(C) Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty This story was originally published by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and is unaltered. . . . . . . . . . . Department Press Briefing – June 26, 2024 [1] [] Date: 2024-06 1:30 p.m. EDT MR MILLER: Good afternoon. Sorry to be a few minutes late. I’ll just start with a couple things. Earlier today, Evan Gershkovich appeared in a courtroom in Yekaterinburg, Russia. We have been clear from the start that journalism is not a crime, and that Evan should never have been detained in the first place. What happened today was a performance put on by Russian authorities to justify their repression of journalists and independent voices. Embassy Moscow officials were granted brief access to the courtroom before proceedings began. However, they were not permitted to speak to Evan. Russia should stop using individuals like Evan Gershkovich and Paul Whelan as bargaining chips. They should both be released immediately. And I can attest to both Evan and Paul and their families that the United States will not rest until we have brought both of them home. And then on one note just much closer to home, so this is the last week of Nathan Tek, the deputy spokesperson who is ending his tour in the spokesperson’s office at the end of the week, and moving on to hopefully greener pastures. He has been – (applause) – agreed, agreed. Nathan has been an absolute joy to work with, one of the people that makes this place really work, does a lot of hard things, and makes them look easy. And I have appreciated him, appreciated all his efforts on behalf of the spokesperson’s office, and wish him well in his next endeavors. So thank you, Nathan. And with that, Matt. QUESTION: Right, sorry, I was late, so I’ll defer to colleagues. QUESTION: Can we just follow up on Evan — MR MILLER: Sure. QUESTION: — while you started with that? Given officials in the Biden Administration have said once a trial begins it’s not highly likely that there will be a deal to secure that person’s release, now that we’re seeing this trial begin, what do you guys expect in terms of the likelihood of any deal coming to fruition in the near term here? MR MILLER: I don’t want to make any kind of public assessment or speak to negotiations that happen, of course, in private. We have been working to bring both Evan and Paul home since they were detained. And as we’ve said, we put – have put a significant offer on the table some months ago. We continue to work privately to try to secure their release. We shouldn’t have to do that. They should both be released immediately, but we will continue our efforts. Those have been happening before Evan’s trial, they will continue during the trial. And should he be convicted – which, of course, he will be, it’s not a free trial – they will continue after the trial. But we want to see him returned home immediately. QUESTION: And that significant offer that you guys have repeatedly referred to that was put on the table months ago, has that offer been re-upped in any way, or changed and put back on the table in any way, or are we still standing at that singular offer that you guys keep pointing back to? MR MILLER: I just don’t want to speak to this in public. I don’t want to negotiate in public. I’ve seen that Russian officials have made comments about this matter in recent days, and I don’t want to respond to those, either. We are working day and night to try to secure the release of both Evan and Paul, and that will continue. QUESTION: Just to follow up – if I understand correctly, the embassy officials were ushered out prior to the — MR MILLER: They were there before the start of the hearing. They were not allowed to attend the hearing itself. QUESTION: What can you tell us about his condition? We all saw his pictures from this glass – behind the glass cage. Where is he being held right now, during the trial? MR MILLER: I can follow up with that off – I don’t have it here at the podium. I can follow up with where he’s being held off — QUESTION: Did the embassy officials have a chance to interact with him? MR MILLER: They did not. I said that in my opening statements. QUESTION: And I know you guys don’t typically get into politics from this podium, but given that it directly intersects with your efforts to secure Evan, the former President Trump, who is now the Republican nominee, said earlier that Evan would be released prior to him taking office if he wins the election on November 5th. Is that – is there any legitimacy to that claim, as far as this building knows? MR MILLER: So I am not going to deal with comments made in a political context in a political campaign. But I would note that I would hope that every American who cares about the safety and security of their fellow American citizens would demand the release of Evan and Paul now – not November, not December, not January, but now. That ought to be the position of every American, because I would hope that every American citizen wants to see these two wrongfully-detained Americans return home immediately. Yes, Janne? QUESTION: Thank you very much, and two questions. North Korea has launched another ballistic missiles on yesterday morning, and following the spray of garbage balloons into South Korea. Due to the impact of these trash balloons, operation at Incheon International Airport are being disrupted, and flight cancellation occurred. What comment can you make on this? MR MILLER: We continue to call on the DPRK to refrain from these provocative actions, and return to diplomacy. QUESTION: And Russian deputy foreign minister said that South Korea must retaliate North Korea and Russia recent agreement. On the other hand, it was announced that the North Korean workers would be dispatched to reconstruction for Donetsk, Ukraine. How do you view this? MR MILLER: So I don’t have any specific comment on that. I had not seen that report. But obviously, we have been quite concerned about the burgeoning relationship between North Korea and Russia. Obviously, Donetsk is part of Ukraine, not part of Russia. And so any kind of increased cooperation between those two countries when it relates to activities on occupied Ukrainian territory is something that we would oppose. QUESTION: Thank you. MR MILLER: So, yeah. QUESTION: Moving on to Julian Assange. Now that he’s free and in Australia, are you satisfied with the outcome of this, and that – and can you give us any details on the diplomatic negotiations that you – that went ongoing between Australia, and U.S., UK, and all that? Give us any light on that? MR MILLER: Yeah. So with respect to the first question, I’m not going to have any comment, only because under our system we have an independent Justice Department that makes its own decisions on these matters, and it’s appropriate that they be the ones that speak to them, and not have other departments in the United States weighing in one way or the other. That has always been our – the case, but of course we have confidence in our colleagues at the Justice Department to make these decisions, and make them in full – with the full interests of the United States in mind. As it pertains to involvement of the State Department, I can tell you it was very limited, only in the last few days. This was a matter that was handled by the Justice Department through law enforcement channels. There was some small coordination role between our embassy and the Australian Government, just in the past few days. But this was, other than that, a law enforcement matter handled through law enforcement channels. QUESTION: But are you satisfied that the case is over? MR MILLER: So look, the Justice Department has spoken to that, and I don’t have anything to add. Obviously, the ambassador put out a statement that said we were happy to work with our Australian colleagues on it, and that remains the case. I do think it is important, when we talk about Julian Assange, to remind the world that the actions for which he was indicted and for which he has now pled guilty are actions that put the lives of our partners, our allies, and our diplomats at risk, especially those who work in dangerous places like Afghanistan and Iraq. This was some years ago now, almost 15 years ago, so I think the world has forgotten much of it, but if you recall when WikiLeaks first disseminated and published State Department documents, State Department cables, they did so without redacting names; they just threw them out there for the world to see. And so the documents they published gave identifying information of individuals who were in contact with the State Department. That included opposition leaders, human rights activists around the world whose positions were put in some danger because of their public disclosure. It also chilled the ability of American personnel to build relationships and have frank conversations with them. And at the time, those of you who covered the State Department at the time will probably remember that in the days leading up to that release, the State Department really had to scramble to get people out of danger, to move them out of harm’s way. It was an extraordinary effort performed by dozens of government officials around the world, but that doesn’t change the danger that those actions put innocent people all around the world in through no fault of their own. And that’s, of course, not even to mention the further actions by WikiLeaks down the road to essentially serve as a conduit for Russian intelligence interfering in a U.S. presidential election. QUESTION: Can I follow up on that? QUESTION: Sorry, Matt, so I actually did cover the State Department back then. And I don’t remember there being any public – there was a public concern that was raised about the potential security risks posed to sources who might have been quoted. Was there actually any? Did you ever discover anyone who was injured, killed, had to go into hiding because of them? MR MILLER: So a few things about that. One, I can’t give you a definitive answer, only because I wasn’t here at the time and so much time – and so — QUESTION: Okay, but you said (inaudible) — MR MILLER: Hold on, so – hold on, no, but – but – Matt, let me finish; I have a full answer on it. One, I can’t speak to that because it was some years ago and I don’t have a full accounting of what happened. But number two, the State Department did an extraordinary amount of work when we found out that these cables were going to be published to get people out of harm’s way, to go around and look at what might become public and take action so people that would be put in danger would be put out of harm’s way. But third, if you drive drunk down the street and get pulled over for drunk driving, the fact that you didn’t crash into another car and kill someone doesn’t get you out of the reckless actions and the endangerment that you put your fellow citizens in. And it’s the same thing – same principle applies here. QUESTION: Right. Well, I – and I don’t think that it does. But the fact of the matter is that the State Department has been – at least as far as I know, and maybe I’m wrong, but – has been – has never been able to point to anyone who was compromised, or killed, or put at risk because of this. MR MILLER: Their identities were compromised. QUESTION: Well – MR MILLER: The State Department went to great work to get people out of harm’s way to prevent that very action from happening. QUESTION: Do you know what – do you know how many people, about? MR MILLER: As I said, this was some time ago; I was in the government at the time, not at the State Department, and I’d have to go back and look at it. But I do know there was work around the world, especially in places like Afghanistan, Iraq, and other places around the world where they did have to do a great amount of work to kind of move people out of harm’s way. QUESTION: Well, one of your predecessors, PJ Crowley, went to – who was the – standing at the podium at the time – went to great pains to talk about the potential damage that could or would be caused by these revelations. And I – unless I missed it, I didn’t hear that there was any. MR MILLER: As I said, number one, the department went to a great amount of effort to avoid people being put in harm’s way. But it doesn’t absolve anyone of their — QUESTION: I’m saying — MR MILLER: I know, but it’s — QUESTION: I’m not saying — MR MILLER: But – I know you’re not, but it’s an important point. Just because people were able to mitigate the harm done by your actions, that doesn’t absolve you of your actions in the first place. QUESTION: Okay. MR MILLER: Shannon, go ahead. QUESTION: Oh, I’m sorry. MR MILLER: Oh, yeah. QUESTION: Just one other thing you said. You said there was some small coordination between the U.S. and Australia over the last couple of days. Was that involving the flight, or — MR MILLER: Just with – it was with relation to his landing and transfer in Australia, yeah. QUESTION: Can I ask you a follow-up? It said in the agreement — MR MILLER: Sure. QUESTION: — that Mr. Assange would not be able to enter the United States without permission. Who will he be seeking permission from? Who would grant that permission, and how would that happen if that were to occur? MR MILLER: It would – so I’m not going to speak to provisions in what was a Justice Department plea agreement. But that would be handled, as is the case for anyone seeking permission to enter the United States. QUESTION: And in the judgment, the sentencing part of the judgment, the judge noted that there were no victims of Mr. Assange’s behavior, which is part of the reason that the sentence was what it was. Do you disagree with that? Do you think there were victims of his actions? MR MILLER: I’m not going to speak to a comment made by a judge in a ruling. It would never be appropriate for me to do so. But I stand by the comments I made just a moment ago. QUESTION: What? MR MILLER: Hm? QUESTION: What do you mean you’re not going to speak to a comment made by a judge? I mean, if he – if he – I don’t know that he did, but that’s exactly the point of my question. MR MILLER: Yeah. I’m not – I’m — QUESTION: Questions earlier. Which is that the State Department has never come up – even though it was one of the prime, quote/unquote, “victims” of these leaks – was never able to identify anyone who came under – who was killed or came under – came under danger. MR MILLER: I think the – I think the point I made a moment ago is an appropriate response to that, which is just because the State Department was able to take actions to keep people out of harm’s way, people that he put in harm’s way, doesn’t absolve responsibility. QUESTION: Okay. So tell us what actions – what actions did the State Department take? MR MILLER: They were able – the State Department at the time was able to reach out to individuals whose names were going to be — QUESTION: How many? MR MILLER: I can’t tell you that. It’s almost 15 years ago, Matt. I wasn’t here. QUESTION: Well, I know. But I mean — MR MILLER: But I – but I know – but I can — QUESTION: The case has just come to a close. You would think someone with that — MR MILLER: But I – I cannot give you a full accounting of something that happened almost 15 years ago. But people that were here will tell you that the State Department went to great lengths to reach out to people whose identities were exposed and get them out of harm’s way. And the other point I made is that it does – when something like that happens, it does chill the ability of American personnel to build relationships with people and count on — QUESTION: No doubt. MR MILLER: — count on the fact that the information they provide us will be held confidential. QUESTION: No doubt. MR MILLER: So it is not just a harm to – or potential harm to the safety and security of those individuals. It’s a harm to American diplomacy. QUESTION: No doubt. But the fact of the matter is that you have not been – ever been able to identify anything tangible about – any tangible negative effect. MR MILLER: That is a different – I think I just did point to a tangible negative effect when it had – when people are less willing to trust the United States Government to keep information secret. QUESTION: Okay. Well, give me an example of that. Who was willing to blab (inaudible). MR MILLER: It was a – so I was in – I was in government at the time, and I can tell you traveling the world with a different — QUESTION: Okay. So — MR MILLER: — a different agency, we often heard from foreign counterparts that they were – I’m obviously not going to speak to — QUESTION: So who? MR MILLER: I’m not going to speak to the exact conversations. But we often heard from foreign counterparts that they were worried about providing information to the United States Government because of our ability to keep it to a secret. QUESTION: Okay. Well, I remember number one, having been here at the time. And I remember that Berlusconi told former Secretary Clinton that he was concerned, mainly because of what the Wikileaks – what the cables suggested about his activities in — MR MILLER: Activities. There were — QUESTION: His lifestyle. MR MILLER: Yeah. There were more — QUESTION: Yes. MR MILLER: There were more substantive and serious concerns, yeah. QUESTION: But were there? Okay. MR MILLER: Yeah. Yeah. The race. QUESTION: Can you – can you name a — MR MILLER: I’m — QUESTION: Not a person, but a country. MR MILLER: So I think you could see why, if the point of the conversation is someone raising concerns about private conversations being made public, it wouldn’t be helpful for me to then make those private conversations public in response to a question at this podium. QUESTION: Well, you just said it was 15 years ago. MR MILLER: Yeah. QUESTION: I’ll drop it. MR MILLER: (Laughter.) Go ahead, Alex. QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. A couple questions on Russia and then I have some on — MR MILLER: Yeah. QUESTION: There are multiple reports claiming that Russian Government plane was headed to New York this morning. Are you in a position to confirm it? What are they doing here? It’s the first time since last year. MR MILLER: I don’t – I’m not able to confirm those reports. I don’t have any information about it at all. QUESTION: Take it for me if possible. MR MILLER: This is not the FAA, Alex, so – (laughter.) QUESTION: Okay. How about the phone call between Moscow – between Russia and U.S. defense ministers yesterday? MR MILLER: I’m sorry, what’s – what — QUESTION: Yesterday’s phone call to Moscow. Why did the administration feel the need to make that phone call yesterday, on the same day when ICC issued an arrest warrant against — MR MILLER: Why did who feel the need to make a phone call? QUESTION: I mean, the Secretary of Defense called — MR MILLER: It’s a question you should direct to the Secretary of Defense or the Pentagon, not to the State Department. QUESTION: Okay. But is there any change in administration policy in terms of discussing Ukraine without Ukraine? MR MILLER: There – of course there’s not. But with respect to questions about calls made by other agencies, especially agencies that hold public briefings, you should go to their public briefings and ask them. QUESTION: Do you have any concern about timing of it? Because yesterday was — MR MILLER: Of course not. Of course not. Of course not. QUESTION: And on the South Caucasus — MR MILLER: Yeah. QUESTION: — assistant secretary is headed to Azerbaijan. He was in Yerevan two weeks ago. He was in Georgia last month. Why having these visits separately to these capitals? Do you guys have (inaudible) — MR MILLER: We continue to engage in diplomacy to resolve a number of the outstanding issues in that region; that’s something we’ve been working on for some time. The assistant secretary regularly travels there. Go ahead. QUESTION: Thanks. There was a Hill hearing today that singled out China’s growing influence in the hemisphere, specifically a mega port that’s being built in Peru set to launch later this year. Is State concerned about China’s gaining a stronger foothold in the hemisphere, and what steps are you taking to counter it? MR MILLER: So we have long understood, and have spoken to this publicly, the fact that other countries are going to have relationships with China. They’re going to have diplomatic relationships with China. We’re going to have – they’re going to have economic relationships with China. That is no different than the United States. We have diplomatic and economic relationships with China. What we have always made clear to countries around the world, and this very much includes countries in our own hemisphere, is that they need to go into those relationships eyes wide open. And they need to understand that if they enter into agreements with China, they ought to ensure that those agreements have transparency, that they are in the best interests of their governments, and most importantly, in – on – in the people of their countries, and to make sure that they’ve – are – fully meet international standards. Nadia. QUESTION: Thank you. On Gaza, half a million people are facing catastrophic levels of hunger, especially in the north. And actually WFP is describing the situation as “full-blown famine.” So what exactly are you doing to pressurize or persuade or cajole the Israelis to make sure that this is not going to happen and not materialize in actually a full famine? MR MILLER: So we continue to work day and night. Our special envoy for Middle East humanitarian issues is back in the region today after being back for – in Washington for consultations around Minister Gallant’s visit. She’s back in the region, working on this exact issue today, trying to not just get humanitarian aid into Gaza but, most importantly, make sure it is distributed around Gaza. I think everyone is aware that that has been the chief impediment to actually getting food to the Palestinian people. It’s not getting aid into the pier. It’s not getting aid into Kerem Shalom. It’s then making sure that it can be distributed from those points onward. We have had a number of discussions between – or have been – I should say we have been involved in a number of discussions in the past few days between the various United Nations agencies and various components of the Israeli Government to try to work through some security challenges that the UN is currently facing to deliver humanitarian assistance. We continue to push to try to resolve their legitimate concerns about the safety and security of their personnel, and are continuing to push to try to get – to try to work through some asks that they have on the table pending with the Government of Israel to try to make it safer for their personnel to take humanitarian assistance and deliver it around to the people of Gaza. QUESTION: That was my follow-up, actually, because the UN said that Israel — MR MILLER: I anticipated that. QUESTION: (Laughter.) You read my mind. MR MILLER: No, or — QUESTION: That Israel – so you believe that actually the Israelis can improve the way that the UN agencies, especially their workers, are delivering the aid that could be met? MR MILLER: Yeah, there are a number of things that Israel – that Israel can do. I spoke to some of them yesterday. Some of them is to allow protective personnel equipment – protective personal equipment for UN workers. Some is to kind of increase communications between the IDF and COGAT and UN workers. And then there’s some other things, too, that the UN workers have asked for that I’m going to get into from this podium, but there is more that can be done. There are some of the requests where Israel has legitimate security concerns, and what we’re trying to do is broker agreements that give the UN personnel the assurances they need that they can offer – that they can operate securely while still protecting Israel’s legitimate security concerns. QUESTION: One last question is I’m sure you’ve seen these detailed reports that most of them have harrowing accounts of Palestinian prisoners being rounded up. Some of them are being sexually assaulted, shackled for hours, inhumane conditions; and that’s the description of Israeli human rights organizations like B’Tselem and others, and witnesses who are actually a part of the IDF who came and talked about what happened. So you often call Israel as an ally who you share values with. So how can the United States make sure that these things, which is obviously unacceptable for most democracies, that is not allowed to happen? What exactly are you doing? What the mechanism that you’re using to make sure that this is not happening? And if you’re investigating it yourself? MR MILLER: So with respect to any investigations, there are, as I’ve said before, a number of incidents that we are reviewing when it relates to potential human rights abuses, potential violations of the laws of war, and I’m not going to speak to any particular incident from here, But there are a number of incidents where we have reviews ongoing. But that said, apart – separate and apart from that, we have made clear to Israel that we fully expect them to comply with all human rights laws, international laws of war; that includes the treatment of prisoners and detainees. And when there are abuses, those ought to be investigated. If there – if accountability is appropriate, there ought to be accountability. And we’ll continue to make that clear to them. QUESTION: Can I follow on that, please? MR MILLER: Sure. Who was that? QUESTION: With the — MR MILLER: Who asked the question? QUESTION: Yeah, I wanted to follow on that. MR MILLER: Yeah. Go. Go. Sure. And that’s the – I will say that’s the last time today I’m going to do one without raising a hand, but go ahead. QUESTION: Oh, I apologize. I – it was a follow-on. MR MILLER: Yeah, go ahead. QUESTION: An investigation of the use of Palestinians as human shields or video that was on social media today about Israeli forces using attack dogs – you talk about investigations. Logistically, what does an investigation look like and when would we see results of that type of investigation? MR MILLER: So it depends whose investigation you’re speaking to. If you mean the reviews that are going on by the United States, there are personnel inside the State Department that conduct reviews with respect to the laws of war in this conflict, as we do in other places around the world. And I don’t speak to the – those reviews before they’re finalized, nor can I preview when they would – when they would be finished. But I – just to speak to some of the complexity that we face in launching those reviews – and it’s the same complexity I face sometimes in answering questions about this from the podium. So yesterday Doctors Without Borders put out a statement saying that a doctor who was a member of Doctors Without Borders was killed by an IDF strike while, I believe, on his way to work inside Gaza. I was asked about it at the podium. I said I can’t give you an assessment on that strike because I don’t know the details. Hours later the IDF put out a statement saying that, that particular doctor was also a terrorist member of Palestinian Islamic Jihad who was a member of their – a participant in their rocket program. I don’t have the ability to litigate that claim. We don’t at first blush often have the ability to litigate claims made by the different parties in this conflict. And so I know sometimes when I’m asked to pronounce judgment, it’s frustrating that we can’t do it. But that – the incident yesterday is the exact situation why oftentimes, in the middle of a conflict, it is difficult to draw definitive conclusions when there is conflicting information that we all face. So I will say as it pertains to our reviews, we collect information from all the relevant parties. As we said when we released a report on this matter some time ago, we have open inquiries to the Government of Israel asking for information about these specific incidents, and we’ll – those reviews will continue. QUESTION: Sorry, just the – do you have any reason to believe that the IDF claim is more credible than the MSF claim? MR MILLER: So both things can be true. What MSF claimed was that he was a doctor who was a member of MSF. QUESTION: Okay. MR MILLER: What Israel claimed is that — QUESTION: Are you saying that that’s wrong? MR MILLER: No, I’m not saying that’s wrong. QUESTION: Oh. MR MILLER: What Israel claimed is that he was a doctor who was a member of MSF who was also a terrorist involved in Palestinian Islamic Jihad’s rocket program. My point is — QUESTION: Okay. And then — MR MILLER: — neither of those are United States-verified information. So when I get asked about a strike — QUESTION: All right. Well, I’m familiar with the IDF claim. He was a doctor and he was also involved in the – in Hamas’s missile program? MR MILLER: Rocket program. QUESTION: Rocket program. MR MILLER: Rocket program. QUESTION: Yeah? MR MILLER: Yeah. QUESTION: How? MR MILLER: I don’t know. That – but that goes – no, no, that goes to my — QUESTION: Well, didn’t the IDF tell you? MR MILLER: They put out a statement on this. They – this goes to my — QUESTION: I mean, what does — MR MILLER: This goes to my exact point that you see claims made by various parties on the ground, and then oftentimes you see conflicting claims made by the IDF. We will reach out to our Israeli partners about the — QUESTION: There are plenty of instances — MR MILLER: We will – hold on. We will reach out to our Israeli partners for more information about these, but oftentimes when I’m asked for definitive conclusions about the specifics of a strike, we are operating on incomplete information and that’s why it’s frustrating as it is, is why can’t I offer a definitive conclusion about any one strike. QUESTION: Well, there are plenty of instances in history where physicians have been also criminals of some kind or whatever. MR MILLER: Yeah, that’s my – yeah. QUESTION: But you were just saying that – you’re just saying, well, MSF, which is a respectable organization; IDF, a respectable organization; but they have completely different views. So you guys need to come in and – in the middle and decide. Don’t you? MR MILLER: And that’s – that is what we do with respect to the ongoing assessments. That’s the point I was making – two points I was making. One, with respect to ongoing assessments, when you look at that information environment, sometimes that’s why it takes time to reach a definitive conclusion. Because things aren’t as simple as they appear at first blush, right? I get a question about it. QUESTION: I – I don’t know — MR MILLER: Hold on. I get a question about it yesterday. QUESTION: You don’t know. They could be as simple as they were at first blush. You just don’t – you don’t know. MR MILLER: Exactly right, and you don’t – you don’t know. The second thing is that’s why it’s hard oftentimes to give definitive answers when I get asked about this from the podium, because information changes; more information comes to light, and maybe that information is correct, maybe it’s not. We try to gather it and make definitive determinations. QUESTION: But Matt, don’t you make assessment to other countries when you don’t have equally same information, whether it’s Iran, whether it is China, whether even an ally, Russia, Ukraine, or others? So is it just with Israel — MR MILLER: No. QUESTION: — that you’re always unable to make the conclusive results? MR MILLER: No. QUESTION: Or is it just because you don’t have the information? MR MILLER: So first of all, I would say there are times when it is quite obvious what happened and we do make specific determinations very quickly. So look at the World Central Kitchen strike, where it’s quite obvious within a few hours, within certainly the first 24 hours, what happened and that it was a mistaken strike, and we spoke to that exactly. Other times it is less clear. So that’s the first thing. But then I would say with respect to Israel, as with any other country, we make determinations based on the information that’s available to us. We reach out in this case to NGOs and others who are on the ground, and we reach out to the Government of Israel when trying to make assessments about individual strikes before making any definitive conclusions. QUESTION: But you do accept at least what both sides agree on, that this person was a doctor? MR MILLER: I have no reason to dispute that, both – I have no reason to dispute at all that he was a doctor. QUESTION: And to be clear — QUESTION: Sorry. MR MILLER: Yeah. QUESTION: And – (laughter). MR MILLER: That’s funny. (Laughter.) QUESTION: Sorry. Well – and to be clear, you have explicitly asked Israel for evidence that this doctor was involved in Hamas’s rocket program? MR MILLER: I don’t know if we have in – with – as pertains to this strike. We often do — QUESTION: Will you? MR MILLER: It is – no, hold on a second. We often do when it comes to strikes like these, when there are claims of human rights abuses or claims of civilian casualties. It is regular practice for us to do so through our embassy in Jerusalem. I can’t say we’ve done so in this case, but it would be normal practice for us to have done so. I just don’t – haven’t verified that we did in this one specific one, or that we’re not doing it in the coming days. But it would be our standard practice to do so, yes. QUESTION: Can I follow up on this? MR MILLER: Simon. QUESTION: Can we move to Kenya? MR MILLER: Sure. QUESTION: I’m sure we can – we can move back later. So according to the White House you’ve – the administration has been in touch with the Kenyan Government after the shootings of protesters yesterday. You’ve expressed concern about the violence. But since then, Kenya has withdrawn the bill that was being discussed. Is that something that you – that the U.S. sort of pushed for or welcomes? MR MILLER: So I won’t speak to the withdrawing of the bill. That ultimately is a matter for the Kenyan Government to determine. I will say that in our conversations with the Kenyan Government, what we did is tell them that the freedom of peaceful assembly and habeas corpus are rights that are enshrined in the Kenyan constitution, and we urge them to ensure that the Kenyan security forces use non-lethal methods and prevent civilian harm in responding to any security concerns. QUESTION: Yesterday, and I think in the White House comments today, it talked about reports of violence against protesters. It sounds like you have a little bit more of a solid conclusion. Like, do you have a – like, an understanding of what actually happened? MR MILLER: Yeah, we’ve seen well-documented reports of violence against protesters, and what we have said is in our – in our conversation with that – with the Kenyan Government is that they should use non-lethal methods and prevent civilian harm in dealing with peaceful protests. QUESTION: And this is the same country that has obviously sent police to Haiti for this Multinational Security Support mission. Does that raise concerns to you about – if you’ve got those particular concerns about how Kenyan security forces are operating inside their country, should we be concerned about how they’re going to operate now in Haiti as well? MR MILLER: So a few things with respect to that. Number one, all MSS Mission personnel both from Kenya and from other countries that we expect to participate in the MSS receive pre-deployment training that is in accordance with UN training standards for similar UN missions, including training on human rights, child protection, countering sexual and gender-based violence. We’ve also worked with Kenya and other partners to integrate critically important accountability and oversight measures in accordance with the authorizing UN Security Council resolution; and that includes operating in the highest standards of transparency, conduct, and discipline, and includes compliance mechanisms to prevent, investigate, address, and publicly report any violations or abuses of human rights related to the MSS Mission. So we have both working with the UN and others worked to establish training on the front end and then to ensure transparency and accountability for any alleged abuses on the back end should they occur. QUESTION: Who has oversight over that mission? MR MILLER: The United Nations, ultimately. It’s a United Nations Security Council-authorized mission. Shannon. QUESTION: Also on Kenya, President Ruto claimed that organized crime groups infiltrated those protests. Is that a claim that they’ve also repeated in your private conversations? And also, do you see any validity that that happened? MR MILLER: So I’m not going to speak to private conversations and I can’t assess the validity of that or not. I would say, in addition to the point I made about restraint by Kenyan security forces, we do urge Kenyan protesters not to put anyone, including government officials, in harm’s way. Protests should remain peaceful in Kenya, as they should remain peaceful all around the world. Yeah, Guita. QUESTION: This morning the Secretary released the 2023 International – freedom – Religious Freedom Report, where there is a considerable chapter on Iran. Today is also the International Day in Support of Victims of Torture, which is – torture is rampant in Iranian jails per your own annual reports on human rights in Iran. On Tuesday, yesterday, a group of political prisoners in Iran, they called – they asked that the world pay more attention to the human rights situation in Iran, especially in view of the recent comment by Ali Khamenei that – among the officials of the judiciary system he was saying ignore international or Western – quote/unquote “Western” human rights standards, and only national laws apply. And I was wondering, besides sanctions against Iranian officials, what other alternatives do you have to try to secure Iranian people’s human rights? MR MILLER: So first of all, we absolutely agree that the world should pay more attention to the oppression of the Iranian people, and one of the things that we have done since the outset of this administration is to work to highlight human rights abuses inside Iran, highlight crackdowns on the freedom of the Iranian people. And we do that not just through our bilateral engagements around the world; we do it through public reports that we issue – you referred to one of them – and we also do it working through international fora, where we consistently raise the regime’s brutal crackdown and brutal repression of the Iranian people and encourage other countries to raise their voices and object to it publicly and object to it privately. We also take measures to ensure that the Iranian people can stay connected to the outside world. We’ve talked before – you’ve heard me talk before from this podium – about what we have done to ensure that they have access to the internet through VPNs so they – the Iranian people can find out from independent news sources outside Iran more about what their government is doing. And then I do think the measures that we impose, the accountability measures that we impose, are important. We can – we have imposed more than – I believe it’s 600 sanctions and other measures on Iran and Iran-related entities since the outset of this administration. Some of those are for their support for terrorism and other destabilizing actions, but a number of them are for their oppression of the Iranian people, and we will continue to take those actions as appropriate. QUESTION: But Matt, sanctions don’t – are not helping people. MR MILLER: Well, so my point is sanctions are just one of the tools in our arsenal. Ultimately, calling out that oppression, making sure other countries focus on it – and we wish more countries would. Let’s be perfectly frank. It would be – we would welcome other countries objecting to the brutal crackdowns of the Iranian people. We see some, of course, and to that statement, yes, a lot of them are in the Western world. We would welcome every country in the world speaking out against Iran’s brutal crackdowns. And as I said, we also work to support the Iranian people, and those are the measures that we have available to us, and we will continue to use them. QUESTION: Well, clearly they are not going to listen, as Khamenei has said to ignore — MR MILLER: I certainly don’t think the regime in Tehran is going to listen, but as I said, we’re going to continue to try to make sure the Iranian people can also get information from outside sources, and we support the Iranian people in their rights to exercise their freedom of expression and other basic rights available to them. QUESTION: (Off-mike.) MR MILLER: Go ahead. QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. Staying on religious freedom, in your report, in Iraqi section it says that restrictions on freedom of religion remain widespread outside of Kurdistan but in some parts of the Iraq, and also there are continued reports of violence by the armed groups, sectarian groups, like Iranian-backed groups on the religious minority in Iraq, especially in Sinjar, the people – Yezidi people – they fear to go back to their region because of these groups. So what tools and what measures do you have and have you put in place against these groups in order to take their — MR MILLER: So first of all, when it comes to the report that we released today, I’m not going to be able to give you a detailed answer as pertains to what’s in the report. It’s a long, detailed report, covers scores of countries around the world, and I’m not an expert who can speak to every piece of information that was in the report. I will say the report itself is a – the point of the report itself is to make information public. It is not a – it is not the vehicle through which we impose accountability measures. It is the vehicle that informs the policy choices that we make. So it is one of the things that we do to gather information, to make that information public, and then we take into account all of the information that’s in the report to inform the policy choices, none of which I’m going to preview from here. QUESTION: Yeah, another question on the Kurdistan region. After – after a long postponement, today the Kurdistan Regional President Nechirvan Barzani set October 20th as the new date for the Kurdistan region’s election. As the U.S. Government were engaged and so encouraged the Kurdistan region to schedule a date for that election, so what’s your comment on that? And how do you see the process of preparation for that election and also the recent change to the election in that region? MR MILLER: So we welcome the announcement of parliamentary elections on October 20th in the Iraqi Kurdistan Region. Elections are a vital element of the democratic process, and we expect the authorities to ensure that they are free, transparent, and occur without further delay. And we appreciate the Iraqi Kurdistan Region’s president’s efforts to reach agreement between all parties. QUESTION: Following — MR MILLER: Go ahead. QUESTION: Thank you, sir. Sir, the — QUESTION: Kurdistan election? MR MILLER: Go ahead. QUESTION: The members of – the member of foreign – Senate Foreign Relations Committee wrote a letter to Secretary Blinken calling for a strong diplomatic response on Indian Government’s involvement in assassination attempt on a U.S. citizen at U.S. soil. They’re also asking for a briefing on this matter. What is your response on this? MR MILLER: So we will respond to those members privately, as we always do. I won’t speak to that here. But as pertains to the other issue, when this issue first arose, we made clear that we had raised it with the Government of India and told them that we expected there to be a full investigation. They have announced that they are conducting an inquiry, and we will look forward to the results of that inquiry. QUESTION: Sir, U.S. lawmakers yesterday passed a resolution supporting democracy in Pakistan. In a significant bipartisan support, U.S. lawmakers urged Biden administration to collaborate with Pakistan in upholding democracy, human rights, and rule of law. Any comments on that? MR MILLER: So I’m not going to comment on that resolution specifically, but speaking generally, our most senior officials – including Secretary Blinken and Ambassador Blome – have consistently both privately and publicly urged Pakistan to respect the rights of its people and live with its constitutional and international obligations. We continuously urge the Government of Pakistan to respect human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the freedoms of expression, association, peaceful assembly, and religion, as well as the rights of marginalized populations such as women and religious minorities. Go ahead. QUESTION: Yeah. About Kurdistan parliamentary elections, how do you expect the elections to be conducted and what steps will you take to ensure their success? MR MILLER: I don’t have anything to speak to – I don’t have anything to add beyond the comment that I gave a moment ago. Elections are obviously a vital, important part of the democratic process, and we welcome the announcement of parliamentary elections on October 20th. So, go ahead. QUESTION: Thank you. QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. So I just wanted to ask about the IRF Report in regards to China. Secretary Blinken said that religious freedom is the worst it’s been, citing a Pew Research poll, study that says it’s the worst it’s been since 2001 when it first started recording. In China, the House just passed a bill yesterday called the Falun Gong Protection Act, which would sanction any individual involved in forced organ harvesting related to the Chinese Government. It would – so it would also stop the U.S. from cooperating with China in the organ transplant field. What further measures does the State Department have in countering the forced organ harvesting by the Chinese regime? MR MILLER: So let me take that comment back and get you a – let me take that back and get you a comment. QUESTION: Sorry, is the IRF Report out? MR MILLER: Hey. I believe it’s out. The Secretary did a public event earlier today. It’s — QUESTION: We haven’t received it. MR MILLER: It should be released. QUESTION: It’s posted online. MR MILLER: Yeah, I think it’s posted online. QUESTION: Ah, okay. MR MILLER: So — QUESTION: I don’t think it was sent to — MR MILLER: My apologies if that’s correct, and I have no reason to doubt it is, but we will – we will get it to you, Simon. QUESTION: It’s all redacted. (Laughter.) QUESTION: All right, thank you, sir. Two questions, please. One is as far as talking about democracy and U.S.-India relations, a lot of analysis were going on as far as this largest elections on the globe with 700+ million people went to the polls in India, and by the Indian American community here, and also analysis in Indian press. What they are saying is that many groups and people here in the U.S., they undermined the democracy of India, that they want to break the democracy or the government there. What happened, a lot of people here, they have admitted that they have sent a lot of money from here, including a billionaire, to defeat Prime Minister Modi or undermine the democracy in India. What I’m asking you here, do we follow all these things as far as largest democracy, India, and the oldest democracy, the United States of America? And so many reports also have come out and are going through so many ups and downs between the two countries, but relations are great – greater. All the officials here and in India are talking about. So where do we stand about this in the future, as far as undermining the democracy in India because of some groups, they might not like or they hate something in India, or maybe Prime Minister Modi, or the democracy there? MR MILLER: So I can’t speak to the specific reports, I’m not – just not sure what they refer to. But I can tell you at – when it comes to the Indian elections, we have been quite clear on behalf of the United States Government that we celebrate what was the largest exercise of democracy in the history of the world. It was an extraordinary achievement. And then, when it comes to the outcome of the election, we obviously take no side, but that is a question for the people of India to decide. QUESTION: And thank you so much. And before I go, my second question, if I just follow quickly on this one, Prime Minister Modi said that he is a friend with every leader around the globe, and he has very good relations with the President Biden and the United States, and we have no ill of any kind with – against anybody. And I have never done anything wrong with anybody, and why they been doing this to me? That is what he said. But anyways, a statement. My second question is sir that as far as Afghanistan is concerned there will be now a UN women’s conference and summit on Afghanistan. And what they are saying now before the conference, that Taliban have broken their promise to the international global community they made, and the womens in Afghanistan – and there are girls – they cannot go to school, there is no freedom of press, there is no freedom of worship, nothing, and they are going through, really, a lot. And they are crying and they are helping – need a help, or asking help from the United States and from the global community to help them out. MR MILLER: So if this is a reference to the UN-led Doha III conference, which I know they just announced — QUESTION: Yes, sir. MR MILLER: — it’s – I’ll ultimately defer to the UN to talk about the details of the meeting. The U.S. will participate, both our Special Representative for Afghanistan, Tom West, and our Special Envoy for Afghan Women, Girls, and Human Rights, Rina Amiri, will be attending. They – but I should note they only committed to participate once they secured clarity regarding the substantive agenda and, more importantly, confirmed that there would be meaningful engagement at the conference with Afghan women and members of Afghan civil society. And so we will be participating in that conference because we take – we will continue, with the international community, to impress upon the Taliban that they need to take seriously their obligations under the Doha Agreement, and that includes with regards to the treatment of women and girls, which, of course, continues to be appalling. QUESTION: Thank you very much, sir. MR MILLER: Yeah. QUESTION: Thanks, Matthew. So I know you talked about Kenya, and that the U.S. is calling for the Kenyan forces to use non-lethal methods, but is the U.S. Government investigating reports of abductions by police during these protests in Kenya? MR MILLER: I just don’t have any further comment to make, other than what I already said about – with regards to this. QUESTION: Okay. And what’s the latest on the Gaza pier? MR MILLER: I would refer you to the Pentagon for that, but they have made clear over the last few days that the Gaza pier is operational, it is receiving aid. I think they had a number of reporters who were actually at the pier over the last couple days. So it’s operational. QUESTION: And is the U.S. concerned that Israel and Hizballah will fight a full-scale war? MR MILLER: We have made quite clear that we do not want to see further escalation, and we have been pursuing a diplomatic resolution to the situation along the Israel-Lebanese border. QUESTION: Thank you. QUESTION: Follow-up? MR MILLER: Yeah. QUESTION: Big debate tomorrow. Has the Secretary played any role whatsoever in debate prep? QUESTION: Which one is that? QUESTION: I know, it’s (inaudible). MR MILLER: No, he has not, he has not. No. QUESTION: Played no role? MR MILLER: No. Yeah? QUESTION: Just one final question. Do you have anything to say on the report of the U.S. diplomat who died at a hotel in Kyiv, reportedly? MR MILLER: I do, and so we can confirm the death of a U.S. Government employee who was under chief of mission authority at Embassy Kyiv. We extend our deepest condolences to the family and loved ones of our colleague. I don’t have any further comment about the situation, other than to say – and I hate to even bring this up, but I know sometimes conspiracy theories spin out of control – that it is our understanding that he died of natural causes, and there is no sign of foul play. And with that, we’re wrap for today. QUESTION: Wait. Wait. Quick, I just want to go back to the one thing – MR MILLER: Yeah. QUESTION: — that Kylie asked at the very beginning, when she asked of you about Trump’s comments on Evan Gershkovich. There is actual and alleged precedent for deals being tried to – for people trying to arrange deals for detainees going back years, decades. MR MILLER: Forty-five years – forty-four years, right. QUESTION: Nineteen eighty, seventy-nine? MR MILLER: Yeah, right. QUESTION: Yes? MR MILLER: Check my math. Yeah, good. QUESTION: Yeah, but not just that. There were also allegations — MR MILLER: Yeah. QUESTION: — that in 2016, that the Trump campaign was involved in trying to do some stuff behind the scenes with Israel and with Türkiye. And then there are also maybe non-political campaign-related things, Bill Richardson’s efforts and others of that ilk. Are you saying that – or are you discouraging any nongovernmental attempt to free Evan and Paul – Gershkovich and Paul Whelan? MR MILLER: A few things about that. We would welcome any productive efforts to secure the release of Evan and Paul. I’m not aware of any non-governmental efforts. I would hope that anyone pursuing such an effort would do it in coordination with the United States Government. As I said, I’m not aware of any now, but I think that would be an important principle. But the other principle I said I think is the most important thing, which is we want to see them released now, not any time down the road. QUESTION: Right, no, no, fair enough. But, I mean, but it doesn’t matter to you guys, but if there is such an effort going on, whether it is potentially politically motivated or not? MR MILLER: I think we — QUESTION: Or does it? MR MILLER: I would want to – we would want to see that effort fully coordinated with the United States Government. Besides that, I don’t think I want to go too far down the rabbit hole of hypotheticals. QUESTION: All right. Thank you. MR MILLER: So with that, we’ll wrap for today. Thanks. (The briefing was concluded at 2:19 p.m.) # # # [END] --- [1] Url: https://www.state.gov/briefings/department-press-briefing-june-26-2024/ Published and (C) by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty Content appears here under this condition or license: By permission of RFE/RL. via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds: gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/rferl/