State Dept Holds Press Briefing After Additional Ukraine Aid Dropped From Government Funding Stopgap
State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller holds a press briefing.
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00 I'd like to echo the President's disappointment that despite longstanding and strong bipartisan
00:06 support for Ukraine as it fights back against Russia's invasion, that the continuing resolution
00:11 that passed Congress on Saturday did not include desperately needed support.
00:16 Ukraine's resilience, courage, and determination have inspired the world.
00:20 The United States is proud to stand with more than 50 countries in helping Ukraine repel
00:25 the Russian invasion and secure its future.
00:28 While we have the ability to continue to support Ukraine's ability to defend itself in the
00:33 immediate term, we have already exhausted much of the existing security assistance funding.
00:38 It is imperative that Congress take action.
00:41 Strong majorities in both houses of Congress support continued assistance to Ukraine because
00:45 this is not simply about Ukraine.
00:47 It is about the world we want to live in.
00:50 If we allow authoritarians like President Putin to do whatever they want to other sovereign
00:54 countries, then the whole UN Charter will be shredded and we are going to live in a
00:58 world where this kind of aggression can happen anywhere, anytime.
01:03 That would be far more expensive for the American people and far more dangerous for the American
01:07 people.
01:08 We must continue to put Ukraine in the strongest possible position to defend itself.
01:12 That means supporting them now while also transitioning to a more long-term posture
01:17 in which its people can rebuild and live safely in a resilient and thriving democracy fully
01:22 integrated with Europe.
01:23 We cannot, under any circumstances, allow America's support for Ukraine to be interrupted.
01:28 Our allies, our adversaries, and the world will be watching.
01:32 That – Matt?
01:33 QUESTION: That was it?
01:34 I thought you said you had a couple of things.
01:36 MR PRICE: I could – I'm sure I could --
01:37 QUESTION: You could go on?
01:38 MR PRICE: I'm sure I could talk – we could talk about it.
01:40 QUESTION: Okay.
01:41 All right.
01:42 But you're still convinced that Ukraine funding will come through at some point, right?
01:48 MR PRICE: Yeah.
01:49 As the President made clear, he does believe it will come through.
01:51 We think it's important that Congress act.
01:53 QUESTION: Can I ask you about another thing that wasn't in the CR, and that is PEPFAR?
01:58 What's your understanding of funding for that, which has been hailed by both sides
02:07 of the aisle as being one of the greatest foreign policy and public health achievements
02:12 for the last 20 years?
02:15 MR PRICE: Yeah.
02:16 So in the short term, PEPFAR will be able to continue providing the lifesaving prevention,
02:21 care, and treatment services in partnership with PEPFAR-supported countries.
02:26 However, the fact that Congress did not reauthorize the program sends a message to partners around
02:30 the world, especially in Africa, that we are backing down from our leadership in ending
02:35 HIV/AIDS as a public health threat.
02:38 The Biden administration remains supportive of five-year clean PEPFAR reauthorization.
02:41 So we can continue the work – we can continue the work now, but we do need in the long term
02:47 a reauthorization.
02:48 QUESTION: Well, now for how long?
02:49 MR PRICE: So this was an authorization – the authorization of certain programs has expired.
02:55 We're still figuring out exactly what that means.
02:57 There's some appropriations that have continued.
02:59 So we're going to work through it.
03:02 But the program can continue in – for now, as we work through it.
03:07 QUESTION: Well, yeah, but for now, what, like in – for three days or a week or two weeks?
03:11 MR PRICE: I don't have a timetable.
03:12 We're going to work through it and work through it with Congress and call on them
03:15 to reauthorize the program long term.
03:17 QUESTION: And does it need to be reauthorized?
03:19 Well, when is the, like, the drop-dead deadline that, like, it – there won't be any money
03:24 left for it?
03:25 MR PRICE: I'd have to get back to you on the drop-dead deadline.
03:27 But it's --
03:28 QUESTION: So no one has thought – no one has thought to look at it?
03:31 MR PRICE: We are continuing to work through the question with Congress.
03:34 But we are able to keep the program running for now.
03:37 QUESTION: All right.
03:38 Thanks.
03:39 MR PRICE: Go ahead, Will.
03:40 QUESTION: Back to Ukraine aid, on the direct budgetary assistance that the U.S. provides
03:46 to Ukraine, wondering how long that would be able to continue without anything in the
03:52 CR and what's the importance of that?
03:55 MR PRICE: So I'm not able to put a timetable on it.
03:57 I would refer you to the Pentagon – my colleagues at the Pentagon to answer that question, because
04:01 ultimately, it relates to Pentagon drawdown authority.
04:05 I will say that while we have some remaining drawdown authority that we can draw to continue
04:11 to provide security assistance to Ukraine in the short term – in fact, we have another
04:15 drawdown package coming in the coming days – USAI funding has been suspended, FMF funding
04:22 has been suspended.
04:23 Those are the contracting programs that allow us to contract for Ukraine's in the long
04:28 term.
04:29 So we're not able to do that without further action by Congress.
04:32 And so we are calling on Congress to fully fund our request to support Ukraine's short
04:38 and long-term security assistance, and also to allow the Pentagon to refill depleted Pentagon
04:45 stocks, which is something that they're not able to do without further action.
04:48 QUESTION: But also going to the – beyond the Pentagon, to the economic side, to the
04:52 direct government aid that provided to the Ukrainian Government through USAID and other
04:58 mechanisms.
04:59 MR PRICE: We are continuing – the vast majority of that funding has lapsed.
05:03 We are continuing to work through what we can continue to provide to Ukraine, but it
05:07 is important that Congress take action.
05:09 Yeah.
05:10 Go ahead.
05:11 QUESTION: Matt, could you expand on what has been said, how that message has been delivered
05:16 on that direct budget support in terms of what measures the Ukrainians need to take
05:22 to root out and fight corruption to maintain that support?
05:27 MR PRICE: So we have been very clear and direct with our Ukrainian counterparts on this question.
05:34 This is a question that obviously goes back to before the full-scale Russian invasion,
05:38 where we have been working with Ukraine to urge them to root out corruption and talking
05:44 about best practices they could rely on for tackling corruption.
05:48 That conversation has continued.
05:50 It has continued as recently as the Secretary's visit, when we talked through these issues
05:56 directly with President Zelensky, with others in the Ukrainian Government.
06:00 And I will say that we have seen Ukraine take aggressive action, and that includes aggressive
06:05 action as recently as the past few weeks to tackle corruption, and we welcome them continuing
06:10 to take these steps.
06:11 I will say oftentimes I see this get portrayed as about – as something Ukraine needs to
06:17 do to win support from Western allies and ultimately fulfill its European aspirations
06:22 to become a member of the EU, and certainly that is true.
06:26 You see members of Congress saying they want to see Ukraine take anti-corruption actions,
06:31 so it's important that Ukraine show them they are.
06:33 You see members of the EU saying they want that, and so it's important that Ukraine
06:36 show that they're taking those steps.
06:38 But it is also important for Ukraine's ability to build a long-term economy, a long-term
06:43 – that can sustain the type of effort we expect it to see.
06:49 And having – they are going to be a neighbor of Russia in perpetuity.
06:53 They need to have the economy that can kind of – that can support a security apparatus
06:58 that can deter future Russian aggression, and they can't do that if there is widespread
07:03 corruption at different – in different sectors of the economy.
07:06 QUESTION: But has there been a specific communication recently or series of communications saying
07:10 you will not get that direct support to your budget unless these specific measures are
07:15 taken?
07:16 MR.
07:17 RATHKE: I am not going to get into specific conversations other than to say that it continues
07:19 to be a high priority for us that we raise with our Ukrainian counterparts, and it continues
07:25 to be a priority for Ukraine.
07:28 And we have seen them take action in response to specific requests that we have made as
07:33 recently as the past few weeks.
07:34 QUESTION: So you say whether it's a condition or not of --
07:36 MR.
07:37 RATHKE: I just can't read out further any private diplomatic conversations.
07:39 QUESTION: On Ukraine, in addition to all of these headwinds that we've just been talking
07:44 about, Matt, we've been hearing from U.S. officials about the Kremlin perhaps sensing
07:49 an opportunity, maybe making a concerted effort to push propaganda through its intelligence
07:54 agencies, to undercut support for Ukraine aid and to fuel pro-Russian political parties
08:00 and sentiment wherever it can.
08:02 Does the State Department have a plan to counter the effects of an effort like that?
08:05 MR.
08:06 RATHKE: So it is something that we have been focused on since before the Russian full-scale
08:11 invasion even began.
08:13 I will say that we have found that the best way to combat Russian disinformation is with
08:19 transparency.
08:20 It's why you saw the Administration in the run-up to the full-scale invasion declassify
08:24 intelligence information, oftentimes not just about what Russia had done but what we expected
08:30 Russia to do, so we could ward off attempts by the Russian Government to mislead people
08:36 in Europe or people around the world.
08:38 And we will continue to do that.
08:40 It will continue to be a priority for us going forward.
08:44 QUESTION: Separately, but relatedly, looking at the election outcome in Slovakia, are you
08:49 aware of any Russian effort, messaging effort in that outcome?
08:54 And generally, do you have a comment on the outcome of those elections, which obviously
08:57 have implications for aid to Ukraine at least in that regard?
09:00 MR.
09:01 RATHKE: So with respect to Russian interference, we've seen the public reports of that.
09:05 We're not able to verify them ourselves.
09:07 We're in close contact with our Slovak counterparts about them.
09:11 In general, with respect to the election, I'll say Slovakia, of course, is a crucial
09:14 NATO ally, partner, and friend of the United States.
09:18 We will continue to work together with the government chosen by the Slovak people to
09:22 advance our shared goals and mutual interests.
09:24 And as I've said about a number of countries from this podium, the United States does not
09:28 take sides in foreign elections.
09:30 Our only interest is in a free and fair electoral process in accordance with Slovakia's longstanding
09:35 democratic tradition.
09:36 Go ahead.
09:37 QUESTION: Thank you, Matt.
09:38 On Russia and China and North Korea, the foreign ministers of North Korea and the Russians
09:48 will meet in Pyongyang this month, and there is a summit meeting between Chinese President
09:56 Xi Jinping and Russian President Putin in Beijing this month.
10:02 What impact do you think the solidarity between Russia and China and North Korea will have
10:10 on South Korea, U.S., and Japan?
10:12 MR.
10:13 RATHKE: So I would say that there's kind of a lot to unpack in that question.
10:18 But as it pertains to China, one of the things that we have urged in our conversations with
10:23 Chinese officials, something Secretary Blinken urged and other officials have urged, is that
10:28 China is uniquely positioned to use its influence with the DPRK, to urge the DPRK to take de-escalatory
10:34 steps, to urge the DPRK to return to diplomacy – all steps we, of course, do not see the
10:40 DPRK as willing to take.
10:43 But we will continue to encourage them to use that influence to the – any degree that
10:52 is possible and that they are willing to do.
10:54 With respect to Russia, we continue to be concerned about increased ties between Russia
10:57 and North Korea, especially as it comes to any potential transfer of weapons either from
11:02 DPRK – the DPRK to Russia or from Russia to the DPRK.
11:06 QUESTION: But Kim Jong-un declared that it would strengthen anti-United States solidarity.
11:15 China will also participate on this.
11:19 How can you comment on this?
11:21 Because Chinese is also support what Kim Jong-un said.
11:25 MR.
11:26 RATHKE: I don't have any further comment than what I just said.
11:28 Go ahead.
11:29 QUESTION: I'd like to ask you a question on Karabakh.
11:32 AFP had a team that was able to go into the capital of Karabakh, Stepanakert, and they
11:39 describe a absolute ghost town.
11:42 Obviously, we know tens of thousands of Armenians fled Karabakh.
11:49 The Armenians call it ethnic cleansing.
11:51 Does the United States abide by that qualification?
11:55 Do you think there was ethnic cleansing here in Karabakh?
11:57 MR.
11:58 RATHKE: So we take allegations of ethnic cleansing, genocide, or other atrocities seriously.
12:03 We are in touch with contacts on the ground about the situation.
12:08 We won't shy from taking appropriate actions to respond to allegations of atrocities and
12:12 promote accountability for those responsible for atrocities when we see evidence that they've
12:16 taken place.
12:17 But as always, the determination regarding genocide or ethnic cleansing is based on a
12:22 deliberate, evidence-based process.
12:24 It's not something I can speak to with any degree of finality from this podium.
12:29 QUESTION: But the region has been emptied of its civilian population?
12:33 MR.
12:34 RATHKE: It is certainly true that 100,000 – or I should say around 100,000 ethnic
12:38 Armenians have departed Nagorno-Karabakh for Armenia.
12:41 Now, we don't know – I don't think any of us can say whether – what percentage
12:45 of those plan to remain in Armenia permanently, what percentage of them may want to come back
12:52 if the conditions allowed, if they felt sufficient assurances about their treatment, if they
12:57 would return, which is why we are reiterating our call for an independent international
13:01 monitoring mission that would provide transparency and reassurance to the population of Nagorno-Karabakh
13:08 that the rights and securities of ethnic Armenians would be protected, particularly for any of
13:13 those that wish to return.
13:15 Azerbaijan has made those assurances.
13:17 We think there ought to be an international monitoring mission there to observe and guarantee
13:21 them.
13:22 Yeah.
13:23 QUESTION: Can I follow up on that?
13:24 MR.
13:25 RATHKE: Yeah.
13:26 QUESTION: Thanks so much.
13:27 The first report of the UN team mission to Karabakh just came out.
13:29 When you were talking about international – deploying international monitors, is that
13:34 a mission you had in mind?
13:36 And if so, is it long-term, short-term?
13:39 And it does bounce back to the initial question that my colleague asked, what is your definition
13:44 of – or sense of what's going on right now?
13:46 MR.
13:47 RATHKE: So the – first of all, we welcome that mission.
13:49 We continue to work with our allies and partners about what a more long-term mission ought
13:53 to look like.
13:54 I don't have any update on that today.
13:57 And then with respect to – what was the second question?
13:59 What the situation was on the ground.
14:00 QUESTION: Right, but the – sense of what's --
14:01 MR.
14:02 RATHKE: The situation on the ground is exactly as I just described it, where around 100,000
14:04 ethnic Armenians have left Nagorno-Karabakh and relocated to Armenia.
14:11 We believe that they – if they wish to return, they ought to have their rights respected
14:17 and that there ought to be an international monitoring mission in place to secure that.
14:22 QUESTION: Is there any room left for peace agreement?
14:24 MR.
14:25 RATHKE: We think certainly there ought to be.
14:27 There are other issues beyond the status of Nagorno-Karabakh that are at dispute between
14:31 Armenia and Azerbaijan, and we would encourage them to return to peace talks to discuss and
14:36 ultimately come to resolution on those issues.
14:38 QUESTION: Yeah, well, Georgia, please.
14:39 I have one very quick.
14:41 The allegations coming out of Georgia was emphasized by the prime minister as well today
14:46 accusing the U.S. funding efforts in Georgia, USAID funding particularly, claiming that
14:53 they are trying to overthrow Georgian Government.
14:55 There have been litany of accusations against civil society members, reporters who ask questions
15:01 about Georgia.
15:02 But now this – where this is coming from and what is your response?
15:05 MR.
15:06 RATHKE: I haven't seen those specific comments, but of course, the only involvement that we
15:09 have in Georgia is for humanitarian and pro-democracy purposes.
15:14 We take no position on the leadership of Georgia.
15:17 We take no position on elections in Georgia other than that they ought to be free and
15:21 fair.
15:22 QUESTION: But why doesn't the prime minister have the impression that he is targeted by
15:24 the U.S.?
15:25 MR.
15:26 RATHKE: I'm sorry?
15:27 QUESTION: Why doesn't the prime minister, pro-Russian prime minister, is under the impression
15:29 that he is targeted by the U.S.?
15:30 MR.
15:31 RATHKE: So again, I haven't seen those specific comments, so I'm not going to make any other
15:34 response to them before I've had a chance to read them in detail.
15:37 QUESTION: And my last one on Georgia --
15:38 MR.
15:39 RATHKE: Let me come back to you, Alex.
15:40 So that, I think, is four, and we'll --
15:41 QUESTION: Let me move on to Kosovo and Serbia.
15:45 You had – the White House said on Friday – raised this concern about the troop buildup.
15:51 It seems at least the Serbian Government is saying today that they've reduced the number
15:57 of troops.
15:58 Have you been able to verify that?
16:00 Are you sort of – are you satisfied that that has been addressed and what level of
16:05 concern remains?
16:06 MR.
16:07 RATHKE: So we have seen the reports that Serbia has withdrawn military personnel and equipment
16:12 away from the border.
16:13 We have not yet verified those independently, and we will be looking for further confirmation.
16:18 But if true, that would be a welcome step, something that we called for to happen last
16:23 week and we would welcome them having taken that step.
16:26 We continue to be concerned about the cycle of rising tensions and sporadic violence in
16:31 northern Kosovo, and encourage both parties to return to the EU-facilitated dialogue.
16:36 QUESTION: Have there been any contacts with officials on either side since this Friday?
16:42 MR.
16:43 RATHKE: So there have been.
16:44 The Secretary, of course, talked with President Vucic on Friday, and we've had other conversations
16:48 over the weekend, not at the Secretary level but at other levels inside the State Department.
16:53 QUESTION: Can I follow up?
16:54 MR.
16:55 RATHKE: Let me – I'll come to you.
16:56 Go ahead.
16:57 QUESTION: Yeah.
16:58 Follow up.
16:59 The Secretary said that they told the White House on Friday that the troops were decreasing,
17:05 and then you have him and – Serbian President going – giving – on the record saying
17:09 that last year they had 14,000 troops, that right now the number was 7,500, and now it's
17:18 reducing to 4,000.
17:19 So my question, why did you then issue a statement saying troops were increasing when he told
17:25 you that they were decreasing?
17:26 MR. RATHKE: Because we did see an increase of Serbian forces at the border.
17:31 Now with respect to whether they are decreasing since Friday, we've seen reports, but as
17:34 I said, we have not yet verified those.
17:36 Said, go ahead.
17:37 QUESTION: Did Joe Biden – no, I just want to follow up because this is really something
17:41 that I follow here from the day one.
17:43 Did Joe Biden sign off on these exact words when the statement went out?
17:47 MR.
17:48 RATHKE: So I'm not going to speak to internal deliberations inside the government, but I
17:54 can tell you we have confidence in what we said about the – let me – now I'm – just
17:58 the same way I cut out – hold on, just this – I will – if there's time, I'll come
18:01 back.
18:02 In the same way I cut Alex off, there's a lot of people with a lot of topics.
18:03 I'm going to move to Said.
18:04 Said, go ahead.
18:05 QUESTION: Yeah.
18:06 MR.
18:07 RATHKE: I'll come back if there's time.
18:08 We're going to go to Said.
18:09 I want to make sure we have a chance to get everybody in the room.
18:12 It's always a little busier on Monday.
18:13 I haven't had a briefing for a few days.
18:16 I know.
18:17 Said, go ahead.
18:18 QUESTION: Thank you, Matt.
18:20 You began by noting how Ukraine has inspired the world in fighting against an illegal military
18:26 occupation.
18:27 And I wonder if you think that the Palestinians ought to be so inspired as to fight an illegal
18:34 occupation with the same kind of intensity and the same commitment, and also count on
18:39 a relentless commitment of support by the United States and the rest of the world, as
18:44 you stated.
18:45 MR.
18:46 RATHKE: We are firmly committed to a two-state solution, as we have spoken to a number of
18:48 times, Said.
18:49 QUESTION: But you said that Ukraine is inspiring the world, and the Palestinians have a right
18:55 to be as members of this world community, to be so inspired and fight occupation, correct?
18:59 MR.
19:00 RATHKE: We certainly take steps that would improve the dignity, the economic situation
19:04 of the Palestinian people, as well as an ultimate two-state solution.
19:07 QUESTION: Okay.
19:08 And one other question.
19:09 Today – yesterday, the Israeli occupation forces forced a Palestinian family to destroy
19:15 her own home in East Jerusalem with her children and move out.
19:21 Do you have any comment on that?
19:22 MR.
19:23 RATHKE: It is critical, as we've said on a number of occasions, for Israel and the
19:26 Palestinian Authority to refrain from unilateral steps that exacerbate tensions and undercut
19:31 efforts to advance a negotiated two-state solution, and that certainly includes the
19:35 practices of forced demolitions and evictions of families from homes in which they have
19:39 lived for generations.
19:40 QUESTION: Thank you.
19:41 MR.
19:42 RATHKE: Go ahead.
19:43 I'll come right – go ahead.
19:44 QUESTION: On the situation in Turkey and northern Iraq, do you have any reaction to what happened
19:48 in Ankara and then the subsequent strikes?
19:51 MR.
19:52 RATHKE: So the United States strongly condemns the October 1st terrorist attack at the Turkish
19:56 Interior Ministry in Ankara.
19:58 You saw the Secretary speak to this yesterday.
20:00 We wish those injured a speedy and full recovery, and we stand firmly with our NATO ally, Turkey
20:06 and the Turkish people, in the fight against the PKK, which has been designated as a foreign
20:10 terrorist organization by the United States.
20:13 We condemn any acts of terrorism against Turkey and its people.
20:17 QUESTION: A follow-up on this?
20:18 MR.
20:19 RATHKE: Yeah.
20:20 QUESTION: Yeah.
20:21 And the Turkish President, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, he said that we are extending
20:24 our military operations in Syria and also in Iraq, and this is at a time that the Iraqi
20:30 Government is rejecting all the violations to their sovereignty.
20:34 They said that this is not a sign of the good neighbor.
20:38 What's your position and comment on that?
20:40 MR.
20:41 RATHKE: We recognize the legitimate security threat the PKK poses to Turkey, and we urge
20:45 Turkey to pursue joint counterterrorism cooperation with Iraq in a way that supports and respects
20:50 Iraqi sovereignty.
20:51 QUESTION: I have a question.
20:52 QUESTION: I'll – I'll come to you after we finish.
20:53 Let's do the left and then we'll --
20:54 QUESTION: Thank you.
20:55 All right.
20:56 About four years ago, the United States Administration reached an understanding with the Turkish
21:02 Government that the YPG elements in northern Syria would move 30 kilometers, 19 miles south
21:08 of the border.
21:10 And that still hasn't fully materialized.
21:11 Do you still recognize that understanding between the two countries, or would you say
21:15 that was the previous administration of us?
21:17 MR.
21:18 RATHKE: Let me take that one back so I can get you a more detailed response.
21:20 Go ahead.
21:21 QUESTION: So as you mentioned, the PKK terror group was behind yesterday's terror attack
21:26 in Ankara.
21:27 And as you may know, there have long been anger in Turkey against the PKK and also against
21:34 the U.S. for its support to YPG, its Syrian branch in Syria.
21:40 So you might have seen it on Twitter yesterday when many Turkish Twitter users reacted against
21:46 Secretary Blinken's post accusing the U.S. of training and arming the PKK Syrian branch
21:54 YPG.
21:55 So I'm wondering how can the U.S. address those concerns among Turkish public about
22:01 its support to YPG or broadly, STA?
22:06 And how does the U.S. plan to proceed in pursuing relations with an entity that is recognized
22:14 as a terrorist organization by its NATO ally, Turkey?
22:18 MR.
22:19 RATHKE: So first of all, we condemn any act of terrorism against Turkey and its people.
22:24 As I said, the PKK has been designated as a foreign terrorist organization by the United
22:28 States.
22:29 We stand firmly by Turkey and the Turkish people in their fight against the PKK, and
22:33 we will continue to do so.
22:34 Go ahead.
22:35 QUESTION: Okay.
22:36 In light – thanks, Matt.
22:37 In light of UNRWA donors – that's the UN agency – recent meetings at the UN, will
22:42 the U.S. ask the UN to inspect and disarm UNRWA refugee camps that have become well-equipped
22:48 arsenals?
22:49 And I have a follow-up question.
22:50 MR.
22:51 RATHKE: Do you mean – where particular do you mean?
22:54 QUESTION: In the Middle East.
22:55 MR.
22:56 RATHKE: In the – yeah.
22:57 QUESTION: In the Middle East.
22:58 MR.
22:59 RATHKE: I'm sorry, I wanted to get a little more specific.
23:00 QUESTION: And the Palestinian idea, but the UNRI issues, so --
23:04 MR.
23:05 RATHKE: So I will say that, as we have said before, we have long recognized Israel's
23:10 right to defend itself and take actions to secure its territory.
23:13 QUESTION: Okay.
23:14 The follow-up about – is will the U.S. challenge the official Palestinian school curriculum
23:18 which rejects the two-state solution by teaching the next generation to reject any recognition
23:24 of Israel?
23:25 MR.
23:26 RATHKE: So I will say that we support the two-state solution.
23:28 You see me asked about that on a number of occasions.
23:31 That will continue to be our policy, and that will be our policy as it pertains to anyone
23:37 on either side of this longstanding conflict who wants to take a different position.
23:42 QUESTION: What about those well-equipped arsenals of concerns that Israel has that are happening
23:47 – that are occurring in the UN agency UNRWA camps?
23:50 MR.
23:51 RATHKE: Again, as I've said, we support Israel's right to secure its nation.
23:55 Go ahead.
23:56 QUESTION: Thank you so much.
23:57 Jahanzaib Ali from Airwinds.
23:58 Just curious what really discussed with the Indian Foreign Minister J. Shankar on the
24:02 issue of Farji Singh Nejaar killed in Canada.
24:04 MR.
24:05 RATHKE: So the Secretary actually spoke to this on – at a press conference on Friday
24:08 when he was asked about it.
24:09 As he made clear then, I'll reiterate now, we remain in close coordination with our Canadian
24:15 colleagues on this question.
24:17 We have engaged with the Indian Government on a number of occasions to urge them to cooperate
24:22 with Canada's investigation, and the Secretary had an opportunity to do that in his meeting
24:26 with the foreign minister on Friday.
24:28 QUESTION: Is he agreed to cooperate with Canada?
24:30 MR.
24:31 RATHKE: I will let the Indian Government speak for themselves and I will speak for the United
24:33 States Government, and we urge that cooperation.
24:35 QUESTION: So my last question.
24:36 There was a deadly bomb blast in Pakistan, another suicide attack.
24:40 More than 50 people killed, most of them were children.
24:44 And those that claim – DTP and ISIS, always claiming these attacks.
24:51 Sir, we have heard a number of statements from Biden administration officials that the
24:53 U.S. will keep its capability to target terrorists in Afghanistan.
24:57 So what stops the U.S. from targeting DTP and ISIS hideouts in Afghanistan?
25:02 MR.
25:03 RATHKE: So first of all, let me say I did put a statement out on this Friday, but I
25:06 do want to reiterate our deepest sympathies for those killed and injured in those attacks.
25:13 The Pakistanis have suffered tremendously from terrorist attacks.
25:16 They deserve to practice their faith without fear.
25:19 We of course offer condolences to families who lost loved ones and a speedy recovery
25:22 to those who are injured.
25:24 And I will say with respect to counterterrorism cooperation, we cooperate with Pakistan in
25:29 a range of multilateral fora on issues including terrorist designations and global strategies
25:34 to defeat terrorist groups.
25:36 Earlier this year, we held a high-level counterterrorism dialogue to discuss the shared terrorist threats
25:41 facing our two countries and to work on strategies to cooperate in areas such as border security,
25:49 terrorist financing, and we will continue to work with Pakistan to ensure that we can
25:55 better assist Pakistan's effort to counter all forms of violent extremism.
25:59 Yeah.
26:00 QUESTION: Thank you, Matt.
26:02 With the U.S.-Mexico high-level security dialogue coming later this week, there will be particular
26:08 attention, of course, to the effort to combat fentanyl and fentanyl precursors.
26:13 The question I have is how does Secretary Blinken measure success in the joint U.S.-Mexico
26:18 fight against fentanyl?
26:20 Is it less overdose deaths in the U.S.?
26:23 Is it more labs destroyed in Mexico?
26:25 Is it less seizures at the U.S.-Mexico border?
26:28 How is success measured?
26:29 MR.
26:30 DEGORY: So I would say that we are always looking for progress on all of those fronts.
26:33 The Secretary has spoken to this on a number of occasion and noted that we do recognize
26:38 that we have a demand problem in the United States and that we need to take steps on the
26:42 United States side to reduce demand.
26:45 At the same time, we need to take steps with our Mexican partners to crack down on trafficking,
26:50 and that would include the destruction of labs in Mexico.
26:54 It would include interdiction of smugglers, both at the U.S. border and, of course, within
26:59 Mexico.
27:00 And so we will continue to take steps.
27:01 We would welcome progress on all of those metrics, of course.
27:05 I wouldn't want to put a bar.
27:06 We have seen increased cooperation with our Mexican counterparts, and we're going to look
27:11 to continue that, because as the Secretary has noted a number of times, fentanyl remains
27:16 the number one killer of young people in the United States, and cracking down on fentanyl
27:21 trafficking from Mexico and elsewhere is one of his top priorities as Secretary.
27:26 Thank you.
27:27 MR.
27:28 RATHKE: On Russia?
27:29 Thank you.
27:30 There are reports that the United States has informed Russia that Washington is not planning
27:34 to invite Vladimir Putin to the upcoming OPEC summit in November.
27:39 Can you confirm that?
27:40 Are you planning to --
27:41 MR.
27:42 RATHKE: I don't have any – I don't have anything I think I want to say about invitations.
27:49 We said we recognize our obligations as the host of OPEC, but we are going to honor our
27:56 sanctions rules and regulations in making invitations.
27:58 I've been asked about that in the context of other individuals.
28:01 I would also say I would be highly surprised if Vladimir Putin, who has been at times reluctant
28:07 to leave his own borders recently for fear of arrest for the war crimes he's committed,
28:11 I'd be highly surprised if he wanted to show up at a meeting in San Francisco.
28:15 QUESTION: What about Sergey Lavrov?
28:16 Do you plan on inviting --
28:17 MR.
28:18 RATHKE: Again, I don't have anything in specific to say about invitations to OPEC.
28:24 QUESTION: Wait, wait, wait.
28:25 In that last comment before last, are you saying that the United States would arrest
28:31 Putin if he showed up in San Francisco when you're not a member of the ICC?
28:36 MR.
28:37 RATHKE: So we're getting into the realm of the most unlikely hypothetical, since I do
28:41 not think that Vladimir Putin will be --
28:43 QUESTION: You entertained the question.
28:44 It wasn't my question.
28:45 MR.
28:46 RATHKE: I know.
28:47 QUESTION: You entertained the question, and then you said it would be highly – or you
28:49 would find it surprising if Vladimir Putin showed up outside --
28:53 MR.
28:54 RATHKE: I said --
28:55 QUESTION: -- to leave his own borders to come --
28:56 MR.
28:57 RATHKE: Correct.
28:58 QUESTION: -- given that he is facing an indictment by the ICC.
28:59 Now, if you're saying that all of a sudden the United States is prepared to act on an
29:03 ICC warrant --
29:04 MR.
29:05 RATHKE: That is --
29:06 QUESTION: -- or arrest notice --
29:07 MR.
29:08 RATHKE: That is not at all what I said.
29:09 We have wanted to hold --
29:10 QUESTION: I know.
29:11 MR.
29:12 RATHKE: Well, hold on.
29:13 Let me just finish.
29:14 We have wanted to hold --
29:15 QUESTION: It's the implication of what you said.
29:16 MR.
29:17 RATHKE: It is not – so the ICC is not the only way that we have said that Vladimir Putin
29:18 ought to be held responsible for war crimes.
29:19 We have --
29:20 QUESTION: Yeah, but that's the only indictment that he's facing, and you --
29:21 MR.
29:22 RATHKE: Correct.
29:23 We have said that there are other accountability mechanisms that we are pursuing.
29:26 The ICC is just one of those.
29:27 QUESTION: Well, I mean --
29:28 MR.
29:29 RATHKE: I'm not going to be hypothetical.
29:30 He's --
29:31 QUESTION: What are you saying?
29:32 What are you saying?
29:33 MR.
29:34 RATHKE: He is not going to be in San Francisco in November.
29:35 I think we can all be pretty clear about that.
29:36 (Laughter.)
29:37 QUESTION: Okay.
29:38 Well, then there's the answer to the question right there, right?
29:39 MR.
29:40 RATHKE: Right.
29:41 QUESTION: You know, if Ernest Kutcher in 1960 promised that if there's a war between
29:43 the United States and Russia, San Francisco would be spared.
29:46 So there you go.
29:47 He couldn't have --
29:48 MR.
29:49 RATHKE: Okay.
29:50 Okay.
29:51 Gita, go ahead.
29:52 Let's get – Gita, get us back on track, please.
29:53 (Laughter.)
29:54 QUESTION: Your Romanian counterpart was today asked about the nuclear talks, and he referred
30:01 to some different initiatives by different parties, but he also referred to the JCPOA
30:08 as the eventual goal of the talks.
30:13 I know you have said, the Secretary have said, that you believe in diplomacy, but my question
30:18 is specifically does the Biden administration still believe in the JCPOA?
30:23 Would that be the framework of any diplomacy that you do?
30:27 MR.
30:28 RATHKE: Let me say that we continue to believe diplomacy is the best option for containing
30:35 Iran's nuclear program.
30:38 We will continue to urge Iran to take de-escalatory steps.
30:42 I think we are a long way off from Iran even considering reentering the JCPOA, given that
30:48 they just in the past few weeks refused IAEA inspectors.
30:53 So our policy hasn't really changed.
30:56 We're committed to ensuring that they do not have a nuclear weapon.
30:59 We're committed to diplomacy to constrain Iran's nuclear program, but we have not
31:04 yet seen them take the kind of de-escalatory steps that we think are important for them
31:08 to take.
31:09 QUESTION: Late last week, the DOD released the 2023 Strategic Counterterrorist – Countering
31:23 Weapons of Mass Destruction report, and it referred – it said that Iran has not complied
31:29 with the Chemical Weapons Convention.
31:32 Is the United States aware of any facilities that Iran has not declared?
31:36 Because that was part of the report.
31:38 MR PRICE: I think I will let my colleagues at the Pentagon speak to the DOD report.
31:42 QUESTION: One last one, please.
31:43 MR PRICE: Go ahead, and I'll come to you next, Matt.
31:47 QUESTION: Sure.
31:48 Go ahead.
31:49 Iran seems to be also eyeing the – eyeing Antarctica.
31:55 The commander of the Army's Naval Force said last week that they – that Antarctica
32:02 is a good place to "control" – quote/unquote – "control" ballistic missiles, given
32:10 that the UN sanctions on the missiles will be – will expire pretty soon.
32:15 How do you see this comment from them and what they want to do?
32:18 MR PRICE: I think that feels a little more like biting off more than they can chew.
32:23 I would say with respect to Antarctica, Antarctica should remain a sanctuary for peaceful exploration
32:28 and scientific research.
32:30 The United States remains steadfast in its commitment to the Antarctic Treaty of 1959,
32:36 which expressly prohibits the establishment of military bases in Antarctica.
32:40 And although Iran is not a party to the treaty, we unequivocally oppose any efforts to militarize
32:45 Antarctica.
32:47 Military activities should have no place in that unique environment, whether they be by
32:50 Iran or anyone else.
32:52 QUESTION: How about the moon?
32:54 MR PRICE: I'm not aware of a treaty as it relates to --
32:57 QUESTION: Since you guys --
32:58 MR PRICE: When the Iran – when the space exploration program gets to the moon --
33:03 QUESTION: Well, okay, but this is not just – I'm not just making this up, but you
33:07 guys basically acknowledge – not you personally or not the State Department personally – but
33:11 that they had successfully launched what could be considered an ICBM.
33:19 So Antarctica is one thing, but space is another, and it's attainable.
33:27 MR PRICE: As we've said, we believe that their missile – that those specific launches
33:32 are in violation of the ballistic missile – the UN security resolutions that relate
33:39 to ballistic missiles with respect to Iran.
33:41 QUESTION: Right, the ones that are about to, like, fade away in the next 10 days, right?
33:47 MR PRICE: Yeah.
33:48 We'll have more to say about that at a later time.
33:50 Yeah.
33:51 QUESTION: Okay.
33:52 And then at a later time?
33:53 MR PRICE: Well --
33:54 QUESTION: After the – after --
33:55 MR PRICE: No.
33:56 Well, I can say what I said before, which is those are not the only authorities we have
33:59 to constrain --
34:00 QUESTION: I'm hearing you, but these are international.
34:03 These are UN scientists.
34:04 MR PRICE: Right.
34:05 They're not the authorities that we – only authorities we have, and they're not the
34:07 only authorities our partners have, and we're continuing to talk with them about the best
34:10 way to constrain Iran's activities.
34:11 QUESTION: And then just one other thing on Iran is that you have seen kind of the fallout,
34:15 especially among Republican critics of the administration's policy on Iran, have really
34:23 started to lean in on this whole email trove that was released involving people who are
34:31 close to Rob Malley.
34:34 Do you have anything new to say about that?
34:38 Do you believe, as some U.S. senators have said and congresspeople have said, that an
34:47 Iranian influence operation infiltrated the U.S.
34:53 Government?
34:54 MR PRICE: I do not have any reason to believe an Iranian influence operation infiltrated
34:59 the United States Government.
35:00 However, as it relates to Rob Malley, that remains an ongoing investigation, so of course
35:04 I can't --
35:05 QUESTION: Not only about him, but about the other people who were --
35:08 MR PRICE: And my comment pertained to that.
35:10 I do not have any reason to believe that.
35:11 Let me go ahead – I'm going to go to some people who have a different question.
35:16 QUESTION: Thank you.
35:17 About a statement by Ambassador Peterhouse in Bangladesh on possible visa curb on media.
35:26 So radical groups that advocate Taliban-style role in Bangladesh with opposition leaders
35:34 hailing the move by the ambassador are already threatening media persons, even circulating
35:43 lists of journalists critical to radical views.
35:48 Other side, civil and human rights activists, anti-war crimes campaigners, editors, journalists,
35:55 writers, minority leaders found the statement by the ambassador on possible visa curb on
36:01 media as an affront to freedom of press that has been a pivot to the fight against terror.
36:09 Do you support the statement by the ambassador and deny outright the concern raised by such
36:16 a large liberal group who vouch for secular nation?
36:20 MR PRICE: So let me restate or state in slightly different language what I said last week,
36:27 which is the United States wants what the Bangladeshis themselves want – free and
36:31 fair elections that are conducted in a peaceful manner.
36:35 The government, political parties, civil society, and the media in Bangladesh have all expressed
36:40 their desire that the upcoming national elections are free and fair and conducted in a peaceful
36:44 manner as we want.
36:46 The visa restriction policy that we've announced supports this objective and the desire of
36:50 the people of Bangladesh to freely choose their leaders.
36:54 And for the – I don't know.
36:55 Well, I'll just say the United States does not support any particular party and does
36:58 not want to influence the outcome of the election, only to ensure that the people of Bangladesh
37:02 may freely choose their leaders.
37:04 Sam, go ahead.
37:05 QUESTION: Thank you.
37:06 MR PRICE: Thank you.
37:07 QUESTION: Did you – thank you.
37:10 Did USAID fund the Wuhan Institute of Virology and/or any of its U.S. collaborators, either
37:16 directly or through subgrants?
37:17 MR PRICE: I will refer you to USAID to respond to that question.
37:20 I have submitted questions to USAID.
37:22 I've submitted questions by email.
37:24 I've asked repeatedly in this room on this issue.
37:28 I don't need to go through what the pandemic caused and the controversy around this issue.
37:33 The fact of the matter is that USAID recently cut off funding to these virus protection
37:38 programs.
37:39 The British Medical Journal did a blank link to their reports noting that USAID had cut
37:43 off this very quietly.
37:46 It seems to be an orchestrated attempt to disengage responsibility.
37:50 So it's a simple empirical question of central importance.
37:54 Did USAID fund the Wuhan Institute of Virology or its U.S. collaborators?
37:58 MR PRICE: And again, I would refer you to USAID to speak to the specifics of their funding
38:03 program.
38:04 QUESTION: They are not responding to my emails.
38:05 I have repeatedly emailed both State and USAID.
38:09 I usually get responses when I email to State.
38:12 I have not gotten a response when I email on this issue.
38:14 MR PRICE: I will look into that.
38:16 It is up to them to respond, but I will look into that question of whether or not it's
38:19 --
38:20 QUESTION: Does the State Department claim that the gain-of-function research or gain-of-function
38:24 research of concern, also called the creation of potential pandemic pathogens, in the academic
38:29 literature, does the State Department maintain that this does not violate the Bioweapons
38:34 Convention or the – and the U.S. implementing legislation, the Bioweapons Antiterrorism
38:40 Act of 1989?
38:41 MR PRICE: We have spoken to this a number of times, and I don't have anything to add
38:44 today.
38:45 Go ahead, Alex.
38:46 QUESTION: No, no.
38:47 I'm sorry.
38:48 Do you claim that you – that that does not --
38:49 MR PRICE: I don't have anything to add to what we said on this on a number of previous
38:52 occasions.
38:53 Alex, go ahead.
38:54 QUESTION: It's just that the person who wrote the treaty says that it does.
38:55 Francis Boyle at the University of Illinois.
38:57 MR PRICE: Yeah.
38:58 Alex, go ahead.
38:59 QUESTION: One more Iran if you don't mind.
39:00 A Ukrainian foreign minister today came out with numbers that – last month, happy October,
39:03 by the way.
39:04 In September, Russia launched a record number of Shahids, Shahid drones on Ukraine, more
39:11 than 500.
39:12 Now, we had the largest number, 413, in May.
39:15 What is your sense of why Iran is being emboldened in its efforts in Ukraine?
39:22 And what does it tell you about the kind of regime we are dealing with?
39:25 MR PRICE: Look, I think we've seen Iran continue to take steps to support illiberal
39:31 regimes, to support acts of aggression both in its backyard and around the world.
39:35 This is consistent with its, unfortunately, very unhelpful activities around the world.
39:42 We have taken steps to impose sanctions on those who have provided such weapons to help
39:48 Russia's war against Ukraine, and we will continue to do so.
39:51 QUESTION: Have you also seen new transactions between the two, Russia and Iran, whether
39:55 it's about missiles or --
39:56 MR PRICE: I don't have any specific announcements to read.
39:59 Let me go to Michel.
40:00 We'll wrap up here.
40:01 QUESTION: Yeah, Matt, on Niger, do you have any comments on the Algerian mediation?
40:06 Are you aware of it?
40:08 Do you support it?
40:09 And do you coordinate with Algeria on it?
40:12 MR PRICE: Sure.
40:13 We encourage Algeria to continue to work with ECOWAS, which is leading efforts to resolve
40:16 the political crisis in Niger.
40:18 The United States and Algeria partner closely and regularly on bilateral and regional parties,
40:24 including on – priorities, including on shared efforts to de-escalate conflict and
40:28 advance regional stability, and that includes in the Sahel.
40:32 This was a topic during the Secretary's meeting with his Algerian counterpart on August
40:35 9th and during our meetings at UNGA, the UN General Assembly.
40:39 As Algeria takes a seat on the UN Security Council next year, we look forward to continuing
40:43 to work together on this and other regional and global priorities.
40:47 With that, we'll wrap for today.
40:48 Thanks, everyone.
40:49 MR PRICE: Any comments on Slovakia?
40:50 MR PRICE: We'll wrap here.