# Solomon Islands - United States Department of State

- Congratulations to Solomon Islands Prime Minister Jeremiah Manele Matthew Miller, Department SpokespersonThe United States congratulates Jeremiah Manele on his election as the prime minister of Solomon Islands, as confirmed by the vote results certified on May 2. We also congratulate the people of Solomon Islands for making their voices heard, and we applaud the many officials and volunteers, especially from the Solomon Islands Electoral Commission and the Royal Solomon Islands Police Force, whose dedication made the free and fair elections of April 17 possible.We look forward to working with Prime Minister Jeremiah Manele to further strengthen the U.S.-Solomon Islands relationship and move our nations toward a better future.
- Elections in the Solomon Islands Matthew Miller, Department SpokespersonThe United States offers its congratulations to the people of Solomon Islands, the Solomon Islands Electoral Commission, and the Royal Solomon Islands Police Force on successfully executing an orderly and efficient election day.  The U.S. stands ready to continue its close collaboration with Solomon Islands’ elected leaders and people.
- Department Press Briefing – April 17, 2024 HomeDepartment Press Briefing – April 17, 2024				hide		if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}																										Department Press Briefing – April 17, 2024																																																					April 17, 2024																																																								1:11 p.m. EDTMR PATEL: Good afternoon, everybody. How’s everyone doing? Such a wonderful Wednesday. I don’t actually have anything off the top, Matt, so if you want to go ahead and kick us off.QUESTION: Sure. In Capri, is the Secretary &#8212;MR PATEL: Yeah. Do you wish you were there?QUESTION: I do wish I was there, but I’m not.MR PATEL: Yeah, same all of us. We can all pretend to be in Capri. We’re here at the Daily Press Briefing instead.QUESTION: Does the Secretary, while he is there, plan to have any Mideast – other than the one group meeting with the G7 that’s about the Middle East, does he have any bilateral plans?MR PATEL: I don’t have any additional meetings to preview or get ahead of, Matt. But a veteran like yourself, who I’m sure has been to many G7 meetings, knows that many important diplomatic conversations happen on the margins, and our G7 partners continue to be important allies and partners when it comes to a lot of our goals when it comes to the conflict in Gaza right now – namely, continuing to press for additional humanitarian aid, doing everything we can to continue to secure the release of hostages, and also, in light of the events over this past weekend, continuing to support Israel’s security and self-defense. So I suspect there will be additional conversations on those topics but I don’t have anything to preview or get ahead of.QUESTION: Okay. And can you bring us up to speed on his – did he have any additional calls on the way?MR PATEL: No other – no additional calls to read out, no.QUESTION: There are not? Okay. And then lastly, what’s your latest understanding from the Israelis about what they intend or not intend to do?MR PATEL: So look, Matt, again I don’t have any updates or anything to offer on that. Ultimately, this is a decision for Israel to make. It’s their own decision. But we continue to be engaged with Israeli officials and members of the Israeli Government. To everyone, though, we continue to emphasize the importance of avoiding further escalation, and we’re working with partners in the region and around the world to continue to create a unified diplomatic response to Iran’s reckless and irresponsible behavior over the course of this past weekend.QUESTION: Okay. Then, sorry, I said that the last one was the last one, but this really is the last one. Is – you’ve seen that both David Cameron and Baerbock, the German and British foreign ministers, were in Israel ahead of the Capri meeting.MR PATEL: Right.QUESTION: The Secretary has no plans to follow suit?MR PATEL: I have no travel updates to offer or preview at the moment.Go ahead, Daphne.QUESTION: David Cameron said it was clear Israel had made a decision to respond to the Iranian attack. Have you gotten a similar message?MR PATEL: I’m not going to speak to the specifics on our diplomatic engagements with Israeli officials. What I can just say is that, again, these decisions are for Israel to make as a sovereign democratic country. We continue to be closely engaged with Israeli officials, but we also continue to stress the importance of further &#8212; escalation. The United States certainly isn’t interested in getting into an all-out conflict with the Iranian regime. But we’ll continue to work closely with partners and allies in the region, as you saw the Secretary do over the course of this past weekend and with the number of counterparts he spoke to about creating a unified diplomatic response to what we believe is Iran’s reckless and irresponsible behavior.QUESTION: What contingency plans does the U.S. have to contain the aftermath of any attack should Israel choose to attack?MR PATEL: I’m just not going to get ahead of hypotheticals or speculate. What I can say, though, is that since October 7th, since the events of this past weekend, we have remained closely lashed up with partners and allies when it comes to events that unfold. This past weekend alone you all saw the call or readouts that went out, and Matt spoke to this a little bit on Monday. You saw the Secretary speak to his counterparts in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Jordan and Egypt. He’s spoken to Israeli officials as well, and we’ll continue to have those high-level diplomatic engagements.QUESTION: Okay. And I’m sorry, I’ve just got two more.MR PATEL: Yeah.QUESTION: The UN Security Council looks set to go on Friday on a Palestinian request for full UN membership. Diplomats tell us the resolution has the support of at least nine members. Does the U.S. plan to veto this?MR PATEL: I’m not going to preview our UN vote. Broadly, though, Daphne, you know that the United States remains committed to a two-state solution, and we believe that the only comprehensive and realistic path to that is through lasting peace and through direct negotiations between the parties. But broadly, we’ll continue to remain engaged with colleagues on the Security Council and on any resolution that may or may not come forward.QUESTION: And then UNRWA has said that some of its staff members and other people detained by Israeli forces in Gaza were subjected to ill treatment, including severe beatings and being forced to strip naked. Have you been in touch with the Israeli Government on this? And what’s been their response if you have?MR PATEL: So we are aware of this recent report that the UN put out highlighting some of these allegations of extensive human rights abuses. We’re deeply concerned by these reports and will continue to press and engage directly with our Israeli partners on the need for a full investigation into these allegations, and accountability for any perpetrators. But beyond that, I don’t have any specific conversations to read out. We of course are in touch with our Israeli partners all the time.But broadly, though, we continue to call on all parties in the region, call on Israel, to do more to protect humanitarian aid workers, to improve deconfliction mechanisms, and to pursue full accountability for incidents of harm against aid workers.QUESTION: Thank you.MR PATEL: Jenny.QUESTION: Do you have any updates on those deconfliction mechanisms, this coordination response? Is that fully stood up (inaudible)?MR PATEL: That is something our partners in the IDF can speak to. I don’t have any updates.QUESTION: And then do you have any updates on any of their other commitments and whether the U.S. has made any assessments on whether that’s sufficient to change U.S. policy?MR PATEL: So look, Jenny. Let me just first state broadly that we are encouraged by reports of increased assistance flowing into northern Gaza, bakeries reopening there, and other steps that we’re seeing of positive collaboration between partners and Israeli authorities that demonstrate the executions of some commitments that our partners in Israel have outlined. But – and I want to stress this – certainly we continue to believe that there is still a need for sustained, significant, multisectoral humanitarian assistance. We think it’s crucial, and more must be done. And as military operations continue, Israel needs to take all feasible steps to minimize civilian harm.So we’ll continue to press these things, but some metrics that you asked for – we have seen openings of northern crossings and seeing the maximization of routes from Jordan. We have also seen Erez reopened on April 14th, which allowed a number of trucks entering daily. We expect some further enhancements there as well. But again, I want to stress that while these are positive steps in the right direction, more absolutely needs to be done. There is – the humanitarian situation in Gaza is dire, and that is why we are continuing to pursue an approach when it comes to humanitarian aid that includes bolstering and supporting and continuing to push for additional land convoy movements.You saw earlier in March us conduct a number of air drop operations. You’ve seen the Jordanians and others do similar things. And in the State of the Union, the President spoke about the maritime corridor as well. These are all things that we think need to be pursued aggressively given the dire situation, and we’ll continue to do that.QUESTION: And any updates on Rafah?MR PATEL: I don’t have any updates on any conversations or anything.Go ahead.QUESTION: Vedant, just a follow-up on your statement earlier about the – your efforts to have a unified response – diplomatic response to Iran’s attack between you and your partners and allies.MR PATEL: Yeah.QUESTION: Is this designed to negate the need for Israel to respond militarily, or regardless of that?MR PATEL: So Israel is going to make its own decisions and its own determinations as a sovereign country. Irregardless of what transpires in that department, we continue to believe that it is important to hold the Iranian regime accountable for what we think is reckless, malign, and destabilizing behavior. You saw National Security Advisor Sullivan speak a little bit to this yesterday, and so we’ll continue to work directly through our systems, multilaterally through forums like the G7 that Matt was alluding to, the UN, and others on ways that we will hold the Iranian regime accountable.Go ahead. Yeah.QUESTION: Thank you, Vedant. On Thursday, April 11th, the State Department Spokesman Mr. Miller said the Biden administration fully supports the rights of the Israeli people. And for our audience, could you explain a disconnect between the Biden administration’s words and behavior, how on one hand that you can say you fully support the rights of the Israeli people, and on the other hand not fully support the rights of the Israeli people to defend themselves as they see fit? And I have a follow-up.MR PATEL: Do you have a specific example of how we are not encouraging them to defend themselves?QUESTION: Also specifically about not allowing them – or the issue of a counterattack against Iran. And not allowing them to easily go into Rafah to take care of Hamas, delaying this. Israel could have been into Rafah a long time ago. So the audience is really concerned about the disconnect about – that they see the Biden administration preventing Israel &#8212;MR PATEL: Well, Doc &#8212;QUESTION: &#8212; from going into Rafah with these operations and &#8212;MR PATEL: &#8212; I’m going to interrupt you a little bit. I think you are in a – frankly, in a misleading way conflating two very different issues. One, in the context of Israel defending itself against attacks from Iran, we believe that they have every right to do that, and they should. And you saw the United States echo, underscore that commitment to Israel’s security and its self-defense this past weekend. And that is a commitment we believe is unwavering and it is ironclad, and we will continue to feel and believe strongly in Israel’s ability to defend itself, in its ability to feel secure in its region.But separate from that, in this conversation of Rafah, it is important again that we underline when we’re talking about Rafah, we are talking about more than a million people seeking refuge. We are talking about a region that is – continues to be an important conduit for humanitarian aid entering Gaza, and it continues to be an access point of safe departure for foreign nationals.So yes, we believe very strongly that any military operation in Rafah or in the Rafah region should require significant serious planning that addresses these three major areas of concern. That continues to be something we feel strongly about.QUESTION: Along that, our audience (inaudible) are concerned about the pressure on Israel to accept the two-state solution that you were talking about. And so what is your response to our audience that really believes that is a way of hurting Israel when many Israeli people do not support a two-state solution, the idea of sharing their land with terrorists – specifically with Gaza, with Hamas – that Hamas blew their opportunity to really have a peaceful area there and so forth?MR PATEL: Well, I hope you’re not – I really sincerely hope you’re not making the claim that all Palestinian people are terrorists &#8212;QUESTION: Oh, no.MR PATEL: &#8212; because that certainly is not the case. And quite respectfully, I’m less interested in what your audience is interested in and more what we think is good policy and what we think is beneficial to peace and security in the region, and that, we have long felt continues to be a two-state solution. That has been our dire belief prior to the events of October 7th, and it will continue to be so. We think that that is the only credible path forward that assures equal measures of peace and security for the Israeli people and the Palestinian people.QUESTION: Well, along with that, what do you say to those people that feel pressured to accept that?MR PATEL: I’m going to move around. You’ve gotten three questions already. Will, you’ve your hand up. Go ahead.QUESTION: Sorry, (inaudible). Do you have any update on the investigation into what Israel actually hit in Damascus on April 1st?MR PATEL: I don’t have any updates for you on the status of that facility or anything like that.QUESTION: Thank you.MR PATEL: Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you, Vedant. So you support a two-state solution. But it seems you’re also oppose Palestine’s membership at the UN? Do you think this is contradictory?MR PATEL: I don’t think these things are contradictory at all. Again, as it relates to the United Nations, I’m not going to preview our vote. And as I said, we’re continuing to engage with our partners on the Security Council. We remain unwaveringly committed to a two-state solution and continue to feel that the only path forward is a comprehensive lasting peace, is going to be through direct negotiations between the parties. And that continues to be what we think is the best path forward.QUESTION: And when you say a two-state solution, is it like a – is it a Palestinian state based on 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as the capital? What is your understanding of the two-state solution?MR PATEL: So I don’t have a change in definition of how we have been talking about a two-state solution. We’ve been talking about this as a Palestinian state for the Palestinian people, and of course, the state of Israel, with the boundaries bounded by 1967, I believe mutually agreed upon land swaps as well, with the status of Jerusalem being a final-status negotiation issue.QUESTION: Just one more on Türkiye.MR PATEL: Yeah.QUESTION: Do you have any readout of &#8212;MR PATEL: On Türkiye, you just said?QUESTION: On Türkiye, yeah.MR PATEL: Yeah. Okay.QUESTION: Any readout of Under Secretary John Bass’ travel to Türkiye?MR PATEL: I don’t – I don’t, but I’m happy to check and see if we’ve got any additional information there. I know, just to say broadly, Türkiye has been an important partner of ours in a number of key lines of efforts acting Under Secretary Bass – as you all know, used to be ambassador to Türkiye. So he has a lot of deep and close relationships there. I have no doubt that he’s engaging on some important issues, whether it relates to peace and stability in the Middle East but also continuing to engage with our partners in Türkiye on issues relating to NATO and Ukraine.Go ahead in the back. Yeah.QUESTION: Thank you. Two questions. I have one on Haiti and one on &#8212;MR PATEL: Can we stay in the region and I can try to come back to you?QUESTION: Yeah, I have one for – I have one for the West Bank as well.MR PATEL: Yeah. Go ahead. Yeah.QUESTION: I keep asking this question and trying to rephrase it in regards to the Palestinian Authority. Within the jurisdiction of Area A, does the Palestinian Authority or Palestinian law enforcement have the right to arrest settlers that are attacking Palestinian homes or Palestinians?MR PATEL: That’ll be – that’s a question I would better refer you to the PA and officials within COGAT. I don’t want to get into the specifics of jurisdiction and that level of detail from up here.Go ahead, Jacob.QUESTION: Earlier today, Israel’s COGAT published footage of what it said are contents of 700 trucks worth of humanitarian aid that is sitting on the Gaza side of Kerem Shalom crossing waiting to be delivered. COGAT said it has scaled up its capabilities over the past several weeks, but that the UN has failed to deliver its job in delivering aid. Ambassador Satterfield said last week that the biggest obstacle at this point is UN international agencies bringing more trucks into Gaza in order to distribute the aid. So where does this stand? The U.S. regularly does urge Israel to boost its aid efforts, but are you willing to call on the UN also to improve its capabilities to deliver this aid that’s piling up on the Gaza side of the border.MR PATEL: Look, broadly, the distribution of aid within Gaza continues to be something that we’re working closely on with partners in the UN and partners in other additional humanitarian organizations. That’s something we’re going to continue to work with them closely on because it’s a priority. I don’t have any updates to offer on immediate steps that have been taken publicly, but we think that that’s an important thing that needs to be addressed, and we’ll work closely continuing with the UN.Go ahead.QUESTION: So related to that &#8212;MR PATEL: Yeah.QUESTION: &#8212; Biden has ordered this pier and it’s going to be set up in the next couple of weeks. Is the State Department confident that you’re going to find the aid groups willing to unload that gear and that – those aid supplies and distribute it?MR PATEL: I don’t want to get ahead of the process here, but look, when it comes to the distribution of aid within Gaza, we have found partners who have been willing to engage, willing to play a role in the disseminating of that aid, particularly – as Jacob was speaking to – making sure that that aid gets from places like warehouses to its end points within Gaza, and have no doubt that we will continue to be able to find partners to cooperate with when it comes to the maritime corridor. But I don’t want to get ahead of this process.Michel.QUESTION: Yeah, do you have any comments on the escalation of fighting between Hizballah and Israel? And do you expect this conflict to be broadened?MR PATEL: We would hope and encourage not, Michel. At every corner, we have stressed our strong desire and importance of making sure that this conflict isn’t widened. We’ve made that clear to our partners in Israel and to other regional interlocutors, and we’ll continue to do so.Go ahead, Alex.QUESTION: Thank you.MR PATEL: On the region or anything &#8212;QUESTION: If we can switch to &#8212;MR PATEL: Let me stay on the region before I move away.Sam, go ahead.QUESTION: Thanks. Euro-Med Monitor, human rights monitor, reports that Israel is using drones to lure residents and then shoot them. They explain the sounds of women screaming and babies crying were heard late at night on both Sunday and Monday. When some of the residents went out to investigate and tried to help, they were shot at by Israeli – quadcopter drones. The sounds they heard were in fact records played by the Israeli drones with the intent of forcing the camp residents out into the streets where they could be easily targeted by snipers and other weaponry.MR PATEL: I have not – I have not seen that report, Sam, so I’m not going to comment on it. But broadly – not relating to this particular circumstance at all – because, again, I haven’t seen the report and I’m not sure if it’s accurate or verifiable – at every conversation that we have with our partners in Israel, we continue to stress the moral and strategic imperative that they have to work on deconfliction mechanisms and to ensure that civilian harm is minimized in every which-way possible. And we’ll continue to stress that every way we can.Go ahead.QUESTION: Will you look at this report?MR PATEL: I’m sure we’ll look at this report, Sam. I don’t have any comment for it – on it right now.QUESTION: Do you recognize &#8212;MR PATEL: Go ahead.QUESTION: &#8212; the Geneva Conventions as applying in this instance?MR PATEL: I’ve answered your question, Sam.QUESTION: No, you haven’t.MR PATEL: Go ahead.QUESTION: You’ve evaded it, and your colleague deceitfully responded to it. Do you recognize the Geneva Conventions?MR PATEL: Go ahead.QUESTION: It’s a simple question.MR PATEL: Go ahead.QUESTION: Do you recognize the Geneva Conventions as applying to Gaza?MR PATEL: When you interrupt me that’s not – it’s not a matter of &#8212;QUESTION: I’m not interrupting you. I’m asking for a simple &#8212;MR PATEL: I’m not going to take additional questions.QUESTION: &#8212; simple answer to a simple question.MR PATEL: Go ahead. You got two questions. I’m &#8212;QUESTION: No, it’s totally – no, I didn’t get two questions.MR PATEL: You did. You &#8212;QUESTION: No.MR PATEL: You asked a question about your report &#8212;QUESTION: I asked a question and you didn’t (inaudible) &#8212;MR PATEL: &#8212; and you asked a follow-up. Please go ahead.QUESTION: (Inaudible) you’re not – you’re refusing to answer it.MR PATEL: Go ahead, sir.QUESTION: Do the Geneva Conventions apply to Gaza or not?MR PATEL: Go &#8212;QUESTION: Apply to everywhere on the planet except for the Palestinians; isn’t that right?MR PATEL: We continue &#8212;QUESTION: Isn’t that U.S. policy?MR PATEL: &#8212; to stress everywhere – at everywhere that international humanitarian law &#8212;QUESTION: Do the Geneva Conventions apply?MR PATEL: &#8212; needs to be abided by and respected.Go ahead.QUESTION: Do the Geneva Conventions apply?MR PATEL: You are now interrupting your colleague. Go ahead.QUESTION: No, I’m interrupting you – I’m not interrupting you.MR PATEL: Go ahead.QUESTION: I’m insisting on an answer to a critical question.MR PATEL: Go ahead, sir.QUESTION: I’d like to ask about the sanctions &#8212;QUESTION: Oh, so you’re deceiving the American public?QUESTION: &#8212; against Iran. I’d like to ask about the sanctions against Iran.MR PATEL: Yeah.QUESTION: Just broadly speaking, what impact do you think they’ll have? And then I’m just curious – given all of Iran’s bad actions in the past, I was almost surprised that there was room left for any new sanctions. Why is there room left for more sanctions?MR PATEL: So it’s important to take a step back and talk about our sanctions and export controls on Iran in a little bit of a wider context going back to the onset of this administration. It’s important to remember that we have not lifted a single sanction on Iran. Rather, we continue to increase pressure, and our extensive sanctions on Iran remain in place, and we continue to enforce them. And over the last three years, we have actually sanctioned over 600 individuals and entities connected to the full range of Iran’s problematic and dangerous behavior, touching the areas of UAV and missile proliferation, terrorism, terrorist financing, and other forms of illicit trade and human rights abuses.But this is something that we are also going to continue to work closely with our allies and partners, including at the G7, on ways that we can continue to exert pressure on the Iranian regime. We believe that our sanctions are effective. They are a way to continue to isolate countries and to exert pressure on them as it relates to their behavior.QUESTION: And the impact on the new sanctions?MR PATEL: Look, I’m not going to preview any additional actions from here, but we continue to believe that should there even additionally be new sanctions that, that continues to be a lever at our disposal to continue to hold the Iranian regime accountable for its actions.QUESTION: So Vedant, it’s just not true that you haven’t lifted a single sanction on Iran. I went through this with Matt the other day. Shortly after this administration came into office, you did lift restrictions on – sanctions on Iranian diplomats travel inside – when they go to the UN.MR PATEL: I think your colleague was speaking about sanctions in the context of designating entities and individuals connected to the Iranian regime, not necessarily parameters that exist around diplomats in the United States.QUESTION: And that &#8212;MR PATEL: I take your point, Matt. But I think &#8212;QUESTION: And then &#8212;MR PATEL: I think that &#8212;QUESTION: Well, so – but it’s not then true to say that you haven’t lifted a single sanction on Iran, because you have.MR PATEL: I &#8212;QUESTION: And then secondly, you have also – you also allowed several UN sanctions to expire. Now, you guys can put as many sanctions as you want in place against Iran, but they don’t have any impact outside of the U.S. jurisdiction; it doesn’t – there’s no requirement for other countries to follow suit, even when they involve secondary sanctions. So the arms embargo and the missile sanctions from the UN were allowed – they were allowed to expire, correct?MR PATEL: That is – that is – are you talking about the ones in – from August 2020?QUESTION: That were in the JCPOA.MR PATEL: Yeah, correct.QUESTION: They – right. So they expired.MR PATEL: That is correct.QUESTION: So those sanctions, the international sanctions, the UN sanctions, the one that the entire world, everyone in the world is supposed to follow, were in fact lifted. They expired. Correct?MR PATEL: Well, I think there’s a difference between lifting and expiring, but sure, Matt. There is; there’s a technical difference.QUESTION: What?MR PATEL: There is a technical difference between sanctions expiring or sunsetting versus actively making the policy decision to lift certain sanctions.QUESTION: The point is that you could have made an active policy decision on snapback, which would have kept those sanctions in place.MR PATEL: And that is a – that’s a mechanism, the snapback mechanism hasn’t expired, Matt. And it remains in place and it’s an available option.QUESTION: But it hasn’t been used. And in fact, those two things &#8212;MR PATEL: I’m not going to preview actions from here.QUESTION: Those two things expired. In other words, you allowed them to be lifted, to expire. So it’s a bit disingenuous to say expiring isn’t the same as lifting.MR PATEL: I don’t think it’s disingenuous at all. I don’t think – as I said, snapback is a mechanism that &#8212;QUESTION: Okay.MR PATEL: &#8212; continues to remain in place. And again, I think your colleague was referring to sanctions and restrictions in the context of – in the economic sense, not travel restrictions we may have on diplomats, which &#8212;QUESTION: That’s fine, but the way you answered his question &#8212;MR PATEL: &#8212; Matt touched on a little bit yesterday.QUESTION: &#8212; is we have not lifted a single sanction on Iran, and that’s not true.MR PATEL: Well, we can agree to disagree.Alex, go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you, Vedant – shift into a different region, if I may.MR PATEL: Sure. Anything else in the region before we totally shift away?QUESTION: Yeah, in the region.MR PATEL: Are you sure on the region?QUESTION: Yes, yes.MR PATEL: You positive?QUESTION: (Off-mike.)MR PATEL: Go ahead.QUESTION: (Off-mike.)QUESTION: Yeah, my question is – sorry – so my question is that there was any – was there any conversation between U.S. diplomats and Chinese diplomats or Russian diplomats about the conflicts between Iran and Israel?MR PATEL: Well, you saw the Secretary had a phone conversation with his counterpart, Foreign Minister Wang Yi, on the tail end of last week in which – Matt spoke a little bit about this last week as well – in which we continued to stress with them through their means of communicating with the Iranian regime that no one was interested in seeing this conflict escalate. And we’ll continue to have those conversations with appropriate interlocutors.QUESTION: How about Russia?MR PATEL: I don’t have any conversations to read out.QUESTION: A follow-up, sorry. So there are reports – Wall Street Journal reported that the Iranian regime has evacuated their bases in Syria. So is there an indication that Israeli Government might attack some targets outside Iran?MR PATEL: I don’t have any – I don’t have any assessment on what our partners in Israel may or may not do.Go ahead.QUESTION: Thanks, Vedant. So Benjamin Netanyahu testified to the U.S. Congress in 2002 – this is before we invaded Iraq – and he said, quote, “There is no question whatsoever that Saddam Hussein is seeking, and is working, and is advancing towards the development of nuclear weapons.” He then went on to say he was hiding nuclear facilities underground. We now know this was a lie, one that many U.S. servicemembers and innocent Iraqis paid the price for. Netanyahu in that same congressional hearing goes on to say, “Obviously, we would like to see&#8230;regime change – at least, I would&#8230;in Iran&#8230;The question now is&#8230;what is the best  to proceed.  not a question of whether  like to see regime change in Iran, but how to achieve it.”So my two questions for you are, one, how can we trust somebody who goaded our country into war in Iraq based on falsehoods? And two, given this weekend’s events, why are we confident he won’t do the same thing with Iran given he’s been calling for us to enact regime change in that country for 20 years?MR PATEL: I’m not sure I fully understand your question, but – so let me just say a couple things. First, as it relates to Prime Minister Netanyahu, this is somebody who the President has a close working relationship with. It’s something – someone that the Secretary has a close working relationship with. But broadly, beyond any immediate official or individual in the Israeli Government, our partnership, our relationship with Israel, our commitment to its self-defense and our commitment to its security, transcends any government in Israel. It transcends any government in the United States, and it’s a relationship that has pursued and persisted over the course of the – of various political parties and presidents.Number two, as it relates to the Iranian regime, let me just be clear and unequivocal about this: We condemn in the strongest terms its reckless and irresponsible attacks from over the course of this past weekend.QUESTION: Okay, but you – one individual, Netanyahu, is the head of the entire Israeli Government. And when – you might condemn those, but there’s a difference between condemning those actions and the U.S. getting roped into a war with Iran.MR PATEL: The United States is not interested in entering an all-out conflict with Iran. We’ve been incredibly clear about that.Go &#8212;QUESTION: Even if they strike Israel?MR PATEL: We have been very clear about our commitment to Israel’s security and its self-defense. We’ve also been clear that we will not be participating in any offensive operation, but our commitment to its security and self-defense has – is ironclad.QUESTION: If I may ask on Georgia?MR PATEL: On Jordan?QUESTION: Georgia?MR PATEL: Georgia? Okay, I’m going to – people are – Michel, do you have anything on the region before we move away?QUESTION: Any role that Russia is playing between Iran and Israel?MR PATEL: That’s a question for the Russian Federation. I’m not &#8212;QUESTION: But are you aware of that?MR PATEL: I’m not – none that I can speak of or that I’m aware of.QUESTION: Region?MR PATEL: Go ahead. You already got a bunch of questions. Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you. Moving to Ukraine, if I may.MR PATEL: Yeah.QUESTION: Russian missiles hit a hospital in Chernihiv this morning. They killed more than – actually 15, almost, and more than 60 were injured. What does it tell you about the state of play on the ground? And how under stress do you think the Ukrainian military is?MR PATEL: This is, Alex, another example of a horrific Russian missile attack, this time on downtown Chernihiv in northern Ukraine, which is only about a two-hour drive from the capital, Kyiv. Approximately 16 people were killed, more than 600 injured, including children, and missiles destroyed residential buildings, a hospital. The images from these attacks are horrifying, but it also, Alex, beyond – to take a step back from the immediate, it underscores the need of passing the national security supplemental. Our support for our Ukrainian partners we believe can continue to make a difference in this conflict. It can save lives, but the House of Representatives needs to act now.QUESTION: Thank you. Staying to – in Russia.MR PATEL: Yeah.QUESTION: There are reports that Russians are – they have started moving their forces/troublemakers, if you want, out of Azerbaijan and to be deployed in Ukraine. What do you know? And what do you think about its implications in both the South Caucasus and &#8212;MR PATEL: Well, Alex, as you know, we were not party to the negotiated trilateral arrangement that ended the fighting in Nagorno-Karabakh in 2020 and established Russian troops in that region. Frankly, we’ve not seen anything to indicate that Russia’s military was contributing to a more peaceful and stable South Caucasus region, and the events in Nagorno-Karabakh over the course of this past fall are pretty indicative of that point, and it’s another highlight or example of how Russia is not a trustworthy ally or partner.But beyond that, we strongly support efforts by Armenia and Azerbaijan to reach a durable and dignified peace, and we stand ready to continue to help facilitate this process.Ben, go ahead. I’m going to work the room, Alex.QUESTION: Please come back to me later on.MR PATEL: Go ahead.QUESTION: Yeah. Thank you, Vedant. If I could follow up on a question that was asked yesterday about China supporting Russia’s industrial base.MR PATEL: Sure, yeah.QUESTION: Matt said the U.S. is very concerned, that this would be on the G7 agenda, but I was wondering if you could provide any more detail, particularly what the U.S. is doing in response to Chinese support for Russia’s industrial base.MR PATEL: Sure, Ben. So let me say a couple things on that. We believe that the PRC is supporting Russia’s war effort, and it’s doing so by helping ramp up its defense production. Specifically, the PRC is providing Russia with significant quantities of machine tools, microelectronics, optics, UAVs and cruise missile technology, and nitrocellulose, which Russia uses to make propellants for weapons. Together, we think that these materials are filling critical gaps in Russia’s defense production cycle, helping revitalize Russia’s defense industrial base, which had otherwise suffered significant setbacks due to sanctions and export controls from the United States, from our partners and allies.This kind of support is actively enabling Russia’s war in Ukraine, and it poses a significant threat to European security. We’ve raised these concerns with the PRC through diplomatic channels, including through recent conversations at the leaders level, and we’ve been briefing our allies and partners on our concerns over the past few weeks. And we issued an executive order targeting third-country banks that facilitate support to the Russian defense industrial base, we’ve sanctioned relevant firms in the PRC, and are prepared to take further steps as necessary. Jalil, go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you very much, Vedant. A few humanist questions – international, yes.MR PATEL: Let’s keep it to less than a few. We’ve got a couple other people who have their hands up.QUESTION: I will stop – I’ll stop whenever you tell me to.MR PATEL: Great.QUESTION: My first question is about these two gentlemen. One of them is very dear to America, and he has my last name as well. His name is Dr. Shakil Afridi. I feel like because of lack of diplomatic courage the Pakistani ambassador has in Washington D.C., the guy has spent 15 years over there. Pakistani lady in the U.S., Aafia Siddiqui, has spent 25 years. I had a father who spent nine and a half years on a fake case. I just personally have sympathies with these prisoners who have spent – and internationally – so, like, keep the – U.S. policy aside, just from humanitarian point of view, why can’t these two people be exchanged?MR PATEL: So I don’t have any assessment to offer on this. This seems like an internal judicial matter as it relates to Pakistan’s justice system, so would defer to them to speak to that.QUESTION: But the U.S. justice system – the U.S. justice system can get that Shakil Afridi guy here. He has spent 15 years – life imprisonment is (inaudible) years in Pakistan, so the guy has spent his life in &#8212;MR PATEL: I just – I don’t have anything for you on that.QUESTION: Okay. One more question, sir. A girl from Utah, Crystal Bayat, even tweeted this today. I have raised this issue here a gazillion times. You have half of the population of country of Afghanistan, where girls since the U.S. withdrawal are without education. Why did you not just leave them in front of the vultures to be eaten? Today a girl was sold for $3,500 to a 60-year-old man. If the U.S. has taken – at least I know these steps cannot be stopped at the moment, but for future of girls, for the ones that are going to come in future, what has the U.S. done &#8212;MR PATEL: So if &#8212;QUESTION: What has the U.S. done in these last three years since its withdrawal?MR PATEL: Equal rights for Afghan women and girls continues to be a key tenet of our Afghanistan policy, and we continue to reiterate regularly, through relevant channels, with the Taliban that their self-stated goal of legitimacy can only be achieved – and will likely be impossible to achieve if half of their population is being left out of participating in its society, participating in its economy. It continues to be a key factor of our approach to Afghanistan policy, and it’s something that we’ll continue to work towards.QUESTION: Thank you, Vedant.MR PATEL: Goyal, go ahead.QUESTION: Just last one about journalism.MR PATEL: No, I’m going to work the room. Go ahead.QUESTION: Just journalism. You’ll like this one (inaudible). You’ll like this one.MR PATEL: Go ahead.QUESTION: (Inaudible) you’ll like this one. Journalists becoming – today &#8212;MR PATEL: Okay. If you ask a question, though, you do this, like, wind-up thing –QUESTION: Yes. Today Time Magazine has – today Time Magazine has a journalist, Palestinian journalist, as 100 more influential people. No country in the world protects and talk about journalists like the U.S. We have a Pakistani journalist, Arshad Sharif, got killed, and we still don’t know who killed him. It’s been two years now. Can the U.S. – can you personally take some interest in the case, or at least let us finally know who killed the guy?MR PATEL: So let me just say broadly that we believe strongly that journalism is integral to our society and journalists do important work, and especially in active conflict zones they – every step possible needs to be taken for them to be protected. But I don’t have much else on that circumstance that you laid out.QUESTION: Thank you, sir. Daphne, you had your hand up. Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you. So we’ve seen on social media that the U.S. embassy received a letter from Chad’s government requesting troop withdrawal. Can you confirm this?MR PATEL: The U.S. embassy in Chad? I’m happy to check on that. I’ve not seen that since I came out, but we’re happy to check with the team and see if there’s anything to offer on that.QUESTION: Okay. And, sorry &#8212;MR PATEL: Go ahead.QUESTION: Really quick, yea. Vote counting is set to begin tomorrow in the Solomon Islands for parliamentary election, the first since the prime minister struck a security pact with China in 2022. Do you have any indication yet on how these elections have been conducted?MR PATEL: I don’t have an assessment to offer yet, and I think we will let the process play out before we have any assessment to offer. Goyal, go ahead. I’ll come to you, then I’ll come to you, and then we will wrap. Go ahead, Goyal.QUESTION: Yes, sir. Two questions, please, different two questions. One, as far as the United Nations are concerned, does the U.S. or the Secretary have faith and trust in the UN? Because recently, Mr. Elon Musk said that there is no meaning of having UN without India’s permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council.MR PATEL: So the President has spoken about this before in his remarks to the UN General Assembly. The Secretary has alluded to this as well. We certainly support reforms to the UN institution, including the Security Council, to make it reflective of the 21st century world that we live in. I don’t have any specifics to offer on what those steps are, but certainly we recognize that there is need for reform. But I will leave it at that for now. Go ahead.QUESTION: And second, sir – please, I’m sorry.MR PATEL: Yeah.QUESTION: As far as this UN-IMF and World Bank meetings are concerned in Washington, D.C., how does the U.S. diplomacy’s affecting around the globe with the other countries? Because poor people are getting more poorer and also their aids they get from the World Bank and IMF not reaching the needy people around the globe, and because it goes to the corrupt politicians or the military people. How can you – you think it can be worked for those needy around the globe?MR PATEL: There are a number of countries that are engaging directly with the IMF as it relates to the economies within their own systems. In those instances, we believe it’s appropriate to be engaging with the IMF. I don’t have any specifics to offer beyond that.QUESTION: Thank you.MR PATEL: Go ahead. Let me come to you. Go ahead.QUESTION: Thank you. Yesterday Haiti’s Government named the members of the transitional council set to take power at some point.MR PATEL: Uh-huh, yeah.QUESTION: Do you have any comment on this? And do you think that they can restore security in Haiti?MR PATEL: Well, we welcome the announcement of the establishment of the transitional presidential council, and we commend stakeholders in Haiti for moving toward democratic governance through free and fair elections. A lot of work lies ahead, specifically, naming an interim prime minister, but we are committed to work with members of this council, CARICOM, as well as other appropriate regional partners to improve the lives of all Haitians.Go ahead.QUESTION: The House has scheduled a vote on foreign aid for Saturday; that includes aid to Ukraine, which has been long delayed. You talk a little about the importance of that aid coming through for Ukraine. But tell us: How much damage has been done by the lengthy delay in Congress to the Ukrainian war effort? Because the Russians have made significant advances over the past several months.MR PATEL: Well, Alex raised this issue and opened up this topic by talking about a missile attack from the Russians. So it certainly would not be hyperbole to say that every day matters, and the House, we believe, needs to act this week to support Ukraine and Israel as they respectively defend against Putin and the Russian Federation and the Iranian regime. And so this is something that we need Congress to provide urgently.There is also, when we’re talking about the national security supplemental, talking about things like humanitarian assistance and efforts to strengthen security in the Indo-Pacific – these are all things that are of vital importance to the – our foreign policy and the national security interests of the American people. You had a question on Georgia. Go ahead.QUESTION: We witnessed a horrific violence in Georgia yesterday by the riot police against peaceful protests, journalists and opposition leaders. Today another protest is taking place against the Russia law, and there is an expectation that police will – and government will use force again. What message do you have for Georgia and Georgian people?MR PATEL: You’re speaking about the protests around the draft law? Yeah. So we remain deeply concerned that this draft legislation, if enacted, could stigmatize civil society organizations working to improve the lives of Georgians citizens and media organizations operating within the – within Georgia to provide information to Georgian citizens. We think that civil society, journalism, media organizations, are cornerstones to any democratic society. And we urge the Georgian Government to heed warnings that this bill is not in line with the European Union’s norms and values, and it certainly would negatively impact Georgia’s progress on its EU path.All right, thanks, everybody.QUESTION: Can I &#8212;QUESTION: Just very quickly. Just very quickly.MR PATEL: Go ahead.QUESTION: (Inaudible) passed the first hearing today with 83 votes. And you’re – just repeated some – same thing that Matt told us previously, that you would hope that it will not go forward.MR PATEL: Yeah.QUESTION: So I understand there were meetings between the U.S. ambassador and Western ambassadors and the Russian prime minister. Is diplomacy – your efforts diplomatically – is dead here, or is it just another bump on the road?MR PATEL: We never think diplomacy is dead, Alex. So again, we will continue to urge and reiterate the – with the Georgian Government our dire concerns of this kind of legislation, and heed the warnings that this kind of legislative – this kind of legislation, sorry, is not in line with the EU’s norms and values, which would certainly negatively impact Georgia’s stated goal to eventually become party to the European Union.QUESTION: But they also pushed an amendment of tax law today, a separate process, that will allow them to transfer the frozen – their assets from abroad. Clearly, they’re preparing for hedging – they’re trying to avoid sanctions, potential sanctions, here. Aren’t you too late to use the &#8212;MR PATEL: I’m not familiar with this other piece of legislation, Alex, but I’m happy to check for you.Matt.QUESTION: Yeah, sorry, I just want to go back to something that was raised a little bit earlier. Can you ask – can you find out from L or from whomever if the United States believes that the Geneva Conventions apply universally – in other words, to everywhere on the planet as – and also the same question on the Vienna Conventions? And obviously, the question before was about whether Geneva Conventions apply in Gaza, but then specifically it would be whether the Vienna Convention applies in Syria. Or are there – or do you – does the administration think that there are certain exemptions to these conventions? That’s &#8212;MR PATEL: Sure.QUESTION: I don’t expect you to have an answer, but maybe you could &#8212;MR PATEL: Well, Matt, let me just – let me close out by saying that I will echo again what I – when I – when responding to your colleague that it is our sincere belief that international humanitarian law needs to be abided by everywhere. And that continues to be the policy we’ll pursue.QUESTION: Thank you.MR PATEL: Alright, thanks, everyone.QUESTION: Thank you.(The briefing was concluded at 1:57 p.m.)# # #60 ↑						Tags																					Afghanistan																								Armenia																								Azerbaijan																								Chad																								China																								Georgia																								Haiti																								Iran																								Office of the Spokesperson																								Pakistan																								Palestinian Territories																								Russia																								Solomon Islands																								Ukraine
- Solomon Islands HomeReportsBureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices&#8230;Solomon Islands				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: Solomon Islands																																					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																																																																											c. Freedom of Religion																																																																											d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country																																																																											e. Protection of Refugees																																																																																	Section 3. Freedom to Participate in the Political Process																																																									Elections and Political Participation																																																																																	Section 4. Corruption in Government																																																									Section 5. Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights																																																																																	Section 6. Discrimination and Societal Abuses																																																									Women																																																																											Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination																																																																											Children																																																																											Antisemitism																																																																											Trafficking in Persons																																																																											Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics																																																																											Persons with Disabilities																																																																											Other Societal Violence or Discrimination																																																																																	Section 7. Worker Rights																																																									a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining																																																																											b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor																																																																											c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment																																																																											d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																																																											e. Acceptable Conditions of Work																																																																																																							EXECUTIVE SUMMARY				There were no significant changes in the human rights situation in the Solomon Islands during the year.Significant human rights issues included credible reports of:  government corruption; laws criminalizing consensual same-sex sexual conduct between adults, although the law was not enforced; and the existence of certain of the worst forms of child labor, including commercial sexual exploitation.The government had mechanisms in place to identify and punish officials who committed human rights abuses, although there were no reports of investigations or prosecutions during the year.																														Section 1.													 Respect for the Integrity of the Person												    																																																a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings										There were no reports that the government or its agents committed arbitrary or unlawful killings.																																				b. Disappearance										There were no reports of disappearances by or on behalf of government authorities.																																				c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses										The law prohibited such practices, and there were no credible reports that government officials employed them.  Impunity was not a significant problem in the security forces.																Prison and Detention Center Conditions						There were no significant reports regarding prison or detention center conditions that raised human rights concerns.Administration:  Authorities permitted prisoners and detainees to submit complaints and request investigations of credible allegations of inhuman conditions.  The respective prison heads screened complaints and requests made to the Professional Standards Unit of the Correctional Service, which investigated credible allegations of problematic conditions and documented the results in a publicly accessible manner.  The Office of the Ombudsman and the Public Solicitor’s Office investigated credible allegations of misconduct made against Correctional Services officers.Independent Monitoring:  Although government procedures permitted monitoring by independent human rights observers, there were no reports of such visits.																										d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention										The constitution prohibited arbitrary arrest and detention and provided for the right of any person to challenge the lawfulness of their arrest or detention in court, and the government generally observed these requirements.At the request of the government and subject to bilateral agreements, police from the People’s Republic of China, Australia, Fiji, New Zealand, and Papua New Guinea were deployed in the country in support of the country’s police force and were duly authorized to act with police powers according to the country’s law.																Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees						Only a magistrate or judge could issue arrest warrants, although police had the power to arrest without a warrant if they had a reasonable belief a person committed a crime.  The law required detainees be brought promptly before a judge, and authorities respected this right.  Delays sometimes arose after the preliminary hearing, but authorities brought detainees to court as soon as possible following arrest, especially if they were held without bail.Police generally informed detainees promptly of the charges against them.  The Public Solicitor’s Office provided legal assistance to indigent defendants, and detainees had prompt access to family members and counsel.  There was a functioning system of bail for less serious cases, and police and courts frequently granted bail.Pretrial Detention:  Delays in adjudication of the large number of cases before the courts resulted in lengthy pretrial detention.  Pretrial detainees comprised 50 percent of the prisoner population.  The average length of time held in pretrial detention was approximately two years.																										e. Denial of Fair Public Trial										The constitution provided for an independent judiciary, and the government generally respected judicial independence and impartiality.																Trial Procedures						The law provided for the right to a fair and public trial, and an independent judiciary generally enforced this right.  Prisoners were not afforded timely trials due to judicial backlogs.						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 prohibited such actions, and there were no reports the government failed to respect these prohibitions.																																					Section 2.													 Respect for Civil Liberties												    																																																a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media										The constitution provided for freedom of expression, including for members of the press and other media, and the government generally respected this right.  An independent media, an effective judiciary, and a functioning democratic political system combined to promote freedom of expression, including for media members.																Internet Freedom						The government did not restrict or disrupt access to the internet or censor online content; there were no credible reports the government monitored private online communications without appropriate legal authority.																										b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association										The constitution provided for the freedoms of peaceful assembly and association, and the government generally respected these rights.  Demonstrators were obliged to obtain permits, which the government generally granted.																																				c. Freedom of Religion										See the Department of State’s International Religious Freedom Report at  www.state.gov/religiousfreedomreport/.																																				d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country										The constitution provided for freedom of internal movement, foreign travel, emigration, and repatriation, and the government generally respected these rights.																																				e. Protection of Refugees										Access to Asylum:  The law did not provide for granting asylum or refugee status, and the government had not established a system for providing protection to refugees.  The government did not grant refugee status or asylum, and there were no known refugees in the country.																																					Section 3.													 Freedom to Participate in the Political Process												    																						The constitution provided citizens the ability to choose their government in free and fair periodic elections held by secret ballot based on equal and universal suffrage.  The weakness of political parties, political fragmentation in parliament, and corruption did not generally provide voters with the basis to make a clear choice among potential governing coalitions.On June 26, the leader of a group of independent parliamentarians, John Kuku, filed a case in the High Court seeking a ruling on whether parliament’s September 2022 constitutional amendment extending the government’s term in office and delaying parliamentary elections one year (to May 2024) was lawful and constitutional.  Kuku argued on procedural grounds the amendment was not lawful and constitutional and therefore, since May 15, all seats in parliament were vacant and all subsequent parliamentary proceedings, including passage of any bills or motions, were null and void.  In September the High Court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the case, finding that parliament and not the judiciary was the appropriate venue for addressing procedural concerns.  Following the ruling, the prime minister directed the attorney general to ask parliament to decide whether members who had voted no on the original 2022 constitutional amendment ceased thereby to be members of parliament and should, accordingly, be removed from parliament.  As of November, parliament had not acted.																										Elections and Political Participation										Abuses or Irregularities in Recent Elections:  Observers regarded the 2019 national parliamentary elections as generally free and fair, although there was evidence of vote buying.Political Parties and Political Participation:  Political parties operated without restriction but were institutionally weak, with frequent shifts in political coalitions and unstable parliamentary majorities.  Electoral law required all candidates to present party certificates.  The formation of a governing coalition after an election was the result of opaque negotiations among parliamentarians.Participation of Women and Members of Marginalized or Vulnerable Groups:  No law limited participation of women or members of marginalized or vulnerable groups in the political process, and they did participate; however, gender discrimination, an expectation that women should be focused on family, lack of access to fundraising resources and knowledge, and a fear of gender-based violence aimed at women in public office limited the role of women in government.  Despite a legal quota requiring 10 percent of all candidates for the National Parliament to be women, the number of women candidates continued to be low.																																					Section 4.													 Corruption in Government												    																						While the law provided criminal penalties for corruption by officials, the government implemented the law inconsistently; officials sometimes engaged in corrupt practices with impunity.Corruption:  Corruption was widely held to be pervasive in the government, especially with respect to the forestry, mining, and fisheries sectors.In February the Auditor General reported on its audit of the use of COVID-19 funding.  The report identified a lack of transparency and accountability pointing to fraud, possible corruption, mismanagement, and regulatory irregularities.  Although the report urged criminal investigations in several cases, neither the prosecutors nor police appeared to take the charges seriously.  The generally vague language accurately depicted societal dissatisfaction, combined with demoralized tolerance, for official misconduct and malfeasance.  A similar audit was underway on funding for the Pacific Games.For additional information about corruption in the country, please see the Department of State’s Investment Climate Statement for the country, and the Department of State’s International Narcotics Control Strategy Report, which includes information on financial crimes.																										Section 5. Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights										Several domestic and international human rights groups generally operated without government restriction, investigating and publishing their findings on human rights cases.  Government officials were somewhat cooperative and responsive to their views.Government Human Rights Bodies:  The constitution established an Office of the Ombudsman with power to subpoena and investigate complaints of official abuse, mistreatment, or unfair treatment.  Although the office was independent, a lack of resources limited its effectiveness.																																					Section 6.													 Discrimination and Societal Abuses												    																																																Women										Rape and Domestic Violence:  Rape of women, including spousal rape, was a crime with a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.  Domestic violence was a crime with a maximum penalty of three years in prison and a substantial fine.  Gender-based violence, including rape and domestic abuse, remained a serious problem and was underreported.  Data from a 2021 UN Women report stated 63.5 percent of women would experience physical or sexual intimate partner violence in their lifetimes.  Among the reasons cited for failure to report abuse were pressure from male relatives, fear of reprisals, feelings of shame, and cultural taboos on discussing such matters.As part of the police curriculum, officers received specialized training on how to work with rape survivors.  A police sexual assault unit, staffed mostly by women officers, supported survivors and investigated charges.  In reported cases of domestic abuse, survivors often dropped charges before a court appearance or settled cases out of court.  When charges were filed, the time between charging and a subsequent court hearing could be as long as two years.  The magistrates’ courts treated physical abuse of women the same as any other assault, but prosecutions were rare due to low judicial and police capacity and gender discrimination.The law provided for access to counseling and medical services, legal support, and a safe place within the community for survivors of domestic violence who could not return home.  The government referral system meant to coordinate these services often lacked funding, especially in rural areas.Nongovernmental organizations operated 11 safe houses throughout the country.  These received funding and support from church groups and international donors but not from the government.  One safe house in the capital, Honiara, provided professional training and workshops and paralegal counseling for survivors of gender-based violence.  The Family Support Center and a church-run facility provided counseling and other support services for abused women.Other Forms of Gender-based Violence or Harassment:  Customary bride-price payments remained common and contributed to the perception of ownership of women by men.  Sexual harassment was not illegal and was a widespread problem.Discrimination:  While the law accorded women equal legal rights, including the right to own property, most women were limited to patriarchal family roles; fear of pervasive gender-based violence prevented them from taking more active roles in economic and political life.  No laws mandated equal pay for work of equal value.  The government did not enforce equal rights laws effectively.Women experienced discrimination in employment, especially in attaining managerial positions.  Women were predominantly employed in low-paying and low-skilled jobs.  A significant gender gap existed in senior positions, and women were not guaranteed equal pay for equal work.  A shortage of jobs and the digital gender divide compounded limited access to, and advancement opportunities in, the workforce for women.Reproductive Rights:  There were no reports of coerced abortion or involuntary sterilization on the part of government authorities.Although the National Population Policy 2017-26 aimed to improve access to sexual and reproductive health services for sexual violence survivors, this goal appeared to be aspirational.  Because of the extreme weakness of the health-care system, no such services were available.  Emergency contraception for survivors of sexual violence was not available.A 2022 survey in three provinces and Honiara by the Solomon Islands Planned Parenthood Association found that contraceptive use by women of reproductive age had “decreased over time” from 27 percent in 2013.  The report, however, did not provide an estimated rate for 2022.  According to the study, because contraception was frowned upon, women were given unreliable information, “leading to drastic situations” when they became pregnant.  According to The Island Sun newspaper, “Participants in the report shared that unwanted pregnancies drive women to either seek unsafe termination methods, abandoning (sic) the baby, or suicide.”  The report noted that women who were married or in a relationship were generally forbidden to use contraception because of their partner’s cultural or religious views.According to the World Bank, the maternal mortality ratio was 104 per 100,000 live births in 2017 due to factors including a high adolescent birth rate (79 per 1,000 girls ages 15 to 19), minimal access to antenatal care, and a high unmet need for contraception.  More recent data were not available.																																				Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination										The law and constitution protected racial and ethnic minorities from discrimination; the government enforced the law effectively.The country had more than 27 major islands with approximately 70 language groups.  Many islanders saw themselves first as members of a clan, next as inhabitants of their natal island, and only third as citizens of the country.  Tensions and resentment on Guadalcanal Island persisted between Guadalcanalese and those from the island of Malaita, including over jobs and land rights.																																				Children										Birth Registration:  Birth registration was provided on a nondiscriminatory basis.  Registration delays did not result in the denial of public services to children.Education:  Education was neither free nor compulsory.  The government policy was to cover operational costs for children ages six to 15 to attend school, but it rarely covered all costs and allowed schools to request additional contributions from families in the form of cash or labor.  These additional costs prevented some children from attending school.  The government closed all schools in the country from October 27, 2023, to January 15, 2024, for the Pacific Games.  School facilities in Honiara were repurposed as dormitories to host visiting athletes.  No grounds were given for closing schools outside the capital.  There were no plans for making up the lost weeks.Child Abuse:  The law prohibited child abuse; however, child sexual and physical abuse remained significant problems.In August a man, age 41, was sentenced to 20 years’ imprisonment for having sex with his stepdaughter three times in 2019, when she was 10.  The survivor dropped out of school after the assaults.Also in August, a man was taken into custody for allegedly raping his two nieces, ages 14 and eight, multiple times in 2022 and 2023.  He allegedly first raped the older of the two girls when she went to fetch water and to have a swim, and he threatened to cut her neck if she told anyone.  He allegedly raped her two other times when she was returning from selling produce at a local market.  The man allegedly exposed himself to the girl age eight when she was sweeping outside her house.  Although she tried to run away, the defendant carried her to his house and allegedly sexually abused and raped her.  The perpetrator hid for seven months but was captured by local villagers when he again attempted to assault one of the girls on August 21.The law granted children the same rights and protections as adults, with some exceptions.  By law the Social Welfare Division of the Ministry of Health and Medical Services coordinated child protection services and authorized courts to issue protection orders in cases of serious child abuse or neglect.  No laws specifically prohibited the use of children in illicit activities such as drug trafficking.Despite numerous prosecutions, government efforts were unable to effectively curb child sexual abuse or neglect and domestic violence against children.Child, Early, and Forced Marriage:  Both boys and girls could legally marry at age 15, and the law permitted marriage at age 14 with parental and village consent.  Marriage at such young ages was not common.Sexual Exploitation of Children:  The minimum age for consensual sex was 15.  The maximum penalty for an adult having sexual relations with a girl younger than age 13 was life imprisonment, and for sexual relations with a girl age 13 to 15, the maximum penalty was 15 years’ imprisonment.  Consent was not a permissible defense under these provisions; however, a reasonable belief the victim was age 16 or older was a permissible defense.  Selling or hiring minors for commercial sexual exploitation was a criminal offense.  There were reports of workers in logging camps sexually exploiting girls as young as 12, but in most cases official charges were not filed.Child pornography was illegal, with a maximum penalty of 10 years’ imprisonment.  The commercial sexual exploitation of children was a crime, as were participation in or the use, distribution, or storing of sexually exploitative materials involving children.  Commercial sexual exploitation of children carried a maximum sentence of 20 years’ imprisonment.  There was no reliable information on enforcement of the law.																																				Antisemitism										The Jewish community was very small, and there were no reports of antisemitic incidents.																																				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:  Sodomy was illegal, as were “indecent practices between persons of the same sex.”  The maximum penalty for the former was 14 years’ imprisonment and five years’ imprisonment for the latter.  There were no reports of arrests or prosecutions directed at lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex (LGBTQI+) persons under these provisions, and authorities generally did not enforce these laws.Violence and Harassment:  There were no reports of violence against persons based on sexual orientation or gender identity, although stigma could have hindered reporting abuses.Discrimination:  There were no antidiscrimination ordinances to protect LGBTQI+ persons.  No criminal justice mechanisms existed to aid in the prosecution of bias-motivated crimes against LGBTQI+ individuals.  There were no reports of open discrimination against LGBTQI+ persons, but lack of reports could have been due to sociocultural pressure and stigma.Availability of Legal Gender Recognition:  There was no legal process for individuals to update their gender markers on identity documents to bring them into alignment with their gender identity.  There were no nonbinary or intersex options on government documents.Involuntary or Coercive Medical or Psychological Practices:  There were no reports of involuntary or coercive medical practices or so-called conversion therapy targeting LGBTQI+ individuals.  There were no laws or regulations against such practices.Restrictions of Freedom of Expression, Association, or Peaceful Assembly:  While there were no ordinances imposing such restrictions, sociocultural pressure and stigma effectively blocked any public discussion of LGBTQI+ matters.																																				Persons with Disabilities										No law or national policy prohibited discrimination against persons with physical, sensory, intellectual, or mental disabilities, and no legislation mandated access to buildings, information, communications, transportation, or health services for such individuals.  Very few buildings were accessible to persons with disabilities.  The law required electoral officials to provide special accommodation for voters with disabilities.The country had one separate educational facility, supported almost entirely by the International Committee of the Red Cross, for children with disabilities.  Children with physical disabilities could attend mainstream schools, but inaccessible facilities and a lack of resources often made it difficult for them to do so.No law required reasonable accommodations in the workplace, and high unemployment nationwide made it difficult for persons with disabilities to find work, particularly in rural areas.Government facilities or services for persons with mental disabilities were very limited.  The National Referral Hospital in Honiara treated mental disability on an outpatient basis and referred in-patients to the National Psychiatric Unit at Kilu’ufi Hospital in Malaita Province, which had a 20-person capacity.																																				Other Societal Violence or Discrimination										Violence related to accusations of sorcery was reported.  Such violence typically targeted young women, widows without sons, and the elderly.  In January a family escaped Sagasa village and moved to Patchuava village in Choiseul Province after being threatened for alleged sorcery following the death of a woman.  A man who burned down the family’s house in Sagasa village was arrested on suspicion of arson.																																					Section 7.													 Worker Rights												    																																																a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining										The law provided for the right of workers in the formal sector to form and join unions, conduct legal strikes, and bargain collectively.  The law prohibited antiunion discrimination but did not specifically provide for reinstatement of workers fired for trade union activity.  The law permitted strikes in both the public and private sectors.  Strikes required a notice to the government 28 days prior to the strike to be legal.  The government had discretionary power to cancel and suspend registration of unions, a power that could take effect even while under judicial review.The law did not provide for organizing or collective bargaining rights to workers in the informal sector.  Additionally, the law limited the rights of workers to act as union representatives based on age, literacy, criminal record, and membership in more than one union.Government enforcement of the law was inconsistent; its small penalties were not commensurate with those for other laws involving denials of civil rights.  There was no reliable information on how often penalties were applied against violators.  The penalty for antiunion discrimination was not effective, in part because employers could afford to pay the fine and could easily replace workers.  Penalties for illegal strikes, on the other hand, served as a deterrent for workers to strike.Collective bargaining agreements determined wages and conditions of employment in the formal economy.  Disputes between labor and management not settled between the two sides were referred to the Trade Disputes Panel for arbitration, either before or during a strike.  Employees were protected from arbitrary dismissal or lockout during arbitration.  The three-member panel, composed of a chairperson appointed by the judiciary, a labor representative, and a business representative, was independent and neutral.  The panel’s decisions were binding on both parties.  Administrative and judicial procedures were not subject to lengthy delays or appeals.Workers exercised their rights to associate and bargain collectively, although employers did not always respect these rights.  Since only a small percentage of the workforce was in formal-sector employment, employers could easily replace most workers if disputes were not resolved quickly.The Workers Union of Solomon Islands actively negotiated with private sector employers.																																				b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor										See the Department of State’s 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&nbsp;.																																				d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																														e. Acceptable Conditions of Work										Wage and Hour Laws:  The law provided for a national minimum wage above the poverty level for all sectors.  The standard workweek was 45 hours and was limited to six days per week.  The law provided for not less than one and a half times the normal rate of pay for overtime work and a rate not less than twice the regular hourly rate of pay for authorized public holidays.Occupational Safety and Health:  Occupational safety and health (OSH) laws required employers to provide a safe working environment and forbade retribution against any employee who sought protection under labor regulations.  These laws were appropriate for main industries.  Laws on working conditions and safety standards applied equally to foreign workers and citizens.  Some workers could not remove themselves from situations endangering their health or safety, particularly in the fishing and logging industries, without jeopardy to their employment.  OSH experts did not actively identify unsafe conditions, including lack of personal protective equipment against COVID-19, or respond to workers’ OSH complaints.Workers in the logging, construction, and manufacturing sectors were subject to hazardous and exploitative work.Wage, Hour, and OSH Enforcement:  The commissioner of labor in the Ministry of Commerce, Industry, Labour, and Immigration; the public prosecutor; and police were responsible for enforcing labor laws.  The government, however, did not effectively enforce wage, overtime, or OSH laws in all sectors of the formal economy.  The law did not specify penalties for violations, significantly weakening effective enforcement.  There was no reliable information on how often penalties were applied against violators.While inspectors had the authority to conduct unannounced inspections, the number of labor inspectors was insufficient to monitor labor practices routinely, particularly in extractive sectors outside of the capital.  The government’s minimal human and financial resources also limited its ability to enforce the law in smaller establishments, the informal economy, and the subsistence sector.  An active labor movement and an independent judiciary, however, helped provide effective oversight of labor law enforcement in major state and private-sector enterprises.There were some accusations regarding pay rates for local workers at the Chinese-built Pacific Games Stadium construction site; China stated all workers were paid according to local labor laws and received at least the minimum wage.  Workers, however, were upset they were paid less than Chinese workers for the same work.According to a 2021 UN report, 75 percent of workers were in the informal sector.  Wage and safety standards applied to the informal sector but were not enforced.  No government entity provided protection services to workers in the informal economy.																																				    							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											Tonga											The Bahamas											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																																																						c. Freedom of Religion																																																						d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country																																																						e. Protection of Refugees																																																			Section 3. Freedom to Participate in the Political Process																																							Elections and Political Participation																																																			Section 4. Corruption in Government																																							Section 5. Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights																																																			Section 6. Discrimination and Societal Abuses																																							Women																																																						Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination																																																						Children																																																						Antisemitism																																																						Trafficking in Persons																																																						Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics																																																						Persons with Disabilities																																																						Other Societal Violence or Discrimination																																																			Section 7. Worker Rights																																							a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining																																																						b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor																																																						c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment																																																						d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																																						e. Acceptable Conditions of Work																																																									Tags																					Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor																								Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs																								Solomon Islands
- Digital Press Briefing with Daniel J. Kritenbrink, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs and Dr. Mira Rapp-Hooper, Special Assistant to the President and NSC Senior Director for East Asia and Oceania Daniel J. Kritenbrink, Assistant SecretaryBureau of East Asian and Pacific AffairsDr. Mira Rapp-Hooper, Special Assistant to the President and NSC Senior Director for East Asia and OceaniaMODERATOR:  Greetings from the U.S. Department of State’s Asia Pacific Media Hub.  I would like to welcome journalists today to the on-the-record briefing with Daniel J. Kritenbrink, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, and Dr. Mira Rapp-Hooper, Special Assistant to the President and National Security Council Senior Director for East Asia and Oceania.  The speakers will provide a readout on the U.S.-Pacific Islands Forum Summit.With that, let’s get started.  Dr. Rapp-Hooper, I’ll turn it over to you for your opening remarks.DR RAPP-HOOPER:  Thanks so much, and thanks to you all for being here this evening, this morning.  We’re glad to have the opportunity to read you out the President’s really consequential summit of Pacific Islands Forum leaders here in Washington just a few days ago, and thrilled to be joining my friend and colleague Dan Kritenbrink to do so.As you know, this week, leaders of the Pacific Islands Forum were all in Washington for the second-ever U.S.-Pacific Island Leaders Summit.  By all accounts, this was an extremely successful and productive visit for the PIF leaders and for the President.  I’ll start with a brief recap of the leaders’ engagements over the past few days, and then I’ll discuss in brief some of the key deliverables that were announced over the course of the summit before handing the floor over to Assistant Secretary Kritenbrink.In advance of the formal meetings that took place in Washington, we got our summit started early on Sunday when Pacific Island Forum leaders took a trip from New York on a special Amtrak train down to Baltimore.  In Baltimore, the leaders attended a Baltimore Ravens game, where they were recognized for their role as American friends in the Indo-Pacific.  They even made it onto the field, where they were recognized before the game began.After the game, they toured a Coast Guard cutter ship in the Baltimore Harbor, the USS Forward, and had a meeting and opportunity to exchange views with Commandant of the Coast Guard Admiral Linda Fagan on key issues to Pacific Island leaders, including combating illegal fishing and effectively managing maritime domains.Following the Pacific Island Forum leaders’ trip to Baltimore, the leaders came to Washington, where they were hosted by President Biden at the White House on Monday for the second-ever U.S.-Pacific Summit.  They also attended a climate roundtable hosted by Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry as well as a dinner hosted by Secretary Blinken and Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield about which Assistant Secretary Kritenbrink will say more in just a moment.On Tuesday, the leaders also met with members of the philanthropic community, U.S. businesses, and members of Congress.  We closed out the summit with a reception hosted by our friends at the Australian embassy, emphasizing the depths of our people-to-people ties.  And I look forward to Dan speaking to those engagements in a bit more detail very soon.At the summit with PIF leaders on Monday, President Biden reaffirmed the United States’ commitment to shared regional priorities and to deepening our cooperation, including to tackling the climate crisis, advancing economic growth, promoting sustainable development, countering illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing, and expanding our people-to-people ties.Before getting into the deliverables that we unveiled on Monday, I’d first like to take a step back and recognize the milestones of engagement with PIF countries that we have passed over the course of the last couple of years.Just in the last year, we have opened new embassies in the Solomon Islands and Tonga in record time, thanks in no small part to the extraordinary work of our colleagues at the State Department.  We opened a USAID regional mission in Fiji and are returning the Peace Corps to the region after years of relative absence.  We are enhancing our engagement with the Pacific Islands Forum as the region’s leading institution, and we continue to expand U.S. cooperation and assistance programs throughout the region.At this year’s summit, we announced expanded ties with our recognition, our diplomatic recognition, of the Cook Islands and Niue, and the establishment of diplomatic relations with both of these Pacific Island nations.Since last year’s summit, this May, Secretary Blinken met with the Pacific Island Forum leaders in Papua New Guinea, and at this week’s summit, the Biden-Harris administration has continued to show that we are delivering on our promises.  All told, we have now announced a commitment to work with Congress towards over $8 billion in new funding and programs for the Pacific Island region.  And again, this is just in the last year.On Monday, President Biden announced a new slate of activities, including plans to work with Congress to request and provide nearly $200 million in new funding.  These programs seek to address the priority issues we hear about from Pacific Island leaders, including the climate crisis – which is existential for many of our Pacific Island friends – and we always stand shoulder to shoulder with them as they work to meet the challenge to achieve net zero emissions by 2050.The President on Monday also reaffirmed his commitment to the security of the Blue Pacific Continent, and to combat illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing, the United States has announced that it will provide over $11 million to bring cutting-edge maritime domain awareness technology to the Pacific through the Indo-Pacific Partnership for Maritime Domain Awareness to help improve the maritime picture and law enforcement information analysis and provision amongst our Pacific Island friends.We’re also delivering on our promise to invest in the prosperity of the region.  As the President has announced, we will invest an additional $40 million working with Congress to expand our Pacific Islands Infrastructure Initiative.  Through this initiative, we’re bringing technical assistance and project preparation work needed to identify commercially viable projects through partners in the U.S. Government, including the U.S. Trade and Development Agency.These are just a few of the key initiatives announced as part of our summit.  One more that I’d flag that we’re happy to go into during our question-and-answer period involves a new microfinance facility that will offer small and micro loans to Pacific Island businesses so that entrepreneurs there have the chance to thrive.  And these deliverables we are working towards illustrate the depths of our collaboration with the Pacific Islands and the promise of expanding our partnership for many years to come.As President Biden has said, the United States is and will long remain a proud Pacific nation.  And as a Pacific nation, the United States is here for the long haul and will continue to deliver on our promises to our partners in the region.I’ll hand the floor over to Dan to talk more about Secretary Blinken’s consequential engagements with the PIF leaders throughout the summit.  Dan, over to you.ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  Mira, thanks so much, and good evening, everyone.  I think, as my esteemed colleague Dr. Mira Rapp-Hooper has outlined, this was a tremendously successful summit that I think demonstrates further the breadth and depth of America’s commitment to the Pacific.  And Mira, I thought that was really a tremendous rundown of a momentous series of events related to the U.S.-Pacific Islands Forum Summit.I thought that I would focus my remarks a bit more narrowly on some of Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s significant engagements with the Pacific Island leaders here in Washington, and then also mention briefly the engagement involving the Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry’s meetings during the summit as well.As Secretary Blinken put it, our engagements were designed to show that we’re seizing on the possibilities of this moment to build a more secure, resilient, inclusive, and prosperous Pacific region.As Secretary Blinken also said on Monday night, the fundamental fact is this:  Our fates are tied together.  We’ve long been committed development partners to the Pacific Islands, and we’re excited to bring new energy and resources to the Pacific, working with partners in the Pacific Islands on our shared goal of meeting Pacific priorities and supporting Pacific institutions.We saw this last week, last Friday at the UN – at the end of the UN General Assembly High-Level Week, when Secretary Blinken hosted a Partners in the Blue Pacific ministerial in New York.  And at that meeting on Friday, we aimed to highlight the tremendous work we’ve done to advance more effective and efficient cooperation and engagement with our Pacific partners, designed to strengthen Pacific regionalism and to facilitate and encourage other partners and institutions to engage and consult with the Pacific.  And of course those efforts flowed nicely into the Pacific Islands Forum Summit itself, which began, as Mira indicated, on Monday.I think a clear sign of our commitment to the Pacific region came through the establishment of diplomatic relations with both Niue and the Cook Islands.  Following an announcement from President Biden earlier on Monday, Secretary Blinken hosted Niue Premier Dalton Tagelagi and Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown for two separate signing ceremonies here in the State Department Treaty Room to make these momentous occasions.  These historic announcements reaffirmed our joint commitments to deepen our cooperation as equal and sovereign partners, guided by respect, genuine engagement, and partnership.  We fully anticipate working even closer with Niue and the Cook Islands on our shared priorities, which include the climate crisis, renewable energy, Pacific regionalism, and good governance, among many others.Secretary Blinken then had the pleasure of joining the millennium compact corporation CEO Alice Albright and iKiribati President Taneti Maamau for a signing ceremony for an MCC-Kiribati threshold program grant agreement that will provide up to $29.1 million to promote safe, accessible, decent, and inclusive employment opportunities for Kiribati workers, both in Kiribati and across the region.  This will be the United States’ largest direct grant investment in Kiribati to date, and it is an agreement that we believe will deliver clear results and benefits to people in the Pacific Islands and solve real challenges to shape our future.I wanted to mention, also on Monday evening, Secretary Blinken hosted really a spectacular dinner here at the State Department in the newly renovated Benjamin Franklin Room, which was an opportunity for the Secretary and other leaders across the U.S. Government to meet with all of the Pacific Island leaders and to discuss in more detail ways that we can expand our cooperation in the future.  The Secretary was delighted to host the banquet with his co-host, Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield – of course, America’s Permanent Representative to the UN – and at the dinner, Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield announced that she will be America’s representative to the next Pacific Islands Forum Leaders Summit in November of this year.I think the final event of the summit, the two-day summit, for Secretary Blinken was his meeting with representatives from the Freely Associated States.  Namely, he met with Marshall Islands Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Ading, he met with Federated States of Micronesia President Simina, and with Palau President Whipps.  That was on Tuesday, late Tuesday afternoon.During the meeting, the Secretary took the opportunity to underscore the strong people-to-people ties and shared history underpinned by the Compacts of Free Association between the U.S. and these three Freely Associated States.  The Secretary commended the dignitaries for the progress in the negotiations on the compact-related agreements, which we believe signals a new era in our partnerships that will help advance a secure, free, and open Pacific.  And we look forward to further progress on these Compacts of Free Association agreements in the months to come.Finally, of course, climate change, as Mira indicated, was a major topic of discussions since it is such an existential challenge, and we recognize it, as our partners do, as the single greatest threat facing the Blue Pacific.Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry met with Pacific leaders on Monday to discuss the climate crisis and ocean resilience.  Secretary Kerry reiterated the United States’ new policy on sea-level rise and statehood that President Biden had earlier announced as well as new investments in strengthening early warning systems and sustainable development.So in the interest of time, why don’t I stop there.  I know that Mira and I will be delighted to take your questions.  Thanks.MODERATOR:  Thank you.  Thank you, Assistant Secretary Kritenbrink.  We’ll now turn it over to the question-and-answer portion of today’s briefing.  The first question will go to Ralph Jennings from the South China Morning Post in Hong Kong, who sent his question in advance:  “How does the recent U.S. engagement with the South Pacific help offset China’s economic influence in the region?”ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  Mira, do you want to take that one first or you want me to dive in?DR RAPP-HOOPER:  I’m happy to take that one, Dan.ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  Please.DR RAPP-HOOPER:  And I’ll turn to you in just a moment to add your thoughts.  Thanks for the question.  I would say just as a topline matter, when we’re working with our Pacific Island friends, we’re really not focused principally on China.  We’re focused on what the United States can offer as a likeminded partner to this group of countries.  And we are very focused on delivering positive, attractive alternatives to these countries that can help them and their people thrive.  But it’s really about what we stand for together alongside our Pacific Island partners, not about who or what we’re against.But with that in mind, I will note that, as the President announced, our $200 million in new programs for Pacific Island Forum nations do include some really consequential new programs that we believe are going to help our friends in the Pacific to generate the economic dynamism that they’re looking for to offset and combat climate change and to continue their recovery from the pandemic, where they were especially hard-hit.Just as a few examples, we’re stepping up our infrastructure efforts.  Specifically, as I mentioned, the President announced $40 million to new infrastructure projects in the Pacific Islands.  He also announced that the United States will be undertaking new submarine cable projects in the Pacific Islands to build secure, reliable connectivity amongst Pacific Island nations and to ensure that our friends there have the basic digital infrastructure that they need, like reliable, speedy internet on which so many businesses and individuals rely.  And of course, that submarine cable work builds on work we have been doing in recent years, including with the East Micronesia Cable, where we’ve already begun work to improve high-quality and more reliable secure communications for over 100,000 people in the Pacific Islands.  So infrastructure is a big part of our work.We are also delivering a new Millennium Challenge Corporation project with the Government of Kiribati, which is intended to advance economic growth in Kiribati in partnership with the International Labor Organization and American Councils of International Education to bolster and promote safe, accessible, and inclusive employment opportunities for Kiribati workers.Through the Quad, we are partnering with the Government of Palau to implement the deployment of a new ORAN network that is a next-generation, secure mobile network to help Palau get the secure connectivity that it needs.  And as we mentioned at the top of the call, the U.S. Trade and Development Agency is working throughout the Pacific Islands to identify through its technical work opportunities for more viable projects in the months and years to come.So this is just a sampling of the work that we’re doing to try to bring the economic tools we have to bear to help Pacific economies thrive, but I’ll hand it back to Assistant Secretary Kritenbrink to see what he might like to add.ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  Mira, that’s a brilliant answer.  I – all I could really do is foot-stomp what Mira has already said.  We approach the region from the perspective of advancing our affirmative agenda – the shared interests and values that we hold in common with our Pacific partners.That’s our focus, not any notion of focusing on a third party.  And as we often say, we have a regional strategy.  We’re focused on our affirmative agenda.  And I think if we continue to deliver benefits to our partners in the Indo-Pacific, I’m very confident and optimistic about our future together.In particular, as Dr. Rapp-Hooper has indicated, our entire approach to the Pacific is predicated on meeting our Pacific Island friends where they live.  In other words, in conversation with our Pacific partners, we have understood clearly what their needs and concerns and interests are, as outlined very clearly in the Pacific Islands Forum’s 2050 Strategy for the Blue Pacific Continent.  And by design, our work and the work of our other partners through the Partners in the Blue Pacific is specifically designed to address the needs that they themselves have outlined in their strategy.Again, that is the focus of our efforts, not any third parties.  Thank you.MODERATOR:  Okay.  The next question is going to go to Rurika Imahashi, who submitted the question on the chat, the Q&amp;A box here on Zoom.  “Our understanding is that the Marshall Islands parliament will soon certify the compact deal with the U.S.  What is the U.S. understanding on the development of the agreement?”  So we’ll answer that part.ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  Mira, why don’t I take an initial stab at this one and we’ll ask you, obviously, to add anything else that you would like.DR RAPP-HOOPER:  Sounds good.ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  I guess what I would say to any friends with questions about the compacts, I would just simply underscore that the compacts remain of vital importance to the United States.  I think they recognize our deep and historic ties to the three Freely Associated States.  I think they embody the strong ties between the peoples and the governments of the Federated States of Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, and Palau.  And we remain very optimistic about the progress that we’ve made in the compact-related negotiations.I know when Secretary Blinken sat down with the leaders of the three Freely Associated States, he really commended them for the progress that we’ve made.  I think as everyone is tracking, we signed COFA-related agreements with Palau in May and with the Federated States of Micronesia in May, and we’ve made tremendous progress with our friends in the Marshall Islands.  We’re confident that we will conclude all of these agreements very soon and we will continue to build out these incredibly significant relationships that are central to everything we hope to achieve in the Pacific.And I think, as friends are tracking, that these compacts really are extraordinary agreements that are 20-year agreements in duration, and again, we’re confident that we will conclude them and implement them very soon.But, Mira, would you like to add anything to that?DR RAPP-HOOPER:  Not much that I could add, Dan, except just to foot-stomp the point that we believe we are well on our way; we’ll soon be at a successful conclusion and very much look forward to being able to mark that milestone after months of really terrific cooperation with all of the Freely Associated States.  That’s all for me.ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  Yeah, and maybe just one final comment.  I think Mira’s comments reminded me that I do want to recognize that obviously this work is all being done at the direction of President Biden and Secretary Blinken, but our Special Presidential Envoy for Compact Negotiations Joe Yun and his team have also done a brilliant job and I really commend them.  And as Mira indicated, we’re very close and look forward to implementing them very soon.MODERATOR:  The next question will go to Stephen Wright from Radio Free Asia’s BenarNews Service.  Stephen, I also see that your hand is up.  If you’d like to unmute and ask your question, please go ahead.  Yeah, please go ahead and unmute.QUESTION:  Yeah, thanks.  Prime Minister Sogavare didn’t attend the recent summit and subsequently he said the U.S. should show respect to Pacific Island leaders and not lecture them at summits.  What do you think that shows about the progress of U.S. and Solomon Islands relations?  And are there any plans to have an ambassador at the new but smaller embassy in the Solomon Islands?DR RAPP-HOOPER:  Thanks very much.  This is Mira; I’m happy to take a first crack at this, and Dan, perhaps I’ll pass to you just on the embassy piece.We were disappointed that Prime Minister Sogavare was unable to attend the summit in Washington.  We did reach out, including at the very highest levels, to encourage him to join us for this terrific conversation that we’ve been laying out for you here, this opportunity to engage amongst friends, and we’re disappointed that he declined to do so.I don’t have much to say about the specific comments except to note, I think as we have been throughout this call tonight, that the conversation with the President, with the Secretary of State, with every cabinet official and member of Congress at the Pacific Island Forum leaders met with was collaborative, constructive, forward-looking, and I think most importantly involved an incredible amount of listening by U.S. Government officials to continue to refine their understanding of what our Pacific Island Forum friends are most looking for from us.So that’s the approach that we’re going to continue to take.  We continue to believe that it’s the right approach.  We feel that our three really dynamic days of programming show that we’re on the right track, and we look forward to continuing that work on the road ahead.Dan, over to you.ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  Thank you, Mira.  Maybe specifically on the question regarding our presence in the Solomon Islands, I’ll just note that we were excited and honored to open our new U.S. embassy in Honiara in January of this year, which was less than one year after Secretary Blinken announced our intent to do so.  Really excited about the work that our embassy colleagues there, led by Chargé Russ Comeau – excited about the work that they’re doing, again, to build our friendship and our ties with the people of the Solmon Islands and ensure that we work to deliver tangible benefits to our partners there.Of course, any new first step in opening an embassy involves staffing it, and of course our chargé d’affaires currently leading our embassy efforts there, and we recognized him for his really stellar work there.I would simply say at this point we have taken a number of steps internally to identify the U.S. ambassador, the next U.S. ambassador to the Solomon Islands, and I don’t have anything to announce to you this evening.  But I hope we’ll have something to announce in the near future, but we are certainly working towards that end.  Thank you.DR RAPP-HOOPER:  Dan, if I may just jump in really quickly to add one additional detail.  I did want to note, as Dan noted, the – our wonderful Chargé Russ Comeau in the Solmon Islands was given a really important inaugural award at the dinner so graciously hosted by Secretary Blinken during the Pacific Island Forum Summit.  That inaugural award commemorates intrepid diplomacy in the Pacific Islands, and Chargé Comeau really embodies that to a T.  He has been just absolutely indefatigable in working to build U.S.-Solomons ties.I underscore that because I do want to make clear that the purpose of an award like this is to continue to draw attention to and raise up Americans who are doing their utmost on the ground to build ties with the Pacific Islands.  And I think the fact that we’ve established this award this year, that it was given by the Secretary of State, is just yet another demonstration that we are continuing to create incentives, recognize achievements so that Americans continue to step up and deliver on our promises throughout the Pacific.MODERATOR:  Okay.  I realize that we’re running a little bit over.  We started a few minutes late, so we’ll take a couple more questions.  We have one from Daniel Hurst from The Guardian.  “To what extent is the United States concerned about the newly announced comprehensive strategic partnership between Timor-Leste and China?  Why or why not?”ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  Perhaps I can take an initial crack at that one and then ask Mira to chime in.  Look, I think as we indicated earlier, our message to partners in the region is that we’re not asking countries to choose.  We’re in the business of trying to ensure that countries have the ability to make their own sovereign decisions and their own choices free from coercion.My second point would be, as indicated earlier, we’re focused on our affirmative agenda in the region, including with friends in Timor-Leste, and we’ll continue to do that.  We’ll focus on how we can further build out our friendship and partnership with counterparts in the region, including Timor-Leste, and focus on the great work that we can do together.But again, we’re not in the business of asking countries to choose, and I don’t really think it’s beneficial to try to get into some kind of a comparison game or comment on engagement of other partners with the PRC.But, Mira, what would you like to add to that?DR RAPP-HOOPER:  Nothing to add, Dan.  I’m in violent agreement.MODERATOR:  Great.  We are – let’s see.  If the speakers are okay, can we take one more question?ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  Absolutely.  Please.MODERATOR:  Great.  Great.  And this one is from Mar-Vic Cagurangan from the Pacific Island Times, based in Tamuning, Guam, who sent it in advance:  “How will a federal shutdown affect the Compact of Free Association, COFA?  Will the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of Marshall Islands, and Palau continue to receive funds throughout the shutdown?  Do you think this affect – this will affect the U.S. credibility with the Freely Associated States?”ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  Mira, perhaps I could provide an initial answer on this one as well and then be happy to turn to you.  Yeah, I really do appreciate the question, and I’ll just underscore what I mentioned earlier.  We’re really excited about the progress we’ve made in the compact negotiations and we’re confident that all of these agreements will be concluded soon.The issue that you raised here was discussed in some detail in the meeting between Secretary Blinken and the three leaders from the Freely Associated States, and I can assure you that we are in very close and constant communication with our friends both in the Freely Associated States and with leaders on Capitol Hill to make sure that we have a plan going forward under all circumstances that will allow us to meet our obligations under the compacts.I think, as friends may be tracking, that the draft Compact of Free Association agreements, the draft legislation on the Hill includes authority to continue programs and services at the same levels provided under current agreements until the new agreements are in place so as to avoid a lapse in services.  And we’re also working very closely with our friends so that if there were to be any kind of a lapse in appropriations that we can take the appropriate mitigating steps wherever possible to minimize any possible impacts on our friends in the Freely Associated States.But I think that I can assure you we’re in close and frequent contact with our friends in the Freely Associated States and I’m confident we have a plan to work through any contingency.Mira, what would you like to add?DR RAPP-HOOPER:  Nothing to add, Dan.  Thanks so much.MODERATOR:  Thank you.  And for our closing remarks, I’d like to turn it back to Dr. Rapp-Hooper.DR RAPP-HOOPER:  Thanks so much, folks, for joining us this evening.  I think from this conversation you’ve gotten a pretty good lay of the land of the incredibly substantive set of conversations that took place in Washington this week.  The point I want to emphasize before we let you go is that for us, this project, this promise to renew our ties, renew our commitment to the Pacific Islands, is really about much more than a three-day summit.  It’s about delivery on the promises that we’ve made in the last two years, which I think we showed in spades this week, but on delivery on those new conversations and those new commitments that have been made just this week.We have clear instructions from the President, the Secretary of State, the National Security Advisor, and many others to move out expeditiously on everything that we announced alongside our Pacific Island friends earlier this week, and we intend to literally put our money where our mouth is and deliver on everything that we seek to do together in the Pacific, whether that is providing finance so that friends in the Pacific can more quickly and readily adapt to climate change or providing micro and small loans to entrepreneurs and small businesses so that women leaders in particular can get the financing they need to allow them to contribute to increasingly dynamic Pacific economies.So we’re really just still in the opening chapter of the new Pacific story that we’re writing here under the Biden administration, but we feel like we have made tremendous progress in just the last two years, and we are emerging from this week’s summit energized and ready to hit the ground running with this new set of programs and new set of promises, and we look forward to being back in touch to share more about how this exciting work is all going.MODERATOR:  And Assistant Secretary Kritenbrink, I’ll turn it over to you for any closing remarks.ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  I can’t say it any better than that.  Beautifully summarized by Mira.  Really grateful to all of our friends in the media for joining us here tonight.  And as Mira indicated, we’re committed to now implementing all of the agreements and the objectives that we’ve set out flowing from this latest summit, and very optimistic, again, about our future ahead with friends in the Pacific.  Thanks again for joining us tonight.MODERATOR:  That brings us to the end of our time today.  Thank you for your questions and thank you to Assistant Secretary Kritenbrink and Dr. Rapp-Hooper for joining us.  We will provide a transcript of this briefing to participating journalists as soon as it is available.  We’d also love to hear your feedback, and you can contact us at any time at AsiaPacMedia@state.gov.  Thank you again for your participation and we hope you can join us for another briefing soon.
- Solomon Islands (22-122) – Millennium Challenge Compact Office of Treaty AffairsForeign Assistance: Millennium ChallengeSigned at Washington and Honiara November 24, 2021 and January 22, 2022; entered into force January 22, 2022.With Annexes.
- Solomon Islands National Day Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of StateOn behalf of the people and Government of the United States of America and in commemoration of your National Day on July 7, I extend warm greetings and congratulations to the people of Solomon Islands.For more than 80 years, our stories have been linked through shared sacrifice and optimism for a better future. With the official opening of U.S. Embassy Honiara, our coordination on efforts to remove unexploded ordnance, our collaboration in boosting the health and welfare of Solomon Islanders, and our shared fight against the effects of the climate crisis are helping our democracies to build that future together.Our commitment to our bilateral relations and respect for the sovereignty of our fellow Pacific countries in the region remains strong, and we continue to work to strengthen our partnership.On this 45th celebration of your independence, I send my best wishes and offer the United States’ hand in friendship to all Solomon Islanders on this momentous occasion.
- Solomon Islands HomeReportsOffice to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons2023 Trafficking in Persons Report&#8230;Solomon Islands				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 Trafficking in Persons Report: Solomon Islands																																					Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons																																																																																																				 In this section										/																							SOLOMON ISLANDS (Tier 2 Watch List)																																													SOLOMON ISLANDS (Tier 2 Watch List)																															PRIORITIZED RECOMMENDATIONS:																																																																																		PROSECUTION																																																																																		PROTECTION																																																																																		PREVENTION																																																																																		TRAFFICKING PROFILE:																																																																																																								SOLOMON ISLANDS (Tier 2 Watch List)				The Government of Solomon Islands does not fully meet the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking but is making significant efforts to do so.  These efforts included developing a communication and implementation strategy for its NAP and raising awareness of trafficking.  However, the government did not demonstrate overall increasing efforts compared with the previous reporting period, even considering the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on its anti-trafficking capacity.  Authorities did not identify or assist trafficking victims, and protection services remained inadequate.  The government did not initiate any trafficking investigations or prosecutions and, for the third consecutive year, the government did not convict any traffickers.  The government did not administer anti-trafficking training for its police or judicial officials, despite a lack of understanding of trafficking among such officials.  For the fourth consecutive year, the Ministry of Commerce’s Labor Division did not conduct systematic monitoring and inspection activities at logging sites or in the fishing or mining sectors, despite clear indicators of trafficking.  Therefore Solomon Islands was downgraded to Tier 2 Watch List.																																					PRIORITIZED RECOMMENDATIONS:						    																																															Investigate and prosecute trafficking crimes, including those involving victims’ family members and complicit officials, and seek adequate penalties for convicted traffickers, which should involve significant prison terms.Increase efforts to identify Solomon Islander and foreign trafficking victims within the country, including in agriculture; the fishing, logging, and mining industries; and in relation to illicit commercial activities.Adopt a comprehensive human trafficking law that criminalizes all forms of the crime and prescribes penalties that are sufficiently stringent and commensurate with penalties prescribed for other grave crimes, and remove sentencing provisions under current laws that allow fines in lieu of imprisonment for sex trafficking crimes occurring outside of Solomon Islands.In collaboration with civil society, screen for trafficking indicators and ensure victims are not inappropriately penalized solely for unlawful acts committed as a direct result of being trafficked, including among individuals in commercial sex, People’s Republic of China (PRC) nationals employed at worksites affiliated with PRC-based companies, communities located near mining and logging camps, and individuals – including children – apprehended for illegal fishing, desertion from foreign‐registered fishing vessels, illegal logging, or immigration crimes and ensure all identified victims are referred to protection services.Train immigration officials, police, prosecutors, judicial officials, and social service providers on all relevant trafficking laws and victim identification procedures, including at the provincial level.Increase government support for victim protection, including funding for specialized shelter services, benefiting both male and female victims.Implement and fund the 2020-2025 NAP.Collect data on trafficking trends in Solomon Islands and disseminate among interagency anti-trafficking stakeholders.Institute a campaign to raise awareness of trafficking, including among remote logging and mining communities in all provinces.Eliminate recruitment or placement fees charged to workers by labor recruiters and ensure any recruitment fees are paid by employers.Amend existing forestry laws to include minimum social safeguards and child protection policies.Accede to the 2000 UN TIP Protocol.																																												PROSECUTION						    																																															The government decreased its law enforcement efforts.  The penal code, together with the Immigration Act, criminalized sex trafficking and labor trafficking.  Article 143 of the penal code criminalized child sex trafficking under its “child commercial sexual exploitation” provision and prescribed penalties of up to 15 or 20 years’ imprisonment, based on the child’s age.  Article 145 of the penal code criminalized sex trafficking and labor trafficking when the offense occurred within the country.  Article 145(2) applied to trafficking offenses involving an element of force, fraud, or coercion; it prescribed penalties of up to 20 years’ imprisonment for offenses involving adult victims and up to 25 years’ imprisonment for offenses involving child victims.  Article 145(3) prescribed penalties of up to 15 years’ imprisonment for offenses that did not involve an element of force, fraud, or coercion.  These penalties were sufficiently stringent and, with respect to sex trafficking, commensurate with those prescribed for other serious crimes, such as kidnapping.  The Immigration Act criminalized other forms of trafficking, including crimes in which the recruitment, transportation, harboring, or receipt of the trafficking victim occurred outside Solomon Islands.  The Immigration Act prescribed penalties of up to five years’ imprisonment, a fine of up to 45,000 Solomon Islands dollars ($5,710), or both for the trafficking of adults; it prescribed a penalty of up to 10 years’ imprisonment, a fine of up to 90,000 Solomon Islands dollars ($11,410), or both for the trafficking of children.  These penalties were sufficiently stringent, but with respect to sex trafficking, by allowing for a fine in lieu of imprisonment, they were not commensurate with penalties prescribed for other serious offenses.  Authorities continued to charge some trafficking cases under criminal statutes carrying lesser penalties.  The government did not report an update to its review, in coordination with a regional body, initiated in the previous reporting period of the Immigration Act to identify gaps in trafficking-specific provisions, among others.  In a prior reporting period, the government allocated 920,000 Solomon Islands dollars ($115,737) to develop a comprehensive human trafficking statute and accede to the UN Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime (UNTOC) and its supplementary protocols, including the UN TIP Protocol; the government did not report adoption of the statute, and it did not accede to the UN TIP Protocol.The government did not initiate any trafficking investigations, compared with three sex trafficking investigations in the previous reporting period.  Authorities continued three sex trafficking investigations initiated in the previous reporting period, which remained ongoing.  The government did not initiate prosecution of any traffickers, compared with prosecuting one alleged trafficker in the previous reporting period.  Authorities continued two prosecutions initiated in prior years.  For the third consecutive year, the government did not convict any traffickers.  Courts acquitted one alleged trafficker due to evidentiary issues.  In addition, observers ascribed a higher likelihood of acquittals and dismissals of trafficking cases to backlogs in court, incomplete investigations, insufficient evidence or lack of testimony, and safety concerns among victims and their families.  The government did not report any investigations, prosecutions, or convictions of government employees complicit in human trafficking crimes; however, corruption and official complicity in trafficking crimes remained significant concerns, inhibiting law enforcement action.The Royal Solomon Islands Police Force and Ministry of Commerce’s Immigration Division jointly investigated trafficking crimes; however, the lack of dedicated funding and inadequate resources in the country’s anti-trafficking policy infrastructure reportedly constrained authorities’ ability to investigate trafficking cases.The government did not report cooperating with foreign counterparts on any law enforcement activities.  Geographic challenges, insufficient funding of enforcement agencies, lack of technical expertise, low judicial and police capacity, and front-line officers’ lack of awareness of trafficking indicators and the relevant laws, particularly in remote areas of the country, hindered the government’s ability to respond to trafficking crimes.  Traditional justice practices, involving retribution or informal compensation arrangements between victims’ families and traffickers, supplanted formal law enforcement efforts and further complicated victims’ access to justice.  The government, in partnership with an international organization, trained immigration officers on various trafficking issues; the government did not provide anti-trafficking training to police, prosecutors, or judicial officials.  The government redirected resources, including those related to anti-trafficking efforts, among government agencies because of the pandemic, which may have adversely affected the government’s ability to detect and address trafficking.																																												PROTECTION						    																																															The government decreased efforts to protect trafficking victims.  The government did not identify any trafficking victims, compared with identifying three Solomon Islander child trafficking victims in the previous reporting period.  The government did not implement its victim identification, referral, and protection SOPs developed in partnership with an international organization in a prior reporting period.  Due to a lack of formal identification procedures, authorities may have detained some unidentified trafficking victims.The government did not assist any victims or refer any for services, compared with referring three child victims in the previous reporting period.  The government reported NGOs could provide health care, counseling, and shelter to trafficking victims; the government did not report providing funding or in-kind resources to NGOs for these services.  The government could not provide specialized care for children or shelter for adult males or labor trafficking victims.  Most trafficking victims identified in prior years came from the provinces, making services exclusively located in Honiara difficult to access.  Observers expressed concern the government sometimes removed victims from trafficking situations without arranging access to shelter or adequate protection services, leaving them vulnerable to re-victimization.  For the second consecutive year, the government did not allocate funding for investigations, public awareness, and victim protection or assistance from the Immigration Division’s budget.The government did not require victims to participate in investigations or prosecutions to access protection services.  The government could provide protective services, including legal assistance, and welfare support to victims who participated in investigations or prosecutions and victims could obtain employment while participating, but the government did not report doing so during the year.  The government allowed victims to speak with social welfare service providers rather than law enforcement officials during investigations.  The Immigration Act granted the government authority to provide temporary residence permits for foreign victims to assist police with investigations, and it insulated foreign victims against prosecution for immigration offenses committed as a direct result of being trafficked.  The government did not report if it extended these protections to foreign victims whose cases authorities investigated under the penal code.  The government did not report providing these or other services to any foreign victims, as it did not identify any.  Some unidentified foreign victims may have opted to return to their home countries due to lengthy legal processes, fear of retaliation by traffickers or prosecution by police, and a lack of incentives to remain and participate in cases.  In prior years, observers noted insufficiencies in protection services likely discouraged some victims from testifying in court proceedings, thereby hindering prosecutorial progress.  The government reported trafficking victims could seek compensation from traffickers through civil suits, although it reported no victims had ever filed such suits.  The government did not maintain a victim compensation fund.  The government did not provide legal alternatives to the removal of foreign trafficking victims to countries where they might face retribution or hardship.																																												PREVENTION						    																																															The government maintained efforts to prevent trafficking.  The Anti-Human Trafficking Advisory Committee, which included government agencies and members of civil society, led the country’s anti-trafficking efforts and met quarterly.  However, government officials reported a lack of information sharing among stakeholders hindered anti-trafficking efforts.  The government developed a communication and implementation strategy to implement its NAP against Human Trafficking and People Smuggling 2020-2025.  Unlike the previous reporting period, the government, in partnership with international organizations and NGOs, raised awareness of trafficking by disseminating information online and through radio programs, posters, and brochures.  For the second consecutive year, the Immigration Division did not report conducting any awareness-raising activities targeting communities near logging or mining operations.The government did not take steps to research and assess the scope of its trafficking problem.  The government did not report implementing a policy framework, developed in partnership with international organizations during the previous reporting period, to set minimum terms and conditions for crewmembers working on licensed foreign and domestic-flagged fishing vessels operating in Solomon Islands’ waters in an effort to address trafficking risks among crewmembers.  The government did not report taking comprehensive measures to assess or address labor trafficking in supply chains or enforce its labor laws.  For the fourth consecutive year, the Labor Division did not report conducting any monitoring or inspection activities at logging operations or in the fishing or mining sectors despite continued reports of trafficking indicators in these sectors.  The government did not prohibit worker-paid recruitment fees, which contributed to debt-based coercion among foreign workers.  In prior years, forestry officials reported the lack of industry regulation and laws outlining child protection and social safeguards prevented them from detecting and investigating potential abuses, including trafficking, related to logging operations’ impact on local communities.  The government did not provide anti-trafficking training to its diplomatic personnel.  The government did not operate or support an anti‐trafficking hotline.  The government did not make efforts to reduce the demand for commercial sex acts.  Solomon Islands was not a party to the UN TIP Protocol; however, the government reported ongoing efforts, in partnership with an international organization, to accede to the UNTOC and its supplementary protocols, including the UN TIP Protocol.																																												TRAFFICKING PROFILE:						    																																															As reported over the past five years, human traffickers exploit domestic and foreign victims in Solomon Islands, and traffickers exploit victims from Solomon Islands abroad.  Traffickers also use Solomon Islands as a transit point to move victims to other countries.  Seventy-five percent of workers work in the informal economy where labor laws are not enforced, increasing vulnerability to trafficking.  Traffickers exploit local, South Asian, and Southeast Asian men and women in labor and sex trafficking in Solomon Islands, and local children are especially vulnerable to labor and sex trafficking.  Women from the PRC, Indonesia, Malaysia, and the Philippines often pay large recruitment fees for jobs in Solomon Islands and upon arrival are forced or coerced into commercial sex.  Labor traffickers exploit men from Indonesia and Malaysia in the logging, fishing, palm oil, and mining industries.  Fishermen from Indonesia, the Philippines, Vietnam, Sri Lanka, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and Fiji report situations indicative of labor trafficking, including non-payment of wages, dire living conditions, violence, and limited food supply, on Taiwan-flagged fishing vessels in Solomon Islands’ territorial waters and ports.  Individuals from the PRC may have been forced to work in Solomon Islands at projects run by PRC‐based companies and at businesses owned by PRC nationals.  Traffickers exploit Solomon Islander children in labor and sex trafficking within the country, sometimes in exchange for money or goods, particularly near foreign logging camps, on foreign and local commercial fishing vessels, and at hotels, casinos, nightclubs, and other entertainment establishments.  The inflow of a cash economic system, coupled with the continuation of an unregulated logging industry, has increased vulnerability to trafficking in remote communities, specifically for women and children.  Contacts have observed a recent increase in commercial sex – and a concomitant uptick in sex trafficking – resulting from certain economic changes.  Family members are often the facilitators of such transactional agreements.  Women and girls may be at risk of debt-based coercion in sex trafficking and domestic servitude via the customary practice of “bride-price,” money or chattel the husband’s family pays to the wife’s family.  Natural disasters significantly increase Solomon Islanders’ vulnerability to trafficking; Solomon Islanders affected by a cyclone in 2020 may be at higher risk of trafficking due to economic hardships the destruction caused.  Anecdotal reporting showed an increase in the sexual exploitation of girls, some of whom may have been sex trafficking victims, as many returned to remote villages because of the pandemic.Some official corruption – especially in relation to facilitating irregular migration and involvement in the fishing and forestry sectors – may facilitate trafficking.  Some boys, girls, and young women are recruited for domestic work and subsequently exploited in commercial sex at logging camps.  Under informal or traditional justice practices, parents frequently receive payments for sending young women and girls into forced marriages with foreign workers at logging and mining companies, where many of them are exploited in domestic servitude or sex trafficking.  Often these payments are rendered after the victims escape or are returned home as informal compensation that local leadership broker.  In this way, local community leaders may also benefit financially from these arrangements.  Mining and logging camp leadership reportedly force boys to serve as solairs – illicit brokers procuring girls for sexual and domestic service in worker lodging facilities – and logging camp personnel force young males to work as domestic servants and cooks.  Following the government’s decision to cease issuance of new logging licenses, a decline in the industry has contributed to an increase in internal economic migration of communities located in former logging areas; these displaced communities may be at higher risk of labor trafficking.  Elsewhere, Solomon Islander children may be exploited in labor trafficking in the agricultural sector, forced harvesting of seafood, and forced criminality in the manufacturing and transportation of drugs and in pickpocketing.  Widespread social stigma against LGBTQI+ individuals increase their vulnerability to trafficking.  Anecdotal reports show an increase in children involved in street vending, begging, and pickpocketing during the pandemic.  To pay off debts, some parents reportedly sell their children to other families via “informal adoption” that often involves forced labor or sexual servitude.																																				    							View report by:																				Afghanistan											Albania											Algeria											Angola											Antigua and Barbuda											Argentina											Armenia											Aruba											Australia											Austria											Azerbaijan											The Bahamas											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											Colombia											Comoros											Costa Rica											Cote d&#8217;Ivoire											Croatia											Cuba											Curaçao											Cyprus											Czech Republic											Democratic Republic of the Congo											Denmark											Djibouti											Dominican Republic											Ecuador											Egypt											El Salvador											Equatorial Guinea											Eritrea											Estonia											Eswatini											Ethiopia											Fiji											Finland											France											Gabon											The Gambia											Georgia											Germany											Ghana											Greece											Guatemala											Guinea											Guinea-Bissau											Guyana											Haiti											Honduras											Hong Kong											Hungary											Iceland											India											Indonesia											Iran											Iraq											Ireland											Israel, West Bank and Gaza											Italy											Jamaica											Japan											Jordan											Kazakhstan											Kenya											Kosovo											Kuwait											Kyrgyzstan											Laos											Latvia											Lebanon											Lesotho											Liberia											Libya											Lithuania											Luxembourg											Macau											Madagascar											Malawi											Malaysia											Maldives											Mali											Malta											Marshall Islands											Mauritania											Mauritius											Mexico											Micronesia, Federated States of											Moldova											Mongolia											Montenegro											Morocco											Mozambique											Namibia											Nepal											Netherlands											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 Lucia											Saint Vincent and the Grenadines											Saudi Arabia											Senegal											Serbia											Seychelles											Sierra Leone											Singapore											Sint Maarten											Slovakia											Slovenia											Solomon Islands											Somalia											South Africa											South Korea											South Sudan											Spain											Sri Lanka											Sudan											Suriname											Sweden											Switzerland											Syria											Taiwan											Tajikistan											Tanzania											Thailand											Timor-Leste											Togo											Tonga											Trinidad and Tobago											Tunisia											Turkey											Turkmenistan											Uganda											Ukraine											United Arab Emirates											United Kingdom											United States											Uruguay											Uzbekistan											Vanuatu											Venezuela											Vietnam											Yemen											Zambia											Zimbabwe																										On This Page				search													>																										SOLOMON ISLANDS (Tier 2 Watch List)																PRIORITIZED RECOMMENDATIONS:																																																	PROSECUTION																																																	PROTECTION																																																	PREVENTION																																																	TRAFFICKING PROFILE:																																																							Tags																					Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs																																Human Trafficking																															Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons																								Solomon Islands
- U.S.-Pacific Islands Forum Leaders Dialogue in Papua New Guinea Office of the SpokespersonSecretary Blinken’s visit to Papua New Guinea for the U.S.-Pacific Islands Forum Leaders Dialogue is a testament to renewed U.S. commitment to our Pacific Island neighbors and partners.  At the historic first-ever U.S.-Pacific Island Summit held in Washington in September 2022, President Biden announced a slate of ambitious initiatives that, working with Congress, will provide over $810 million in additional expanded programs to meet Pacific priorities.  The Biden-Harris Administration is following through on these commitments, including through opening new U.S. embassies in the region in record time and expanding our diplomatic and development engagement to unprecedented levels.  The United States is also working together with likeminded partners through the Partners in the Blue Pacific to collectively support Pacific priorities as outlined in the Pacific Islands Forum 2050 Strategy for the Blue Pacific Continent.Today, Secretary Blinken highlighted our commitment to working with Congress for over $7.2 billion in new funding and programs for the Pacific Islands region.  This includes over $45 million in new programming for Papua New Guinea, as well as additional Pacific Islands programming.  The President’s FY 2024 Budget also requests $7.1 billion over 20 years to extend assistance under the Compacts of Free Association with the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and Palau.With these new announcements, the Biden-Harris Administration has committed to working with Congress on providing over $8 billion to the Pacific Islands region since the historic first Summit in Washington, demonstrating U.S. commitment to the region.  These announcements include the following lines of effort:I. Delivering on the U.S.-Pacific Islands PartnershipAt the U.S.-Pacific Islands Forum Leaders Dialogue, Secretary Blinken and Pacific Leaders reaffirmed their commitment to the Declaration on U.S.-Pacific Partnership issued in September 2022.  The Declaration laid out an affirmative vision of cooperation and partnership to address shared challenges, bolster Pacific regionalism, advance economic growth and sustainable development, maintain peace and security in the Blue Pacific continent, and expand opportunities for our peoples.  The United States has been delivering on our commitments from the historic first Summit, the Declaration on U.S.-Pacific Partnership, and the first ever U.S. national strategy on the Pacific Islands, the Pacific Partnership Strategy.  This includes our request to Congress for $7.1 billion in funding over 20 years under the Compacts of Free Association for the Freely Associated States and signing agreements to extend Compact-related assistance with the Federated States of Micronesia and Palau to extend Compact-related assistance.Signing Agreements related to the Compacts of Free Association with Palau and Federated States of Micronesia (FSM): Extending COFA-related assistance is a critical component of the Administration’s Indo-Pacific, Pacific Partnership, and National Security Strategies, necessary to enhancing our relationships with the Freely Associated States and to maintaining our status as a committed preferred partner in the Pacific.  In Papua New Guinea, Special Presidential Envoy for Compact Negotiations Joseph Yun signed the Palau 2023 Compact Review Agreement with Minister of Finance Kaleb Udui.  The United States and FSM will sign Compact related agreements on May 23 in the FSM.New Embassy Openings: S. Embassy Honiara in Solomon Islands opened on January 27, 2023.  U.S. Embassy Nuku&#8217;alofa in Tonga opened on May 9, and a public event is expected in the coming months.  We are in active discussions regarding our interest in opening an embassy in Kiribati and have announced our intent to open an embassy in Vanuatu, subject to host government approval and completion of Congressional notification procedures.Returning Peace Corps to the Region: In September 2022, we announced that the Peace Corps would be returning to the Pacific region.  Peace Corps Volunteers are now on the ground in Fiji, Samoa, and Tonga, and will return to Vanuatu later this year.  The Peace Corps is also assessing the reestablishment of operations, budget permitting, in Solomon Islands, Palau, and the Federated States of Micronesia. II. Expanding People-to-People ConnectionsThe United States is following through on commitments to strengthen people-to-people ties with our Pacific Islands neighbors.  We are also leveraging connections with academia, sports, and the private sector to build connections between our peoples.Expanding American Spaces in the Pacific: The United States intends to enhance and expand access to our American Spaces across the Pacific with a focus on inclusivity and accessibility and promoting people-to-people connections to build mutual understanding and partnerships.  In modern environments equipped with advanced technologies, visitors to American Spaces can explore and share a wide range of topics and ideas, access reliable information, develop practical professional skills, and participate in programs that foster economic strength, hone critical thinking, and build capacity.  Through a new Regional Public Engagement Specialist (REPS) position in Suva, Fiji, the United States will support the operations of American Spaces throughout the Pacific Islands.  In addition to the recently opened American Center in Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea, the United States intends to work with the Carnegie Library in Suva to open an American Corner and develop American Spaces for Solomon Islands, Tonga, and the Republic of the Marshall Islands.Building Relationships through Sports in the Pacific: S. sports diplomacy programs in the Pacific are fostering resilience, health, economic development, and gender equity as well as building people-to-people ties.  In the last six months alone, U.S. athletes and coaches in surfing, running, rugby, and football have visited Papua New Guinea, Fiji, Tonga, and Kiribati, as well as with Indigenous Australians and New Zealanders.  American female surfers traveled to Papua New Guinea to teach youth surfing skills while advocating for greater gender equity policies in sports.  On May 19, eight Tongan and 10 Fijian female athletes and coaches traveled to the United States to participate in the State Department-funded International Sports Programming Initiative (ISPI) to build leadership skills and discuss the role that sports can play in preventing gender-based violence.Expanding the Special Professional Fellows Program for Young Economic Empowerment Leaders: For the first time, fellows from Cook Islands, New Caledonia, and Niue will join a group of 10 Fellows from other Pacific Islands on a four-week, U.S.-based exchange to collaborate with U.S. professionals on post-pandemic equitable and sustainable economic recovery  The program features individually tailored Fellowships at private and public sector organizations across the United States which are designed to enhance the Fellows’ leadership and professional skills.  The Professional Fellows Program has supported programming in the Pacific Islands since 2018.Launching the U.S.-Pacific Institute for Rising Leaders: The Department of State is working with the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies on the newly created U.S.-Pacific Institute for Rising Leaders, announced last September.  Beginning in the fall of 2023, this multi-year program will bring exceptional rising leaders from the private sector, government, media, and non-profit organizations across the Pacific to Washington, D.C. for several weeks of professional and leadership development.Announcing the Indo-Pacific Museum Exchange Partnership: In summer 2023, the State Department Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs&#8217; Cultural Heritage Center will launch a new, two-year exchange program for cultural heritage specialists from Indo-Pacific countries.  The Indo-Pacific Museum Exchange Partnership will build capacity to preserve and promote national identity and create a network of museum professionals across the region.  Participants from Fiji, Kiribati, Papua New Guinea, Palau, Solomon Islands, Tonga, and Vanuatu will join participants from across the region to develop and share knowledge about collections management, conservation, and public engagement for the cultural objects in the national museums of these countries, many of which are important to Indigenous Peoples and the national identities of these countries.13th Festival of Pacific Arts and Culture 2024: The United States is pleased to support the Governor of Hawaiʻi and the Pacific Community (SPC) in hosting the 13th Festival of Pacific Arts and Culture (FestPAC) June 6-16, 2024, in Honolulu, Hawaiʻi.  We look forward to providing a warm welcome filled with the Aloha Spirit to FestPAC delegations of royal families and Ministers to Indigenous practitioners and student performers next year.III.  Climate Action, Clean Energy, and Sustainable InfrastructureThe United States is committed to keeping 1.5 degrees Celsius limit on global warming within reach, including through outreach to major emitters to raise ambition and to take action in this critical decade.  We are committed to helping Pacific Islands manage both sudden-onset impacts of climate change, such as major storms, and slow-onset impacts such as sea-level rise.  To date, USAID has helped Pacific Islands countries unlock more than $500 million from international organizations such as the Green Climate Fund (GCF), Adaptation Fund, and the Global Environment Facility.  The Administration will also work to scale the Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Investment (PGII) in the region to deliver quality, sustainable energy, physical, digital, health, and climate-resilient infrastructure.Technical Assistance Support for the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) Pacific Resilience Facility: The United States intends to provide $2 million, subject to Congressional notification and the completion of domestic procedures, to support the PIF to design and stand up the Pacific Resilience Facility (PRF).  This program is envisioned to support investments into enhancing adaptation and resilience at the local level in the Pacific Islands.  The United States is proud to be among the founding development partners for this important new initiative promoting better access to climate finance in the Pacific.Reaffirming New Sea-level Rise Policy: The United States reaffirms our sea-level rise policy announced at the September 2022 Summit, which says that climate change-driven sea-level rise “should not diminish” maritime economic zones of coastal states and calls on all countries to commit to supporting this policy by COP 28.Transportation Partnership with the Pacific Islands (TPPI): The Department of Transportation (DOT) and U.S. Trade &amp; Development Agency (USTDA) conducted a joint scoping trip to Fiji, Samoa, and Tonga in February 2023 on transportation priorities and challenges to inform the basis for bilateral and regional technical assistance and capacity building activities.  Initial near-term DOT cooperation will focus on aviation safety with the Pacific Aviation Safety Office (PASO) and bilaterally through Federal Aviation Administration engagement.  In the medium-term, DOT is exploring other areas of cooperation, including maritime development, decarbonization, transportation safety, sustainability, planning, and inclusivity. USTDA is also currently evaluating transportation opportunities in airport and port upgrades, aviation safety, drone delivery, EVs, and climate-smart transportation.Pacific Islands Port Leaders Visit: USTDA will host a Pacific Islands Port Leaders Visit Reverse Trade Mission that will bring a delegation of 15 port sector leaders from the Pacific Islands to the United States to familiarize them with U.S. technologies, services, and best practices that can improve port operations, security, and sustainability in the region.  The visit advances the goals of the Transportation Partnership with the Pacific Islands, launched last September, by promoting sustainable transportation infrastructure in the region.Pacific Islands Strategic Infrastructure Initiative: USTDA launched a call for proposals to develop quality infrastructure for the Pacific Islands and conducted a six-country scoping mission to the Pacific Islands.  The Call for Proposals closed in April 2023, and USTDA is currently evaluating over 80 proposals from 11 Pacific Islands countries that have the potential to develop high-quality infrastructure projects and help unlock financing.  This work builds on USTDA’s current activities in the Pacific Islands aimed at unlocking over $450 million in financing for clean energy, connectivity, and digital infrastructure solutions.IV. Economic Partnership and RecoveryThe United States is committed to partnering with the Pacific Islands and allies and partners to drive economic growth and prosperity, including through increasing trade and investment; providing assistance to strengthen enabling environments, infrastructure, and macroeconomic stability; and continued support for recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic.Conclusion of Negotiations on Economic Assistance Agreement Related to the Tuna Treaty: The United States is following through on its pledge to request from Congress $600 million over ten years in connection with a new Economic Assistance Agreement associated with the South Pacific Tuna Treaty.  We and the Pacific Islands Forum Fisheries Agency have concluded negotiations on a new 10-year agreement, and the President has included $60 million for the first year of the agreement in the FY 2024 budget request to Congress.  The United States is working on completion of its domestic procedures to conclude the agreement.Supporting Economic Growth by Promoting High Quality Business Opportunities in Pacific Islands Countries: The Department of Commerce will lead a U.S. business delegation to Pacific Islands countries in the coming year, complemented by virtual trade promotion events.  The trade mission delegation will seek to bring U.S. company representatives together with host nation officials, business associations, and potential private sector partners, distributors, and licensees to learn about business opportunities in Pacific Islands countries.  Target market sectors will include high-impact government procurements, particularly in seaports, airports, energy, healthcare, and telecommunications sectors.Increasing Competitiveness and Economic Inclusion by Bolstering Commercial Cooperation with Pacific Islands Countries: The Department of Commerce has begun the process of engaging interested Pacific Islands countries in discussions on bilateral Memoranda of Commercial Cooperation, aimed at supporting partners in expanding trade and investment with the United States, while improving business climates in the Pacific Islands.Technical Assistance for Aviation Security to Support Reopening Borders in the Pacific: Since 2022, the Transportation Safety Administration (TSA) has conducted aviation security oversight visits to Fiji, Samoa, and French Polynesia in support of Pacific border reopening and to ensure the security integrity of the civil aviation sector.  TSA plans to visit Cook Islands and Kiribati in the second half of 2023.  Civil aviation authority representatives from Fiji and Samoa have been nominated to attend the Idaho National Lab Industrial Control Systems Cybersecurity Training in June 2023.  TSA, along with the Republic of Korea’s Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport and the International Civil Aviation Organization, will host a Joint Covert Testing workshop in July 2023, where countries including Solomon Islands and Vanuatu will learn to utilize joint covert testing programs to strengthen global aviation security effectiveness.Supporting Health through COVID-19 Vaccines:  The United States has provided over 1.3 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines to Pacific Islands countries.  Through our partnership with COVAX, the United States has donated over 860,000 life-saving doses of the Pfizer vaccine across the Pacific Islands countries.  Recent deliveries include the first U.S.-donated pediatric Pfizer doses (19,200) to Kiribati and the first U.S.-donated Tris Pfizer vaccines (70,200) to Solomon Islands.  Through the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), we have also provided an additional 476,270 doses to the Freely Associated States of Palau, Federated States of Micronesia, and Republic of the Marshall Islands.  USAID and HHS, through the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response (ASPR), are working with partners to ensure these vaccines reach people who need it most and are administered efficiently and safely.Deployment of NOAA Ship Rainier to support Pacific Hydrographic Survey Requests: The United States deployed the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) ship Rainier April 30-May 1, 2023, to conduct a hydrographic survey of Kanton Island and its port area per a request from the Kiribati Ministry of Information, Communication, and Transport (MICT). This is the first-ever, high-resolution multibeam mapping mission conducted of Kanton Island, and the data will be used to improve maritime safety and support new infrastructure projects.  NOAA is working with MICT to develop Kiribati’s first integrated geospatial information framework with additional projects forthcoming. V. Bolstering Security Cooperation and Maritime Domain AwarenessThe United States is committed to ensuring the Blue Pacific Continent remains a place of peace and prosperity.  We are strengthening our cooperation with Pacific Islands countries on improving maritime domain awareness, combatting illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing, and countering transnational criminal activity.Expanding United States Coast Guard (USCG) Security Cooperation in the Pacific: The U.S. Coast Guard conducts cooperative training with Pacific Islands country partners to expand their maritime security capabilities through technical resident training at U.S. Coast Guard schools and focused subject matter expert exchanges.  Under the U.S. Department of State Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement-funded Pacific Australia Maritime Partnership (AMP) program, the USCG continues to provide maritime law enforcement trainings through in-region mobile training team (MTT) engagements with recipients of Australia’s Guardian Class patrol boats.  In 2023, the U.S. Coast Guard will conduct 15 MTT visits to Pacific Islands countries.Improving Security Sector Governance: At the 2022 Summit we committed to improving security sector governance and institutional capacity of U.S. partners through advisory support efforts.  As part of the Global Defense Reform Program, we are implementing projects in Palau through an embedded senior advisor focused on maritime security governance; in the Federated States of Micronesia and Republic of the Marshall Islands through intermittent capacity building engagements by the U.S. Coast Guard; and in Vanuatu through an embedded senior advisor focused on maritime security and safety.
- Secretary Antony J. Blinken and Papua New Guinean Prime Minister James Marape at a Joint Press Availability Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of StatePort Moresby, Papua New GuineaAPEC HausPRIME MINISTER MARAPE:  All right.  Thank you.  Thank you very much for your extreme patience.  I just want to sincerely appreciate all of you from our various media outlets who have spent almost a whole today to wait for this occasion to happen.  I just want to sincerely apologize, but also thank – thank each and every one of you for your patience, especially those of you from Papua New Guinea.  This is extraordinary day for us.  We have two extremely important meetings today – separated but joined at the hips, if I can call it this way.  And the President of the United States is represented by Secretary of State Mr. Antony Blinken.For this press, I will also cover the earlier meeting that took place and I think one (inaudible) of the outcomes of the earlier meeting that we later released to press for each and every one of you.  But on this – on this note, let me again thank you, Secretary Blinken, for your patience to remain through – right through as we dispense informations that we have to the press that is awaiting us, (inaudible) likewise (inaudible) to the viewers, to the business, and to the group leaders here and far and wide.This morning the Pacific Island leaders had the extraordinary pleasure of being with Prime Minister Modi.  We completed successfully our third Pacific Island and India leaders meeting and dialogue.  President – I beg your pardon – Prime Minister Modi flew out this afternoon extremely satisfied.  The leaders of Pacific were satisfied that outcomes that we wanted to secure for this meeting, especially establishing great rapport between Delhi and the Pacific, was established in today’s meeting we had earlier with Prime Minister Modi.We engaged in serious conversations, most of pointing to Prime Minister Modi and the Indian Government that they must rise as the leader of the nations from the south, (inaudible), and the nations expressly – those of us who are still (inaudible), knowing that he has a role to play especially in mobilizing Indian technology, Indian capacities to help – and he himself also did pledge support to the small Pacific Island nations solar energy solutions – for instance, desalination solutions.  Also, his response to climate change upkeep.He also committed to ensure that there’s a contribution from the Indian people and the government to having a modern health facility and health facilities in the center of Pacific, in (inaudible), as well as supporting the information system capacities that already India has partnered, invested in Papua New Guinea, in our country.  Conversations were of warmth (inaudible), and frank; and I think we all can be richer in our dialogue because of this India dialogue going back and for possibly can take that relationship west from us.I want to also indicate to all of you in the press that we had a successful meeting with Secretary of State Mr. Blinken.  Earlier, PNG had a special bilateral meeting with Secretary Blinken.  It was concepts of issues of the Defense Cooperation Agreement that was discussed.  But far from it, general conversations were discussed on the important relationship we have with U.S.A.Just like we rank India as the biggest democracy by population size, and I imagine a strong economy, expressly ranked fourth and fifth – going fourth very soon – U.S.A. remains number one economy.  The U.S.A. remains the leader of the free world.  For those of us who believe in democracy, for those of us who believe in a Christian worldview, we share many commonalities with the United States of America.The Secretary of State conveyed the apologies of President Biden that he would not come, but Secretary of State is the seniormost under President Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris to come to us to convey apologies, and also conduct an important bilateral with Papua New Guinea and a multilateral with members of the Pacific Island foreign nations.I just wanted to place on record that we don’t take your trip for granted. You could have picked another place – another time and place for us to have this occasion, but you picked Port Moresby, you picked our nation’s capital, and you picked Papua New Guinea – and we sincerely appreciate you very much for this kind gesture.Today, in our bilateral meeting, you were witness to the signing of our Defense Cooperation Agreement.  That was a culmination of many years and months of engagement with Pentagon, engagement with Washington, engagement with U.S. officials and our team.  I just want to stress this point: It wasn’t shoved down our throat.  It wasn’t forced upon us; it was a mutual agreement.  A conversation was held expressly on the need for Papua New Guinea to have our defence force assisted, supported, stepped up.Papua New Guineans, you must know you have domestic security issue, as well as closer to home security issues.  We cannot forever remain in (inaudible) in as far as our defence force is concerned.  Our defence force needs to be stepped up and supported.  We’ve had similar defense cooperation agreement with Australia, Indonesia, and other nations we enjoy strong long-term partnerships with.  We have every right also, in the same vein, to engage in a straight partnership with United States of America, where we have had no problem with similar defense force cooperation agreements &#8211; have been foundation of our relationship.And today, the defense force cooperation comes with a backdrop of elevating what was originally the umbrella status of force agreement that kept us together.  We are now elevating that to a specific relationship exclusive for U.S.A.-PNG military cooperations and military engagements and partnership.  There is nothing for us to be fearful about.  I just want to needless repeat but for emphasis because of a lot of misconception and confusion out there in the public.  This agreement is subsidiary to a treaty – it’s below the treaty level.  This agreement in no way breaks or encroaches into our country’s legislations, (inaudible) the fundamental constitution of our country or every other (inaudible) legislations we have.This agreement is congruent to the 1975 Visiting Forces Act, the 1975 Visiting Forces Act.  James Marape was still a child in 1975, when the fathers of this nation saw it important to have an act called the Visiting Forces Act to ensure we’re engaged in partnership with nations of similarities, nations where we have common bond, where exchanges can be made possible.And so, I just want to inform the educated out there, especially those of you who want to pick a political bone with me – let’s not confuse everyone.  We are a nation of rule of law.  If you feel that this agreement encroaches into one iota of our constitutional law of the land, make reference to the supreme court.  I’m sure the court will find – I’m sure the court will find that what we have done is within the gambit of the constitution of our country and all subsidiary legislations.  It is meant to ensure that our country’s domestic as well as sovereign security is secured, beefed up, bumped up, and prepared for any challenges – not just military challenges, but more importantly, challenges of disaster, challenges of social issues, and every other challenge we go through, including securing our country to be a country known to have secured the security issue and prepared for investments that we are trying to attract into our country.My conversation with India is not just purely on politics; my conversation with U.S.A. is not purely on politics.  But more importantly, deep inside – and Secretary Blinken knows this; those who worked with us on this one knows this – we want American-based investors to come to our country.  We want Indian-based investors to come into our country.  We are looking at diversifying our economic base, and growing it – and make it stronger so that government can in turn look after our citizens.  That is foundationally not so today because of the weak security structure we have in our country.  Strengthening our defense force, strengthening our police, strengthening our court system, ensuring that our democracy is secure is a key foundational interest of the state to make sure our country is secure.It is in this vein that we are in partnership with the biggest democracy on the face of Planet Earth, and I just want to encourage our people, please don’t be – don’t think that something suspicious of funny is behind this.  It was a work over many years that has culminated over – into a six month of robust conversation between Port Moresby and Washington, (inaudible) and Washington, our own military head official or former head official as well as Pentagon and Washington officials.  Today is a result of many weeks, months, and years of work.And I will be making available to the public, as we complete due process of key documents to be made known to public in the very near future &#8211; possibly in days, this agreement will be made public to everyone for all of us to understand.  The United States of America is always transparent about matters that is of importance to the public.  They too, I would believe – and I don’t like to speak for Secretary Blinken, but they too will make known to public, their own country, they will report – they have a duty to report back to their country the agreement that we’ve signed.  And for matters of transparency for the people and citizens of Papua New Guinea, people and citizens of U.S.A. will know exactly what we’ve signed.I just want to conclude by saying what we’ve signed does not encroach – or affect, rather – Papua New Guinea’s own relationships we have with other nations we trade with, or we have relationships with, be it military or government-to-government relations.  Period.  It does not affect – whether in China or Australia or United Kingdom or Japan or India or any other nation, for that matter – this agreement does not in one way, shape, and form stop Papua New Guinea from continuing on doing business with those we do business with.  So, I just want to inform everyone to have a bit of understanding that your government is in the business of securing your future and your economic future as we (inaudible) on these matters.Other matters we discussed with Secretary Blinken on behalf of President Biden, (inaudible) ways continuing issue on the climate change, our energy and security, our (inaudible) greater regional security in the region.  You would have been informed earlier that we did sign a subsequent agreement called a (inaudible) agreement that secures PNG’s maritime borders and our resources found in our seas.  That sort of conversation was also held in the Pacific Island Leaders Meeting, the concern of care for our resources and the security of our seas; all conversation made – Secretary Blinken was very generous with his time and ears.  He sat through, listened to our conversations (inaudible), but a substantial part of Pacific Island and U.S.A. engagements were put to a work-in-progress mode.  And we will arrive in Washington in September of this year, hopefully for substantial progress where United States is making a greater commitment to respond to some of the key development challenges we face in the region, including (inaudible) issues and the other insecurity issues that (inaudible).On this note, Secretary Blinken, I have not stolen your time now.  There is now space for you.  (Laughter.)  And I just have (inaudible) the discussions that we held and (inaudible).  We’ll take a few questions (inaudible).SECRETARY BLINKEN:  Prime Minister, thank you so much.  And I fully endorse everything you said.  And you can speak for me, because you do it so eloquently.  And I can only fully agree with everything that you said.  But thank you.  Thank you for the incredibly warm reception, and thank you for the incredibly productive day – both on a bilateral basis between the United States and Papua New Guinea, but also with all of our regional partners – discussing and making progress on issues that are critical to our shared future.There is an old Hawaiian saying that translates loosely to “united to move forward.”  And I think that’s the spirit in which we all came together today as Pacific nations.  Our partnership is crucial to how we deliver for our people, how we meet their needs and aspirations, and advance our common vision for the region – one that is free and open, connected, prosperous, secure, and resilient.  Or, as your 2050 Strategy for the Blue Pacific Continent puts it, a “resilient Pacific region of peace, harmony, security, social inclusion, and prosperity that ensures all Pacific peoples can lead free, healthy, and productive lives.”  It is a powerful, positive ambition that we share.At this forum we’ve built on momentum from the first U.S.-Pacific Island Summit last fall.  There in Washington, President Biden pledged to open a new era in our partnership – one of mutual respect, trust, and benefit.  As I had an opportunity to tell Pacific leaders at our meeting today, over the past year the United States has been listening to you, engaging with your governments, working to deliver on our summit announcements that align with your broader vision.  And together, we’ve made considerable, tangible progress on many of the commitments in a short period of time.  Together, we are super-charging our climate action.Today, I announced that the United States will support the PIF in standing up the new Pacific Resilience Facility.  This Pacific-owned, Pacific-led solution will drive investment into climate adaptation and resilience in front-line communities.  Together, we’re boosting our bilateral security relationship to ensure that the Blue Pacific remains a place of peace and prosperity.The prime minister and I just signed, as he mentioned, two agreements which will boost cooperation between Papua New Guinea Defence Forces and the U.S. Coast Guard to help build up the Defence Forces’ capacity, and help combat illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing.Together, we’re driving progress to expand trade, investment, and business initiatives that can lift up all communities.  In Papua New Guinea specifically, we’re working with Congress to provide over $45 million in new programming on sustainable and inclusive development, public health, and energy security.  And later this year the Department of Commerce will lead a first-ever U.S. business delegation to Pacific Island countries to explore opportunities in energy, in transportation, in health care, tourism, and telecommunications.Together, we’re modernizing and enhancing the Compacts of Free Association.  These are the bedrock of U.S. engagement in the Pacific.  We just signed our agreement with Palau today, in this room.  And I’m grateful to President Whipps for his partnership.  Tomorrow, we’ll sign our agreement with the Federated States of Micronesia.  And I look forward to finishing negotiations with the Republic of the Marshall Islands soon, to ensure that this arrangement reflects the realities and the challenges of our time.  As part of these agreements, the United States will commit $7.1 billion to the Freely Associated States over the next 20 years.Together, we’re also strengthening ties between our peoples.  We are very excited to announce the return of the Peace Corps to the Pacific Islands, and that we’re launching new educational exchanges to share skills and expertise, and forge enduring connections that will benefit our communities.So, we’ve got a lot to work on, a lot to accomplish together.  And that’s why we’re expanding our diplomatic presence in the region, delivering on our commitments last year.  We’ve opened two new embassies, one on the Solomon Islands, the other just two weeks ago in Tonga.  And we’re working to do the same in Vanuatu and Kiribati by the end of this year.We’ve named our first ever envoy to the Pacific Islands Forum, Ambassador Frankie Reed, who will continue to engage throughout the region to strengthen our partnerships.  We’ll continue to strive to meet the Pacific where it is, (inaudible) Pacific leaders and through the Pacific Islands Forum.  We’ll encourage other partners to do the same, including through the Partners in the Blue Pacific, to support the 2050 Strategy for the Blue Pacific Continent.  And in that regard, we very much welcome India’s engagement with countries in the region.  That, too, is a very positive development for the future that we all want.So Prime Minister, to you, thank you.  Thank you for this partnership at a critical time for the region that we share.  And thank you for the work that we’re doing every day to build it, to make it stronger, to deliver on our shared vision.  Thank you.PRIME MINISTER MARAPE:  All right.  Thank you, Secretary Blinken.  Any questions?  We’ll just take two or three questions.MR PATEL:  We will first go to Gorethy Kenneth from The Post-Courier.QUESTION:  Prime Minister, (inaudible), the line credit – the line of credit program with India and Papua New Guinea (inaudible).  Was it – will it be extended or was it extended?PRIME MINISTER MARAPE:  The prime minister took note of this fact, and he is taking it back to his country.  We – for us, as a country, it’s important we also diversify our source of support.  India has opened up that facility – those facilities.  We’ve asked them to go back and maintain the facility and expressed the (inaudible) invite to procure a source.  So, he said he’ll take back to his officials.  We don’t run other forms of government.  We run democratic form of government (inaudible) our systems to go back to (inaudible) said he would look at (inaudible).MR PATEL:  We’ll next go to Jack Moore from AFP.QUESTION:  Hi.  Thank you for taking the time to speak to us.  My question is for you, Secretary.  Given the inroads that China has made in the Pacific in places such as the Solomon Islands, how important was it for Washington to secure the deals today with Papua New Guinea and renew with Palau to counter Beijing’s rise and influence in the region?  And how satisfied are you with the outcome?SECRETARY BLINKEN:  Well, I’d say a few things.  First, the agreements that we reached, the work that we’re doing, is not about any other country.  It’s about our relationship with the Pacific Islands and the shared vision that we have for this region.And as you heard the prime minister say, while we signed the Defense Cooperation Agreement today, the ship (inaudible) agreement – these are very important in helping to strengthen Papua New Guinea’s capacity.  We’re working across the board on issues of direct concern to people of Papua New Guinea and throughout the region, whether it’s climate, whether it’s energy, whether it’s investment, whether it’s building up healthcare systems.  But this is grounded in – I think what’s fair to say is a shared vision that we have for a free and open Indo-Pacific.And we talk about that a lot.  And I just want to be clear about what we mean by that when we’re talking about a free and open Indo-Pacific.  We need a region where countries are free to choose their own path and their own partners, where problems will be dealt openly, transparently.  Goals will be reached in a transparent way, (inaudible) fairly, and goods, ideas, and people can float freely and lawfully across the land, the seas, the skies, and in cyberspace.  That’s the vision that we have, as well as making sure that the citizens in our countries have the opportunity to reach their full potential, providing the support necessary to do that.But this vision doesn’t exclude anyone.  We welcome contributions by other countries, including the PRC – the regional development – so long as they adhere to the highest standards, including in areas like transparency and the rule of law.  If all of us are going to be engaged in a region as partners – well, if there’s going to be a race, let it be a race to the top.  That’s what we’re all about, and we want to simply see anyone who’s engaged engage in a way that advances the shared vision of a free and open Indo-Pacific.But as I said, the focus that we have is on building and strengthening these partnerships on their own terms, not with regard to any other country.MR PATEL:  Take a final question from Tim Swanston from ABC.QUESTION:  I’m happy just to talk loudly if you can hear me.  (Laughter.)  Secretary Blinken, I appreciate what you’re saying that this isn’t about any other countries, but ultimately, China has made very serious inroads with respect to the defense and security arrangement here in the Pacific.  Now that the Defense Cooperation Agreement is being signed, under what kind of timeframe would you like to see U.S. military or U.S. assets placed in PNG?  And what bases are you looking at of importance to the island states?SECRETARY BLINKEN:  What we’re focused on is what our partners here are working and trying to achieve in strengthening their capacity.  As you heard the prime minister say, there’s a focus on humanitarian assistance, disaster relief.  That’s the main import of what we’re doing.  But the main point is that, as you heard the prime minister say, we’ve had this basic arrangement going back to 1975.  So, this is simply updating and modernizing what has been a longstanding agreement between our countries just to make sure that we can work together as effectively as possible.And as I said in the first instance, we want to make sure that we’re being responsive to some of the challenges that the PNG faces.  There are other challenges that I mentioned that – where these agreements will be very helpful – for example, the issue of illegal, unreported, unregulated fishing.  This is something that is having a devasting impact on livelihoods in the Pacific Islands, as well as the ecosystem that is so vital to nourishing these economies.  So, this could – I think the work that we’re doing with PNG can be of a real assistance there.You heard the prime minister talk about other concerns with regard, for example, to (inaudible), where again these agreements will help.  But that’s the immediate focus of what we’re looking to do, but it’s all on the basis of simply bringing up to date and modernizing agreements that have been there for a long, long time.  And I would emphasize, again, something the prime minister said: these are being done in a fully transparent way, respectful of PNG’s institutions, of its sovereignty.  These are agreements that we reach together, not agreements that anyone is imposing on anyone else, and they take away no freedom of action from the PNG.  And as the Prime Minister said, we’ll be making these publicly available – as we always do, as we complete the process of finalizing the agreements in our respective countries.PRIME MINISTER MARAPE:   Mr. Secretary, if I could just add one or two more lines &#8212;SECRETARY BLINKEN:  Please.PRIME MINISTER MARAPE:  &#8212; the presence of China, let me inform everyone, China is (inaudible) and people have no interest whatsoever with what they do in other nations.  We have a healthy relationship with Chinese Government, and they are important and big trading partner, but we are moving into finalizing this agreement.  We did not need to tell anyone else what we’re doing.  But they have given assurance to us in our conversations that we have every right to engage with U.S.A. as much as we have with them.And so, I just want to inform Papua New Guineans in the first instance and the media, we’re trying to play out from this issue of China versus U.S.A.  The Secretary of State correctly has stated this has nothing to do with the bigger issues, the headline issues that keep on going off every now and then.  Papua New Guinea invited U.S.A. to move beyond just an ordinary agreement to a specifically defense-focused agreement.  In my view, that strengthens our Defence Force, and they will come in at the invitation of our Defence Force, and not at their own will.  That’s something that must be clear that everyone in the Pacific – upon our invitation, they come in.That is subsequently a question on when that needs to be done that dwarfs other agreements and other processes.  This is just a framework agreement that now (inaudible) this element of specific relationship with U.S.A. like we’ve never had before.  And I want to assure Papua New Guinea’s – particularly with China (inaudible) to do with our internal security issue to ensure that our military is now responsive to the challenges of 21st century, living in this part of Planet Earth.SECRETARY BLINKEN:  Thank you, Prime Minister.PRIME MINISTER MARAPE:  All right.SECRETARY BLINKEN:  And let me just say one last thing if I could.  The ocean that we share is called the Pacific.  And our ambition is for it to remain exactly that: an ocean of peace.  That’s what we’re looking to do together.PRIME MINISTER MARAPE:  All right.  Thank you very much.MR PATEL:  Thanks, everyone (inaudible).