we’re pursuing, because we believe that important steps need to be taken to degrade Hamas so that it cannot carry out the October 7th attacks over and over and over again.  That’s not hyperbole.  That’s not me up here exaggerating.  That’s the stated intent of Hamas.  They want to conduct October 7th every day if they had the opportunity to.  And so currently Israel is conducting an operation to take steps to degrade Hamas so that it cannot do that.  And we believe that that is something that they must and should do.  Simultaneously, we believe that there is a moral and strategic imperative to hold – to take steps so that civilians are not impacted at the rate that they have been.  But while we have this conversation, let’s not forget that over the course of this, it is Hamas that has been co-locating itself with civilian infrastructure.  It is Hamas that has been using facilities like schools and hospitals and apartment buildings as headquarters, co-locating itself within civilians.  So we shouldn’t lose sight of that also.  One other – go – no, no, no, behind you.  Go ahead.QUESTION:  Thank you. MR PATEL:  Yeah. QUESTION:  Let me go back to the Treasury sanctions on &#8212;   MR PATEL:  Sure. QUESTION:  &#8212; Iran-backed militias.  How would you believe the sanctions on Iranian-backed figures and militia groups are impacted – impacting their abilities?  Because they say we don’t have any assets in the United States, and Iran and its backed militias use different tactics to evade sanctions.MR PATEL:  Well, the important thing to remember here also is that sanctions are not the only steps that we are – we have at our disposal, but we also believe that our sanctions are a vital tool against those who try to misuse not only their own economic systems but also try to subvert the U.S. financial systems as well.  I already offered an example of how Fly Baghdad had been working closely with the IRGC already.   Okay.  All right.  Thanks, everybody.  QUESTION:  Hold on, I just wanted a last &#8212;  MR PATEL:  Go ahead. QUESTION:  Last and possibly least.  I noticed that it is now past halftime at the football match in Ivory Coast that the Secretary is going to.  And Equatorial Guinea is beating the hosts one to nothing.  Who is the Secretary rooting for in this?  MR PATEL:  The Secretary is looking forward to just catching a great game and seeing &#8212;     QUESTION:  So he has no &#8212;MR PATEL:  &#8212; the sport of soccer, or football, played.  QUESTION:  He has no interest in either rooting or wagering either way?  MR PATEL:  No, he is very glad to be hosted, to be catching this match.  As you know, Matt, he’s a big soccer fan, and I know he is enjoying what seems to be turning out to be a great game.  And while I have the floor, my condolences on the Bills yesterday.  QUESTION:  Yeah, I’m still recovering.MR PATEL:  So you and Under Secretary Allen can commiserate together.QUESTION:  Yeah. MR PATEL:  All right.  Thanks, everyone.  (The briefing was concluded at 1:23 p.m.)
- Concern with Hungary’s Sovereign Defense Authority Law HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases&#8230;Concern with Hungary’s Sovereign Defense Authority Law				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();			}		});	}																										Concern with Hungary’s Sovereign Defense Authority Law																																		Press Statement																														December 20, 2023																																							The United States is concerned by the Hungarian government’s decision today to enact a new law which equips the Hungarian government with draconian tools that can be used to intimidate and punish those with views not shared by the ruling party. The “Sovereign Defense Authority” could be used to subject Hungarian citizens, businesses, and organizations to intrusive investigations with no judicial oversight, even if they have had no contact with or support from a foreign government or foreign entity. This new law is inconsistent with our shared values of democracy, individual liberty, and the rule of law.						Tags																																											Anti-Corruption and Transparency																															Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor																								Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs																																														Human Rights and Democracy																															Hungary																								Office of the Spokesperson																																Sovereignty
- The United States Joins Multinational Declaration to Triple Nuclear Energy Capacity by 2050 to Support Global Climate and Energy Security Goals Office of the SpokespersonToday, U.S. Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry joined leaders and ministers from four continents to announce the Declaration to Triple Nuclear Energy at the U.N. Climate Change Conference in Dubai, United Arab Emirates (COP28).  The Declaration recognizes the key role of nuclear energy in achieving global net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 and keeping the 1.5-degree Celsius goal within reach.  The Declaration also highlights the need for secure supply chains and encourages shareholders of the World Bank, international financial institutions, and regional development banks to include nuclear energy in their lending policies. Endorsing countries include Armenia, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Czech Republic, Finland, France, Ghana, Hungary, Jamaica, Japan, Moldova, Mongolia, Morocco, The Netherlands, Poland, Republic of Korea, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, and the United States.See the full text of the Declaration in the link .
- Hungary’s National Day Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of StateOn behalf of the United States of America, I wish the people of Hungary a happy Saint Stephen’s Day as you celebrate over a thousand years of history as a nation.The American and Hungarian people are united in our fundamental commitment to democratic values and rule of law, collective security, and prosperity.  It is on this basis that we look forward to increasing our cooperation on shared challenges at an important moment.The relationship between Hungary and the United States is too important not to do everything we can to ensure the actions of our governments fully reflect the strong historic ties between our nations and our tremendous potential to address the challenges of our day, together as NATO Allies.It is my hope that the partnership between our governments and our peoples only grows stronger and more productive in the year ahead.
- Department Press Briefing – August 1, 2023 Matthew Miller, Department SpokespersonWashington, D.C.													HomeDepartment Press Briefing &#8211; August 1, 2023				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 &#8211; August 1, 2023																																																					August 1, 2023																																																																																																				Article Index																									DEPARTMENT / UNSCNIGER / REGION / RUSSIAPAKISTAN / AFGHANISTAN / CHINASAUDI ARABIA / ISRAEL / PALESTINIAN TERRITORIESAFGHANISTANIRAQIRANISRAELCHINAUKRAINE / SAUDI ARABIA / RUSSIAARMENIA / AZERBAIJANDEPARTMENLEBANON / PALESTINIAN TERRITORIESHUNGARYNIGERSYRIA / RUSSIAISRAEL / PALESTINIAN TERRITORIESBURMACHINA																													1:25 p.m. EDTMR MILLER: Good afternoon, everyone. Let’s start with – thank you, Said. I think that was you. Was that you that sent a “good afternoon” back? No.QUESTION: (Off-mike.)MR MILLER: Thank you. (Laughter.) Even if it wasn’t you the first time, thank you. (Laughter.)QUESTION: Let’s start.MR MILLER:  Let me start with some brief comments. Today the United States assumes the presidency of the United Nations Security Council for the month of August.Among its many responsibilities as president, the United States will set the agenda for the Security Council. And for the third time in as many presidencies during the Biden administration, the United States will draw attention to food insecurity.Roughly 345 million people face acute food insecurity. One of the primary causes for this is conflict.For example, after Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, wheat prices spiked to near record highs. The Black Sea Grain Initiative helped bring prices back down, but after Russia terminated its participation in the program, wheat prices rose again by 17 percent.To highlight this topic, on Thursday, Secretary Blinken will chair a High-Level Open Debate in the Security Council, focusing on Famine and Conflict-Induced Global Food Insecurity.The United States will also highlight another Biden administration priority – the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. As you may know, the united – the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was drafted almost 75 years ago. And to commemorate that milestone, we will elevate human rights at every opportunity throughout the month by including voices from civil society in the council’s meetings.The United States will also preside over a full agenda in the Security Council, featuring regularly scheduled meetings outlined in our planned Program of Work.The world is looking to the UN Security Council to fulfill its mandate of maintaining international peace and security. The United States is committed to real progress during our presidency and carrying that progress into the upcoming General Assembly.And with that, go ahead, Simon.QUESTION: (Inaudible.) I wonder if we could start with Niger. If you could give us an update on what you’re seeing on the ground, and specifically France and some other European countries have started evacuating their people. Is the U.S. seeing anything that would cause you to start that process?MR MILLER: A few things. Number one, our embassy is open today, operating on a normal schedule. We’re monitoring the efforts by France and other Europeans to evacuate their citizens. We urge Nigerien authorities to facilitate an orderly, safe evacuation. At this time, we do not have indications of threats to U.S. citizens or facilities, but we are continually reevaluating our posture to ensure the safety of our citizens.QUESTION: And I wonder if you would have any comment on these statements by Mali and Burkina Faso, rejecting the ECOWAS intervention on Niger, and that basically this concern that this is going to spill over into a regional conflict. So where does the U.S. stand on those countries seeming to support the coup makers in Niger?MR MILLER: We support the efforts of ECOWAS and leaders in the region to resolve this situation, to restore the democratic president, the elected president of Niger. We obviously saw the comments by other countries. I think it’s inappropriate to make those statements at this point. We’re not going to engage in hypotheticals. We don’t need – believe there’s any reason to ever get to that ultimate conclusion. We believe that the democratically elected president of Niger ought to be restored to full authority immediately.QUESTION: Do you see any prospect for that? Is there any progress on reversing the coup?MR MILLER: We continue to work at – the Secretary, as I said yesterday, has talked to a number of leaders in the region, has spoke to President Bazoum on a number of occasions. ECOWAS is, of course, involved on the frontlines and is continuing to work it diligently. I don&#8217;t have any updates, but it continues to be our policy to push for his full restoration.QUESTION: And just one more. I wonder if you foresee – if that is unsuccessful and the status quo remains, do you see U.S. security cooperation with the government in Niger continuing? I know you’ve spoken to this could have an impact on humanitarian aid and other things, but in terms of the security cooperation, which is a major part of the relationship, is that likely to continue, even if they don’t reverse course?MR MILLER: Again, I don&#8217;t want to go into hypotheticals, because that is an outcome that we hope is not fulfilled. We hope to see the president restored to leadership of the country. He’s the democratically elected president, and all of our work right now is to see him restored.As Secretary Blinken has made clear, however, there are hundreds of millions of dollars in aid from the United States that are at stake. I don&#8217;t want to talk about what specifically we might do if President Bazoum is not restored to authority, but certainly our aid, our assistance is at stake. But again, I think it’s premature to speculate what that might look like at this point.QUESTION: Follow up on Niger, on that one?MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: You guys mentioned – in fact, Kirby again this morning – and you believe there’s a little window of opportunity or – how you want to call it, I’m not sure – for diplomacy and to restore President Bazoum. On what basis are you saying that? What window is this exactly? Because on the ground, things are not going that way at all.MR MILLER: So it – there is a window. I would say we make those assessments based on the fact we are continuing to have conversations with President Bazoum; other leaders in the region are continuing to have conversations with him. We’re continuing to have conversations with other leaders in Niger. We’ve spoken with the former president and continue to press for the leaders of the – the security leaders who are attempting to seize power, to press for them to restore President Bazoum to his rightful place as the democratically elected leader of the country.We will pursue that for as long as that possibility remains open. It does remain open today. I wouldn’t want to speculate on how long that might remain open, but as long as it is, we’ll continue to press that case. Because we believe that the democratically elected leader who was chosen by the people ought to be the one who leads the country.QUESTION: Just a follow up on that.MR MILLER: Yeah. Let me – yeah, go ahead, Alex.QUESTION: Just very, very quickly, we all have seen pictures from the weekend, how protesters were waving Russian flags, chanting Putin’s name. Is there any involvement from Russia that you have noticed during past couple of days?MR MILLER: We have not seen any evidence that Russia was behind this coup, but certainly it would not be out of character for Russia or for the Wagner Group to try to take advantage of instability in this country or any other in Africa.Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you so much, sir. Jahanzaib Ali from ARY News TV Pakistan. There was deadly bomb blast suicide attack in Pakistan. More than 54 people were killed, dozens of have life-threatening injuries. And it is not about 54 people, it’s about 54 families. Would you like to share your comments?MR MILLER: We condemn in the strongest terms the attack in northwestern Pakistan on Sunday during a political rally. We are deeply saddened by the loss of life and injuries sustained from the explosion and share our heartfelt condolences with those affected by the attack.The Pakistani people have suffered greatly at the hands of terrorists. We believe in the resilience of Pakistan’s people and their capacity to recover from this devastating attack. No country should have to suffer such acts of terror, which are, of course, an affront to all peaceful and democratic societies.And I’ll say finally that we remain committed to working with Pakistan to address the shared threat posed by terrorist groups throughout the region and support the Pakistani Government’s efforts to combat terrorism in a manner that promotes the rule of law and the protection of human rights.QUESTION: But a few days ago, you told us that United States will not allow Afghanistan to be used against United States and its partners. Pakistan is a close partner, and Tehrik-e Taliban Pakistan, Daesh, ISIS is the biggest threat operating from Afghanistan and targeting innocent civilians and security forces. So what kind of assurances or message you brought from Taliban in a recent meeting in Doha?MR MILLER: We made clear in that meeting, as we have in our other meetings with the Taliban, our other engagements with the Taliban, that we believe it is important that they not allow Afghanistan to be used as a base for terrorist attacks in the region or anywhere else.QUESTION: Sir, one last question, please. The attack have raised questions about whether Pakistan’s security establishment can stamp out militancy without the American air and other military support it will – it relied on during 2014 security operation. Is Pakistan asking any support, like military support, air support?MR MILLER:  I’m not going to get into conversations between our two countries, but I will say that the State Department does fund several counterterrorism capacity building programs in Pakistan, focused on law enforcement and the justice sector, and we’ll continue to do so.Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you. Wajid Ali Syed, I’m from Geo TV Pakistan. The China’s leadership is in Pakistan these days to mark ten years of the CPEC project. Any comments on this relationship?MR MILLER: Yeah. I will say that, first of all, our support for Pakistan’s economic success is unwavering. We’ll continue to engage with Pakistan about strengthening our trade and investment ties, all of which are priorities for our bilateral relationship.With respect to investments by any country, we believe good governance, long-term capacity building, and sustainable market-based approaches that allow the private sector flourish are the best paths to sustained growth and development. We welcome trade and investment that promotes such development and growth.But we will continue, in all cases, to emphasize the need for transparency, sustainable financing practices, and preservation of national and data security to ensure mutual benefit for both Pakistan and its partners. We have not always seen that with respect to investments by the PRC in countries around the world. But if – investments that promote transparency and responsible debt management we believe are appropriate.QUESTION: Thanks.MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. So enough of Mr. Donald Lu and cipher. I promise, no more.MR MILLER: I don’t believe you, but we’ll see.QUESTION: I’m – no, no. No more. (Laughter.) But I’m moving to a subject that I hope for the next couple of weeks you are not going to get bored from me, and I hope you will read about it a lot, too. So I want to start with that for last one week I personally, after a long time since I moved to the U.S. of eight years ago, I’ve been dealing with a bunch of different (inaudible) and stuff but doesn’t matter. But my question that brings me to this whole thing is – and I have raised this question with Mr. Kirby as well, eight years ago – since last 20 years &#8212;MR MILLER: Eight years ago with &#8212;QUESTION: Yeah.MR MILLER: Okay.QUESTION: Since 20 years when the U.S. has been – was in Afghanistan, how much responsibility until today do you think the U.S. or the State Department takes in the number of deaths caused by the heroin trade from Afghanistan, which is the largest producer of heroin in the world? Every country, every nation has thousands of people die every year.MR MILLER: I think the responsibility for those deaths rests with the traffickers of heroin and those that enable it.QUESTION: Exactly. And that &#8212;MR MILLER: All – okay.QUESTION: &#8212; bring me to the second questions.MR MILLER: Okay. All right. Let’s &#8212;QUESTION: Let me one more question, please.MR MILLER: We’ve got a lot people – got a lot people with their hands up.QUESTION: Very quickly. Very quickly.MR MILLER: So let’s move through.QUESTION: But very important matter – I swear I have no agenda with it except &#8212;MR MILLER: I know. I know. Just –QUESTION: &#8212; professional journalism.MR MILLER: I just want to get to the question.QUESTION: How much funds has the U.S. provided to Pakistan in last 20 years with regards to drug trafficking?MR MILLER: I do not have &#8212;QUESTION: But will you provide it to me?MR MILLER: I do not have my abacus here in front of me to add it up so &#8212;QUESTION: But next time can I ask you that?MR MILLER: But we will – I will happily look into it.QUESTION: Just last one.MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: May I?MR MILLER: No. Let me move around. And if there’s time, I’ll come back to you, but – just Said, and then I’ll come to you, Abbie.QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. There has been a lot of reports about the – a grand old initiative that may be coming from the White House on a grand peace plan by the Biden administration that includes normalization of the Saudis in exchange for nuclear program security agreement, and many others, as was revealed by Thomas Friedman last week. I wonder if you’re aware of these reports.MR MILLER: Aware of the reports? Certainly, and we’ve &#8212;QUESTION: And have you read them and so on?MR MILLER: We’ve – we have engaged in promoting such normalization from the State Department. As you may remember, the – Secretary Blinken traveled to Saudi Arabia, talked about normalization of relations with Israel with the crown prince, and then has discussed it with the prime minister of Israel as well.QUESTION: So you are in tandem with the White House in terms of working together and so on?MR MILLER: Of course.QUESTION: Of course. Okay. So let me ask you something. I mean, it used to be that the United States of America used to have a peace envoy, an envoy for peace, but now you have replaced him with a normalization envoy. Is that correct?MR MILLER: We have – we have &#8212;QUESTION: So you decided &#8212;MR MILLER: We do have a normalization envoy, but &#8212;QUESTION: Right.MR MILLER: &#8212; the senior leadership of this department, as the senior leadership of this – of the – at the White House, from the President on down, have made clear that we support a two-state – two-state solution, and it continues to be our policy.QUESTION: Nonetheless, you don’t have a peace envoy. You have an envoy for the Abraham Accords and normalization.MR MILLER: I &#8212;QUESTION: Is that – is that the – that’s where the priority is?MR MILLER: I don’t think you should read into – I don’t think you should read in – I don’t think you should read into anything about relative prioritization based on the appointment of a special envoy. There are senior officials in this building and senior officials at the White House who are actively engaged in pressing for a two-state solution and who raise it directly with senior leaders in Israel, including the prime minister.QUESTION: So when was the last time that the United States actually tried to broker some sort of talks even, peace talks, between the Palestinians and the Israelis and so on?MR MILLER: There have been – this is the second – the second historical question at the briefing today. I will say that &#8212;QUESTION: (Inaudible) rhetorical question.MR MILLER: Well, let me – Said, let me – let me – when you &#8212;QUESTION: Sure.MR MILLER: I don’t interrupt when you ask a question; I would appreciate you letting me give my answer. It is an issue that we have raised repeatedly in our conversations with leaders in Israel as well as our conversations with leaders of the Palestinian Authority.QUESTION: But the truth is, I mean, there are envoys. There’s Andrew Miller – today had met with the Palestinians, went to Palestinian towns, and so on. But there is no effort to reignite, if you wish, or restart peace talks. You agree with me, right?MR MILLER: Said, it is our policy that we continue to press both the Israeli prime minister and the leadership of the Palestinian Authority for. It is also an issue that has come up in the context of normalization. I don’t know if you – if you followed the press conference when the Secretary traveled to Saudi Arabia. The foreign minister of Saudi Arabia made clear that one of the things that they were interested in, in the context of normalization, was seeing some progress on issues between Israel and the Palestinian people.QUESTION: Matt, on this?MR MILLER: No, let me – I promised Abbie she would go next. So let me – okay.QUESTION: No, no, on this – on this topic.MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: A follow-up. Do you have an update on the efforts that the U.S. is making with Saudi Arabia and Israel? And where are the sticking points on this – in this matter?MR MILLER: Well, as I’ve said before, it continues to be a priority for us, but it is not something where we are going to constantly read out what are private diplomatic conversations.QUESTION: (Off-mike.)MR MILLER: Let me – let me go to – let me – hold on, hold on. Let me just – I’m going to – I’m going to work the room a little bit because other people have had their hands up and you have had &#8212;QUESTION: This is going back &#8212;MR MILLER: I’m not trying to be – I’ve got to give everyone a chance.QUESTION: No, no (inaudible).QUESTION: This is going back to Afghanistan. The readout of the discussions between the U.S. and the Taliban in Doha mentioned that U.S. officials were pressing for the immediate, unconditional release of detained U.S. citizens. How many U.S. citizens are currently detained in Afghanistan, and what can you tell us about their condition?MR MILLER: I’m not going to make public the number that are there, but it is correct that in the meeting with leaders of the Taliban, we did raise that issue as well as a number of issues such as the resumption of flights, counternarcotics, combating terrorism, and we continue to press for the release of the detainees. But due to their privacy I don’t think it’s appropriate for me to get into the – their specific conditions.QUESTION: Follow-up on Afghanistan?MR MILLER: No, let me just – let me &#8212;QUESTION: One more follow-up on that.MR MILLER: There’s – let me just say – like, everyone is shouting questions today – (laughter) – people can raise their hand. I will – hold on.QUESTION: (Off-mike.)MR MILLER: I will – I will work the – it’s the weather? I will work the room and get to everyone, but no one needs to shout their question.QUESTION: As a part of the Taliban’s readout of those meetings, they said a significant portion of the restrictions on Afghanistan’s banks have been lifted; the development is expected to ease banking transactions and facilitate economic activities in the country. Can you speak a little bit more about what was discussed about – in that context?MR MILLER: Yeah. So I will say I saw that in their readout, other people here saw that in their readout, didn’t know what they were talking about. There were no such restrictions that we are aware of, and any sanctions that we do have in place have not been lifted. So we were confused by that language in their readout.All right, go ahead. Yeah.QUESTION: Just on Afghanistan really quickly, one of the – one of the conditions that were mentioned in the State Department earlier was that the Taliban needs to – in order for it to be recognized in some way, shape, or form, it needs to meet some criteria in terms of human rights and et cetera. Thousands of Hazara – ethnic groups consisting of Hazaras and other groups within Afghanistan has been facing genocide in some way, shape, or form, and also at the same time we have just heard that the Taliban is actually burning all types of books relating to music, and the erosion of women’s rights are just rampant in the country. But firstly, even just going back to the genocide of groups like the Hazaras, for example, would that be something that the State Department would consider to be one of the conditions for the recognition of the Taliban?MR MILLER: So I’m not going to stand here and say what the conditions are. I will say, as we have said in the past, that the Taliban continues to seek recognition; it continues to seek legitimacy. And that’s not where we are right now for a number of reasons, including the treatment of their own people, including their many flagrant human rights violations.Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. Today Baghdad commemorate the 9th anniversary of the Yazidi genocide. David Burger, the U.S. embassy in Baghdad deputy chief of mission, were there and said the U.S. commitment to the Yazidi community and also civil society. That’s been for years that the Sinjar Agreement has not been implemented by both the Iraqi and also – Iraqi Government and the Kurdish government. And also, thousands of the Yazidi people are still living in a dire situation in the makeshift camps. What’s this commitment that the U.S. has towards the Yazidi people, and what’s your view about the current situation in Sinjar?MR MILLER: So the United States is fully committed to supporting Yazidis and other communities in Iraq that were devastated by ISIS. And we are working closely with and supporting the Government of Iraq as they pursue justice and accountability.With respect to the 2020 Sinjar Agreement, we believe it was an important and construction – constructive step forward. The lack of implementation and the longstanding political deadlock on the agreement are not acceptable. Meaningful progress to implement the Sinjar Agreement is a necessary step to strengthening Iraq’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. In particular, the U.S. embassy, as you referenced, in Baghdad called today for officials in Baghdad and Erbil to immediately break the political deadlock by working with Sinjar communities and Yazidi leaders to appoint a mayor in Sinjar.QUESTION: Is there any pressure from the U.S. on the Kurdish and also the Iraqi leaders to implement the Sinjar Agreement?MR MILLER: I’m sorry, I just didn’t hear.QUESTION: Is there any pressure from the U.S. Government on the Kurdish and also the Iraqi Government to implement the Sinjar Agreement?MR MILLER: I think that’s exactly what I just said.QUESTION: And I have one question about the Iranian female journalists, that Iran yesterday sentenced two female journalists over four years. Do you have any reaction to that?MR MILLER: We are aware. We’re obviously following those cases, as we have followed the cases of previous sentences of journalists in Iran. I would say that the Iranian regime’s continued crackdown on journalists for engaging in the acts of journalists, oftentimes with baseless and completely discredited allegation, remains a violation of their human rights, something that the world continues to watch.Alex, I’ve already come to you. Let me go &#8212;QUESTION: Thanks so much, Matt. Really appreciate it. I want to just circle back to Israel for a second. Dan Shapiro was just in the region trying to help re-jump, I guess, or jumpstart the Negev Forum. Are you worried about the future of the forum with Morocco recently, obviously, postponing a meeting? And are we any closer to another meeting after his trip?MR MILLER: I am not going to speak to the scheduling of another meeting other than to say obviously we support rescheduling or scheduling the next meeting of the Negev Forum. And in general, we look – continue to look for ways to both broaden and deepen the Abraham Accords and other normalization agreements. It’s a priority. We just talked about the normal – potential normalization of relations with Saudi Arabia. But it’s something that senior leaders of the department continue to work on.Go ahead, Olivia.QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. Noting the readouts that you issued late yesterday between U.S. and Chinese officials here in Washington, can you confirm today whether the invitation was made to Foreign Minister Wang Yi to visit the U.S.?MR MILLER: I can. As you noted, Assistant Secretary Kritenbrink yesterday met with his counterpart, Director Yang Tao, here at the State Department in Washington, D.C. This was a follow-up to the meetings that we had in Beijing in June, as well as the recent meeting several weeks ago that Secretary Blinken had with Wang Yi. In the meeting yesterday, we extended the invitation that had previously been made to the former foreign minister, Qin Gang, and made clear that that invitation did transfer over to Minister Yi, as I somewhat previewed in my remarks yesterday.QUESTION: And can you say whether that invitation was accepted and whether an agenda or timeline to the visit has been set?MR MILLER: With respect to accepting the invitation, I’ll let the Chinese Government speak to their side of it. We certainly expect that it is something that they would accept, and it is a trip that we expect to happen, but we have not yet scheduled a date.QUESTION: And in terms of the topics that were raised, the readout was sort of terse. Did they – did the meetings notch any progress on the priority areas that were identified in the aftermath of Secretary Blinken’s trip, specifically on fentanyl and American detainees?MR MILLER: We continue to make progress on those issues. We don’t have – I don’t have any concrete results. We’re not at the point of establishing the fentanyl working group, which, as you know, has been a major priority for us and we continue to press the Chinese side to agree to. But we did feel it was important to continue the conversations. That was something that we thought we had established in the meetings in Beijing. Since then, the Secretary has had another meeting with his counterpart, and we have these meetings going on at sub-cabinet, sub-ministerial levels to continue talking about these.We will note, as we did even before we left Beijing, that we fully recognize that progress on many of these areas is hard. But we are committed to continuing to work because the issues on which we need to cooperate with China, we think, are important, just as the issues in which we need to raise concerns with them are important.QUESTION: Last one: Did the specific issue of Travis King in North Korea and enlisting China’s support in that come up, and have the Chinese indicated in any direction whether they’re willing to engage on that?MR MILLER: I don’t know if it – I just don’t know if it came up. I can check.Okay, go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you. Last week, the Ukrainian defense ministery said that Kyiv would submit its first report on the use of cluster munitions to the United States. Has the administration received this report yet?MR MILLER: I’m not aware if we have.QUESTION: My second question is about the peace talk summit in Saudi Arabia on Saturday. Do you think it is a good idea to organize such a summit without Russian participation in it?MR MILLER: I would echo what Ukrainian President Zelenskyy has said, which is that he is open to real diplomacy with Russia when Russia is ready to engage in such diplomacy. Unfortunately, what we have seen is that from the outset of this war – really from even before the outset of this war – Russia has never been willing to engage in actual diplomacy. We made clear on behalf of the United States we were willing to talk about any legitimate security concerns Russia had before the outset of the war. Ukraine made clear that they were able to do the same. Russia never engaged in a serious or meaningful way.With respect to the talks that will be held in Saudi Arabia, we believe it’s important that countries around the world hear directly from Ukraine about the horrors that have been unleashed on their country, about the attacks on civilians, about the attacks on schools, on hospitals, on apartment buildings and civilian infrastructure; that they hear about just how Russia has violated their territorial integrity, violated their sovereignty. So if at some point Russia is willing to engage in meaningful diplomacy – I will not speak on behalf of president – of the president of Ukraine, but he has made clear in the past that he’d be willing to engage with them on such matters.QUESTION: On Ukraine.MR MILLER: Yes.QUESTION: Thanks, Matt. Liam Cosgrove with The Grayzone. So back in May I asked you about Gonzalo Lira. He was the U.S. citizen arrested in Ukraine for posting dissident content online, and you told me the State Department was aware of his arrest in May. And we learned last night through a series of tweets by him that he had been tortured in the Ukrainian prison and he was now on a motorcycle with a broken rib trying to flee to the Hungarian border. And so I’m wondering, if this is true, given the State Department knew of his arrest and his detention, how has this been allowed to occur? We have a U.S. citizen being – being detained and perhaps tortured in the prison of one of our strongest allies.MR MILLER: Well, you lost me with the “perhaps” and the “if this is true.” I think I’d want to verify those reports before I commented on it.Alex, go ahead.QUESTION: Is the State Department – is the State Department investigating?MR MILLER: I just want to verify anything before I comment.Go ahead, Alex.QUESTION: Two separate topics, first one Belarusian and Polish border. The incident that this morning was reported referring to a Belarusian helicopter crossing the border just got confirmed by Polish defense minister saying that they had noticed insertion in Polish territory. Are you aware of the incident? And what kind of reaction would that invite from the NATO?MR MILLER: I was aware of the reports this morning. I believe if it’s accurate – and I don’t dispute your accuracy that the Polish Government has come out and confirmed that – that’s something that happened while I was up at the podium, and I’m going to maintain my policy of not commenting on things that break while I’m up here that I haven’t had a chance to read myself.QUESTION: If that appears to be true &#8212;MR MILLER: Again with the “if.” I would rather wait and verify it with my own eyes before I comment on it.QUESTION: Okay. Moving to South Caucasus, I am told that Special Advisor Bono is traveling to region this week. Do you have anything about details of the trip, and what kind of message does Secretary want to convey to the regional leaders?MR MILLER: I don’t. He’s not the Secretary. I don’t have – unless you meant separately the &#8212;QUESTION: (Off-mike.)MR MILLER: Yes. I don’t have any details of the trip to – of any trip to convey. I will say, though, as we have said consistently, we do believe that a peace agreement is within reach. It’s why we continue to engage both at the seniormost levels of this department and at subcabinet levels with leaders in Armenia and Azerbaijan to urge them to reach the difficult compromises that are necessary to reach a full peace agreement.QUESTION: Do you have – do you know if he’s going to visit Tbilisi as well?MR MILLER: I just don’t have details on his trip.QUESTION: And final housekeeping on the new bureau that was established today, Global Health Security and Diplomacy. As I understand, the bureau will be laser-focused on the pandemic and relevant topics. What will be its involvement in the conflicts area, like Ukraine, South Caucasus, and other conflicts? Will there be any involvement? And who will represent the bureau in this type of countries?MR MILLER: Well, the bureau is being launched to lead our work in fighting pandemics and other health emergencies around the world. I don’t have any specific information about what it will be doing in conflict zones. But stay tuned; we launched the bureau today, so.Let me – yes, go ahead.QUESTION: So the bureau is being established – I’m wondering if the State Department will see – find further investigation into the pandemic origin as one of the priorities for the bureau. And on that, just recently a few lawmakers have introduced a bill to ban the NIH to – from funding the animal experiments in adversarial countries such as China, and I’m wondering if the State Department shares that kind of position and whether this pandemic origin topic will be one of the topics that come up in the ongoing conversations you have with the Chinese counterparts in the days ahead.MR MILLER: I do not have – I don’t have any comment on that legislation, which I’ve not reviewed. I will say that the work of the bureau is a forward – is forward leaning to bring together global health leadership staff and resources from across the department to address current and future health challenges, to strengthen our global health security architecture, and to prevent, detect, respond to, and control infectious diseases.With respect to those questions about the origin of COVID, that is a question that has been much examined inside the United States Government. I’m not sure that we need a new bureau to take on questions that have already been examined repeatedly by the Intelligence Community and other agencies.QUESTION: And on human rights in China, so the – the House Select Committee on Chinese Communist Party has flagged the BlackRock and MSCI as two companies that fund Chinese companies that help advance the Chinese military and further human rights abuses in China. And I’m wondering if you have any comments on this and see any concerns in U.S. companies having such financial links with Chinese &#8212;MR MILLER: I have not reviewed that report or talked to others in the department about it, so I don’t have a comment on it.Michel.QUESTION: Do you have any comments on the fighting between Palestinian factions in Ein el-Hilweh camp in south Lebanon?MR MILLER: I do. We continue to follow the alarming reports of escalating violence in the refugee camp that has reportedly resulted in at least 11 deaths and many injured, including two children, with at least 2,000 people displaced. We are especially concerned by reports that the violence has damaged at least two schools operated by UNRWA. We applaud UNRWA’s work to provide emergency shelter and humanitarian services to the displaced, and we call on all factions in the camp to respect the protection and dignity of civilians and public and private property, including schools and health care facilities, and to abide by the humanitarian principles of neutrality, impartiality, and independence, including with respect to medical care.Go &#8212;QUESTION: (Off-mike.)MR MILLER: Let me come back to you. I’m going to work some people that haven’t gotten a question yet. So go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you. Thank you for taking my question. Today, the United States imposed restriction for Hungarian passport holders – I mean under the Visa Waiver Program, saying that Budapest has not addressed the security vulnerabilities repeatedly raised by Washington. I would ask you: Can you elaborate more on which these security vulnerability are?And secondly, if I may, a U.S. official said, and I’m quoting, “The United States is paying close attention to Hungary’s choices.” So are the restrictions on the visa program related to other issues that cause friction – I mean human and civil rights and that problem – between U.S. and Orban government?MR MILLER: So I would say first the visa – the new conditions on the Visa Waiver Program have nothing to do with any issue other than Hungary’s compliance with the Visa Waiver Program itself. In 2011, the Hungarian Government launched a simplified naturalization process. Nearly 1 million people gained Hungarian citizenship through this program before Hungary began instituting full biometric and identity verification in 2020.During that period from 2011 to 2020, the program lacked adequate procedures to verify applicants’ identities before allowing them to obtain citizenship. We know that valid Hungarian passports were then fraudulently obtained by criminals and individuals with no connection to Hungary. And since we’ve identified this issue and raised it with the Hungarian Government, they have not taken the necessary steps to fully mitigate these border and travel security threats.So we have made the requirements of the Visa Waiver Program clear to Hungary for multiple years over multiple administrations. We’ve provided them extensive guidance on ways that they can mitigate the vulnerability. Unfortunately, the Hungarian Government has not opted to take those steps, and so we were forced to institute this new policy today.QUESTION: Can I follow up on that?MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: I’m just wondering. You said that valid Hungarian passports were obtained by criminals. Did any of those criminals come to the U.S. on those passports?MR MILLER: I don’t have specific information about who came in in the last however many years.QUESTION: Were there any Hungarian passport holders that came to the U.S. with questionable backgrounds that triggered this?MR MILLER: I don’t have information on people who came. But I would say as a – it was a policy question. We looked at the fact that there were people who were getting passports without going through rigorous screening that we think is necessary to gain – should be necessary to gain a passport. And so we raised the issue with the Hungarian Government, gave them an opportunity to address the situation, and they refused to do so.QUESTION: And just why did it take nine years to change?MR MILLER: I won’t speak to that other than that we were trying to work with the Hungarian Government to give them an opportunity to correct the situation. It’s not a step we wanted to take today. We engaged with them, as I said, for multiple years over multiple administrations working through possible changes that they could make, and they refused to do so, which ultimately led us to take this step.QUESTION: And then can I just ask one question on Niger? Sorry, I was late coming in today.MR MILLER: Ooh, the dreaded repeat a question because you weren’t here thing.QUESTION: I know. I hope I won’t repeat it though, no. You said earlier that the U.S. has no indications of threats to U.S. citizens or facilities in Niger right now. How would you characterize the safety, the security situation on the ground right now for those U.S. citizens and for the U.S. diplomats who are still there?MR MILLER: I would say that broadly the situation in the capital remains calm. However, we have reached out to American citizens – or we – those American citizens who have communicated with us, we have reached out to them and told them that, of course, it’s difficult to leave the country right now. The security forces who have attempted to seize power have closed the airport and closed the borders. So we’ve asked them to remain in place and limit their movements around the capital, and we have broadly said if you are an American citizen who is in Niger to register with our Safe Traveler Program and we will keep you updated on any information as it changes.QUESTION: And then just last question with regard to the coup determination that the U.S. is not calling this a coup at this time. How are you characterizing what is happening? As an attempted coup? Is there some other description?MR MILLER: As I said yesterday, it is clear that security forces have attempted to seize power. It’s not yet clear that they will ultimately be successful.Said.QUESTION: Thank you. On Syria – actually, the skies of Syria – the Russian Ministry of Defense claims that over the past few days, there has been violation by the U.S. of the deconfliction agreement by F-16s, F-35s, and the MQ-9 Reapers. I wonder if you have any comment on that. They’re saying that you did not even inform them.MR MILLER: For any specific military operations, as usual, I would refer you to the Pentagon. It’s not something I can speak to from this podium.As I’ve noted before, though, the United States and the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS continue to work with our local partners in Syria to maintain constant pressure on ISIS remnants and to ensure ISIS’s lasting defeat. I will reiterate the statements the Department of Defense has made, that we strongly urge Russian forces in Syria to immediately stop reckless and threatening behavior, and to instead adhere to the standards of behavior expected of a professional force. But with respect to any exact engagements, I would refer to the Pentagon.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Go ahead.QUESTION: Thanks, Matt. On June 27th, Chairman Gallagher and other Republican members of the House Select Committee on the CCP sent Secretary Blinken a letter urging him not to renew the U.S.-China Science and Technology Agreement that’s set to expire August 27th. Has the department issued a response, or can you give us any updates?MR MILLER: I don’t believe we have yet issued a response, but I will keep you updated as we work through the issue.We’ll go around – Simon.QUESTION: I just wanted to come back to something you talked about yesterday, the Visa Waiver Program with Israel. Could you clarify that in order to get into the Visa Waiver Program, Israel will have to extend the new policies that it’s introduced for U.S. citizens to people living in Gaza?MR MILLER: There’s not much to clarify other than exactly that. We have made clear, both publicly and privately, that the Visa Waiver Program needs to apply to all American citizens in Israel, whether they be in the West – and that includes whether they be in the West Bank or whether they be in Gaza. We understand that there can be different procedures for Americans in the West Bank because of the different security situation there. But we have made clear that the program needs to apply for Americans there as well, and to the extent Israel needs to make changes to how they’re implementing the program now, that is something that we fully expect them to do.QUESTION: And they would have to do that before this September deadline?MR MILLER: I would just say we expect them to make those changes. We’re in constant conversations with – we’re in conversations with them about it now, and it is one of the requirements of the program.QUESTION: Sure. A separate issue because it hasn’t come up – the events in Myanmar where the junta has partially pardoned Aung San Suu Kyi. I wonder if that changes your view of the U.S. position towards Myanmar at all, whether – and sort of what would it take for this military junta to do to start to ease sanctions against them?MR MILLER: I would say that no, it does not change our position. We remain deeply concerned by the Burma military regime’s extension of the state of emergency, which will only prolong the violence and delay a just and peaceful resolution to the current crisis. We have repeatedly called on the military to immediately release Aung San Suu Kyi, deposed President Win Myint, and all the others unjustly detained – something they have not done. And we continue to urge the regime to ends it violence, to allow unhindered humanitarian access, seek justice for survivors, and engage with all stakeholders to pursue a peaceful, just, and democratic future for Burma.So there are a number of steps that we believe they have yet to take that they must before we can talk about any change in our posture towards them.All right. Go this, and then we’ll wrap up.QUESTION: So last one, just regarding China, there has been – firstly, Se Hoon Kim, correspondent for Global Strat View. There has been an ongoing transnational repression against Uyghurs living in the United States particularly, a lot of them U.S. citizens, green card holders, and asylees. Recently there was a “turn yourself in” video released by the Chinese police, telling dissidents and Uyghurs living overseas that they must come back and turn themselves in. And for an example, someone like Kalbinur Gheni, who is actually living in the United States right now, a Uyghur refugee, has been receiving multiple threats by – from the Chinese Communist Party.I’m just wondering: Is this something that will be brought up by – as – in terms of a topic of human rights when Wang Yi or any other CCP official visits the United States?MR MILLER: We – in our engagements with PRC leaders, we always raise human rights issues, including the treatment of the Uyghurs. Secretary Blinken has raised that directly in his meetings; other officials raise them directly in their meetings. Human rights is always on the table for the United States.Thank you.(The briefing was concluded at 2:08 p.m.)# # #&nbsp;						Tags																					Afghanistan																								Armenia																								Azerbaijan																								Burma																								China																								Hungary																								Iran																								Iraq																								Israel																								Lebanon																								Niger																								Office of the Spokesperson																								Pakistan																								Palestinian Territories																								Russia																								Saudi Arabia																								Ukraine