Article Index
1:18 p.m. EST
MR MILLER: Hello, good afternoon. Start with some opening comments.
The United States condemns Russia’s unjust sentencing today of Oleg Orlov, the renowned Russian human rights leader and co-chair of the 2022 Nobel Prize-winning organization Memorial. Russian authorities – dissatisfied with the outcome of an earlier ruling that imposed a simple fine – sought a re-do. The outcome? Mr. Orlov was sentenced today to two and a half years in prison simply for peacefully and courageously speaking out against Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine. Ambassador Tracy joins diplomats from 17 other countries to bear witness to this latest miscarriage of justice in Putin’s Russia, which Orlov aptly described as Kafkaesque.
Today’s verdict falls on the 9th anniversary of the assassination of Russian pro-democracy politician Boris Nemtsov. Like Aleksey Navalny, Nemtsov was a clarion voice for reform and accountability who Putin targeted for his activism. A former deputy prime minister of Russia, Nemtsov devoted his life to improving the lives of his fellow citizens until he was gunned down in the shadow of the Kremlin.
Nemtsov’s civic commitment continues to be an inspiration for other pro-democracy politicians and human rights defenders in Russia and beyond. Vladimir Kara-Murza, a Nemtsov protégé and courageous leader in his own right, now languishes in a Russian prison for advocating a freer future for Russia.
The United States strongly condemns the Kremlin’s escalating domestic repression. Together with our allies and partners, the United States will continue to insist Russian authorities immediately release the more than 680 political prisoners they continue to hold, and we reiterate today our support for Russia’s courageous citizens who continue to work toward a better future for the Russian people.
And with that, Matt.
QUESTION: Right. Sorry, yeah. Sorry, I was on the phone.
MR MILLER: Sorry for being —
QUESTION: I apologize.
MR MILLER: Sorry for being on time today.
QUESTION: Exactly.
MR MILLER: Guess I caught everyone off guard.
QUESTION: Well, exactly. It’s such a shock. So because I was late and I missed your opening, I’ll defer.
MR MILLER: Shaun.
QUESTION: Could I ask you maybe switch to the Middle East first?
MR MILLER: Yes, of course.
QUESTION: The President’s comments talking about Sunday as the goal for a ceasefire, what can you tell us about that? Is that a goal? Is that something that is actually maybe not a deadline but something that you think is possible?
MR MILLER: So our goal is to achieve a deal to reach a humanitarian pause and the release of hostages as soon as possible. Certainly, we’d welcome getting one by this weekend. What I can say about the overall progress is that we made significant progress towards an agreement last week when we had officials from the United States Government engaging in the region. We continue to pursue further progress this week. American officials across the government continue to be engaged on this question.
We are trying to push this deal over the finish line. We do think it’s possible. But as you’ve heard me say before, ultimately some of this comes down to Hamas and whether Hamas is willing to agree to a deal that would provide significant benefits to the Palestinian people that they claim to represent.
QUESTION: Sure. I mean, you said it’s possible by the end of the weekend, and you mentioned the U.S. diplomacy. I mean, are there – what needs to happen for that to take place? Are there actual talks that are going on actually with the U.S. side?
MR MILLER: So I’m not going to negotiate in public, but there are talks that continue. American officials continue to engage on this and discuss it with our counterparts in the Government of Israel as well as the Governments of Qatar and Egypt. And we continue to push to try to get this deal over the finish line. We think it’s possible. We think we can reach a deal. But ultimately, we would need Hamas to say yes. We would need Hamas to agree to a deal that would allow for the release of hostages which never should have been taken in the first place, that would allow for a temporary ceasefire and allow increased humanitarian assistance to come in.
As I said, that is a deal that is not just in the interest of the hostages obviously, it’s not just in the interests of the Government of Israel or the Israeli people. It is a deal that is in the interest of the Palestinian people, so we will continue to push for it because we think it’s in the interest of all parties concerned.
QUESTION: And could I just – just as a part of that, the President talked about a ceasefire, not necessarily a temporary ceasefire. I know you’ve – the Secretary himself has said that there needs to be a durable – I forget the exact phrasing, but durable solution. But is what’s – is the goal for this weekend or the goal for as soon as possible an actual ceasefire, like a long-lasting ceasefire rather than a temporary?
MR MILLER: So again, I’m not going to negotiate in public and talk about what the contours of a deal might look like, but we certainly are trying to reach a temporary ceasefire as part of this agreement that would allow us to get hostages out and would allow us to get humanitarian assistance. And we would like to see a temporary ceasefire go on long enough to allow all the hostages to get out. Again, without talking about what the contours of any agreement might look like, we want to see a ceasefire go on for as long as it can to get all the hostages out.
That said – and you’ve heard the Secretary speak to this and heard the President speak to this – our ultimate goal is to end this war as soon as possible and end it in a way that ensures Israel’s security and in a way that puts us on a path towards the establishment of an independent Palestinian state, and that’s the diplomatic route that we continue to pursue.
QUESTION: Can I follow up on that, Matt?
MR MILLER: Sure.
QUESTION: Do you foresee the ceasefire being in one continuous phase or in multiple phases, and would you expect female IDF soldiers to be released (inaudible)?
MR MILLER: Again, I just don’t want to talk about what the contours of an agreement might look like as we continue very sensitive negotiations.
QUESTION: And can you give us any more details on what’s underpinning the President’s optimism given that partners in the region have kind of thrown cold water on the notion that this could be accomplished in the coming days?
MR MILLER: What’s underpinning the President’s optimism is looking at the broad outlines of a deal that we have put in place through negotiations last week and negotiations that are continuing through this week, and the fact that he believes and we believe one was in – one is within reach. That said, to be clear, we don’t have one yet. Hamas will need to agree to one. But we do think it’s possible and we’re going to continue to push for it, and we want to see it happen as soon as possible.
QUESTION: And then one more unrelated to the hostages.
MR MILLER: Yeah.
QUESTION: Do you have any updates on the CHIRG assessments that you mentioned are underway?
MR MILLER: Only that it’s ongoing. As part of our regular work and normal processes, we’re accessing facts and examining them as they develop, but I don’t have any update on the outcomes of that review.
Yeah, Simon.
QUESTION: Yeah, I wanted to just, I guess, try this from another approach. But the President said that the Israelis have agreed to a ceasefire during Ramadan. It’s sort of been said all along from the Hamas side that what they want is a longer-lasting, a permanent ceasefire, right. So I mean, has there been any movement that’s closed the gap between the two sides on that specific aspect?
MR MILLER: I appreciate you trying from another angle. I still don’t think I can answer that without getting into the underlying contours of a deal and the underlying issues that we are trying to negotiate.
That said, if we got a temporary ceasefire as soon as this weekend or as soon as early next week, just looking at logically how that would proceed, that would extend over the course of Ramadan. So obviously we’re trying to reach it as soon as possible. If we were able to reach over Ramadan – or before Ramadan, that would extend through Ramadan and would provide an outcome that I think would help alleviate the suffering of the Palestinian people and, as I said, get hostages out. So we will continue to pursue it and try to get it as soon as possible.
QUESTION: Just to sort of understand where this optimism, I guess, is coming from, we’re talking about – we’re talking about a temporary ceasefire, but you think that that will lead to a – or the Secretary has said and you just said, I think, this is the best way to get to an end of the conflict. But just so we kind of understand, Israel’s position is still – they still are seeking to take out the leadership of Hamas. There are these battalions in Rafah that they want to get to. So is there a prospect for a longer-term ceasefire? Even if you get a temporary ceasefire, the Israelis are still going to have those broader war aims.
MR MILLER: Yeah.
QUESTION: Are you going to be able to support – are the Israelis ever going to be able to agree to that before they’ve sort of achieved those aims?
MR MILLER: So that’s a great question. Let’s start by saying no one here can predict the future, and we ought to be – all ought to be humble in trying to predict how the future will unfold, especially in such a volatile situation. We want to get a ceasefire, as I’ve said, as soon as possible. We want to see it last long enough to get all of the hostages out.
Once you get a temporary ceasefire, there are a number of variables that could be in play. Yes, we agree with the Government of Israel that the persistence of Hamas battalions in Rafah or wherever else they might be, or Hamas fighters wherever else they might be in Gaza, does represent a legitimate security threat to the state of Israel that they have a right to address. And so that may be addressing through a military campaign. But as we’ve heard us say before, Hamas could make all this easier by laying down their arms and forswearing further threats against the Government of Israel.
So I know whenever I say that, people say, oh, Hamas will never do that. But again, there’s no reason why they shouldn’t if they want to see this war end, if they want to see the suffering of Palestinians – one way to alleviate that suffering would be for those Hamas battalions to swear off the fight against Israel. So all of that said, it’s very hard to predict what might happen weeks from now. What we are focused on now is trying to get this temporary ceasefire that would alleviate the very severe conditions on the ground right now as well as get these hostages out.
QUESTION: Sure. Finally, I wonder if you had any concern with some comments that the Israeli Defense Minister Gallant made saying if there is a possible ceasefire, then Israel would increase attacks on Hizballah in the north. Do you have concern that there would be escalation in that sort of separate front in the north?
MR MILLER: So we do not want to see either side escalate the conflict in the north, and in fact, we are going to continue to pursue a diplomatic resolution of that conflict. And while we saw the defense minister’s comments, we have also taken note that repeatedly the defense minister and other officials of the Government of Israel, including the prime minister, have said publicly that they would prefer this situation to be resolved diplomatically.
They do face a real security threat in that there are tens of thousands of Israelis who do not feel safe returning to their homes in northern Israel. That’s a legitimate issue that needs to be addressed. We want to achieve a diplomatic path. The Government of Israel has said publicly and they have assured us privately that they want to achieve a diplomatic path, and so that’s what we’re going to continue to pursue, and ultimately that would make military action unnecessary.
QUESTION: Can I follow up on that?
MR MILLER: Said, go ahead.
QUESTION: Thank you. Just following up on Shaun, Jen, and Simon on – there’s a great deal of pushback. I mean, when the President spoke yesterday, there was an element of certainty that we will have a ceasefire by next Monday.
MR MILLER: I think you’re over describing his comments a little bit.
QUESTION: Well, I’m not – I’m not —
MR MILLER: He said that’s what we’re trying to – what we’re trying to get to.
QUESTION: I mean, okay. I mean, let’s see what he – he said that —
QUESTION: (Off-mike.)
MR MILLER: Yeah, yeah. Exactly. He used the word —
QUESTION: Well, I mean, okay, the impression – let’s put it this way. The impression —
MR MILLER: I don’t speak to people’s impressions, Said. Sorry.
QUESTION: Okay, fine. It’s okay. That’s all right. I mean, you know exactly what I – where I’m coming from on this issue. What I’m saying is that does that mean that all the I’s have been dotted and the T’s have been crossed, or at least they have been fined-tuned right now and we are probably getting closer? Would you say we are closer today than we were yesterday?
MR MILLER: We’re closer today than we were yesterday. But no, the I’s haven’t been crossed and the T’s haven’t been dotted. As I said, we don’t have a deal. And we are trying to get one and we’re trying to push this over the finish line. There are a number of officials from the United States Government doing that hard work even as we speak, and we want to get there. But ultimately Hamas has to agree to a deal, and we hope that they will.
QUESTION: Yeah, but time and again, you put the blame squarely on Hamas, and that’s your prerogative. That’s fine. But before October 7th, there was – there was a siege on Gaza for 16 years. I mean, the suffering has been going on for a very, very long time. Would there be, as a part of this deal – whenever it comes to pass – would there be a commitment to lift the siege by the Egyptians, by the Israelis, with the influence of the United States of America?
MR MILLER: So again, I don’t want to speak to what this deal would look like, if and when we get one. But if you go back to the principles that the Secretary outlined in Tokyo that we want to see govern Gaza going forward, one of the principles that he outlined was no ongoing siege of Gaza.
QUESTION: But, I mean, let me ask you about the food situation in Gaza. We saw that the Jordanian monarch himself went on a plane and was – also, they say, was – basically they were dumping the foodstuffs and so on from an airplane. Why couldn’t the United States do that? I mean, you guys have all these C-130s anyway that Jordan is using, Israel is using, everybody’s using. Why not do it —
MR MILLER: Every partner —
QUESTION: — and show the Palestinians a great gesture?
MR MILLER: Sure. Every partner plays a different role and has different capabilities that they bring to bear. We are the leading donor of humanitarian assistance to the Palestinian people. The United States just announced a significant new aid package of over $50 million in humanitarian assistance today that will go into Gaza. That said, there are other partners that bring other capabilities to bear, and we welcome the Government of Jordan air-dropping supplies in and will continue to work with them on that. But we have our own ways of getting humanitarian assistance into Gaza.
QUESTION: And lastly, would the United States be prepared to deal with a sort of super-urgent situation if the ceasefire ever takes place, because you have disease, you have – probably have issues of shelter, and so on, schools and all these things, to sort of – like I said, beyond aiding UNRWA on your own, so to speak?
MR MILLER: I don’t – what was the last?
QUESTION: The question is would the United States have any kind of its own initiative, so to speak, after – if the ceasefire takes place, if the hostilities cease? Will – is there – do you talk in this building, do you discuss in this building ways and means to aid the Palestinians afterwards with possibly tents, with foodstuff —
MR MILLER: Yeah.
QUESTION: – medicine, emergency things?
MR MILLER: Absolutely. So it would be a part of our ongoing – excuse me – humanitarian assistance that we’ve been providing to the Palestinian people. But as we saw in the last pause, the nature of a pause is it’s safer for humanitarian assistance to move around inside Gaza and so relief can get into the hands of the people that need it most. And because you alleviate some of that backlog that happens once you get humanitarian assistance through Rafah or through Kerem Shalom into Gaza, you then can get more of it in. So we would very much anticipate that during a pause or a temporary ceasefire you would see increased humanitarian assistance come in, and of course the United States would play its role and its part, as we have from the outset, to try to get that humanitarian assistance in and make sure it’s sustained.
QUESTION: Matt, is there anything you can point to to back up the assertion that you just made in response to one of Said’s questions, that we’re closer today than we were yesterday?
MR MILLER: Just that we continue negotiations, and I can’t, unfortunately – I can’t – but I —
QUESTION: Well, you’re – okay, fine. But continuing negotiations – so they haven’t broken down. Is that why they’re closer to them —
MR MILLER: We – I am – so I can’t really answer that —
QUESTION: — today than yesterday?
MR MILLER: — without getting into the underlying substance of the negotiations. But the talks continue, and we think we continue to make progress on them.
QUESTION: Okay. But I’m – well, yeah, you said that —
MR MILLER: You said – I said we think we continue to make progress. That’s the basis.
QUESTION: Well, no, no, I —
MR MILLER: That is the basis of my statement.
QUESTION: You said we are closer today than we were yesterday, and so —
MR MILLER: Continuing to make progress is closer.
QUESTION: — I’m just wondering – just wondering what you can point to to back that up.
MR MILLER: I am not going to point to anything related to these underlying talks because I can’t do it without —
QUESTION: Okay. So just so it’s like —
MR MILLER: Hold on. Let me just finish, Matt. I can’t do it without getting into the issues that we’re discussing and the sticking points that remain. But we continue to make progress, and that’s the basis of my statement.
QUESTION: And it sounds like that old one-hit-wonder Spiral Staircase song: “I love you more today than yesterday, but not as much as tomorrow.” But you can’t – but you can’t show —
MR MILLER: Well, we would hope – we – we – you can —
QUESTION: There isn’t anything you can give to us now or present to us or tell us that would actually back up the idea that I – that a ceasefire/hostage deal —
MR MILLER: I —
QUESTION: — is closer today than it was yesterday.
MR MILLER: I can never show you definitive progress in talks that, by their very nature, are secret until we have an agreement. What I can tell you is that we made progress last week, we continue to make progress, and we hope to get a deal as soon as possible.
QUESTION: Shifting back to Europe before – if I may. Starting from your opening statement on Russia and human rights, the Navalny family has found itself in a very peculiar situation. They can’t recover the body, and her mom was threatened by the officials, and her lawyer got arrested today. Do you have any comment on —
MR MILLER: So we remain in touch with the Navalny family. As you know, the Secretary met with Yulia Navalny on the margins of the Munich Security Conference last week. We, as we’ve said, hold Russia accountable for Navalny’s death. You saw us impose sanctions on officials connected to the death of Navalny last week. And we will continue to maintain – to be in touch with the Navalny family. I had not seen the reports of the arrest, so I’m not going to comment in detail until I have a chance to look at them. But I will say we have of course seen continued crackdown on dissent by the Russian Government; that was the focus of my opening comments, and it’s why we continue to call on the Russian Government to release all of the more than 600 political prisoners it is holding.
QUESTION: Thank you. And moving to Ukraine, any comment on the French leader’s latest comments about potentially Western soldiers, troops, fighting in Ukraine? Concerns around it, debates around it – where are you standing?
MR MILLER: So President Biden has made clear, going back more than two years to before even Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, that he will not send U.S. soldiers to fight in Ukraine.
QUESTION: And what is your observation about the current state of – state in the battlefield? Ukraine appears to be in retreat. What’s next? How dangerous is the current situation?
MR MILLER: The situation is extremely serious right now. We have seen Ukrainian frontline troops who don’t have the ammo they need to repel Russian aggression. They’re still fighting bravely. They’re still fighting courageously. They still have armor and weapons and ammunition they can use, but they’re having to ration it now because the United States Congress has failed to act. And so we expect that for the remainder of the year Ukrainian forces will continue to fight bravely and they will make advances, as they have done most significantly in the Black Sea as of late. But it will be much tougher for them if they don’t have access to the ammunition that (inaudible) need, which is why you see the President continue to push for Congress to act.
We believe, as we have said multiple times, if the House would just hold an up-or-down vote on aid to Ukraine, it would pass. And so we again call on Congress to do its duty to hold this vote and get the assistance to the Ukrainian army, that desperately needs it.
QUESTION: Thank you. And final one from me on Armenia-Azerbaijan. The ministers – foreign ministers – are meeting tomorrow in Berlin. I know the Secretary wanted to have them here in Washington since December. Is it the end of the Washington process? And also, what is your expectation from tomorrow’s meeting?
MR MILLER: I don’t have any announcements to make, but we continue to encourage both sides to try to reach a durable, lasting agreement.
QUESTION: Could I actually —
MR MILLER: Yeah, yeah.
QUESTION: — just ask a question that the – Alex’s question on Macron?
MR MILLER: Yeah.
QUESTION: I know, of course, the President has it clear – made clear that the U.S. isn’t going to send soldiers to Ukraine. The overall debate, though, do you think it’s useful to have Macron’s sort of musing that it shouldn’t be ruled out? Is this something that should be in the cards a little bit, should be discussed, not necessarily U.S. troops but some Western NATO forces?
MR MILLER: So certainly every country is free to speak to its own interests. But in addition to the President making clear that the U.S. will not send any troops to fight in Ukraine, the NATO secretary general has ruled out any NATO troops to fight in Ukraine. I think fundamentally we think that the path to victory for Ukraine right now is in the United States House of Representatives. That’s what Ukraine needs most. They need the national security supplemental that the President has proposed to get Ukraine the weapons and ammunition it needs to defend themselves and continue to fight courageously for their freedom and independence.
QUESTION: And just finally, have there been any discussions with the French, before or after, about these remarks made by Macron?
MR MILLER: I don’t have – I’m not aware of any conversations or don’t have any to read out.
QUESTION: Thanks.
MR MILLER: Go ahead, Michel.
QUESTION: Yeah. Do you have any comments on the attacks that the Houthis made yesterday on cables, submarine communication cables, in the Red Sea?
MR MILLER: Only that it’s the latest in the – a long string of reckless attacks by the Houthis on entities and interests that have nothing to do with the conflict in Gaza. Just as when we saw the Houthis attack ships that were bringing food to the people of Yemen, these attacks are on entities that do nothing to help Palestinians who are suffering, are in no way connected to the conflict in Gaza, and they should stop immediately. And we will continue to hold them accountable for the attacks.
QUESTION: And how will you counter these attacks, and what alternative does the international community have?
MR MILLER: I’m not going to speak to the – any specific actions we might take. I never want to preview them in advance. But we will continue to work to degrade and deter the Houthis’ capability to take such reckless actions.
QUESTION: Is there any alternative for these cables?
MR MILLER: You’re going to have to talk to a telecommunications expert, someone other than – and that is very much not me. Sorry.
QUESTION: (Off-mike.)
MR MILLER: Yeah.
QUESTION: Just briefly.
MR MILLER: Yeah.
QUESTION: Just reading back when he said – just wanted to see if there’s a nuance to it, saying that the President’s been clear – back on Macron’s comments – ruling out sending soldiers to fight in Ukraine. Is that – could there be a training role? Could there —
MR MILLER: There is no nuance that I mean – that I mean to communicate there. We are not sending boots on the ground to Ukraine. The President has been very clear about that from the beginning.
QUESTION: Sorry, isn’t there already a training role?
MR MILLER: I don’t believe it’s in Ukraine. I believe it’s in – I’ll defer to —
QUESTION: But there is various National Guard forces who were in Ukraine and are in Poland and elsewhere training.
MR MILLER: I believe that’s correct. I’ll defer to my colleagues at the Pentagon. But I believe the training – if I remember correctly, the training mission was before the invasion, and since it’s happened, outside of Ukraine.
QUESTION: On Afghanistan, I know the Secretary spoke to the oppression of women there today. He didn’t mention anything about the three public executions that have been held there in the past five days. So what, if any, comment do you have on that?
And separately, Chairman McCaul is again threatening to hold the Secretary in contempt of Congress, demanding notes from Dan Smith on the withdrawal be turned over by March 6th. Does State intend to comply with that?
MR MILLER: So as it pertains to public executions, we condemn the public executions. It’s another sign of the brutality that the Afghan Government shows to its own people.
And with respect to the letter from Chairman McCaul – so been a while since I’ve spoken to this, but I’ve spoken to it before. We have repeatedly and explicitly underscored the important role that we believe Congress plays in foreign policy – excuse me – and its vital oversight responsibility. We have engaged with the committee extensively to respond to requests on the after-action review. We remain committed to accommodating the committee’s legitimate need for information regarding the withdrawal.
In terms of that cooperation and what it’s looked like, for more than six months we have, every week, provided hundreds of pieces of – hundreds of documents and information from the AAR files. We sent our most recent transmission to the committee just this past Friday. We have provided them numerous briefings, tens of thousands of pages of documents, public testimony from the department’s senior leaders, and witnesses for day-long transcribed interviews – all demonstrating, in our view, our commitment to accommodating the commitment’s – the committee’s request to the greatest extent possible, while still respecting the Executive Branch’s legitimate confidentiality interests. So that’s our overall record in cooperating with the committee’s oversight responsibility.
As it relates to the chairman’s latest letter, I think it is worth pointing out that it doesn’t have some of the facts right. The department has never told the committee that the White House or any other agency is holding the interview notes used to compile the AAR. Those are department records. What we have actually asked for is the chance for Chairman McCaul to speak to the Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources Rich Verma to discuss our concerns in order to try to reach some understanding, and those requests have gone unanswered.
So we will continue to work in a good faith and timely manner with the committee to answer their oversight requests, but we would ask that they also engage with us in good faith.
QUESTION: Matt, follow-up on Afghanistan?
MR MILLER: Go ahead. I told Nike I’d come —
QUESTION: Matt, follow-up on —
MR MILLER: I – please don’t interrupt. I told Nike I’d come next.
QUESTION: But Matt, this is —
QUESTION: If I may —
MR MILLER: Please do not interrupt your colleagues. Go ahead.
QUESTION: If I may, I would like to go back to Gaza. Earlier this month, the Sinai Foundation said that they obtained information that current constructions in eastern Sinai is to create a highly securely gated, isolated area near the Gaza borders to prepare for the reception of Palestinian refugees. I took note that the Egyptian Government has come out – has denied it. What is the State Department’s assessment, especially at a time when Israel is planning for a military operation around Rafah that would affect about 1.5 million Palestinians?
MR MILLER: So I will let the Government of Egypt speak to what it is they’re constructing. I know they’ve said that that is construction, I believe, for staging of humanitarian assistance. I will also note that we have made clear for months that we are opposed to the forcible displacement of Palestinians from Gaza. The Egyptian Government has made quite clear that it is opposed to the forcible displacement of Palestinians from Gaza and we have seen, just in the past few days, that the Government of Israel has come out publicly and said it has no intention to forcibly displace Palestinians from Gaza.
So as it pertains to any potential military operation in Rafah, what we want to see is a credible and executable humanitarian assistance plan to account for the more than 1 million Palestinians who are sheltered there, some of who them – who have been displaced more than once. We have not been briefed on such a plan yet by the Government of Israel. It’s our understanding that they have developed one and presented it – we’ve seen the public comments that they’ve presented it to the prime minister, so we will look to that plan.
But I do think it’s worth emphasizing, again, that our focus continues to be on achieving an agreement that would give us a temporary ceasefire and alleviate some of that humanitarian suffering, that might allow people to leave crowded areas in Rafah and go elsewhere inside Gaza.
QUESTION: When you said —
QUESTION: (Inaudible) Gaza.
MR MILLER: Yeah. Go ahead. If you weren’t done —
QUESTION: Yeah. When you said that we have not been briefed by Bibi’s plan, are you talking about the State Department or are you talking about the whole Biden administration?
MR MILLER: I’m speaking on behalf of the State Department. I’m not aware of any briefings. It may be that we’ve received cursory briefings, but I know we have not engaged with them in any kind of substantive way on this plan that was reported, was presented to the prime minister just in the past couple days.
QUESTION: Oh, great. Thank you, Matt. I wanted to ask —
QUESTION: (Inaudible) follow-up. I (inaudible) get it.
MR MILLER: Hold on. I’m just going to say, I was getting ready to call on you, but —
QUESTION: I’ve been coming to this house for eight years. I know very (inaudible) —
MR MILLER: I was getting ready to call on you, but I’m going to observe my long —
QUESTION: (Inaudible) get the follow-up from (inaudible).
MR MILLER: First of all, it’s the second time you’ve interrupted your colleague. I’m going to observe my longstanding rule that the best way to get called on is to not interrupt your colleagues when they’re asking questions. And I’ll call on the gentleman sitting next to you.
QUESTION: Thanks, Matt. I wanted to ask about Aaron Bushnell, the 25-year-old, active-duty airman who self-immolated in front of the Israeli Embassy on Sunday, especially since it didn’t come up during yesterday’s briefing. I know you released a statement extending your condolences to his family, but I wanted to ask if you have any comments beyond that. Specifically, I wanted to ask: Will U.S. policy in any way be changed or affected by what happened on Sunday?
MR MILLER: So again, I just want to reiterate here our deepest condolences to his family. It’s obviously a horrific situation, and our most heartfelt sympathies go out to them.
With respect to this act or any kind of protest, obviously we are aware of the depth of feelings that people have over this issue, and we are constantly taking those points of view into account and using them to think about how we approach the issue and whether there is – there are things that we can do differently. That is the case whether it’s with respect to protesters; it is the case with respect to people that the Secretary meets with and hears from directly on all sides of this issue.
So yes, we will always look at the points of view that people have and – but ultimately, we have to make our own decisions based on what we think is in the national security interests of the United States, and we’ll continue to do that.
QUESTION: So will U.S. policy be affected? Yes or no.
MR MILLER: I – that’s – I don’t want to – again, just – I don’t think I should comment with regard to this specific case, other than extending my sympathies to his family.
As I’ve said, generally, we are always looking at the strongly held views by people across the spectrum, and I guarantee you we do hear from people across the spectrum who want us to do one thing differently, whether it comes from stopping support for Israel to supporting Israel more, and we hear loudly from people about this issue. We have to make the best decisions we can about national security interests, and right now we believe the best thing that we can do is to continue to pursue a temporary ceasefire that would get the hostages out and alleviate the suffering of the Palestinian people.
QUESTION: Thank you.
MR MILLER: Go ahead, in the back. Go ahead.
QUESTION: Thank you, Matt.
MR MILLER: No, no, no. Behind you. Go ahead.
QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. God bless you.
QUESTION: Thank you.
QUESTION: There have been now at least six documented instances depicting members of the IDF displaying or rifling through women’s underwear, and of course that’s just on camera. Soldiers have, as we’ve seen, stripped and tortured Palestinians. There have been a reported history of soldiers abusing children that they’ve detained even before October 7th. And, of course, investigations need to be pursued, but still, given all that we’ve seen from Israeli forces just up to this point, what’s the U.S. Government doing in response now, given the UN experts’ alarm at credible allegations of human rights violations and sexual violence committed against Palestinians?
MR MILLER: We made clear to the Government of Israel that we expect them to behave consistent with the laws of war and consistent with their own rules of engagement, and we have seen the Israeli military come out and say it is conducting its own investigations into reports of soldiers who have failed to comply with either of those two sets of rules. And that’s appropriate, and that’s what you expect a professional military to do, and we expect those investigations to proceed and, if appropriate, hold the responsible parties accountable.
QUESTION: Then a few more. And then, like, related to that investigation and related, as well, to the Biden administration’s memo a couple weeks ago regarding this kind of thing of ensuring that American military aid isn’t contributing to these kinds of violations, what sort of conversations are being had right now to make sure that these accountability measures, if they need to be taken, are taken on time, expeditiously? I know, for instance, like the assurances for the memo, those need to be done within 45 days. So what’s the conversations like around this?
MR MILLER: It is the exact kind of conversation I just detailed in response to your last question, which is we have very frank and candid conversations with the Government of Israel about this. But again, the Government of Israel has itself come out and said publicly – you’ve seen the head of the IDF say that they are conducting investigations. You’ve seen – I think it’s the chief attorney or the chief lawyer – I’m going to get the exact title wrong – come out with a report in the last week or so of alleged violations and say that there are members of the IDF who did not behave in accordance with Israeli rules of engagement and that there are investigations ongoing.
We think those are appropriate. That’s what we expect our military to do when American servicemen or servicewomen don’t behave consistent with the laws of war, consistent with rules of engagement. It’s what we expect the Israeli military to do. It’s what we would expect of any professional military operating anywhere in the world.
QUESTION: And then on Aaron Bushnell, per my colleague’s question just now, specifically I was wondering if there’s any concern with regards to him saying – as he said, “I’m an active-duty member of the United States Air Force, and I will no longer be complicit in genocide.” I’m curious if there’s been any conversations about that kind of claim being made by a member of the armed service before. Of course, he committed such a —
MR MILLER: I think I should defer to the Pentagon for an answer to that question.
QUESTION: And any updates on Hind Rajab’s – the investigation into the killing of Hind Rajab’s family and the paramedics sent to save her?
MR MILLER: I don’t have an update. My understanding is that the investigation is ongoing. It’s not concluded yet.
QUESTION: Thank you.
MR MILLER: Go ahead.
QUESTION: Thank you, sir. Sir, authorities in Pakistan detaining journalists who are talking about the reports of rigging in elections. We also heard that Pakistani authorities also ask the bureau chief of New York Times to leave Pakistan as soon as possible because she was also reporting on the same subject. Do you have any comments on the free speech?
MR MILLER: So we want to see freedom of expression and the right to a free press observed in Pakistan, as is true anywhere around the world.
QUESTION: Sir, United States spends millions of every year winning hearts and minds and promoting democracy overseas, including significant investments in Pakistan. But in last few months, the image of U.S. has suffered due to some misleading and irresponsible statements by some political leadership. What’s your message to the Pakistani people, like —
MR MILLER: Is there anything – is there anything in specific you’re asking me to respond to other than general statements? What specifically do you mean?
QUESTION: President Trump has said – he’s still saying that U.S. was involved in Pakistani politics because of America – I mean, I’m not on the far end. People are chanting slogans in the streets against U.S.
MR MILLER: All I can do is continue to stand up here and tell the truth, which is those allegations are incorrect, they are false. What we want is for the people of Pakistan to be able to decide the future of Pakistan, including their own government.
Jalil, go ahead.
QUESTION: Thank you very much, Matt. After so many weeks, I don’t know how to even ask question.
MR MILLER: Just get to the question.
QUESTION: So a couple of weeks ago, I had asked you about my assessment of the Taliban getting stronger. And my colleague just mentioned them, about there’s public hanging. You did not agree with my assessment, but the State Department in their letter to the SIGAR stated that the Taliban resurgence is going on. Can you now at least officially accept that under President Biden the Taliban have becoming more stronger at least?
MR MILLER: I am not familiar with that letter, so I want to review it before I comment in detail.
QUESTION: Okay. One more, sir. Just one more, sir.
MR MILLER: Go ahead.
QUESTION: For 20 years, the U.S. was in Afghanistan. It lost more than 2,000 of its soldiers there, okay? So some questions are a bit more serious. Can you officially agree with me on one point here, that all these 20 years China was the one basically that was supporting the Taliban with those weapons, especially those Chinese AK-47s, which they copied from the Russians? And China is the only country right now that has one of the diplomats from Taliban in their country.
MR MILLER: So I am unfortunately unable to offer you an assessment of how the Taliban was arming itself over the course of that 20 years of war. It’s not something that I was working on in the U.S. Government at the time.
Guita, go ahead.
QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. Back to the war in Gaza. You’re pursuing the negotiations in Paris, in Doha. Is the government holding off the draft resolution in New York to see if you get to a deal? And what do you intend to do with that?
MR MILLER: No, the two issues are not related. We continue to discuss a potential resolution with partners on the UN Security Council, continue to talk through the – both the content of such a resolution and the timing of when one might come up for a vote. I don’t have any updates other than those conversations continue.
QUESTION: Would reaching a deal put – cancel that, presenting the resolution?
MR MILLER: That asks me to, I think, respond to a hypothetical, and I’m going to decline to do.
QUESTION: Well, I have another hypothetical, but just listen to it.
MR MILLER: Shoot.
QUESTION: Should you get a deal, did you – does the administration want it presented to the Security Council?
MR MILLER: Again, I’m going to decline to comment on that until if and when we reach such an agreement.
QUESTION: Yes, you would?
MR MILLER: No, I said I’m going to decline on commenting on what we might do until if and when we reach such an agreement.
Go ahead, Jen.
QUESTION: Matt, has the U.S. gotten any information or additional answers from the Israeli Government on the deaths of the two 17-year-old Americans who were shot in (inaudible)?
MR MILLER: Only that those matters are both under investigation, and we think that’s appropriate. And when those investigations conclude, if accountability is the appropriate outcome, you will – you can be sure that we will be calling for accountability and we will expect accountability.
QUESTION: Have you given them any sort of timeline in which they need to get back to you with answers?
MR MILLER: So again, like – with respect to the two investigations, one is being conducted by I believe it’s the Israeli national police; the other is being conducted by the Palestinian police because of where that specific killing took place. And so it’s not just a question of pressing the Israeli Government. It’s – one of the investigations is being conducted by the Palestinian Authority’s police force. That said, we want them to proceed – we want them to be finished as soon as possible. I think you know it’s sometimes hard to put a timeframe on investigations, especially criminal investigations, so I’m not able to do that. We want to see it happen as soon as possible.
QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. Given the fact that the Palestinian Authority has removed maps of Israel from new Palestinian textbooks, is there any evidence that the Palestinian Authority will accept and/or recognize a two-state solution, yes or no? And I have a follow-up.
MR MILLER: So the evidence I’d present to you is that in all of our conversations with President Abbas he has represented that he is ready to move towards a two-state solution. He is ready to look at any proposal that we can put forward, and we are working with our Arab partners in the region to come up with just such a plan.
QUESTION: Okay. The Palestinian Authority at UNRWA have reinserted a text which praises a woman terrorist, Mughrabi, who attacked a civilian bus, murdering 38 Israelis, including 13 children. Will you demand that the Palestinian Authority and UNRWA remove that text, yes or no?
MR MILLER: I am not familiar with the specific text to which you’re referring, so I’m not going to comment on it.
QUESTION: Sorry, just to take the —
MR MILLER: Yeah, yeah, go —
QUESTION: Can I please —
QUESTION: Yeah, yeah, yeah. Go.
MR MILLER: Go ahead, yeah.
QUESTION: Matt, do you mind? Please.
QUESTION: No, go ahead.
QUESTION: Thank you very much. So I’m very – I’m genuinely confused. Is the administration calling for a permanent ceasefire, or are they calling for a temporary ceasefire?
MR MILLER: We are calling for a temporary ceasefire as part of the negotiations.
QUESTION: Okay. And President Biden is going to the southern border on Thursday. Do you expect him to bring up the migration matters in Latin America?
MR MILLER: I think that’s a question you should direct to the White House briefing, which I believe starts in two minutes.
QUESTION: You’ve called for the unconditional release of hostages. Why then support a deal where there would be hostages released in exchange for Palestinian prisoners who have committed terrorism against Israel?
MR MILLER: We ultimately want to see these prisoners get out, and in any —
QUESTION: Talking about the Palestinian prisoners?
MR MILLER: No, we want to see the hostages get out.
QUESTION: I was just (inaudible).
MR MILLER: And in any such negotiation, you have to make difficult choices. Ultimately, these are choices that the Government of Israel is going to have to make, and we’re going to work with them to try to reach the best deal possible. We want to see all the hostages released. But this is – as often is the case around the world, when you’re trying to get hostages released or where you’re trying to get wrongfully detained individuals released, you have to make difficult choices to bring them home.
QUESTION: And finally, funding for the State Department expires at midnight on March 9th. Does the department have a contingency plan in the event of a shutdown?
MR MILLER: I’m not going to speak to contingency plans other than to say that we think Congress should do its job and pass a funding bill.
QUESTION: Thank you.
MR MILLER: Matt, go ahead.
QUESTION: So sorry, just two really brief things. One, you were just asked if there was any evidence that the Palestinian Authority supports a two-state solution or any evidence that they do. Is there any evidence that the current Israeli Government supports a two-state solution?
MR MILLER: So we continue to engage with the Government of Israel about —
QUESTION: Sorry. No, no, no just answer the –
MR MILLER: No, no.
QUESTION: This is what I said. Do – does the current Israeli Government support a two-state solution?
MR MILLER: I think you can – I think you can look at the prime minister’s very well-covered public comments —
QUESTION: Yes.
MR MILLER: — on this matter.
QUESTION: And the answer would be yes or no?
MR MILLER: That said – that said —
QUESTION: Do they or do they not?
MR MILLER: That said – I will let you interpret them how you want. That said, we continue to believe that a two-state solution is in the interest —
QUESTION: So no doesn’t always mean no.
MR MILLER: — of Israel, and we’ll continue to push for it.
QUESTION: All right. And then secondly on these questions about Bushnell – I’m a little bit confused as to why this is coming up at the State Department briefing other than that it is a policy matter – but this guy was not an employee of the State Department. As it does relate to the State Department because this happened outside the Israeli embassy, was there any contact between the Israelis and you guys about what actually happened?
MR MILLER: There was contact at the security level on Sunday, I believe, when this happened. I know there was contact when DSS was looking at the matter, and I believe the Secret Service was as well. So there was contact at that level about a potential security situation. But I’m not aware of any beyond that.
QUESTION: Just on the – when the incident actually happened?
MR MILLER: When the incident occurred.
QUESTION: So —
MR MILLER: There may have been other conversations that I’m not aware of, but —
QUESTION: And – okay, but since then, since Sunday, there hasn’t been any discussion, at least involving you guys?
MR MILLER: About? In what regards?
QUESTION: About what —
MR MILLER: I’m not trying to be cute.
QUESTION: About what happened.
MR MILLER: It’s just that we talk to them all the time about things, so —
QUESTION: Well, there – I mean – no, look, I mean, if you’re – from an Israeli perspective, you could have imagined that this might be – like they might look at this as a security incident in which they might get in touch with you guys about it. But as far as you know, there hasn’t been anything?
MR MILLER: We – so I will say we talked to them Sunday, when the event first happened, about any potential security threat. I’m sure we are having ongoing dialogue with them about that. That would be the normal course of practice. I’m not aware of any specific conversations in that regards.
QUESTION: Okay. Thank you.
MR MILLER: And with that, we’ll wrap for today. Thanks everyone.
(The briefing was concluded at 2:02 p.m.)
