# Paraguay - United States Department of State

- Paraguay HomeReportsBureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices&#8230;Paraguay				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: Paraguay																																					Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor																																																																																							Download Report																																																							Translations																																																																 In this section										/																							EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																																													EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																															Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person																																																									a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings																																																																											b. Disappearance																																																																											c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses																																																																			Prison and Detention Center Conditions																																																																																																																		d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention																																																																			Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees																																																																																																																		e. Denial of Fair Public Trial																																																																			Trial Procedures																																																								Political Prisoners and Detainees																																																																																																																		f. Transnational Repression																																																																											g. Property Seizure and Restitution																																																																											h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence																																																																																	Section 2. Respect for Civil Liberties																																																									a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media																																																																			Internet Freedom																																																																																																																		b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association																																																																			Freedom of Peaceful Assembly																																																																																																																		c. Freedom of Religion																																																																											d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country																																																																											e. Protection of Refugees																																																																																	Section 3. Freedom to Participate in the Political Process																																																									Elections and Political Participation																																																																																	Section 4. Corruption in Government																															Section 5. Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights																															Section 6. Discrimination and Societal Abuses																																																									Women																																																																											Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination																																																																											Indigenous Peoples																																																																											Children																																																																											Antisemitism																																																																											Trafficking in Persons																																																																											Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics																																																																											Persons with Disabilities																																																																											Other Societal Violence or Discrimination																																																																																	Section 7. Worker Rights																																																									a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining																																																																											b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor																																																																											c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment																																																																											d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																																																											e. Acceptable Conditions of Work																																																																																																							EXECUTIVE SUMMARY				There were no significant changes in the human rights situation in Paraguay during the year.Significant human rights issues included credible reports of: torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment by security forces; harsh and at times life-threatening prison conditions; arbitrary arrest and detention; serious problems with the independence of the judiciary; serious restrictions on freedom of expression and media freedom, including intimidation of journalists by politically and economically powerful actors; serious government corruption; extensive gender-based violence, including domestic or intimate partner violence, sexual violence, femicide, and other forms of such violence; and the existence of the worst forms of child labor.The government took credible steps to identify and punish low- and midranking officials who committed human rights abuses, but impunity for high-level politicians and officials in police and security forces was widely alleged.																														Section 1.													 Respect for the Integrity of the Person												    																																																a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings										In contrast to 2022, there were no reports the government or its agents committed arbitrary or unlawful killings, including extrajudicial killings, during the year. Nevertheless, media occasionally reported allegations of law enforcement officers inappropriately using lethal force in security operations.In July 2022, three police officers in Ciudad del Este shot and killed Juan Daniel Ortigoza Ávalos, who they mistook for a murder suspect, when he failed to stop at a police checkpoint. On October 1, the officers were convicted of manslaughter, but in lieu of prison sentences placed on two years’ probation because the court determined they acted “under extreme emotional duress.”																																				b. Disappearance										There were no reports of disappearances by or on behalf of government authorities.The Paraguayan People’s Army and its splinter groups allegedly continued to hold three captives: police officer Edelio Morínigo, missing since 2014; farmer Félix Urbieta, missing since 2016; and former Vice President Óscar Denis, missing since 2020. During the year authorities reported no additional information on the welfare or whereabouts of the three missing men.																																				c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses										The law prohibited such practices, but there were credible reports some government authorities employed them. Between January 1 and September 25, the Special Human Rights Unit of the Public Ministry (the Attorney General’s Office) opened investigations into 134 allegations of torture and other human rights abuses. By year’s end there were no convictions. Unlike other crimes, torture did not have a statute of limitations or a defined period within which charges, an investigation, or a trial had to be completed. As of October 3, the unit was investigating 847 cases, most of which dated from the Stroessner dictatorship era (1954-89). A representative of the unit stated it was unusual for a case to move to prosecution and sentencing in less than one year due to mandatory time-consuming procedural steps and a lack of investigative resources.Impunity was a problem in the security forces. Authorities often transferred prison guards accused of torture or cruel and degrading treatment to other units without conducting credible investigations into abuse allegations. Corruption and politicization allegedly contributed to impunity. The Special Human Rights Unit and the semi-independent National Mechanism for the Prevention of Torture (NMPT) both continued to investigate alleged human rights abuses by security forces. Charges and prosecutions often took years of investigation and judicial processing.																Prison and Detention Center Conditions						Prison and detention center conditions were harsh and at times life-threatening due to inmate violence, mistreatment, overcrowding, poorly trained staff, poor infrastructure, and unsanitary living conditions.Abusive Physical Conditions: According to the NMPT, prisons were overcrowded, with inmates at some facilities forced to share bunks, sleep on floors, and sleep in shifts. According to the Ministry of Justice, as of November 6, the Emboscada Penitentiary near Asuncion was at 330 percent of design prisoner occupancy capacity while the average rate nationally was 155 percent of capacity.Prisons and juvenile detention facilities generally lacked adequate ventilation systems. Some prisons had inadequate lighting. At times prisoners were confined in cells for long periods without an opportunity for exercise. Some prisons lacked basic medical care. There were reports inmates paid bribes for basic services such as medical treatment.Overcrowding and limited resources to control the prisons abetted criminal organizations and generated violent prisoner-on-prisoner confrontations. According to the NMPT, as of October 3, 71 percent of prisoners awaited trial or sentencing, a major factor in overcrowding, prisoner-on-prisoner violence, illegal activity, and inadequate basic services.Government authorities reported inmate recruitment within prisons by members of Brazilian gangs, including Primeiro Comando da Capital and Comando Vermelho, as well as domestic criminal organizations, including the Rotela Clan prison-based drug trafficking gang.On September 7, a government delegation led by Minister of Justice Angel Barchini and Attorney General Emiliano Rolon visited Tacumbu Prison in Asuncion; however, threats by inmates who were members of Rotela Clan prevented delegation access to prisoner areas.As of October 3, authorities were investigating an abuse case at the Ciudad del Este Prison involving the shooting with rubber bullets of a male inmate that resulted in the amputation of his finger.On October 10, inmates – mostly members of Rotela Clan – at Tacumbu Prison rioted in response to the minister of justice’s announcement of his intention “to regain power in the penitentiary centers” and his accusation that Rotela Clan was responsible for an inmate murder. Gang members demanded the minister’s removal from office. They set fires inside the prison and took hostage 22 prison staff. One inmate was killed, and two prison staff injured. The president ended the 15-hour standoff by providing some concessions to inmates but did not remove the justice minister.Administration: Authorities conducted some investigations of credible allegations of mistreatment, but the NMPT reported authorities often failed to conduct adequate investigations, particularly regarding prison directors accused of mistreatment.Independent Monitoring: The government granted access to prisons for media, international monitoring bodies, independent civil society groups, and diplomatic representatives. Officials sometimes barred access to investigative journalists.																										d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention										The law prohibited arbitrary arrest and detention and provided for the right of any person to challenge the lawfulness of his or her arrest or detention in court, but the government did not always observe these requirements.																Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees						The law provided for police to arrest individuals with a warrant or with reasonable cause, although in some cases, police allegedly made arrests without judicial authorization or reasonable cause. Following arrest, the law required police to notify the Public Ministry within six hours, and thereafter the ministry was required to charge a defendant and notify a judge of its intention to prosecute within 24 hours. The government generally respected these rights. The law allowed judges to use measures such as house arrest and bail in felony cases. According to civil society representatives and legal experts, in misdemeanor cases, judges frequently set bail too high for many poor defendants to post bond, while politically connected or wealthy defendants paid minimal or no bail or received other concessions, including house arrest.The law granted defendants the right to hire counsel, and the government provided public defenders for those unable to afford counsel. Detainees had access to family members.Arbitrary Arrest: Media and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) reported several cases of arbitrary arrest and detention occurred during the year that were not officially reported to authorities. In some cases, police ignored requirements for a warrant by citing obsolete provisions that allowed detention if individuals were unable to present personal identification upon demand.Pretrial Detention: Lengthy pretrial detention was a problem. The law permitted detention without trial for a period equivalent to the minimum sentence associated with the alleged crime, a period that could range from six months to five years. Some detainees were held in pretrial detention beyond the maximum allowed time.																										e. Denial of Fair Public Trial										The constitution provided for an independent judiciary; however, courts were inefficient and subject to corruption and outside influence. The National Republican Association (ANR) party and the Liberal Party politicized the Supreme Court, lower courts, and the selection and disciplining of judges and prosecutors. The Council of Magistrates was responsible for selecting candidates for attorney general, judges, prosecutors, and public defenders throughout the judicial system. This process, combined with similarly politicized five-year career renewal appointments and a parallel qualifications examination, contributed to influence and lack of judicial independence.NGOs and government officials alleged some judges and prosecutors solicited or received bribes to drop or modify charges against defendants. Interested parties, including politicians, routinely attempted to influence investigations and pressure judges and prosecutors. Judicial selection and disciplinary review board processes were often politicized.																Trial Procedures						The constitution provided for the right to a fair and public trial, which the judiciary nominally provided. Defense attorneys, along with complicit judges and prosecutors, however, regularly manipulated the judicial process to reach the statute of limitations before trials concluded. Defense tactics to remove or suspend judges and prosecutors exacerbated the lengthy trial process.Criminal defendants had the right to promptly receive information on the charges against them, but some defendants received notification only upon arrest or seizure of their property. Defendants had the right to a trial without undue delay, but trials were often protracted.						Political Prisoners and Detainees						There were no reports of political prisoners or detainees.																										f. Transnational Repression										Not applicable.																																				g. Property Seizure and Restitution										Not applicable.																																				h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence										The constitution and law prohibited such actions, and the government generally respected these prohibitions.																																					Section 2.													 Respect for Civil Liberties												    																																																a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media										The constitution and law provided for freedom of expression, including for members of the press and other media, and the government generally respected this right. An independent press and a functioning democratic political system combined to promote freedom of expression, including, for the most part, for media members, although widespread corruption in the judiciary hindered protections in court.Violence and Harassment: On August 23, authorities ordered major newspapers ABC Color and Ultima Hora to reveal the names of the authors of three articles written in 2022 regarding allegations of money laundering by former President Horacio Cartes. Civil society and newspaper editors stated the order constituted harassment and intimidation that undermined freedom of the press.Libel/Slander Laws: Libel, slander, and defamation were criminal offenses, and such laws were generally enforced. Individual authorities sometimes used these laws to restrict public discussion or retaliate against journalists or political opponents.Nongovernmental Impact: Criminal groups sought to inhibit freedom of expression, including for members of the press. NGOs reported criminal groups often used threats of violence and harassment, especially in areas along the border with Brazil.																Internet Freedom						The government did not restrict or disrupt access to the internet or censor online content.																										b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association										The law provided for the freedoms of assembly and association, and the government generally respected these rights.																Freedom of Peaceful Assembly						Following the April 30 presidential elections, protesters demonstrated largely peacefully for four days in front of the Electoral Justice Supreme Court, claiming the presidential elections were fraudulent. Media alleged police used unnecessary force to disperse the demonstrators. According to police reports and civil society, 120 persons were arrested and 110 charged with illegally blocking roads, disturbing the public peace, and destruction of property.																										c. Freedom of Religion										See the Department of State’s International Religious Freedom Report at  https:www.state.gov/religiousfreedomreport/.																																				d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country										The law provided for freedom of internal movement, foreign travel, emigration, and repatriation, and the government generally respected these related rights.																																				e. Protection of Refugees										The government cooperated with the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and other humanitarian organizations in providing protection and assistance to refugees, returning refugees, or asylum seekers, as well as other persons of concern.Access to Asylum: The law provided for the granting of asylum or refugee status, and the government established a system for providing protection to refugees. The government did not assist in the safe, voluntary return to their home countries of those who were not granted refugee status; it relied on assistance from the Office of the UN Human Rights Commission to facilitate such returns.Durable Solutions: Persons whose claims of asylum or refugee status were refused could seek other migration options, including obtaining legal permanent residency in the country.																																					Section 3.													 Freedom to Participate in the Political Process												    																						The law provided citizens the ability to choose their government in free and fair periodic elections held by secret ballot and based on universal and equal suffrage.																										Elections and Political Participation										Abuses or Irregularities in Recent Elections: National elections were widely reported to be fair and free of abuses and irregularities. In April the country held general elections to elect a president, vice president, department governors, and members of both houses of Congress. Santiago Peña of the ANR won the presidential election. Election observation missions from the Organization of American States and the EU characterized the elections as free and fair, albeit with recommendations to improve voting procedures. Although there were postelection protests claiming the elections were fraudulent, the Electoral Supreme Court found no evidence of fraud.																																					Section 4.													 Corruption in Government												    																						The law provided criminal penalties for conviction of corruption by officials, but the government generally did not implement the law effectively. There were numerous reports of government corruption in all branches and at all levels of government. Investigative journalists and NGOs reported on hundreds of cases of embezzlement, tax evasion, illicit enrichment, breach of public confidence, falsification of documents, and criminal association.Corruption: Impunity was endemic among former and sitting high-level government officials accused of crimes. NGOs and the press continued to report on several former government ministers, mayors, governors, and existing elected officials who avoided prosecution despite being accused of, and indicted for, corruption and other crimes. Persons indicted for corruption were not held in pretrial detention. As of October 1, unresolved high-level corruption cases included criminal cases of illicit enrichment, bribery, breach of trust, and money laundering against officials such as former ministers, members of Congress, and governors, and a former attorney general and a former Supreme Court justice.Public Ministry corruption investigations and indictments typically proceeded slowly and took several years to reach a verdict if the case was not dismissed. Taking advantage of a law that prohibited court cases from lasting longer than four years, politicians and influential individuals convicted in lower courts routinely avoided punishment by filing appeals and motions until reaching the statute of limitations or by successfully requesting the removal or suspension of judges and prosecutors working on their cases. Although indictments and convictions of low- and midlevel public officials for corruption occurred occasionally, most high-ranking public officials enjoyed a high degree of impunity. In addition politicization and corruption were pervasive throughout the judicial branch, particularly in the lower courts and regional offices, hampering the judiciary’s effectiveness and undermining public trust.For additional information regarding corruption in the country, please see the Department of State’s Investment Climate Statement for the country, and the Department of State’s International Narcotics Control Strategy Report, which includes information on financial crimes.																											Section 5.													 Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights												    																						A number of domestic and international human rights groups generally operated without government restriction to monitor or investigate human rights conditions or cases and publish their findings. Government officials were generally cooperative but rarely acted in response to NGO reports or recommendations.Retribution against Human Rights Defenders: Human rights organizations reported an increase in attacks and intimidation from conservative political activists who accused human rights defenders of polarizing and ideologizing the population, fomenting violence against the government, and destroying “traditional family values” by employing “leftist” and “globalized” rhetoric.Government Human Rights Bodies: The human rights ombudsman generally operated with independence, focusing on the promotion of human rights, investigating human rights abuses by public officials, being a channel for citizen complaints, and protecting community interests. The ombudsman was ineffective. The recommendations of the NMPT, however, were not always acted upon.The Public Ministry maintained a special human rights unit that investigated allegations of human rights abuse on behalf of the government. Several other government ministries had human rights offices to monitor compliance with human rights legislation. According to NGOs and civil society, however, there was no central point of contact within the government to coordinate human rights matters.																											Section 6.													 Discrimination and Societal Abuses												    																																																Women										Rape and Domestic Violence: The law criminalized rape of women or men, including spousal and domestic or intimate partner rape and other forms of domestic and sexual violence, including so-called corrective rape of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex (LGBTQI+) persons; and provided penalties for conviction of rape or sexual assault of up to 10 years’ imprisonment. If the survivor was a child, sentences ranged from three to 15 years’ imprisonment.The government generally charged and prosecuted persons accused of rape and sometimes obtained convictions. Prosecutors reported difficulties obtaining convictions due to survivors’ reluctance to testify or submit to medical examinations. Due to the slow judicial system, cases often reached the statute of limitations before trial.According to the Ministry of Women’s Affairs and media sources, rape continued to be a significant and pervasive problem, with many rapes unreported due to social stigma, survivors’ fears of retaliation, and inaction due to lack of training of law enforcement officers.Although the law criminalized domestic violence, including psychological abuse, conviction required proof abuse was habitual and the aggressor and survivor were “cohabitating.” Judges typically issued fines, but in some cases imprisoned convicted offenders to protect the survivor. In some instances, courts mediated instead of taking domestic violence cases to trial.According to NGOs and the Ministry of Women’s Affairs, domestic violence was widespread. The National Police reported registering more than 11,000 complaints of domestic violence between January and August. In many instances survivors asked prosecutors to drop cases against their attackers due to fear of reprisals, allowing their attackers’ crimes to go unpunished and potentially for the violence to continue.The Ministry of Women’s Affairs promoted a national 24-hour telephone hotline for survivors. The ministry also operated a shelter and coordinated survivor assistance efforts, public outreach campaigns, and training. The ministry’s Woman City in Asunción, an integrated service center for women, focused on prevention of domestic violence and on reproductive health, economic empowerment, and education. According to Ministry of Women’s Affairs and the Special Human Rights Unit of the Public Ministry, all police officers received training in handling domestic violence complaints. Each National Police departmental jurisdiction had one specialized four-officer unit and Asuncion had three four-officer units dedicated exclusively to responding to domestic violence situations.Other Forms of Gender-based Violence or Harassment: Femicide remained a serious problem. The law criminalized femicide and conviction mandated a sentence of between 10- and 30-years’ imprisonment. Officials generally enforced the law and prosecuted femicide cases, but impunity in these cases remained high. From January to September, media reported 26 femicides and 29 attempted femicides. The judiciary often failed to adequately protect survivors, and police failed to enforce restraining orders against perpetrators already under house arrest or with pending arrest warrants. On August 27, a man under house arrest for violence against his former partner stalked and killed her.Indigenous girls who lived on the streets were often a target for sexual abusers. The Public Ministry reported several investigations; however, the difficulty of identifying the attackers was an obstacle to obtaining arrest warrants and apprehension.Discrimination: The constitution and law provided for the same legal status and rights for women as for men, but there was no comprehensive law against discrimination. The government did not effectively act on complaints of discrimination. There was a law specifically against workplace discrimination based on gender, but it was rarely enforced. Gender-based discrimination persisted, and employers were sometimes reluctant to hire women who might require maternity leave as set forth in the labor code.Reproductive Rights: There were no reports of coerced abortion or involuntary sterilization on the part of government authorities.Reproductive health services were concentrated in cities; rural areas faced significant gaps in coverage.The government provided access to sexual and reproductive health services, including for survivors of sexual violence. A Ministry of Health protocol for survivors of sexual violence, which included provision of reproductive health services, applied to all health-care institutions. Emergency contraception was available as part of clinical management of rape. Follow-up psychiatric care and legal referrals were also available for survivors. Health-care institutions did not consistently provide access to reproductive health services. Occasionally, doctors denied such services to sexual violence survivors based on their personal religious beliefs or due to social stigma and survivor-blaming surrounding sexual violence.Women’s rights advocates reported cases of doctors at public hospitals refusing to perform tubal ligation procedures on childless women younger than age 30, or without spousal consent. This practice was not based on law or Ministry of Health guidance but on the doctors’ personal (often conservative or religious) beliefs.While menstrual-period stigma was not sufficiently strong to prevent women and girls from participating in society, lack of sexual education and limited access to hygiene products might have dissuaded some students from going to class during their periods. Additionally, women’s rights advocates reported some pregnant adolescents were barred from attending private schools.According to the most recent UN estimates, in 2020 the adolescent birth rate remained high at 70 births per 1,000 girls and women between ages 15 and 19. Ministry of Childhood and Adolescence authorities attributed the high adolescent birth rate to a lack of adequate sexual education in schools, noting Roman Catholic and evangelical religious groups effectively quashed the ministry’s 2020 attempt to improve sexual education in public schools.																																				Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination										The law provided for the protection of members of racial and ethnic minorities or groups from violence and discrimination; however, the government did not enforce the law effectively. In 2022 Afro-Paraguayans became the first and only racial minority to receive legal protections. The Public Ministry was responsible for investigating crimes against ethnic minorities. NGOs also performed independent investigations.																																				Indigenous Peoples										The law provided Indigenous persons the right to participate in the economic, social, political, and cultural life of the country, but the law was not effectively enforced. Discrimination, coupled with a lack of access to employment, education, health care, shelter, water, and land, hindered the ability of Indigenous persons to progress economically while maintaining their cultural identity. Indigenous workers engaged as laborers on ranches typically earned low wages, worked long hours, received pay infrequently, and lacked medical and retirement benefits. This situation was particularly severe in the Chaco region.The National Institute for Indigenous Affairs (INDI), Public Ministry, Ministry of Justice, Labor Ministry, and Ombudsman’s Office were responsible for protecting and promoting indigenous rights. The law mandated INDI negotiate, purchase, and register land on behalf of Indigenous communities that claimed a lack of access to their ancestral lands. Land rights activists reported INDI was unable to fulfill its mandate due to lack of government support. The Ombudsman’s Office often failed to safeguard the rights of Indigenous communities.Propertyless farmers and Indigenous groups used land invasions to claim unused land or land these groups believed to be rightfully theirs. NGOs and Indigenous rights groups characterized laws criminalizing land invasions as designed to protect politically powerful families who took possession of public land during the Stroessner dictatorship.The law authorized Indigenous persons to determine how to use communal land. There were insufficient police and judicial protections from encroachments on Indigenous lands. This often resulted in conflict and occasional violence between Indigenous communities and large landowners in rural areas. Indigenous rights NGO Tierraviva and media reported Indigenous communities were often victims of threats, intimidation, and violence from large agrobusinesses in land disputes, frequently resulting in forced displacement. Agrobusinesses often employed private security guards to intimidate Indigenous communities. Tierraviva and media reported law enforcement authorities failed to protect victims in such cases.The NGO Paraguayan Human Rights Coordinator expressed concern regarding widespread rape, sexual harassment, and physical abuse of women in Indigenous communities. Perpetrators were often male members of the community, workers, or employees from neighboring ranches and farms. There were also credible reports of trafficking in persons in Indigenous communities. NGO representatives alleged agrobusiness operations exploited and violated the labor rights of Indigenous workers by undercompensating them. Security officials reported the Paraguayan People’s Army actively recruited children from indigenous communities.In contrast to 2022, the Ethnic Rights Office of the Public Ministry reported no cases of Indigenous communities being expelled from their lands during the year.																																				Children										Child Abuse: The law prohibited child physical abuse and child sexual abuse. Penalties for conviction ranged from one year in prison for physical abuse and four to 15 years in prison for child sexual abuse. The government frequently prosecuted child abuse cases and had a large but ineffective agency to combat child abuse.The Ministry of Childhood and Adolescence received reports of physical and psychological child abuse through its child abuse hotline.The government did not have a shelter exclusively for child survivors of sexual abuse; survivors were usually assigned to an extended family member or referred to general-purpose youth shelters. Several such shelters existed, including one comanaged by the government and a Roman Catholic organization. In many cities the municipal council for children’s rights assisted abused and neglected children.Child, Early, and Forced Marriage: The legal minimum age for marriage was 18, but the law permitted marriage for persons ages 16 to 17 with parental consent. For those younger than age 16, marriage was permitted only with judicial authorization and under exceptional circumstances. The government generally enforced the law.Sexual Exploitation of Children: The law prohibited the sale, grooming, or use of children for commercial sexual exploitation, including sex trafficking, and child pornography or other forms of online child sexual exploitation and abuse. According to a Public Ministry report released in August, the ministry received a daily average of nine complaints sexual abuse of children. The law provided for a penalty of eight years’ imprisonment for persons convicted of having pimped or brokered survivors younger than age 17. The government generally enforced the law.The minimum age of consent was 14 if married and 16 if not married.																																				Antisemitism										The Jewish community numbered fewer than 1,000 members. There were no reports of antisemitic acts.																																				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: The law did not criminalize consensual same-sex sexual conduct between adults, cross-dressing, or other sexual or gender characteristic-related behaviors. LGBTQI+ advocates reported police sometimes applied laws on loitering disproportionately to LGBTQI+ persons to justify arbitrary arrest and targeted LGBTQI+ persons in public spaces for document verification.Violence and Harassment: Although police or other government agents did not incite or perpetrate violence, LGBTQI+ advocates stated victims of such violence rarely reported it to authorities due to fear of retribution or lack of faith the judicial system would take their cases seriously. According to civil society, violence against transgender persons remained high throughout the country and was generally reported confidentially.LGBTQI+ rights NGOs reported an increase in hateful or threatening rhetoric during the year made many activists afraid to publicly advocate for LGBTQI+ rights. In July Asuncion ANR councilman Javier Pintos submitted a “straight pride” resolution to the council opposing a LGBTQI+ Pride parade; human rights specialists condemned the resolution as homophobic.Discrimination: The law did not explicitly prohibit discrimination by state and nonstate actors based on sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or sex characteristics, nor did it recognize LGBTQI+ couples.Many workers within the LGBTQI+ community preferred not to file complaints with the Labor Ministry due to the ministry’s ineffective enforcement of the law and due to fear of being dismissed. During the year many public officials and legislators engaged in anti-LGBTQI+ discrimination. In July ANR Senator Lizarella Valiente introduced a bill to ban the teaching of “gender ideology” in schools and “penalize the indoctrination of homosexuality.”Availability of Legal Gender Recognition: The law did not provide for individuals to change their or birth names, which might “cause confusion over the person’s sex,” and gender identity. As a result, transgender individuals did not obtain legal and government identification documents in alignment with their gender identity. LGBTQI+ rights activists reported not having accurate documents created difficulties for transgender individuals when accessing essential services, including denial of those services. On September 8, an appellate court overturned a decision of a first instance judge that would have allowed trans woman Mariana Sepulveda to legally change her name.Involuntary or Coercive Medical or Psychological Practices: There were no reports of conversion therapy practices. LGBTQI+ advocates, however, reported a variety of nongovernmental institutions, including evangelical Christian churches, organized retreats for teenagers that emphasized the importance of “traditional” gender roles to stigmatize LGBTQI+ lifestyles and “scare straight” any LGBTQI+ participants. Medically unnecessary and irreversible “normalization” surgeries were performed on newborns. There were no reports of such surgeries performed on nonconsenting adult intersex persons.Restrictions of Freedom of Expression, Association, or Peaceful Assembly: There were no legal restrictions on public discussion of LGBTQI+ matters nor on the ability of LGBTQI+ organizations to legally register or convene events. Nonetheless, many who spoke out or participated in such events were met with hateful or otherwise intimidating responses, particularly on social media platforms.																																				Persons with Disabilities										The law prohibited discrimination against persons with physical, sensory, intellectual, and mental disabilities, but the law was generally not enforced. Discrimination was widespread, however, and most of the country’s buildings, communications, public transportation, and health services were inaccessible to persons with disabilities.Many persons with disabilities faced significant discrimination in employment. Some persons with disabilities were unable to seek employment because of a lack of accessible public transportation. The law mandated the allocation of 5 percent of all available civil servant positions to persons with disabilities; however, persons with disabilities occupied only 1 percent of civil service positions. As of September 2022, only 2,677 were filled of 16,900 positions allocated in 425 public institutions for persons with disabilities. Systemic barriers such as inadequate accessibility in education and logistical accessibility obstacles in public transport and infrastructure limited the numbers of persons with disabilities filling these roles.According to the 2022 UNESCO Paraguay Overview on Profiles Enhancing Education Reviews, only 36 percent of persons with disabilities between ages six and 18 attended educational institutions. Only 17 percent of students with disabilities completed elementary school, and only 2 percent of students with disabilities enrolled in higher education. Most children with disabilities who attended school were enrolled in the public school system. Some specialized schools served specific disabilities, such as deafness.																																				Other Societal Violence or Discrimination										The law specifically prohibited workplace discrimination based on race, skin color, sex, age, religion, political opinion, disability, HIV-positive status, or social origin. Labor Ministry regulations prohibited employers from requiring HIV testing prior to employment, but many companies reportedly did so. NGOs SOMOS GAY and Panambi stated LGBTQI+ persons with HIV or AIDS who sought access to health care and employment opportunities faced discrimination often due to their sexual orientation and gender identity.																																					Section 7.													 Worker Rights												    																																																a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining										The law, including related regulations and statutory instruments, provided for the right of workers (except for the armed forces and police) to form and join independent unions, bargain collectively, and conduct legal strikes. The law prohibited binding arbitration or retribution against union organizers and strikers.There were several restrictions on these rights. The law required that industrial unions have a minimum of 20 members to register. All unions had to register with the Ministry of Labor, a process that often took more than a year. The ministry, typically within weeks of the application, issued provisional registrations that allowed labor unions to operate. Unions with provisional registrations had the same rights and obligations as fully registered unions. Workers were not authorized to be members of more than one union, even if they had more than one employer. Strikes had to be directly linked to workers’ occupations. Candidates for office in trade unions had to work for a company and be active members of the union.The government generally did not effectively enforce laws related to freedom of association, the right to bargain collectively, and the right to strike. The Labor Ministry was responsible for enforcing labor rights, registering unions, mediating disputes, and overseeing social security and retirement programs. Investigations to protect labor rights from antiunion discrimination were rare and reportedly occurred only if requested by an aggrieved party.Employers who failed to recognize or to bargain collectively with a registered union faced a fine, as did employers who blacklisted employees. These penalties were commensurate with penalties for workplace discrimination based on gender or race but were generally ineffective and were rarely applied against violators. The government did not prevent retaliation by employers who acted against strikers and union leaders. Administrative and judicial procedures were subject to lengthy delays, mishandling of cases, and corruption. Employer and professional associations had undue influence over some private sector unions.																																				b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor										See the Department of State’s annual Trafficking in Persons Report at:  https://www.state.gov/trafficking-in-persons-report/.																																				c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment										See the Department of Labor’s Findings on the Worst Forms of Child Labor at  https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ilab/resources/reports/child-labor/findings/ .																																				d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																														e. Acceptable Conditions of Work										Wage and Hour Laws: The law did not provide for a national minimum wage for all economic sectors, but a standard minimum wage applied to most sectors. Further, there were minimum wage standards stipulated for specific sectors, such as cattle raising. The standard minimum wage was above the official estimate for the poverty income level.The law stipulated a maximum of eight hours per day. The law provided for a standard legal workweek of 48 hours (42 hours for night work with one and one-half days of rest) and required employers to pay higher wages for overtime hours depending on the time of day and day of the week the work was performed.The Labor Ministry continued campaigns aimed at employers and workers to raise public awareness of labor laws and worker rights. Alleged violations of wage, hour, or overtime laws were common in cattle ranching, the textile industry, and for domestic workers. There were reports of employers making illegal wage deductions or not meeting minimum wage requirements due payment by commission.Occupational Safety and Health: The government set appropriate occupational safety and health (OSH) standards stipulating conditions of safety, hygiene, and comfort. These standards were current and appropriate for the light manufacturing and construction industries but were rarely applied. OSH experts did not actively identify unsafe working conditions or respond to worker’s OSH complaints. Workers were not able to remove themselves from unsafe conditions without jeopardizing their employment. Violations were common in the construction, textile, and mining sectors.Wage, Hour, and OSH Enforcement: The Labor Ministry was responsible for enforcement of wage, hour, and OSH laws. Inspectors had the authority to make unannounced inspections and to initiate sanctions. The number of labor inspectors was insufficient to enforce compliance. Penalties for OSH violations were commensurate with those for crimes such as negligence, but penalties for wage and hour violations, which were limited to fines, were not. Penalties were rarely applied against violators.In 2021 the National Institute of Statistics estimated 64 percent of workers in nonagricultural sectors were active in the informal economy. Informal-sector workers were not covered by OSH laws or inspections.																																				    							View report by:																				Afghanistan											Albania											Algeria											Andorra											Angola											Antigua and Barbuda											Argentina											Armenia											Australia											Austria											Azerbaijan											Bahrain											Bangladesh											Barbados											Belarus											Belgium											Belize											Benin											Bhutan											Bolivia											Bosnia and Herzegovina											Botswana											Brazil											Brunei											Bulgaria											Burkina Faso											Burma											Burundi											Cabo Verde											Cambodia											Cameroon											Canada											Central African Republic											Chad											Chile											China (Includes Hong Kong, Macau, and Tibet)											Colombia											Comoros											Costa Rica											Côte d&#8217;Ivoire											Croatia											Cuba											Cyprus											Czech Republic											Democratic Republic of the Congo											Denmark											Djibouti											Dominica											Dominican Republic											Ecuador											Egypt											El Salvador											Equatorial Guinea											Eritrea											Estonia											Eswatini											Ethiopia											Fiji											Finland											France											Gabon											Georgia											Germany											Ghana											Greece											Grenada											Guatemala											Guinea											Guinea-Bissau											Guyana											Haiti											Honduras											Hungary											Iceland											India											Indonesia											Iran											Iraq											Ireland											Israel, West Bank and Gaza											Italy											Jamaica											Japan											Jordan											Kazakhstan											Kenya											Kiribati											Kosovo											Kuwait											Kyrgyz Republic											Laos											Latvia											Lebanon											Lesotho											Liberia											Libya											Liechtenstein											Lithuania											Luxembourg											Madagascar											Malawi											Malaysia											Maldives											Mali											Malta											Marshall Islands											Mauritania											Mauritius											Mexico											Micronesia											Moldova											Monaco											Mongolia											Montenegro											Morocco											Mozambique											Namibia											Nauru											Nepal											New Zealand											Nicaragua											Niger											Nigeria											North Korea											North Macedonia											Norway											Oman											Pakistan											Palau											Panama											Papua New Guinea											Paraguay											Peru											Philippines											Poland											Portugal											Qatar											Republic of the Congo											Romania											Russia											Rwanda											Saint Kitts and Nevis											Saint Lucia											Saint Vincent and the Grenadines											Samoa											San Marino											Sao Tome and Principe											Saudi Arabia											Senegal											Serbia											Seychelles											Sierra Leone											Singapore											Slovakia											Slovenia											Solomon Islands											Somalia											South Africa											South Korea											South Sudan											Spain											Sri Lanka											Sudan											Suriname											Sweden											Switzerland											Syria											Taiwan											Tajikistan											Tanzania											Thailand											The Gambia											The Netherlands											Timor-Leste											Togo											The Bahamas											Tonga											Trinidad and Tobago											Tunisia											Turkey (Türkiye)											Turkmenistan											Tuvalu											Uganda											Ukraine											United Arab Emirates											United Kingdom											Uruguay											Uzbekistan											Vanuatu											Venezuela											Vietnam											Yemen											Zambia											Zimbabwe															Build A Custom Report																						On This Page				search													>																										EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person																																							a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings																																																						b. Disappearance																																																						c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses																																																				Prison and Detention Center Conditions																																																																																				d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention																																																				Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees																																																																																				e. Denial of Fair Public Trial																																																				Trial Procedures																																												Political Prisoners and Detainees																																																																																				f. Transnational Repression																																																						g. Property Seizure and Restitution																																																						h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence																																																			Section 2. Respect for Civil Liberties																																							a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media																																																				Internet Freedom																																																																																				b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association																																																				Freedom of Peaceful Assembly																																																																																				c. Freedom of Religion																																																						d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country																																																						e. Protection of Refugees																																																			Section 3. Freedom to Participate in the Political Process																																							Elections and Political Participation																																																			Section 4. Corruption in Government																Section 5. Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights																Section 6. Discrimination and Societal Abuses																																							Women																																																						Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination																																																						Indigenous Peoples																																																						Children																																																						Antisemitism																																																						Trafficking in Persons																																																						Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics																																																						Persons with Disabilities																																																						Other Societal Violence or Discrimination																																																			Section 7. Worker Rights																																							a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining																																																						b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor																																																						c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment																																																						d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																																						e. Acceptable Conditions of Work																																																									Tags																					Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor																								Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs																								Paraguay
- Joint Statement on U.S.-Paraguay Bilateral Relationship Office of the Spokesperson													HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases&#8230;Joint Statement on U.S.-Paraguay Bilateral Relationship				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();			}		});	}																										Joint Statement on U.S.-Paraguay Bilateral Relationship																																		Media Note																		March 27, 2024																																							The following statement was released by the Governments of the United States of America and Paraguay on the occasion of a bilateral meeting between&nbsp;Deputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell and Paraguayan Minister of Foreign Affairs Rubén Ramírez Lezcano.Begin TextDeputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell and Paraguayan Minister of Foreign Affairs Rubén Ramírez Lezcano&nbsp;reaffirmed the strong U.S.-Paraguay partnership during a&nbsp;bilateral meeting on March 26, 2024, in Washington, D.C.&nbsp; The Deputy Secretary and Foreign Minister highlighted&nbsp;broad alignment between the United States and Paraguay on key foreign policy priorities, including supporting Ukraine in its self-defense against Russia’s war of aggression and standing for democracy in Venezuela.&nbsp; Both sides agreed to the importance of supporting the Multinational Security Support mission to Haiti and underscored the urgent need to combat corruption, protect democratic institutions, and strengthen bilateral cybersecurity cooperation.&nbsp;The Deputy Secretary and the Foreign Minister reiterated mutual concerns over efforts to repeal&nbsp;USDA’s rigorous scientific evaluation and risk analysis that resulted in a final rule to allow for the importation of fresh beef from Paraguay into the United States under certain conditions. &nbsp;They emphasized the importance of continuing joint efforts to ensure that Paraguayan beef access to the U.S. and other potential global markets follows a science- and rules-based approach.Both officials also committed to further strengthening the strategic partnership between the two countries, including through the current Trade and Investment Framework Agreement, the third meeting of which is scheduled for this year in Washington, D.C.&nbsp;&nbsp;The Deputy Secretary and the Foreign Minister&nbsp;also reaffirmed the importance of Paraguay&#8217;s participation in economic initiatives in the Western Hemisphere and Asia Pacific.The Deputy Secretary welcomed Paraguay&#8217;s convening of the 54th General Assembly of the Organization of Americas States in June 2024, and both sides agreed to work together toward the shared goal of building a more resilient and prosperous hemisphere.End Text						Tags																					Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs																								Deputy Secretary of State																								Office of the Spokesperson																								Paraguay
- Economic and Health Dialogue of the Americas Advances Through a Second Annual High-level Meeting in the Dominican Republic Office of the SpokespersonOn March 10, 2024, Under Secretary of State for Economic Growth, Energy, and the Environment, Jose W. Fernandez, kicked off the Second Annual High-Level Meetings of the Economic and Health Dialogue of the Americas (EHA) alongside PAHO Deputy Director Mary Lou Valdez, Department of Commerce Deputy Under Secretary Diane Farrell, Executive Vice President of the Inter-American Development Bank, Mr. Jordan Schwartz, and Minister of Health for the Dominican Republic Víctor Atallah at the welcoming reception. Official government meetings were held the next day on March 11, where ministers and vice ministers from 17 countries across ministries of finance, economy, health, foreign affairs and social development were in attendance.Several countries were represented by ministries of health, as well as ministries of finance, economy, foreign affairs, and commerce given the whole-of-government approach the EHA takes through multisectoral workstreams. EHA co-chairs, the United States and Panama, made remarks at the event along with the country host of the meeting, the Dominican Republic. EHA members focused discussions on smart spending, prioritization of health-sector transformation, responsive social protections, technology and health, workforce development, and foundations of resilient supply chains.EHA co-lead countries Brazil, Paraguay, Bahamas, Costa Rica, Argentina, Peru, Uruguay, Chile and the United States affirmed leadership roles for 2024, and members approved the workplan for the coming year. Several USG agencies were in attendance, including USAID, CDC, USTDA and Commerce. USAID and the Department of State made several announcements along with several EHA members. For more information on those announcements please see the fact sheet: https://www.state.gov/economic-and-health-dialogue-of-the-americas-high-level-meeting-outcomes-for-2024/.Learn more about the EHA on the main webpage: https://www.iadb.org/en/home/economic-and-health-dialogue-americas .To stay up to date, follow Under Secretary Fernandez on X: @State_E, LinkedIn: @State-E, and Facebook: @StateDeptE.For further media information, please contact E_Communications@state.gov.
- Economic and Health Dialogue of the Americas High-level Meeting Outcomes for 2024 Office of the SpokespersonThe Economic and Health Dialogue of the Americas (EHA) was launched on the margins of the 9th Summit of the Americas in June 2022 by the U.S. Department of State. In 2023, the EHA held its first high-level meeting to establish the governance structure and approve scope of work. Since then, countries have organized 11 technical meetings and a first in person encounter in Uruguay at the end of 2023.On the 11th of March of 2024, the 2nd annual high-level meeting of the EHA was held in the Dominican Republic with representation from 17 countries. Ministers and Vice Ministers from health, finance, economy, foreign affairs, and commerce agencies participated to include Ministerial-level participation from of the United States, Dominican Republic, Uruguay, Mexico, Bahamas, Costa Rica, Guyana, Guatemala, Suriname, Panama, Colombia, and Paraguay, in addition to high-level representatives from Brazil, Chile, Argentina, and Ecuador. In addition to government representatives, leadership from regional technical organizations participated, including IDB Executive Vice President Jordan Schwartz and PAHO Deputy Director Mary Lou Valdez. Representatives from ECLAC, USAID, USTDA, U.S. Department of Commerce, and CDC were also in attendance.What were the main agreements and outcomes of the 2nd Annual EHA High-Level Meeting in the Dominican Republic?Countries reaffirmed EHA’s commitment to strengthen health systems and economic resilience to emergencies in the region. Paraguay, Uruguay, Bahamas, Argentina, Peru, Brazil, and Chile affirmed their commitment to co-lead EHA technical working groups. Panama was praised for their leadership as co-chair of EHA along with United States.PAHO announced the launch of their Public Finance Management tool. The tool will enable countries to conduct analysis of fiscal space for the health sector to support responsible spending as well as sustainable and equitable public health financing. PAHO has committed to the goal of two countries applying the tool in 2024-2025. Several countries expressed interest at the meeting. The work supports the “Smart Spending” workstream.PAHO committed to use the Essential Public Health Functions (EPHF) assessments from 14 countries to produce a policy document that would establish shared priorities and identify institutional capacity gaps across the region that will require future investment to fill, with a sub-regional focus on Caribbean countries. This work will support the workstream on Prioritization of Health Sector Transformation, which is led by the Bahamas. The Bahamas announced the completion of their EPHF assessment at the meeting.Brazil, Dominican Republic, and Chile committed to apply the IDB’s Maturity Assessment Tool (MAT) to measure the capacity of social protection systems to respond to emergencies. Countries like Colombia, Dominican Republic, and Paraguay outlined some of the best practices around social protection during COVID-19, as well as lessons learned from other sectors and emergency response scenarios. The goal for 2024 will be to explore potential regional agreements to coordinate increased preparedness and responsiveness to future crises in the region. This work supports workstream on Responsive Social Protection.EHA countries announced commitment to conduct a pharmaceutical mapping exercise and prepare a regional strategy for nearshoring of critical inputs and consumables. EHA members short-listed mRNA vaccines, monoclonal antibodies, and antimicrobials, including for malaria and tuberculosis, as priority products for the 2024-2025 analysis. The United States committed to support this analysis in coordination with co-leads Argentina and Peru. Argentina affirmed their commitment to conduct a regional Private-Public Partnership analysis. This work supports the Resilient Supply Chain workstream.USAID shared progress on the Americas Health Corps initiative, announcing the training of 120,000 healthcare workers in the region thus far.USAID also announced funding for a market analysis of the current capacity within the Latin America and Caribbean (LAC) region to produce or manufacture vaccine countermeasures for emerging threats, endemic diseases, and local priorities relevant to the regional market. The EHA platform committed to supporting the implementation of recommendations from the analysis.EHA members approved the work plan for 2024-2025 and committed to a mid-year high-level meeting to review progress.EHA members recognized the importance of digital health and utilization of technology in the public health system and proposed establishing a new EHA workstream on technology and health. The EHA Executive Technical Working Group will develop a scope of work for this proposed workstream with the goal of launching it in 2024.For further information, please contact E_Commmunications@state.gov, or visit the EHA website: https://www.iadb.org/en/home/economic-and-health-dialogue-americas .
- Coordinator on Global Anti-Corruption Nephew’s Travel to Ecuador, Peru, and Paraguay HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases&#8230;Coordinator on Global Anti-Corruption Nephew’s Travel to Ecuador, Peru, and Paraguay				hide		if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}																										Coordinator on Global Anti-Corruption Nephew’s Travel to Ecuador, Peru, and Paraguay																																		Media Note																														February 26, 2024																																							Coordinator on Global Anti-Corruption Richard Nephew will travel to Ecuador and Peru from February 27 – March 4. In both countries, he will discuss progress made, ongoing efforts, and the continuing challenges to address corruption. His visit will reinforce the U.S. commitment to fighting corruption and desire to work to identify areas for further cooperation.&nbsp;In Ecuador from February 27-28, Coordinator Nephew will meet with government officials, including justice sector, law enforcement, legislative representatives, and civil society.&nbsp;In Peru from February 29 – March 1, he will attend the APEC Anti-Corruption and Transparency Experts Working Group. He will meet separately with justice sector actors, and participate in roundtable discussions with government representatives, civil society, and the private sector.On March 4, Coordinator Nephew will travel to Paraguay. He will meet with government representatives and engage with civil society and the private sector to discuss ongoing challenges and identify additional areas for collaboration. His visit will underscore the United States’ commitment to combatting corruption and strengthening the rule of law.Follow @StateCGAC on Twitter to learn more.						Tags																					Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs																																Corruption																															Ecuador																								Office of the Coordinator on Global Anti-Corruption																								Office of the Spokesperson																																Official International Travel																															Paraguay																								Peru
- Economic Health Dialogue of the Americas Advances Through a Strategic Summit in Uruguay HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases&#8230;Economic Health Dialogue of the Americas Advances Through a Strategic Summit in Uruguay				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();			}		});	}																										Economic Health Dialogue of the Americas Advances Through a Strategic Summit in Uruguay																																		Media Note																														December 7, 2023																																							On December 6, 2023, Under Secretary of State for Economic Growth, Energy, and the Environment Jose W. Fernandez hosted the Economic Health Dialogue of the Americas (EHA) Strategic Summit alongside Dr. Jarbas Barbosa, Director of the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), Minister of Health for Uruguay, Karina Rando, and the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) with country representatives from 18 countries.Presentations were made from EHA co-lead countries of Uruguay, Paraguay, Brazil, and the United States on the advancement of our work in four key workstreams – smart spending for health and health resource analysis; prioritization of health sector transformation; social protection in emergencies; and foundations for strengthening supply chains.&nbsp; The meeting served as an opportunity for countries to learn more about the progress of the EHA and begin strategic planning for the&nbsp;next EHA Ministerial Meeting in March 2024.The EHA comprises a series of official sector-only meetings aimed at fostering the political will and commitments necessary to strengthen public health systems and protect economies in the region.&nbsp;Launched by Secretary Blinken at the Ninth Summit of the Americas in June 2022,&nbsp;the EHA actively supports countries in the region in coordinating efforts for health system resilience, as well as in identifying and leveraging best practices in the public sector, with a focus on the intersections of health and the economy. This initiative receives joint support from the U.S. Department of State, PAHO, the IDB, and the Organization of American States.To learn more about the EHA, visit: Economic and Health Dialogue of the Americas, and read Under Secretary Fernandez’s full remarks from the summit.To stay up to date, follow Under Secretary Fernandez on Twitter/X:  @State_E, LinkedIn: @State-E, and Facebook: @StateDeptE.For press inquiries, please contact: E_Communications@state.gov.						Tags																					Brazil																								Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs																																														Economic Prosperity and Trade Policy																																																					Global Health																															Office of the Spokesperson																								Paraguay																								Under Secretary for Economic Growth, Energy, and the Environment																								Uruguay
- Paraguay HomeReportsBureau of CounterterrorismCountry Reports on Terrorism 2022&#8230;Paraguay				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();			}		});	}});																							Country Reports on Terrorism 2022: Paraguay																																					Bureau of Counterterrorism																																																																																																				 In this section																																												Paraguay																																												Paraguay				Overview:  In 2022 the Government of Paraguay continued to be a receptive partner on counterterrorism cooperation with the United States.  Paraguay’s challenges on CT cooperation stem from ineffective immigration, customs, financial, and law enforcement controls along its porous borders, particularly the TBA with Argentina and Brazil, and its dry border with Brazil from the TBA to Pedro Juan Caballero.Since 2008, persons claiming to be part of the Paraguayan People’s Army (EPP) — a domestic criminal group initially dedicated to a socialist revolution in Paraguay — have conducted violent acts meant to extort and intimidate the population and local governments in the northern departments of Amambay, Concepción, and San Pedro.  Paraguayan authorities officially consider the EPP and its offshoots — the Ejército del Mariscal López (EML) and Agrupación Campesina Armada (ACA), the latter of which reemerged in 2020 — as organized criminal groups rather than terrorist organizations.  However, in public remarks, Paraguayan leaders occasionally refer to them informally as such.On October 23 the Government of Paraguay’s Joint Task Force (FTC) killed EPP leader Osvaldo Villalba moments after Villalba executed two Indigenous persons he believed were cooperating with the authorities.  The Government of Paraguay believes the death of Villalba severely degraded the EPP’s operational capabilities and estimates the group currently contains fewer than 20 members.  The activities of the ACA, EML, and EPP have consisted largely of isolated attacks either on remote police and army posts, or against ranchers and peasants accused of aiding Paraguayan security forces.  Ranchers and ranch workers in northeastern Paraguay, including members of the Mennonite community, claimed the EPP frequently threatened both their livelihoods and personal security.  Three individuals — including former vice president Oscar Denis — remained missing after kidnappings attributed to the EPP.2022 Terrorist Incidents:  Alleged elements of the EPP and ACA continued to conduct killings and sabotage operations:On April 27 an EPP-conducted IED attack injured three FTC soldiers on the border between Concepción and Amambay Departments.On November 21 a group of suspected EPP members wounded three police officers when attempting to overrun a police outpost in Amambay Department.Legislation, Law Enforcement, and Border Security:  Paraguay passed no new terrorism-related legislation in 2022.Paraguay’s efforts to provide more effective law enforcement and border security suffered from a lack of interagency cooperation and information sharing, a chronic lack of resources, as well as pervasive corruption within security, border control, and judicial institutions.  The TBA remained particularly vulnerable, as the ineffective — and often corrupt — police, military, customs, and migration agency presence along these borders allows for a largely unregulated flow of people, goods, and money.Paraguay struggles to deter terrorist travel.  On May 13, airport authorities in Ciudad del Este permitted a cargo plane owned by a Venezuelan airline subject to U.S. sanctions to land at the Guaraní International Airport.  According to the flight manifest, the plane contained 11 Venezuelan crew members and seven Iranians, one with ties to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Qods Force.  According to government sources, airport officials did not follow proper security procedures by allowing the plane to land.  The plane departed Ciudad del Este on May 16, reportedly loaded with cigarettes produced by a company owned by former president Horacio Cartes consigned for delivery to a separate Cartes-owned company in the United States.  The plane later landed in Argentina, where on August 11 authorities seized it in response to a U.S. court order.  Paraguay currently is receiving international assistance to better utilize API and improve its border screening technology and capabilities.Countering the Financing of Terrorism:  Paraguay is a member of GAFILAT; its FIU, Financial Intelligence Unit Paraguay, is a member of the Egmont Group.  GAFILAT adopted Paraguay’s mutual evaluation report in July and assessed that the country made significant improvements to comply with global AML/CFT standards but had achieved only a moderate level of effectiveness.  GAFILAT further noted that, while Paraguay had not achieved any convictions for terrorist financing, it had continued to increase the number of investigations initiated under its terrorism statutes.For further information on money laundering and financial crimes, see the 2022 International Narcotics Control Strategy Report, Volume 2, Money Laundering and Financial Crimes.Countering Violent Extremism:  Paraguay had no CVE program in 2022.International and Regional Cooperation:  Paraguay continued to support CT efforts in regional and multilateral organizations, including by participation in CICTE.  It continued to collaborate with Argentina and Brazil on border security initiatives, regional exchanges, and law enforcement projects.  The three countries coordinated law enforcement efforts in the TBA through their Trilateral Tri-Border Area Command.																												    							View report by:																				Afghanistan											Albania											Algeria											Argentina											Australia											Austria											Bahrain											Bangladesh											Belgium											Bosnia and Herzegovina											Brazil											Bulgaria											Burkina Faso											Cameroon											Canada											Chad											Colombia											Côte d’Ivoire											Cyprus											Democratic Republic of the Congo											Denmark											Djibouti											Egypt											Ethiopia											France											Georgia											Germany											Greece											India											Indonesia											Iraq											Israel, West Bank, and Gaza											Italy											Jordan											Kazakhstan											Kenya											Kingdom of Saudi Arabia											Kosovo											Kuwait											Kyrgyz Republic											Lebanon											Libya											Malaysia											Maldives											Mali											Mauritania											Mexico											Morocco											Mozambique											Niger											Nigeria											North Macedonia											Norway											Oman											Pakistan											Panama											Paraguay											People&#8217;s Republic of China (Hong Kong and Macau)											Peru											Philippines											Qatar											Russia											Senegal											Serbia											Singapore											Somalia											South Africa											Spain											Sri Lanka											Sudan											Sweden											Sweden											Sweden											Tajikistan											Tanzania											Thailand											The Netherlands											Trinidad and Tobago											Tunisia											Türkiye											Turkmenistan											Uganda											United Arab Emirates											United Kingdom (Northern Ireland)											Uzbekistan											Venezuela											Yemen																										On This Page				search													>																										Paraguay																	Tags																					Bureau of Counterterrorism																								Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs																																														Countering Terrorism																																							Countering Violent Extremism																																							Counterterrorism																															Paraguay																																Terrorism
- Joint Statement on U.S.-Paraguay Cybersecurity and Digital Cooperation HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases&#8230;Joint Statement on U.S.-Paraguay Cybersecurity and Digital Cooperation				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();			}		});	}																										Joint Statement on U.S.-Paraguay Cybersecurity and Digital Cooperation																																		Media Note																														November 9, 2023																																							The text of the following statement was released by the Governments of the United States of America and Paraguay&nbsp;on the occasion of&nbsp;Under Secretary Jose W. Fernandez’s November 9-10 visit to Asunción.Begin Text:On November 9, 2023, Under Secretary of State for Economic Growth, Energy, and the Environment Jose W. Fernandez met with Minister for Information and Communications Technology Gustavo Villate to discuss U.S.-Paraguay cybersecurity and digital cooperation.Building on their close ties and partnership, the two delegations shared their concern over the threat&nbsp;posed&nbsp;by state and non-state actors in cyberspace.&nbsp; The two sides agreed to further strengthen cooperation to prevent, disrupt, and respond to&nbsp;threats.&nbsp;On digital issues, both countries recognized the importance of building a trusted, resilient, and secure digital ecosystem.&nbsp; This includes ensuring that information and communications technology companies are focused on protecting privacy, intellectual property rights, and human rights.Both governments agreed to promote an open, interoperable, secure, and reliable Internet&nbsp;in order to&nbsp;enable people to safely and openly engage online, reliably receive critical services and information from their governments, exercise their human rights and fundamental freedoms, and drive inclusive economic growth.&nbsp; The U.S. government will work with Paraguay on ways to attain its digital infrastructure goals.&nbsp;We will continue strengthening cooperation to build a more secure, resilient region and address shared threats in cyberspace.&nbsp; We will seek to broaden this collaboration by including like-minded partners&nbsp;in these efforts.End Text.						Tags																					Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs																																														Cyber Issues																																							Cyber Security																																							Economic Affairs																																							Human Rights																																							Intellectual Property																															Office of the Spokesperson																								Paraguay																																														Science, Technology, and Innovation																															Under Secretary for Economic Growth, Energy, and the Environment
- Under Secretary Fernandez’s Travel to Chile, Uruguay and Paraguay Office of the SpokespersonUnder Secretary of State for Economic Growth, Energy and the Environment Jose W. Fernandez will travel to Chile, Uruguay and Paraguay November 5-11, 2023, to deepen economic cooperation and strengthen strategic partnerships.  During his visit, he will meet foreign government counterparts and private sector leaders on priority topics including critical minerals, clean energy, trade and investment, technology, health, and the environment. In Chile and Uruguay, Under Secretary Fernandez will follow up on the inaugural Leaders’ Summit  of the Americas Partnership for Economic Prosperity (Americas Partnership), which President Biden hosted at the White House on November 3.In Santiago, Chile, November 5-7, Under Secretary Fernandez will meet with business leaders and government officials to discuss the new financing tools the President announced at the Americas Partnership Summit, bolster trade and investment, support Chile’s ICT infrastructure, advance cooperation in APEC ahead of the November 15-17 APEC Economic Leaders’ Meeting in San Francisco, and strengthen critical mineral supply chains to accelerate the clean energy transition.  Under Secretary Fernandez will also provide keynote remarks and participate in a panel on critical minerals at the Wilson Center Conference on US-Chile Climate Action and the Energy Transition.Under Secretary Fernandez will visit Montevideo, Uruguay, on November 8 to follow up on the Americas Partnership Summit, particularly President Biden’s announcement of a new regional accelerator for entrepreneurs.  He will also meet member countries at the Latin American Energy Organization (OLADE) Energy Week Ministerial, where he will explore areas of partnership to strengthen green energy cooperation, tackle environmental challenges, and expand investment in Latin America’s energy transition.  He will also provide remarks at the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) Latin America Energy Transition Investment Forum and meet with key partners in the Uruguayan government.In Asuncion, Paraguay, November 9-10, Under Secretary Fernandez will meet with government officials to discuss deepening trade and investment, supporting communication technology infrastructure, and addressing shared environmental concerns.  He will also meet with farmers and producers to discuss sustainable agriculture and new techniques to increase food-system resilience.To stay up to date, follow Under Secretary Fernandez on Twitter: @State_E, Facebook: @StateDeptE, and LinkedIn: @State-E.For press inquiries, please contact: E_Communications@state.gov.
- Department Press Briefing – July 31, 2023 Matthew Miller, Department Spokesperson													HomeDepartment Press Briefing &#8211; July 31, 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; July 31, 2023																																																					July 31, 2023																																																																																																				Article Index																									DEPARTMENTAFGHANISTANHAITINORTH KOREA/RUSSIAISRAEL/PALESTINIAN TERRITORIESUKRAINE/RUSSIA/SAUDI ARABIAUNITED ARAB EMIRATESUKRAINE/RUSSIAIRAQ/IRAN/REGIONCHINANIGERUNITED ARAB EMIRATES/DEPARTMENTBANGLADESHDENMARKGEORGIAARMENIA/AZERBAIJANUKRAINE/RUSSIA/REGIONNICARAGUATAIWAN/PARAGUAY/CHINA/SOUTH KOREA/REGION																													1:26 p.m. EDTMR MILLER: Good to see everyone again after a week away. Let me start with some brief comments before coming to questions. Part of the United States strategic efforts to engage emerging leaders and changemakers throughout – through the Young African Leaders Initiative, the Mandela Washington Fellowship 2023 Summit kicked off this morning in Washington, D.C. The three-day summit caps off six weeks of academic study and leadership development at 28 institutions of higher education in 20 U.S. states and the District of Columbia. Driven by young leaders, nearly 6,000 strong, who have gone on to address key issues such as democracy and voting rights, food security, economic equity, public health and education, the Mandela Washington Fellowship has been a vital public diplomacy tool to help catalyze positive change within the Sub-Saharan Africa – within Sub-Saharan African nations for nearly a decade.On Wednesday, Secretary Blinken will address the 700 Mandela Washington Fellows at this year’s summit during the closing plenary session. In addition to the Secretary, Administrator Samantha Power, Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs Elizabeth Allen, Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs Molly Phee, and other U.S. Government and private sector leaders will also address the Mandela Washington Fellows. And we would like to welcome them to Washington and encourage them for all their efforts on behalf of the nation.With that, start us out?QUESTION: Thanks. If I could start with Tom West’s meeting with the Taliban representatives today. What was discussed in that meeting? How did it go?MR MILLER: I’m going to wait. We have a readout that we have coming. We’re working on putting together the details now. And I’m going to wait and withhold comment till we have the – all those details wrapped up and put out. It should be in the next hour or two.QUESTION: Okay. And the Taliban said they discussed the lifting of travel and other restrictions on Taliban leaders, and the return of Afghan Central Bank assets. Is that something that’s seriously under consideration?MR MILLER: Again, I’m going to wait until – just because the meeting just wrapped and we’re still in talks with the people that were there at the meeting, I’m going to wait until we have the readout out to talk in detail about the meeting.QUESTION: Haiti?MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: Do you guys have any update &#8212;MR MILLER: Good to see you in the front row.QUESTION: There was no room back there. (Laughter.)MR MILLER: These – I see. Someone took your seat. I see. It was confusing to me; I’m used to people in their – you know.QUESTION: Yeah.MR MILLER: Sorry.QUESTION: Alix Dorsainvil, do you guys have any update on her abduction in Haiti last week?MR MILLER: I don’t. I will say we are aware of the reports that two U.S. citizens were kidnapped in Haiti. Obviously, the safety and security of American citizens overseas is our highest priority. We are in regular contact with the Haitian authorities and will continue to work with them and our U.S. Government interagency partners. But because it’s an ongoing law enforcement investigation, there’s not any more detail I can offer.QUESTION: You don’t know who’s holding her at this time, or you can’t share that information?MR MILLER: Again, because – as is usually the case with ongoing law enforcement questions, I’m not going to comment on any of the underlying details.QUESTION: And can you tell us if there’s been any – if those who have abducted her have requested anything from the U.S. Government?MR MILLER: Again, I just think it would be inappropriate to comment on details. You shouldn’t read into that one way or the other what the answer might be. But because it’s an ongoing law enforcement situation, those are obviously quite sensitive and I just don’t want to comment on the details.QUESTION: And just the last question. This doesn’t have to do with the details of the investigation. But she was abducted the same day that the State Department put out a new Travel Advisory and drew down the majority of the U.S. diplomats who are in the country. So do you think that there is any linkage between those two things?MR MILLER: I have no reason to believe there is.Any more on Haiti before I –QUESTION: Haiti.MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: Yeah, on Haiti. So the – now that you have a lead force, potentially, for the police mission or force in Haiti, which will be led by Kenya, something you are actively on, it’s supposed to be a multinational force. So are there, to your knowledge, any other countries that will now confirm and will be involved? And specifically the United States, will you fund this force? Will you send police officers or anything like that?MR MILLER: Sure. Let me say there are a couple things that need to happen as next steps before we get to addressing some of those questions. First, the United Nations – the UN Security Council needs to pass a resolution authorizing this mission. The United States, along with Ecuador, are going to introduce a resolution at the UN Security Council to take that step. That’s the first step that needs to happen.The second step is that the Government of Kenya needs to conduct an assessment mission, which they plan to do in the coming days and weeks. And then once they have conducted that assessment mission, they, as the lead of this of this multinational force, will talk with other partners about what additional type of assistance they need, what other countries might participate. That’ll kick off a series of discussions, of which the United States will of course be a party.We do – we are committed to finding the resources to support this multinational force. As I said, I think it’s too early to get into any details about what those resources might be. But after the Kenyans have conducted their initial assessment mission, we will of course be in contact with them about what it might look like. I would note Secretary Blinken, on – actually, before we left Australia, had a call with the president of Kenya to talk about how we might coordinate this work, and we’ll continue to be in close coordination with them.QUESTION: Okay. Just to follow up, any date yet for the UN resolution to be introduced by you and Ecuador?MR MILLER: No. But in the near future.Yeah, Shannon.QUESTION: Same topic. Thank you. It’s been, I think, about 10 months since the Haitian president first requested international intervention, and as you’ve just clearly detailed, there’s still a lot of steps that need to happen before that international intervention can take place. Do you think that in those roughly 10 months, has that allowed the situation to deteriorate further to what we’re seeing now?MR MILLER: I think the situation has been challenging for some time. It was – it was – that’s not been a secret of any kind. We’ve talked openly about it. We have recommended that U.S. citizens do not travel to Haiti for some time. We have made it a priority to find a lead nation to operate this multinational force. That has been a challenge. There have been a number of conversations, some of which have been publicly reported, some of which have not. But I will say that we are pleased, as the Secretary said in a statement that we issued – or as the Secretary has said, we are pleased that Kenya is stepping forward and giving positive consideration to leading this – to taking this role.QUESTION: And the U.S. – can you just say why you didn’t see – the U.S. was not fit to lead an international intervention?MR MILLER: We just thought there were other ways in which we could be supportive that would be both more appropriate and more useful than taking the lead role. We have been committed to the safety and security of the Haitian people. We’ve been a large humanitarian donor to relief efforts in Haiti for some time, and we have worked behind the scenes to find a lead nation to run this multinational force and are pleased that that has been successful.Yeah, before – anything else on Haiti before I go?QUESTION: Different &#8212;MR MILLER: You will be next. Okay, go ahead.QUESTION: Change &#8212;MR MILLER: Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you. To North – thank you, Matt, and I have two questions for the North Korea. Secretary Blinken has mentioned to possibility that Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu would purchase weapons from North Korea. When North Korea provides new weapons to Russia, to concern is that it could cause threat to – I mean security of Ukraine as well as the Korean Peninsula. What can you say about security uncertainty on the Korean Peninsula? Then I follow up.MR MILLER: Yeah. I would say, as the Secretary noted over the weekend, it certainly did not appear that Defense Minister Shoigu was in North Korea for vacation. I’m not going to speak any more – in any more detail, but will say that we have imposed a number of sanctions on North Korea in the past for various activities. We’ve also imposed sanctions on a number of entities and individuals around the world for assisting Russia in its war effort. We won’t hesitate to do so in the future.QUESTION: These actions are subject to UN Security Council sanctions. The role of the UN Security Council is weak now. How will the United States respond to this?MR MILLER: Respond to what?QUESTION: Respond to the – to this happening. You have own individual sanctions you imposed.MR MILLER: Sure. I will say, as I said in my previous answer, we have never hesitated to impose sanctions on North Korea and North Korean entities when we’ve found violations or when we’ve found actions that merit sanctions, and we won’t hesitate to do so in the future. But of course I’m not going to preview any specific action.QUESTION: Lastly – lastly, Kim Jong-un invited Russian President Putin to Pyongyang this fall. How can you see this? How did you comment on this?MR MILLER: Obviously there’s been a close relationship between those two countries for a while, one that’s not exactly been productive to increasing the security of the world, and I wouldn’t expect that to change as a result of this meeting.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Said, go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you. I’m going to switch topics to the Palestinian issue. On the visa waiver issue, I mean, it seems that Palestinian Americans and Arab Americans are unhappy with the MOU because it’s convoluted. They don’t really understand what’s going on. So my first question to you I asked last week: Could there be any – at any time an effort to publish this so people know exactly what you guys agreed with the Israelis on?MR MILLER: We continue to review that question. I don’t have any updates at this time, but we are continuing to look into what exact information from the MOU we can make public.QUESTION: And second, the Israeli Government’s public-facing guidance directs some U.S. citizens to use a smart application which allows the Israelis really, like, intrusive access to their – everything that they do. Have you looked into that?MR MILLER: I &#8212;QUESTION: Are you aware of this app or &#8212;MR MILLER: I am aware of the app. I’m not going to speak to the specific kind of technical details of how &#8212;QUESTION: All right.MR MILLER: &#8212; Israel is going to implement the program other than to say the important thing for us is that the Visa Waiver Program is implemented without discrimination and that the same rules apply to all American citizens.QUESTION: But it seems that still Gazans are not really included. It seems – or at least somehow &#8212;MR MILLER: No.QUESTION: &#8212; they are not equally included.MR MILLER: So I would say, as I have said before, our understanding is that Americans who are in Gaza are very much included in this program. They might have different procedures because of the different security situation in Gaza, but it is our expectation that they will be included in this program. But we will be monitoring the implementation over the coming weeks and months to make sure that they are included and are not discriminated against.QUESTION: And finally, Amnesty International slammed a Israeli court decision to demolish a Palestinian Bedouin village in the Negev. Do you have any – are you aware of these reports?MR MILLER: I am. I &#8212;QUESTION: And do you have any comment on that?MR MILLER: Yeah, I’d say it’s critical for Israel and the Palestinian Authority to refrain from unilateral steps.QUESTION: That’s inside Israel. The Palestinian Authority has absolutely nothing to do with that. They have no authority whatsoever.MR MILLER: I understand – that exacerbate tensions and undercut efforts to advance and negotiate a two-state solution, and that certainly includes the demolition of homes and the evictions of families from their homes.Yeah.QUESTION: Yeah, on Ukraine, President Zelenskyy’s chief of staff has said that there are talks this week on security guarantees in Washington. Do you have anything on this?MR MILLER: Sure. Those talks are going to kick off this week. Those are an outgrowth of the statement that we released at – that the G7 released on the margins of the last NATO Summit in Vilnius, where President Biden and G7 leaders made clear that we were going to engage in negotiations with the Government of Ukraine about our long-term commitments to Ukraine’s security so it can establish a military that can defend itself and deter a future attack, rebuild its economy, protect its citizens, and pursue integration into the Euro-Atlantic community.I will note this is separate and apart from the security assistance that we regularly provide now. We’ve made clear that we see this proceeding on two tracks: one, security assistance to support their efforts to repel the Russian aggression inside their country; and two, to establish a long-term military that can serve as a deterrent effect from future Russian aggression. So those meetings are going to start this week. I would add that since we released that joint declaration at the – from the G7 and EU in Vilnius, 12 other countries have joined their names to the declaration. So talks will begin this week about how we can decide on the actual details of those security commitments going forward.QUESTION: And on the summit in Saudi Arabia this week on Ukraine, do you support this summit? Who will attend it? And what’s the goal of it?QUESTION: Yeah.MR MILLER: We do, of course, support this summit. We have long said that it is important that Ukraine be in the driver’s seat when it comes to any potential diplomatic resolution to this war. It’s important that countries that have not yet heard directly from Ukraine hear from Ukraine, so we are gratified that there will be countries that are attending this summit to talk directly with Ukraine. If your question was with respect to what other countries will be attending, I would defer to the governments of Saudi Arabia and Ukraine to that – to answer that question. If the question is respect &#8212;QUESTION: (Off-mike.)MR MILLER: Let me – I’m coming to you. You don’t have to – if the – (laughter) – you don’t have to jump in.QUESTION: All right.MR MILLER: If the question is with respect to what U.S. Government &#8212;QUESTION: Yeah.MR MILLER: &#8212; officials will be attending, I can confirm that there will be U.S. Government officials. Not ready to make announcements yet about who those will be, but as the week goes on, certainly you can expect that we will do so.QUESTION: One more on UAE. Do you have any updates on the case of Tierra Young Allen, known as Sassy Trucker, who is stuck in UAE?MR MILLER: No. Only that – what we’ve said previously, that we’re aware that she is unable to depart the UAE. We take seriously our commitment to assist U.S. citizens abroad. We’re providing all appropriate consular assistance in this case, and we will remain in regular communication with her and her family.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Did anyone else want to do something on Russia-Ukraine before I &#8212;QUESTION: (Off-mike.)MR MILLER: Go.QUESTION: Yes.MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: Thanks, Matt. Welcome back.MR MILLER: Thank you.QUESTION: I do want to move to South Caucasus, but before that Russia-Ukraine.MR MILLER: Do Russia-Ukraine and then I’ll make sure – before you do your South Caucasus question, I’ll see if anyone has on it.QUESTION: You said – thanks so much. You said that talks will take place this week. In this building? Or &#8212;MR MILLER: They’ll be virtually &#8212;QUESTION: Gotcha.MR MILLER: If – not the – not the talks happening in Saudi Arabia but the talks about long-term security commitments &#8212;QUESTION: Right.MR MILLER: &#8212; will be talks virtually – held virtually.QUESTION: And who is it going to be from the U.S. side involved?MR MILLER: It’ll be at the deputy assistant secretary level.QUESTION: Toria?MR MILLER: She is not a deputy assistant secretary, no.QUESTION: Okay.MR MILLER: No.QUESTION: Well – so I just wanted to make sure.MR MILLER: She is the – the acting deputy secretary.QUESTION: So on Eurasia issues, right – so &#8212;MR MILLER: On Europe – European issues. Yeah.QUESTION: Oh, Europe. Okay. Fantastic. On Russia abducting Ukrainian children, indicted Russian war criminal Maria made a statement, a report saying that, well, since the beginning of the war, we have received more than 4 million – 4.8 million residents in Ukraine, and more than 700 of them being children. What do you think she’s saying here and what is your response?MR MILLER: I would not – I would not begin to try to get into her head and speculate about what she’s saying. I would say, though, that one of the worst incidents we have seen in this war is the deportation of Ukrainian civilians to Russia, including civilians who have been forcibly separated from their families. I will note that was an important consideration in the Secretary’s determination that Russian forces and officials have committed crimes against humanity. We call, as we have before, for Russia to stop those abusive actions and return Ukraine’s children. And I would say that we support accountability for these crimes.QUESTION: Are you going to share your information on this very matter with the ICC very soon?MR MILLER: I’m not going to speak to any specific matter. I will note, as the Secretary did last week when I believe we were in New Zealand – maybe it was Australia – the few days run together – but I think when – it was when we were in New Zealand – that we will cooperate with the ICC’s investigations. We support accountability through the ICC and a number of mechanisms. But consistent with the ICC’s confidential treatment of requests with respect to any specific request for information, we will keep those details confidential.QUESTION: Okay. Thank you. Please come back to me on South Caucasus. I have &#8212;MR MILLER: How could I not?QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: Anything else on Russia before I &#8212;QUESTION: Ukraine?MR MILLER: Yeah, go ahead.QUESTION: All right. Can I follow up on talks you mentioned about? What kind of security guarantees could be provided to Ukraine? Is it kind of Israel formula President Biden mentioned before?MR MILLER: I wouldn’t want to comment about the eventual outcomes of talks that are just beginning other than to make clear what President Biden and other leaders of the G7 and the EU and, now, the other 12 nations that have joined the statement have made clear, is that we are committed to the long-term security of Ukraine and helping Ukraine build a long-term security infrastructure that can deter Russian aggression. What the details of that will look like, of course, will be something that will be covered in these conversations and conversations that will go on for some time. And I don’t think it’d be appropriate for me to try to get ahead of those talks.Go ahead.QUESTION: Yeah. Another short question. The Secretary this Thursday will participate in the ministerial in the United Nations. Do you expect him to meet Ukrainian Secretary Kuleba if he will be participating?MR MILLER: I don’t know – I don’t know if he will be – I know Secretary Blinken will be participating. I don’t know the other participants that will be there, so I’ll have to – I’ll wait until later in the week to see who else has been confirmed as an attendee.Any Russia – Russia? Go ahead.QUESTION: (Off-mike.) So President Zelenskyy made a statement yesterday like an hour after a major drone explosion in Moscow. And I’m quoting him here, he said, “Gradually, the war is returning to the territory of Russia – to its symbolic centers and military bases, and this is an inevitable, natural, and absolutely fair process.” So I just wonder if the administration supports that stance, specifically with regards to symbolic centers, which appears to mean kind of civilian targets.MR MILLER: I will say that – first of all, I’m not sure that I would agree with that interpretation of what symbolic centers means. I will say that we neither encourage nor enable strikes outside Ukraine’s borders. But as we have said many times, it is up for – to Ukraine to decide how to conduct this war. And when it comes to strikes, as you raised, on civilian centers, it has been Ukrainian civilian infrastructure that has been targeted over and over, Ukrainian civilians that have been murdered in this war – schools, hospitals, apartment buildings. I could go on down the list. So I don’t think any attempt to draw any equivalency is one that’s actually backed up by the facts.QUESTION: Right, but if I could follow up on that, I mean, we’re not &#8212;MR MILLER: Go ahead – go ahead. I’m going to move &#8212;QUESTION: &#8212; arming Ukraine &#8212;MR MILLER: I’m going to – I’m going to move – I’m going to move the room.QUESTION: &#8212; or we’re not arming Russia &#8212;MR MILLER: Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you, Matt.QUESTION: The Iraqi Government has informed the recent KRG delegation to Baghdad that they are not being paid international oil companies’ duties for their past operation in Kurdistan Region of Iraq, which there’s a lot of U.S. companies are operating in the Kurdistan Region.MR MILLER: Can you – sorry, just repeat that last part a minute. It was &#8212;QUESTION: Okay. The Iraqi Government has informed the Kurdistan Region delegation that they are not going pay the international oil companies for their past operation in the Kurdistan region of Iraq. There are a lot of U.S. companies are working and operating in the Kurdistan region. And to that end, the U.S. Development Finance Corporation, FDC, has extended over 300 million U.S. dollars to these energy firms in the Kurdistan Region. What’s your reaction to this Iraqi decision? And the second: How do you engage to make sure that the U.S. companies in the Kurdistan region will get their share and the U.S. loans government are secure?MR MILLER: So I would say, first of all, I don’t know it to be a fact that the Iraqi Government has taken that position. I will say generally, we have repeatedly urged Baghdad and Erbil to agree on a range of issues of mutual interest, including a viable budget and a new national hydrocarbons law. We will continue to encourage the parties to determine a way forward that benefits Iraq’s foreign investment climate and respects the important contributions of U.S. entities, including in the energy sector, while advancing the interests of all Iraqi people.QUESTION: And one question on the – yesterday’s visit by the UN envoy to Iraq to Iran, and she met with the Iranian foreign minister. What’s your comment on that? And do you believe that for having a political stability in Iraq, we should talk to Iran first?MR MILLER: I won’t speak to the UN envoy’s visit. I will say that, obviously, Iraq has bilateral relationships with Iran. What we have always said is we would like for those bilateral relationships to be a normal relationship that reflects Iraqi sovereignty. We haven’t always seen that in the past. You’ve seen us implement policies to try to prevent or lessen or mitigate the way that Iran tries to gain leverage against Iraq. And so in the extent – to the extent there are bilateral relationships between the country, we hope that it would be one that respects, as I said Iraqi sovereignty.QUESTION: Have you sent any correspondence to Iran through the UN envoy to Iraq? Because there are some Iraqi media outlets saying that you sent a message to Iran yesterday.MR MILLER: I will never – I have – as I have said before at this podium, I will not comment on specific engagements. But we’ll note, as we have many times, that we have always said we have the ability to deliver messages to Iran when it’s in our interest.QUESTION: Thank you.QUESTION: Iran follow-up? Matt?MR MILLER: Go – let me – do you mind if &#8212;QUESTION: (Off-mike.)MR MILLER: All right.QUESTION: Thank you. A member of the Iraqi parliament – actually he is the member of the finance committee – has said that Iran has been printing Iraqi dinars in Argentina, shipping them back to Baghdad, exchanging them into dollars, and then trucking them to Iran. Is the United States aware?MR MILLER: I will have to take that one back.QUESTION: Thank you.MR MILLER: The United States may be aware. I’m not personally. So I don’t know. (Laughter.) Go ahead, Olivia.QUESTION: This is on China unless there’s more on &#8212;MR MILLER: It’s fine. Go ahead.QUESTION: Okay. With the removal of Qin Gang as foreign minister, will the U.S., has the U.S. extended the invitation that he originally accepted to visit the United States back in June to his replacement or anybody else?MR MILLER: I don’t know if we have yet officially extended that invitation, but it was an invitation to the foreign minister. Obviously, Wang Yi is now serving in the role of foreign ministers, so I would expect that the invitation would be extended to him. Whether that has actually happened, I do not know. We are engaged in a number of conversations with Chinese Government officials even as we speak. And I would expect at some point we would make clear that the invitation extends to the new foreign minister.QUESTION: Okay. And you would expect it to be accepted?MR MILLER: I would expect so. Given that the Chinese Government had already accepted the invitation, I would assume they would. But of course, I won’t speak for them.QUESTION: Okay. Still on China, but slightly separate topic. There’s been this drumbeat of revelations regarding Chinese cyber activity that’s targeting email accounts within this department or reportedly embedded malware in military systems. Is it fair to say that that cyber activity by the Chinese, including malicious cyber activity, is on the increase even as diplomatic engagement is increasing?MR MILLER: I am going to, as we have before, decline to comment on any specific incident, which I know you were asking it generally, but you were referring to increased diplomatic engagement, so I think you were getting at a specific reported attempt. So I won’t speak to any specific action. I will just say generally that we constantly monitor attempts to breach our various systems. And as the Secretary has made clear, when we see those attempts, we don’t hesitate to hold the actors accountable.QUESTION: Can I just follow up on that, if I may?MR MILLER: If Olivia yields the floor.QUESTION: You had a follow-up? Okay, go ahead, go ahead.QUESTION: Well, I – one quick one, and then I’ll turn it over to you, Leon. It’s just in the past, the U.S. has tried to engage with China, say, to roll back cyber activity that had a momentary effect, and it seems to have subsided almost entirely. So I’m just wondering if there’s any thinking going into re-initiating that kind of conversation.MR MILLER: I will say that the Secretary did raise the issue of attempts to breach United States systems in his meeting with Wang Yi and raised it to say that we always watch for this type of activity and we will never hesitate to hold people accountable for it.QUESTION: Thank you. Leon, over to you.QUESTION: Yeah, I was just wondering why you are so reluctant to spell out things as they are. You’ve always been very keen in the past to say that Chinese hackers or this or that. And in this incidence, which comes at a time, as was pointed out, that there are a lot of diplomatic engagements in Beijing, you’re being very, very (inaudible).MR MILLER: We have yet to determine an actor, which leaves me unable to speak to specific actions we would take to hold specific countries accountable. I’ve said before we have no reason to doubt the assessment that Microsoft made, but the U.S. Government itself has not made its own attribution, so that leaves me in a place where it’s difficult to speak about –QUESTION: Yeah, I mean, Microsoft came out and said it was the Chinese –MR MILLER: That’s what I just said. And we have no reason to doubt it, but until the United States Government makes its own assessment, which is a technical matter, it leaves us unable – leaves me unable to comment specifically on the incident.Go ahead.QUESTION: May I ask about Niger?MR MILLER: Please.QUESTION: I just wanted to ask a little bit about the coup determination question. I mean, what do you, what does the U.S. Government, need to see before it can call this a coup? And are you concerned that holding back, as you are right now, is going to lead to some blowback in the region about sort of the U.S. hesitancy about what pretty clearly is a coup?MR MILLER: No, let me say first of all with respect to the region we have been in close conversations and consultations with partners in the region. Secretary Blinken on the trip to New Zealand and Australia and Tonga was on the phone throughout that trip with leaders in the region talking about our approach and their approach and how we should align it. And I don’t think there is any daylight between us and our partners in the region with respect to the actions that we are taking and the actions that they are taking.And with respect to any determination, I’d say we haven’t made a determination yet because it is still an ongoing, fluid situation. It is clear that there has been an attempt to remove President Bazoum from office. It’s not yet clear that attempt will ultimately be successful, so we are watching and monitoring very – monitoring the situation and trying to prevent President Bazoum from being removed from office.But we have made very clear, Secretary Blinken has made very clear, that the future – that the hundreds of millions of dollars in assistance that the U.S. has provided and is continuing to provide to Niger is very much in the balance, depending on the outcome of the actions in the country. It is important that democrat – that U.S. assistance hinges on continued democratic governance in Niger.Anything else on Niger before we – I realized we hadn’t done that. All right, I’m going to – before I – I’ll come back to you. Go ahead. Behind you.QUESTION: Thanks. Martina Strong was just – was confirmed last week for the ambassador to the UAE. I was just wondering why it took so long for President Biden to nominate someone to that position, as well as your frustrations with the delay in confirmations.MR MILLER: I will say that we have – there are of course a number of nominations that the President has to make, and we’ve worked through them expeditiously. In respect – with respect to the delays in Congress, obviously that was something we were very frustrated by. We were quite public with that. Secretary Blinken came to this podium to speak to our concerns about holds that had been placed by certain senators on ambassadors, including career ambassadors, who were being held up for issues that had nothing to do with their qualifications for the job to which they were nominated. And we were heartened that a number – I think it was 14, I may be off by one or two nominees – ambassador nominees were confirmed in – last Friday, the last day that the Senate was in session before adjourning for August.But I would add that that number’s not sufficient. There are a number of ambassadorial nominations that remain pending on the floor that are being held up for no reason at all related to that nominee’s qualifications, and that it hurts United States national security when we don’t have confirmed ambassadors in place. Because those ambassadors weren’t confirmed before the recess, you now have another six weeks that the Senate is in session that they can’t even get a vote on the floor. So we will continue to work with members of Congress and hope that we can get all of our nominees confirmed expeditiously.Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. On Bangladesh, millions of people marched capital city Dhaka in protest demanding the resignation of the ruling Prime Minister Hasina. The local and international media reports that on Saturday police and ruling party members brutally attacked peaceful demonstrations – peaceful demonstrators and opposition leaders, resulting in hundreds of injuries, including the top opposition leader, Mr. Gayeshwar Roy. How do you assess the – monitor this escalating situation, considering the government’s apparent hardline stance towards the opposition and police brutality? What steps will the State Department take to ensure the possibility of a credible and peaceful election in Bangladesh?MR MILLER: We are concerned about the reports of intimidation and political violence in Bangladesh surrounding this weekend’s political protests. We encourage the Government of Bangladesh to investigate reports of violence thoroughly, transparently, and impartially, and to hold the perpetrators of violence to account. We urge Bangladesh to create a safe environment for people to peacefully assemble and voice their concerns, and we call on all parties to respect fundamental freedoms and the rule of law, and to refrain from violence, harassment, and intimidation.And I will say finally that free and fair elections depend on the commitment of everyone – voters, political parties, youth wings, and police – and cannot take place in an environment with political violence.QUESTION: One more on Bangladesh?MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: Thank you so much. People are – we, everybody, knows that Bangladesh is approaching a national election, and the U.S. also declared a visa policy to ensure democratic process in Bangladesh. Also the ruling prime minister also ensure U.S. and the EU, the European Union, that there will be a free and fair election. But the main opposition party using arson, terrorism, and vandalizing the country capital as last week. They were attacking not only civilian properties, also the police properties. They burned everything there. They made a situation like a war field at the capital. The – and on a demand of a election-time government, which is unconstitutional declared by the supreme court of Bangladesh. What is your comment?And then I’ll have a small question.MR MILLER: My comment is the same as I made in response to the previous question.QUESTION: Thank you so much. And my – another. I want only one observation from you. Last 15th of June, while descending a judicial review application that just labeled – Canadian federal judge labeled BNP as a terrorist organization. The judicial review was filed against the rejection of a BNP activist request for political asylum in Canada. This is the fifth time they labeled the party as a terrorist organization. What is your observation on that?MR MILLER: I don’t have any observation on that.QUESTION: Bangladesh – one more.MR MILLER: Let me &#8212;QUESTION: (Off-mike.)MR MILLER: Let me – go ahead, go ahead.QUESTION: Okay. So – sorry.MR MILLER: No, go ahead.QUESTION: Okay. Yesterday Denmark announced that they were looking for legal ways to prevent a burning of holy books in the aftermath of increasing attacks against Qu’ran, and there were a similar statement from Sweden too. And today there was again incidents of Qu’ran burnings in both Sweden and Denmark. Any comment on – comment on it? I know you have previously said that you see the burning of holy books as freedom of expression, but I’m wondering if you are concerned that these increasing attacks against Qu’ran could turn into violence against Muslims.MR MILLER: Of course we are concerned that it could spark violence. That is why we have said we condemn the burning of religious texts. It is something that we have spoken to a number of times at this podium. At the same time, we recognize the right to freedom of expression even when it’s freedom of expression – it’s acts of freedom of expression with which we may disagree. That continues to be our policy.Alex, go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you. A couple questions on the South Caucasus, Georgia first. Hundreds of Georgians last night got out in Batumi protesting a shipment of Russian tourists to their country. Some of them got arrested by pro-Russian government. Georgia’s 20 percent is still under Russian occupation. Do you think they have legitimate concern?MR MILLER: Do they have legitimate what?QUESTION: Concern about not letting Russians into their country and &#8212;MR MILLER: Let me take that one back.QUESTION: Okay. As you also know that Georgia’s occupied Abkhazia region last week decided to gift very strategic airport Sukhumi to Russians. Does department have any position on that?MR MILLER: I’ll take that one back as well.QUESTION: Okay, two Azerbaijan. The Secretary spoke with Aliyev on Saturday. He raised his concerns about Lachin corridor situation on the ground. This is not the position where the Secretary wanted to be in this month, right, when he was hosting former ministers last month in this town?MR MILLER: This is not – what did you say? This is not the position &#8212;QUESTION: Not the position you guys wanted to be in. You were talking about a peace agreement.MR MILLER: Yes, and we continue to talk about a peace agreement and we continue to believe that a peace agreement is within reach. However, we have always said that for it to be within reach both parties have to make difficult compromises, and that’s why the Secretary has been remained engaged in talking to the leaders of both Armenia and Azerbaijan to encourage them to make those difficult compromises so we can – they can reach an agreement.QUESTION: Is it your observation that the situation has been worsening that caused the Secretary’s concern?MR MILLER: I’m not going to comment on the situation &#8212;QUESTION: Okay, and the Secretary’s not &#8212;MR MILLER: Last one, Alex, and then I’ve got to move to some others.QUESTION: Just a follow-up. You did &#8212;MR MILLER: This is like number six for you, I think, so &#8212;QUESTION: Yes. You didn’t mention the state of human rights in the country when you had the readout about this call. We discussed the case of Qubad Ibadoglu just a week ago. Would you be surprised if Secretary did not mention those cases during that phone call? I just want to make sure you guys are not putting out new template without mentioning human rights when you have a high-level call.MR MILLER: We always – I will say human rights is always on the table for the United States, and we raise our concerns publicly and privately.Go ahead, back of the room. I’ll come to you next. Back of – yeah.QUESTION: Good afternoon. So two questions, one Ukraine, one Nicaragua, if that’s all right. Pope Francis yesterday calling for the Black Sea initiative to be restored. The Biden administration, do they feel the Vatican can help make that happen, the Black Sea initiative?MR MILLER: We certainly would encourage anyone’s support for re-instituting the Black Sea Grain Initiative, and of course that includes the pope. If you look at Russia’s actions since the Black Sea Grain Initiative, they – they have made very clear that for all their protestations that what they are concerned about is the supposed inability for them to export grain or inability to export fertilizer – both of which were not true, since our sanctions did not apply to either of those activities – their actions have proven that that’s not their real concern. And when you look at how they’ve bombed ports in Odesa, how they’ve taken out key facilities to facilitate the export of grain, how they’ve been practicing attacks on ships in the Black Sea, it’s clear that they want to use food as a weapon of war, and the result has been the increase by 17 percent in grain prices since the termination of this initiative.So we welcome any countries who are willing to get involved to encourage Russia – I would say two things: one, to call out Russia’s actions for what they actually are and call out Russia’s propaganda for what it actually is; and two, to encourage Russia to rejoin the initiative.QUESTION: All right. One more on Nicaragua, if you will, please. So I know the State Department has called for the release of Catholic Bishop Rolando Alvarez, the same for Father Fernando Zamora Silva. Have you heard from Daniel Ortega’s government yet after this?MR MILLER: I don’t have any update on that, sorry.QUESTION: Okay. And then &#8212;MR MILLER: And then that was – I’m going to go because we’re running out of &#8212;QUESTION: Well, just real quick – one more just real quick.MR MILLER: Yeah.QUESTION: I don’t get here too often. Thank you.MR MILLER: Well, you can come every day. (Laughter.) It’s a free and open room.QUESTION: What’s the message to Daniel Ortega – thank you. What’s the message, the Biden administration’s message to Daniel Ortega, who continues to persecute the Catholic Church in Nicaragua?MR MILLER: I would say that we of course believe in the freedom of religion everywhere and would encourage the release of wrongfully detained – people who are detained for exercising the freedom of religion.Go ahead.QUESTION: Thanks, Matt. Two questions on Taiwan. The Taiwanese vice president and frontrunner for the presidential election, William Lai, is expected to transit the U.S. before and after his visit to Paraguay on August 14th. Earlier this month, the Financial Times reported that Lai made remarks at a campaign event that seemed contrary to the U.S. “one China” policy. He said that, quote, “When Taiwan’s president can enter the White House, the political goal that we’re pursuing will have been achieved.” What is the State Department’s comment on those remarks and on this upcoming transit?MR MILLER: I don’t have any reaction to his remarks. I will say that from the United States perspective, our “one China” policy has not changed, continues to be our policy. And with respect to his transit, such transits have happened numerous times going back decades over multiple administrations, and there’s nothing out of the ordinary about them.QUESTION: Okay. And also, although he said he supports the cross-strait status quo, there’ve been some concerns about his foreign policy and that he may support Taiwanese independence. What is the administration’s view of this? And is it concerned that either during the election cycle or if he is elected, this could negatively impact U.S.-China relations?MR MILLER: I’m not going to speak to comments by a candidate for office, really, in Taiwan or any other country.QUESTION: Thanks.MR MILLER: Couple more and then we’ll – go ahead.QUESTION: Can I follow up on Taiwan? So Matt, you just mentioned the U.S. “one China” policy. U.S. officials have said that the United States “one China” policy is based on Taiwan Relations Act, Six Assurances, and three communiques. Are there any wordings in those documents explicitly prevent a democratically elected vice president from transiting into a city in the United States?MR MILLER: I do not have those – the entire law in front of me or the various communiques, but I will say that transits are well established president – precedent, as I said, that go back multiple administrations.All right, at the back, and then we’ll wrap up.QUESTION: Thank you. So I’m just wondering if you have any comment on the fact that Chinese companies are pouring billions of dollars in past few months to Korean – South Korean companies in an effort to reach the U.S. markets and skirt the U.S. EV rules.MR MILLER: I will say about that, number one, we certainly understand that other countries like South Korea have relationships with China, including economic relationships. We have a significant economic relationship with China. I will say with respect to all of our enforcement actions we always look on ways to improve those actions, in ways to tighten those actions, in ways to enforce them, including people who are – people and entities that are trying to evade them. That’s a general comment without respect to any specific report, but that remains our policy and will be going forward.Thanks, everyone.(The briefing was concluded at 2:07 p.m.)# # #&nbsp;						Tags																					Afghanistan																								Armenia																								Azerbaijan																								Bangladesh																								China																								Denmark																								Georgia																								Haiti																								Iran																								Iraq																								Israel																								Nicaragua																								Niger																								North Korea																								Office of the Spokesperson																								Palestinian Territories																								Paraguay																								Russia																								Saudi Arabia																								South Korea																								Taiwan																								Ukraine																								United Arab Emirates