Daily Press Briefing
Marie Harf
Deputy Spokesperson
Daily Press Briefing
Washington, DC
September 15, 2014
Index for Today's Briefing
SECRETARY KERRY'S TRAVEL / CRIMEA
IRAQ
IRAQ / IRAN
IRAQ / SYRIA / IRAN
SYRIA / REGION
RUSSIA/IRAQ/SYRIA
UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY / IRAQ
UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY / TURKEY
ISRAEL / IRAQ / SYRIA
IRAQ
SYRIA
DEPARTMENT/IRAQ/SYRIA
UNITED STATES / UKRAINE
AZERBAIJAN
DPRK
BENGHAZI
TRANSCRIPT:
1:16 p.m. EDT
MS. HARF: Good afternoon. Happy Monday, everyone. Welcome to the daily press briefing. I have a few items at the top, and then open it up for your questions.
First, Secretary Kerry will travel to New York on Friday, September 19th to chair a ministerial debate of the United Nations Security Council on Iraq as part of the U.S. presidency of the council for the month of September. Secretary Kerry will convene the council to demonstrate broad and unified international support for the new Iraqi Government and emphasize the need for broad political inclusivity as the new government pursues its agenda on behalf of the Iraqi people. In addition, the council session will also provide a platform for the international community to underscore its support for Iraq's new government as it fights against ISIL and responds to the ongoing humanitarian crisis that ISIL is spreading. Lastly, the council session will highlight support for Iraq's further reintegration into the region and the international community. The debate will begin at 2 p.m. on Friday. Secretary Kerry will return to New York on Sunday, September 21st, to begin his UNGA schedule, which we'll have more details on later this week.
Second item at the top: The United States does not recognize the legitimacy of the so-called regional and local elections in Crimea on September 14th and will not acknowledge their outcome. Our position on Crimea remains clear: The peninsula remains an integral part of Ukraine. The United States continues to condemn the Russian Federation's occupation and purported annexation of Ukrainian territory and its violation of Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity in breach of its obligations and commitments under the UN Charter, the Helsinki Final Act, and its military basing agreements with Ukraine. We call on Russia to return Crimea to its rightful status as part of Ukraine. We are also concerned about wide-scale reports of Ukrainian citizens in Crimea being forced to give up their Ukrainian passports for Russian passports and reports of routine human rights abuses against Crimean Tatars and other minorities and pro-Ukrainian activists, such as killings, disappearances, detentions, and raids on private homes and businesses. These abuses are unacceptable and we call for an immediate end to such practices.
And finally, a trip update. Secretary Kerry is in Paris today participating in the International Conference on Peace and Security in Iraq. Additionally, he will – had or has already had – obviously, the schedule's ongoing – bilateral meetings with French Foreign Minister Fabius, the Lebanese foreign minister, the Dutch foreign minister, Iraqi President Masum, and Qatari Foreign Minister al-Attiyah.
That is it.
QUESTION: Okay.
MS. HARF: Get us started.
QUESTION: Okay. Let's start with Iraq.
MS. HARF: Okay.
QUESTION: And just first with a logistical question about the meeting on Friday.
MS. HARF: Uh-huh.
QUESTION: Is that – is it your expectation that that will foreign ministers, all foreign ministers, or you're not --
MS. HARF: I can check on participation. I know that's still being worked out, obviously. He's chairing it, but we can check on specific participation and at what level.
QUESTION: Okay. And then related to that – so he will leave New York, or he will definitely not have any schedule on Saturday until --
MS. HARF: In New York.
QUESTION: -- Sunday – sometime on Sunday? Is that correct?
MS. HARF: Correct. Yes. We don't want people to think he's up there Friday for the duration.
QUESTION: Okay. All right. So on Iraq and the coalition and Secretary Kerry's travels, I realize that this has been – there was a lengthy discussion of this at the White House, so I think that a lot of questions have been answered or they've been --
MS. HARF: Great. I will always let them go out to the podium first. (Laughter.)
QUESTION: Right. But I – you saw this – these reports from Iran with the Supreme Leader. He said when he left the hospital that both your ambassador in Baghdad, Ambassador Beecroft, and the Secretary made direct outreaches, made outreaches to Iranian – well, the ambassador to the Iranian ambassador and Secretary Kerry to Foreign Minister Zarif – about the situation in Iraq. Is that --
QUESTION: About the situation where?
QUESTION: In Iraq.
QUESTION: Yeah.
QUESTION: With ISIL. Is that – one, is that true? And two, if it is – even if it isn't true, can – have there been – what kind of contacts have there been other than the ones that you have already spoken to between Deputy Secretary Burns and others on the side of the P5+1?
MS. HARF: Well, we don't outline every diplomatic discussion publicly that we have. We've said we've talked about it on the sidelines of the P5+1 talks, as you mentioned. We'll be continuing these talks on the nuclear issue starting this week at UNGA, so there may be additional opportunities for conversations. We're not going to outline every discussion we have, but to be very clear, we are not coordinating with, we do not want to coordinate with, we are not planning to coordinate with Iran in any way on Iraq, period. So obviously, we're open to having a discussion with them. We won't always outline all of those discussions. But in terms of the content of what those discussions might look like, we are not coordinating with them.
QUESTION: And there has been no approach to them either in – there's been no approach to them in Baghdad through the ambassadors?
MS. HARF: I'm not confirming one way or the other any reports of contact. As we've said, there are a variety of ways we can talk, but again, don't always outline all of those publicly.
QUESTION: But what you're saying is that any contact that you have had and may have in the future will not be an ask of Iran; is that right?
MS. HARF: Correct, absolutely correct.
QUESTION: Okay.
QUESTION: Wait a minute. Not coordinating is different from not asking them something.
MS. HARF: Well, he was – but the reports were about asking to coordinate.
QUESTION: Right.
MS. HARF: Correct? So that's what I was referring to.
QUESTION: The Secretary of State personally asks Zarif and he rejected the request.
MS. HARF: So I was --
QUESTION: So it says nothing that Iran – there's nothing – in these meetings they haven't been set up so that Iran – you're expecting a response, yes or no, from Iran; is that correct?
MS. HARF: We're certainly not discussing coordinating with them because we're not going to be coordinating with them.
QUESTION: Well, there's a question – is there anything for the Iranians to say no to?
MS. HARF: I have – I mean, I don't even know – I'm sure they could say no to something.
QUESTION: Well, they say – I mean he says no, we said no – right from the start, the U.S. asked through its ambassador whether we would cooperate against Daesh.
MS. HARF: And I just said we are not going to cooperate --
QUESTION: Not. So there --
MS. HARF: So obviously, that would follow that we haven't asked them to.
QUESTION: Okay. So there is nothing for the Iranians to say no to?
MS. HARF: Well, not necessarily. If we say hypothetically, as I said publicly, we'd like you to support the inclusive government --
QUESTION: Oh, okay. All right.
MS. HARF: I guess then --
QUESTION: As far as you understand --
MS. HARF: -- technically that could be a yes or no question.
QUESTION: But the Iranians – as far as you know, the Iranians have at least gone along with supporting an inclusive government?
MS. HARF: I haven't heard otherwise.
QUESTION: All right. Sorry, Arshad.
MS. HARF: Yeah, I just wanted to be clear on that for you, so --
QUESTION: What is – can you explain what you're talking to them about? If you're not talking about coordinating against IS, what are you – and you're not asking them to do anything, what are you talking to them about?
MS. HARF: Well, I've actually said publicly that we're asking every country in the region to support the new – including Iran – to support the new inclusive government in Iraq, to channel any assistance to the Iraqi security forces, not to militias or others. Again, I'm not saying these are actual things we've said privately to the Iranians; but in general, what I've said publicly is that is our message to the Iranians.
QUESTION: So – but then what are you asking them? If that's your message to the Iranians, are you not saying that to them in private, too?
MS. HARF: Well, I'm not going to outline our private discussions with them from the podium.
QUESTION: So you can't tell us what you've actually discussed with them privately; all you can say is that you're not going to coordinate with them and you're not asking them to coordinate?
MS. HARF: Correct.
QUESTION: But there's a lot you could do other short of coordinating with them.
MS. HARF: Like what?
QUESTION: Well, I mean, you outlined some of it. You talked about even if you're not coordinating with them, you're asking them not to fund Iraqi militias. Is that coordination or is that not coordination? I guess in your definition it's not coordination?
MS. HARF: Well, I didn't say we were asking them that privately. I said in general, what I've said publicly is our message to the Iranians is everyone in the region should support this new government. That's not a secret.
QUESTION: Right.
MS. HARF: That everyone should funnel their support to the Iraqi security forces. I think the report Matt is referencing is a report about coordinating military action, which we have been very clear we are not going to do. And we're not coordinating with the Iranians on activities inside of Iraq. We're making clear privately what we say publicly, and they can make their own decisions.
QUESTION: So – okay, so you are making clear privately what you've said publicly and what you just referenced about what you've said publicly about your desire that they not fund – that nobody fund --
MS. HARF: I'm not getting into specifics, but that we think every country should support the Iraqi security forces if they're going to private support in this fight here.
QUESTION: But you're not willing to admit that you've said that privately even though you just said we're saying to them privately what we're saying publicly?
MS. HARF: I just said, Arshad, that I'm happy to say we are telling everyone we talk to, including the Iranians, that any support should be given to the new government and to the Iraqi security forces.
QUESTION: And --
MS. HARF: That is as detailed as I'm going to get about what we say privately to the Iranians.
QUESTION: If the report is wrong that they have rejected your entreaties or your floating the idea of some kind of cooperation --
MS. HARF: Because we haven't.
QUESTION: -- so why not try to give people some understanding of what you're trying to get from them?
MS. HARF: Because we don't think the way to handle this diplomatically is to talk about our private discussions publicly.
QUESTION: Yes, please.
MS. HARF: Yes, let's go around the room. Go ahead, and then I'll go to you. Go ahead.
QUESTION: I mean, he and the secretary-general of the National Security Council, they raised their criticism against the coalition and they are saying the way to fight ISIL is – should go through the Iraqi Government and Syrian Government, the Assad regime. What do you say to that?
MS. HARF: Well, everything we do when it comes to Iraq is completely coordinated with the Iraqi Government and is at the invitation of the Iraqi Government. So I would use that first to describe what we're doing in Iraq.
But in Syria, President Assad has lost all legitimacy to lead Syria. We are not going to be working with the Assad regime or to be sharing our plans with them, as we haven't in the past as you know, because we think that the people we're going to be working with are the moderate opposition in Syria. That's who we think is the alternative to ISIS, that's who we want to increasingly support, but we're not going to be working with the regime.
QUESTION: Yes, please.
QUESTION: Marie.
MS. HARF: Yes, go ahead.
QUESTION: Just before the first topic that you raised, which means that you are not coordinating with Iran – as publicly we said.
MS. HARF: Correct.
QUESTION: Does – this means that you don't object or you object any coordination going on between Iraqi Government and Iran?
MS. HARF: Well, the Iraqi Government can make its own decisions, obviously, about who it works with. And we've said any support needs to be channeled to the Iraqi Government as long as that is support to the new inclusive government, to a better path forward, to a nonsectarian path forward. So obviously, they can make their own decisions about who they work with. As long as it's towards that end is something I think we would be fine with.
QUESTION: So in this case, which is ISIL – ISIS and the new government, do you know or do you expect that the Iraqi Government with its nature – with close (inaudible) ties with Tehran, are they going to make any coordination with them? And if they are going to coordinate with them, are they supposed to tell U.S. about it or not?
MS. HARF: Well, I'd let the Iraqis speak for themselves, but I think, broadly speaking, one important point that came out of, particularly, the meetings in Jeddah is the extent to which the new Iraqi Government is coordinating with its Arab partners in the region – going to Saudi Arabia to meet with all of these countries to talk about working together, reports that the Saudis may be sending an ambassador back to Baghdad soon coming out of the Saudi foreign ministry. We're seeing a level of cooperation between the Iraqi Government and other Arab Gulf states that I think we hadn't seen in a long time. So when it comes to who's part of this regional coalition, that really is going to be an important piece.
QUESTION: So can we say that from what you said about this position and that what you are expecting from Tehran is just to support what was done, what's going on with – by Iraqi Government – not more than that?
MS. HARF: Well, I'm not outlining anything further for you. Obviously, we believe that ISIL is a threat to Iran, as it is to all countries in the region, and we know the Iranians believe that. So again, we're not going to be coordinating with them, and we think anyone who has influence in Iraq, which the Iranians clearly do, should use that to support this new government, to support their security forces in this fight – and not try to support their security or stability in other ways.
Yes.
QUESTION: Okay. Two questions. I just hear, like, earlier that there are like – that ISIS has like 12 hostages – American hostages or captives, like --
MS. HARF: We've said a small number of Americans. I would dissuade you from the number 12.
QUESTION: Okay. The other question is: Have you requested a budget for the coalition, like from the Congress? It's --
MS. HARF: Well, that's the not the way the coalition – I think you should think about the coalition. The coalition is really a broad-based, holistic one. I think people tend to think of military options only when they think of a coalition. But it's going to include other countries cutting off funding to ISIL, helping to stem the flow of foreign fighters. Those are things we don't need a congressional budget for; we need other countries to step up to the plate and help. So obviously, that's a conversation we're having with those other countries now.
QUESTION: But the U.S. is like running airstrikes there, and now it's moving --
MS. HARF: In Iraq.
QUESTION: -- to another – yeah, and moving to another phase. So do you still, like, go on the same way like with the budget? I mean, is there – or are you going to ask --
MS. HARF: Well, I'm not aware of additional budgetary requirements except for the train and equip mission, in terms of the moderate opposition in Syria that we've asked Congress for funding for the Department of Defense to conduct that train and equip mission. So that's obviously a piece of funding that's, we think, key to this effort. I'm not aware of other budgetary needs, but obviously, we're having an ongoing conversation with Congress about how they can support this effort going forward, but that's all – that's the only budget issue at this point that I'm aware of.
QUESTION: Thanks.
MS. HARF: Yes.
QUESTION: I have three very short clarifying things.
MS. HARF: Uh-huh, okay.
QUESTION: One, your colleague at the White House, Mr. Earnest, said – referred to in – the discussions are – referred to discussions with Iran as back-channel discussions. Back – by back-channel, is he referring to the Burns – or the ones that you have talked about?
MS. HARF: I'm guessing – well, I don't know, but I'm guessing, which aren't really back-channel anymore.
QUESTION: Well, right. But that's what – but that's what he was talking about. I think he means back-channel --
MS. HARF: Yeah. They used to be.
QUESTION: -- in terms of the fact that the meeting was arranged for something else, the nuclear talks, but --
MS. HARF: And they used to be back-channel talks, as you remember.
QUESTION: Well, right, yes.
MS. HARF: Yes.
QUESTION: But secondly, Jen earlier this morning said – pointed out that the P5+1 talks are going to resume again --
MS. HARF: Yes.
QUESTION: -- this week and presumably next – they'll go into next week?
MS. HARF: Yes. So – yes.
QUESTION: But will they – yes.
MS. HARF: Well, I can give an update on that.
QUESTION: All right.
MS. HARF: Go ahead.
QUESTION: But – and then she said there may be another opportunity on the margins --
MS. HARF: Mm-hmm.
QUESTION: -- in the future to discuss Iraq. She is referring to this upcoming --
MS. HARF: Correct.
QUESTION: -- set of meetings?
MS. HARF: She is.
QUESTION: So you would expect there to be, to use Josh Earnest's phrase, some more back-channel discussions on the sidelines of the – on the margins of the P5+1 on Iraq?
MS. HARF: I think there's a good chance there will be, given, obviously, so much of UNGA is going to be focused on Iraq and ISIL. We do start – beginning on the 18th, we will all be headed to New York for the next round of the P5+1 talks. They are scheduled to go through the high-level week, so I have a suitcase packed for a week and a half.
QUESTION: Okay. That means the 27th, 28th?
MS. HARF: Mm-hmm, yep, around that time. I think the 27th is Saturday, but – I don't have an exact date. But there will be, as there always are, a variety of meetings, including plenary sessions, coordination meetings, bilaterals, all of the above.
QUESTION: All right.
Yes, uh-huh.
QUESTION: And speaking of Congress, arming and training of the moderate Syrian rebels, this budget – there are reports that it looks like it's going to postponed after the elections. What is your view on that?
MS. HARF: Well, I'd refer you to congressional leadership, but I think we're still hopeful that we can get – we, the Administration, not the State Department – can get the funding done before they leave. We've heard members of Congress talk quite a bit about how important they think this effort is, and they should put their vote where their words are, and hopefully we can get it done.
QUESTION: So since there are credible reports that this vote might be postponed, what --
MS. HARF: I'm not sure they're credible, but continue.
QUESTION: From Politico, I don't know. So what does it mean, do you think, if it's postponed to after the mid-election?
MS. HARF: Well, I don't – again, I don't know how accurate those are. We think this needs to happen as soon as possible, and I've heard a lot of members of Congress come out very strongly and talk about the importance of this effort and how it needs to be done quickly. And again, holding this off until after the midterm elections, I think, would set this effort back even further. This is something the President first proposed in May. So again, this is an effort we think should move forward as soon as possible.
QUESTION: You don't have to lay out, but do you have an alternative plan if this doesn't pass through at Congress?
MS. HARF: I don't have any other assessment on that for you.
QUESTION: And one last thing: Is – you stated today several times that ISIL presents a serious threat to Iran as well as others. I asked this question several times over the last few months, that your own Treasury Department in February identified operatives in Tehran within the knowledge of the Iranian Government that funded and facilitated fighters, al-Qaida affiliated groups in Syria. Are you going to – from this podium or in your talks with the Iranians, are you going to address this?
MS. HARF: I'd refer you to Treasury for any designations they made, and obviously, I don't have more details for you on any private discussions with the Iranians. I would say that they recognize this as a threat, certainly. They've said so publicly and I think I'd let them speak for themselves.
QUESTION: Assad regime says the same thing. Assad – you identified Assad regime as key factor in terms of ISIL becoming much more – a bigger threat.
MS. HARF: Correct.
QUESTION: And the Assad regime says the same thing, that it's a big threat to themselves.
MS. HARF: Well, I wouldn't compare them to the Iranians.
QUESTION: You don't?
MS. HARF: No.
QUESTION: Okay.
QUESTION: Marie, the definitions in this building and at the White House about what constitutes a active coordination seems to have been kind of nebulous. There doesn't seem to be --
MS. HARF: I don't think that's true.
QUESTION: Okay. Well, then can you provide a definition of what counts as coordination?
MS. HARF: Working together or working in tandem or telling each other what we're going to be doing and coordinating those activities with each other before we do them.
QUESTION: So does that mean if the United States is in a position where it could give a heads-up to Iran about – because we've discussed in this room and at the White House that there are issues of mutual interest between the United States and Iran. So it stands to reason that some of those issues of mutual interest might be where ISIS is presenting the biggest threat at any given moment, so --
MS. HARF: Well, we're not going to be sharing intelligence with them either.
QUESTION: Okay, but, I mean, that may not be actual intelligence. That could just be movements on the ground that are --
MS. HARF: Which would come from where besides intelligence?
QUESTION: That are just – being on the ground. No – I mean, Iran has forces on the ground as well.
MS. HARF: Okay.
QUESTION: So it would stand to reason that they both – would both be observing changes on the ground. So you're saying that there would be no conversations of those kinds to get a sense of what's going on. You're --
MS. HARF: Correct.
QUESTION: You've ruled out completely the idea that --
MS. HARF: That we will be working together to fight ISIL.
QUESTION: I guess I'm just wondering – where's the line drawn between working together and discussing issues of mutual interest? To me, that seems like a distinction without a difference.
MS. HARF: Well, I think they're completely different things. Obviously, we've made clear what our position is in Iraq. We're not going to be telling the Iranians what we're doing. We're not going to be coordinating actions with them. We're not going to be sharing intelligence with them. We've made clear how people can be helpful, but again, we're not going to be coordinating with them, and I'm not sure how much more we can say about that.
Yes.
QUESTION: Yes, please. Regarding this Secretary Kerry trip to Middle East countries, and in particularly raising the issue of how moderate – let's say moderate Islam is looking to this ISIL issue or ISIS issue, do you expect any – I mean, more strategic approach to what's the so-called public diplomacy to explain exactly what this war is, if you want to – if you – I don't know if you call it a war or not.
MS. HARF: I did on Friday.
QUESTION: Okay. That's fine. So it's – especially because it was mentioned on the trip to Egypt; it was official that was quoted that it's – he will ask the Azhar to play a role in moderate Muslims regarding these extremists.
MS. HARF: Right.
QUESTION: My – okay, go ahead.
MS. HARF: Go ahead. Were you done? Sorry.
QUESTION: No, I'm just trying to figure out, because I have a follow-up question as well.
MS. HARF: Okay. Well, a key part of this coalition and what we need people to do is to delegitimize – excuse me – ISIL's ideology. And obviously, it's not always or ever the United States that's best at doing that. It's moderate Muslim voices in the region; it's people like the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia standing up and saying this group does not represent Islam. It's leaders in the region – it's people all over the region, quite frankly, who can stand up and say this. So that's a key part of this coalition and what needs to happen.
It's an effort we certainly have resources that we can put towards as well, particularly when it comes to radicalization or potential radicalization inside the United States – not at the State Department, but at our – my partner domestic agencies who focus on counter-radicalization efforts in vulnerable communities, where we know there is a foreign fighter challenge, places we've had people leave to go overseas and join terrorist groups.
QUESTION: So the question – because yes, whether we like it or not, the first two letters of ISIS is Islamic State, and it is used in media, modern – most of the Western world as in Islamic State so in – doing this and that. How you are going to handle this issue, especially in this war of perceptions, which is a reality in that foreign policy is – big part of it is perception? And then, again, whether we like it or not, the other side is saying that okay, the West again is trying to whatever – confront Islam or Islamic State.
MS. HARF: Well, I think a few points. First, the most important voices in speaking up are, as I said, Muslim voices, particularly religious leaders who've said this does not represent Islam. The President was clear in his speech last week when he said ISIS is neither nor Islamic nor is it a state. So they may try to use that language to describe what they're doing, but quite frankly, they are neither, and not recognized as either by people around the world, including in the region.
So you're right; if I could call them something else, I wish I could. That's what they've chosen to call themselves, but part of our job and really part of this coalition's job – part of Iraqis' job; people in Syria; people who are most at threat from this – is to stand up and say these people don't represent us. And so this is not about a fight with Islam. This is about people in the region standing up and saying this does not represent who we are, and standing together. And we will stand with them to fight this threat, but I want to be very clear about how we're viewing the threat.
QUESTION: So from your perspective, or let's say from your understanding now, these countries in the Middle East are cooperating on this front, or just their cooperation is concentrated on, let's say, military or security side?
MS. HARF: Well, we're asking them to cooperate on a whole host of fronts. Obviously, part of it is the security piece and what that looks like, but part of it is the ideology piece, you're absolutely right. To stand up and say these people are putting forward this grotesque version of what they're calling Islam which is not Islamic, and that we need credible voices to stand up and say that. And we've seen a lot already, which I think has shown the rest of the world exactly what we're working with here.
QUESTION: So just one – the last one. You asked them, but did they respond, or they are responding properly or not?
MS. HARF: Well, we ask broadly. I don't want to indicate that people like the grand mufti of Saudi Arabia are people we're going to and asking to do this. Many, if not all of these statements, come out organically. We are saying very publicly if you – if anyone around the world can play a role in pushing back on this ideology, pushing back on what they're saying it is – this isn't a specific ask that the United States wants, this is what we think is most important in fighting ISIS. So this is something they're deciding to do on their own, not at the ask of the United States, because they believe it's important to say publicly.
Yes, Matt.
QUESTION: So I'm presuming that you have the same response that the White – that Mr. Earnest had at the White House when he was asked about reports that some of the moderates in Syria have, at least if not joined or affiliated themselves with ISIS --
MS. HARF: Those are not true.
QUESTION: -- have – okay. So I won't ask you to repeat it if you're going to say – well, you – maybe --
MS. HARF: I was --
QUESTION: Go ahead and do it because I'm sure you don't know – you might not know what he said.
MS. HARF: I actually haven't seen his briefing.
QUESTION: Okay. So go ahead.
MS. HARF: The Syrian Opposition Coalition said on Saturday that "not a single" U.S.-vetted rebel group has entered into a truce with ISIL. The Free Syrian Army affirmed to us that there is no ongoing truce between FSA elements and ISIL. Furthermore, the Syrian Revolutionaries Front issued a statement Sunday confirming it had never participated in any ceasefire with ISIS. So again, I'm – would back-down those reports wholeheartedly.
QUESTION: So you're – okay.
MS. HARF: Yes.
QUESTION: Which means that you're not concerned about the reports. However, you would --
MS. HARF: No.
QUESTION: -- be concerned if such a thing were, in fact, happening, yes?
MS. HARF: But we don't think it is.
QUESTION: Right.
MS. HARF: Yeah.
QUESTION: Secondly --
MS. HARF: But that's why we vet people, too.
QUESTION: Right.
MS. HARF: Yeah.
QUESTION: In terms of the coalition, there's been a lot of criticism, I guess unsurprisingly, coming – at least coming from some quarters, that this is kind of a phantom coalition, doesn't really exist. I'm wondering – I want to ask you today about not what people – not what countries are not doing, but counties that are doing and have announced. Other than the Australians saying that they're going to send planes and I think 600 troops to UAE, and what you guys are doing, and the French saying that they're prepared to do military strikes – and I'm only talking about the military side here --
MS. HARF: Yeah.
QUESTION: Okay, I'm not --
MS. HARF: But can we include in the military side the countries that have pledged resupply to, particularly, the Kurds and the Iraqi security forces? That's been ongoing --
QUESTION: Sure.
MS. HARF: -- for the past few weeks. And that's a bunch of other countries – resupply, arms --
QUESTION: Anything having to do with things that go "bang" is what I'm talking about.
MS. HARF: Yeah. And there's a number of countries that have pledged to do that with the Iraqi security forces.
QUESTION: Can you --
MS. HARF: We can – we have a full list I think we sent out last on Friday, but we can get it around to you again today, of other countries who've said they will supply the Iraqis. But that's been ongoing.
QUESTION: With military stuff?
MS. HARF: Uh-huh.
QUESTION: With military hardware?
MS. HARF: Yeah, particularly with some of the resupply they need.
QUESTION: Okay.
MS. HARF: Yeah.
QUESTION: I missed it on Friday. Did you – was there a list?
MS. HARF: Well, we've been talking about it for the past few weeks.
QUESTION: I know. But on Friday, we were talking more about – and you got annoyed because I was asking – I was talking about countries that hadn't said they – what they would do.
MS. HARF: I know.
QUESTION: So I wanted to ask now --
MS. HARF: What countries have.
QUESTION: What countries have, and what it is they have or if they haven't decided.
MS. HARF: Yeah, and we can get that full list around. And I'm not sure, actually, I have it. It's like a 40-page-long list.
QUESTION: All right, and just --
MS. HARF: And I'm not sure I have it in here, but I will say, just broadly speaking, there are a number of countries who have agreed to provide – and I'm just seeing if I actually have it in here – weapons to the Kurds and the Iraqi security forces, particularly resupply from their own existing stocks; that's been ongoing since we started this air campaign in Iraq. So we can get the full list around to you. And it's an ongoing process. I think we'll continue to see people come out and pledge support to this effort, but they are the same effort.
QUESTION: Are you asking – will the Secretary be asking at the Security Council meeting for other – for additional – in other words, is this meeting on Friday going to be – is it part – is it centered around coalition-building, or is it, rather, a broader discussion of the whole situation?
MS. HARF: I think it's both. I think it's both. I think it will be safe to say in every discussion the Secretary has about Iraq and the fight against ISIS particularly, he will be talking about how we are building this broad-based coalition.
QUESTION: My last one on coalition: The Russian foreign minister, your friend Mr. Lavrov, said today that Russia wasn't going to – Russia isn't interested in joining or being part of or contributing to any coalition against ISIL that doesn't include Iran and the Assad government. What's your response to that? Is it just --
MS. HARF: Well, we've said the Assad government won't be part of this coalition.
QUESTION: Does that mean that you're not – if that's the Russians' condition, does that mean you're not interested in Russian participation?
MS. HARF: Well, we're interested in people who are willing to contribute to this coalition, but we are not interested in the Assad regime being a part of it.
QUESTION: Or Iran?
QUESTION: (Off-mike.)
MS. HARF: I'm sorry?
QUESTION: – because he said both Iran and Assad.
MS. HARF: Correct.
QUESTION: So basically, you're not interested in the Russians' assistance here.
MS. HARF: Well, if --
QUESTION: If that's their condition.
MS. HARF: If they come with preconditions --
QUESTION: Right. If they say --
MS. HARF: -- that going be pretty tough.
QUESTION: -- "we're not going to do anything to help you out unless you -- "
MS. HARF: But it's not about – to be fair, it's not about helping us out. They talk a lot about how --
QUESTION: But how about the coalition? I mean, not just --
MS. HARF: Right, but, I mean, if they're uninterested in helping the people of Syria and Iraq who are being brutalized by ISIS because they have preconditions on that, then they can defend that position publicly themselves.
QUESTION: But just --
QUESTION: The Iraqi president said that he regretted that Iran wasn't invited to the Paris conference. Given that everything is happening in large part inside his country, why didn't the Iraqi Government have the final say on who got to come to the conference?
MS. HARF: Well, Iran's participation in the conference this week, we believe, would have been premature given the status of our own talks on building a coalition. We're also not aware of an invitation being issued nor of Iran wishing to accept one. Obviously, this does not mean there won't be future opportunities for Iran to be included in a broad and multinational dialogue about the shared threat, so obviously, those are still opportunities. But we didn't think this participation in this conference was appropriate. The conference is going on as we speak. The Iraqi president is there and there will be many of opportunities for everyone to discuss this.
QUESTION: How is it that the U.S. gets to decide who gets to come to a conference dealing with the security of another sovereign nation?
MS. HARF: Well, we don't. Again, the French issued invitations and we are not aware of them issuing an invitation or of the Iranians wanting to accept one.
QUESTION: Can I just --
QUESTION: But it's not a matter of whether or not the Iranians wanted to accept. If the Iraqis think that the Iranians can help them deal with a fundamental security threat which you yourself have said is also a threat to the Iranian nation, why is it that now we have President Masum saying it was a mistake for Iran to not be there at the very beginning of what looks to be a protracted fight against ISIL?
MS. HARF: Well, let's pull his exact comments to see what he said, but again, we're not aware of any invitation being issued to them, nor of them wanting to accept one. There will be plenty of opportunities for all of us to sit down and discuss this. I would note that in March, we joined nearly 30 countries, including Iran, at a counterterrorism conference in Iraq where we were all there at the table talking together. So there are many ways we can do this; just this wasn't the right time.
QUESTION: But that was six months ago, Marie.
MS. HARF: I understand the calendar, Roz.
QUESTION: And this is before the U.S. Government and the UK Government and others decided or acknowledged that ISIL was a much more fundamental security threat to the region --
MS. HARF: But the threat has changed since March.
QUESTION: -- and so really, one could argue that the discussions back in March are moot.
MS. HARF: I was pointing out that we are willing to sit down in a counterterrorism forum and discuss these issues with the Iranians --
QUESTION: So just --
MS. HARF: -- that this conference wasn't the right time. And again, the French were in charge of invitations. There will be plenty of conferences and discussions and I'm sure when we're all in New York, there will be as well. So this is not the end-all-be-all of conferences, and I think we should just be careful about putting too much into that.
QUESTION: So just that we're clear --
MS. HARF: Uh-huh.
QUESTION: -- you are open to the possibility of the Iranians taking part in some form in such a coalition. The only thing you've excluded is military cooperation, right?
MS. HARF: No. I said to be included in a broad and multilateral dialogue about this shared threat – dialogue.
QUESTION: Okay. So you cannot see the Iranians taking part in a coalition, whether they – whether it involved military or nonmilitary aspects? You've ruled that out?
MS. HARF: If they – well, if they have a role to play to fight against ISIL, we can have that conversation, again, going forward and see what that looks like.
QUESTION: Marie, as the president of the --
QUESTION: So you don't rule it out, then? You don't rule it out?
MS. HARF: I don't have anything else for you on that, Arshad.
QUESTION: But as the president of the Security Council for the month of September, you --
MS. HARF: We are the president, yes.
QUESTION: Yes, and you have – that comes with privileges.
MS. HARF: It does.
QUESTION: One of those privileges is being allowed to invite whoever you want to sit in on the meeting.
MS. HARF: I don't know --
QUESTION: Would you --
MS. HARF: On Friday?
QUESTION: On Friday --
MS. HARF: I don't --
QUESTION: -- consider an invitation to the Iranians?
MS. HARF: I don't --
QUESTION: Presumably, the Iraqis, who are not on the Security Council --
MS. HARF: The Iraqis will be there --
QUESTION: -- will be there. Right.
MS. HARF: -- considering it's – yes.
QUESTION: It is their country, after all.
MS. HARF: It is their country.
QUESTION: So what about an invitation to Iran?
MS. HARF: I haven't heard that there will be broader invitations, but let me check with our team at USUN and see.
QUESTION: Or Syria for that matter.
MS. HARF: Let me check with our team.
QUESTION: Just one question.
MS. HARF: Yes.
QUESTION: What you are expecting exactly from this Security Council meeting on Friday? I mean, to come with a resolution or just to raise a consensus?
MS. HARF: Well, I think to raise concerns, to talk about – again, this is another multilateral forum where we can all sit down and talk about it with a number of key countries here, and it's leading into the high-level week at UNGA where the President will be chairing a session on foreign fighters, where we will have a number of conversations – the Secretary will be at the Global Counterterrorism Forum – where we'll have a number of conversations about how we can fight this threat. So I think this will be a good session where we can put issues on the table, talk about it in a place we haven't at this level yet, and lead into the high-level week at UNGA.
QUESTION: So you said – I think you mentioned that it's – the meeting will start at 2:00 p.m.?
MS. HARF: 2:00 p.m.
QUESTION: And it will finish that night?
MS. HARF: Correct. It could be – I mean, these tend to go fairly long, at least from my reading of the UN.
QUESTION: When is the Global Counterterrorism Forum going to be held?
MS. HARF: Let me see if I have that. I believe it's the 23rd, but let me double-check. Yes, on September 23rd Secretary Kerry will co-host with Turkish foreign minister, the new Turkish foreign minister, the fifth GCTF Ministerial. I was at the one last year. These obviously happen during UNGA. They're an important place for countries to talk about the shared threat from terrorism, including foreign terrorist fighters, kidnapping for ransom, the growth of violent extremism, and other issues as well.
QUESTION: And just to check, Israel is not a participant?
MS. HARF: So GCTF ministerials are limited to GCTF members; however, we are pleased to report that in 2013 they agreed to significantly expand the opportunities for Israel and others who are committed counterterrorism partners. Since then, Israel has been at a bunch of GCTF meetings, but this meeting will only be the founding members. This is 29 countries plus the EU. They're the only ones who participate in ministerial meetings. So Israel will not be there.
QUESTION: Okay.
MS. HARF: Let's just do a couple more on ISIS, and then I think I have to move on.
QUESTION: Yeah. Prime Minister Netanyahu, like, said that he support Obama's effort, the President effort.
MS. HARF: And we've welcomed that. We welcome that support.
QUESTION: Yeah. But thing is, like, like how do you see the participation of Israel, like in the coalition?
MS. HARF: Every country can make their own decisions about how they participate in this broad coalition, whether that's sharing information, whether that's cutting off financing or foreign fighter flows or any of those issues, obviously, they can make their own decisions about how best to participate.
QUESTION: But ISIS itself, like, has declared, like, several times, like, aggressive, like, comments against Israel. Actually al-Qaida as well, like, they – their original plan, according to Abu Musab Suri that to surround Israel, like to put sleeping cells, like, all around Israel.
MS. HARF: Well, Israel knows it's a threat to the whole region. And again, how they'll participate in this coalition specifically I'd let them speak to.
QUESTION: Marie, can I ask one more on this topic? There are reports that there was a chlorine gas attack in a town called Dhuluiya in Iraq. Are you aware of those reports?
MS. HARF: I hadn't seen that.
QUESTION: Okay.
MS. HARF: I can check on that.
Yes.
QUESTION: How about on Ukraine, if that's okay?
MS. HARF: Last on ISIS.
QUESTION: Secretary --
MS. HARF: Unless you have one.
QUESTION: Secretary of State John Kerry said on CBS Face the Nation that he will – or we will not coordinate airstrikes with the Assad government.
MS. HARF: Correct.
QUESTION: But we will "de-conflict to make certain that they're not about to do something that they might regret even more seriously." What did he mean by that?
MS. HARF: Well, as he said several times in that interview, we will not – this is like I'm a broken record today – we will not be coordinating in any way with the Syrian Government. The President has made clear we will hunt down terrorists wherever they are if they threaten America; that means we will not hesitate to take action against ISIL in Syria as well as Iraq. We're obviously not going to telegraph our plans in advance, and as the Secretary said during that interview multiple times, we are not and will not be coordinating with the regime.
QUESTION: What did he mean by "de-conflict"? I mean --
MS. HARF: I think I just made clear what he meant. And we have to move on. I'm on a little bit of a tight time schedule today, so any last ones on ISIS? Yes, last one.
QUESTION: Going back to the effort to discourage foreigners, especially people in the United States, from going over to join ISIS, you mentioned reaching out to credible voices worldwide. There's also the State Department video that was released. A two-part question: Since the release of the video have you had any initial feedback on whether it is having the intended effect of discouraging people from associating with this group; and then secondly, are there other efforts in the works to also discourage people from getting involved?
MS. HARF: Yeah. And that video you referenced is part of our CSCC efforts here. This has been ongoing for some months now. This was just the latest video. First it was in Arabic and others languages, and now we're doing it in English, which is, I think, the video you're referring to. So this is an ongoing effort to make clear how brutal ISIL is, to make sure the world sees that. And again, it's a counter-radicalization tool. It's hard to quantify the impact that it has, but we believe it's an important message. Obviously, there are many other credible voices out there on this topic.
Yes, Ukraine.
QUESTION: Yes, on Ukraine. So today, the military exercises Rapid Trident began in Ukraine today. I wanted to know if you could comment on the timing of these.
MS. HARF: Well, these have been long preplanned. This is a U.S.-led military exercise in western Ukraine – I would note nowhere near the conflict zone in eastern Ukraine. This is an annual exercise, happens every year, and it was planned before Russia's military actions in Ukraine began. Obviously, this is something we've said is important to us to improve interoperability, security, and stability, but nothing to do with what's going on in the east.
QUESTION: And so Russia should not interpret this as a response to their actions in Ukraine?
MS. HARF: Not at all. It happens every year, long pre-planned, very open and transparent about it.
QUESTION: Stay on the general subject?
MS. HARF: Mm-hmm.
QUESTION: I want to go back to your opening – second statement from the beginning.
MS. HARF: Yeah, on Crimea.
QUESTION: Yeah. The U.S. – correct me if I'm reading – if I'm repeating this incorrectly. U.S. does not recognize the elections in Crimea and will not acknowledge them. What does that mean?
MS. HARF: We don't recognize the legitimacy and will not acknowledge their outcome.
QUESTION: Not acknowledge their outcome?
MS. HARF: Uh-huh.
QUESTION: Okay.
MS. HARF: Yeah.
QUESTION: And I had one more thing about that, because it appears that the worst violations of the ceasefire have happened now --
MS. HARF: Yes.
QUESTION: -- and I'm wondering what you have to say about that.
MS. HARF: Yeah. The ceasefire is increasingly strained. We strongly condemn the recent surge in separatist attacks against Ukrainian positions around Donetsk over the weekend, particularly the assault on Donetsk Airport. Additionally, over the weekend, OSCE monitors came under fire and sustained serious damage to their vehicles. These incidents are in violation of the commitments made in the September 5th Minsk Agreement. It is still holding, although it's increasingly strained. But we believe the parties should come back from the brink here and continue holding the ceasefire.
QUESTION: Can I ask you, what does it mean if – "holding," if there are just multiple violations pretty much every day? That seems to be that it's not holding at all.
MS. HARF: It's increasingly strained, and we hope that it doesn't further escalate and that actually there are steps taken back to de-escalate.
QUESTION: All right. And then in Paris – or sorry, up in New York, are you – do you expect the Secretary to have any meetings with or any discussion with Foreign Minister Lavrov about the situation in Ukraine?
MS. HARF: I don't know.
QUESTION: All right. Last one on that: The NATO secretary general who's leaving at the end of the month --
MS. HARF: Yes.
QUESTION: -- had some pretty harsh words for Russia, saying it had violated all sorts of things that have kept the peace since the end of the Cold War. Do you share – does the Administration share those --
MS. HARF: I didn't see the full comments --
QUESTION: He gave a speech.
MS. HARF: -- but I obviously agree with the general concept. But I didn't see the full comments, so I don't want to endorse every single --
QUESTION: Okay, well – all right. Well, what's – can you outline what the --
MS. HARF: -- crossed T and dotted I in it.
QUESTION: What's the general concept that you agree with?
MS. HARF: Well, what you just mentioned in terms of Russia being in flagrant violation of international law and international norms. The values that led to the founding of NATO are as relevant, if not more relevant, today than they were at the founding.
QUESTION: Really.
MS. HARF: And so there are things that Russia has – its actions have flown in the face of: peace, security, stability across Europe, across the continent. Obviously, this is something that we take very seriously – promotion of democracy, civil society, all of those issues which Russia has just ran roughshod over these past few months.
QUESTION: Okay, I just – you talk about the founding of NATO and NATO principles, but those aren't necessarily Russian principles, right? So --
MS. HARF: Correct.
QUESTION: So – but you would agree with the general --
MS. HARF: But they are principles that underlie peace and stability.
QUESTION: And – but are you referring at all to the NATO-Russia agreements that have been – that existed?
MS. HARF: I was --
QUESTION: Are they --
MS. HARF: I was referring in general to the fact that one of the things that has kept peace and stability to the extent that it has since the end of World War II has been the commitment of countries on the continent to these principles.
Just – I think I can do one more.
QUESTION: Last week I asked about Crimean --
MS. HARF: I'll do one – two more. You, and then we're – then I'm done.
QUESTION: -- Crimean Tatar leader Mustafa Dzhemilev. He's saying that his community, Crimean Tatars, being ethnically cleansed by Russians.
MS. HARF: Well, I spoke at the top about our concern for that community's welfare.
QUESTION: Oh, you did?
MS. HARF: I did, yes.
Yes.
QUESTION: Azerbaijan.
MS. HARF: Yes.
QUESTION: Said Nuri, the U.S. citizen of Azerbaijani origin, was deported from the country last week. He'd been detained in connection to an undisclosed investigation. Shortly before he was deported, he spoke out against an explicit video depicting him that had been posted on the Internet, saying it was an attempt by the government to discredit him. Something similar happened about a year or so ago involving an investigative reporter – also photos posted on the Internet, and a pro-government newspaper ran an article about this journalist attacking her personal life. My question is, is there concern that these secret recordings and – which seem to be for the purpose of blackmail or intimidation may be a pattern by the government, and if so, is the State Department issuing any kind of protest to the embassy?
MS. HARF: Well, we are increasingly concerned that the Government of Azerbaijan is not living up to its international human rights commitments and obligations in its actions against civil society groups, including in the case – the cases, but in particular this latest case that you referenced. We have made our concerns clear to them both publicly and privately.
QUESTION: Can I ask one more?
MS. HARF: One more, yes.
QUESTION: Yes. On Matthew Miller.
MS. HARF: Mm-hmm.
QUESTION: He was sentenced to six years in a prison camp. Do you have any reaction to that?
MS. HARF: He was. The alleged actions for which Mr. Miller and the other two U.S. citizens detained in the DPRK were arrested and imprisoned on, of course, would not give rise to arrest or imprisonment in the U.S. or in most other countries around the world. Despite official claims, the U.S. citizens arrested there are not used for political purposes. It is increasingly clear that the DPRK seeks to use these U.S. citizens as pawns to pursue its own political agenda. We have been very clear that they should all be released and returned home, period. Obviously, we've seen the reports about the sentencing and disagree with it.
Thank you.
QUESTION: Marie, can I get just one? I know you released a statement. I wanted to just get you on camera saying this on Benghazi about the recent report that was published in The Daily Signal.
MS. HARF: Okay.
QUESTION: It wasn't you that – it wasn't you in particular that released the statement, but it was someone in the press corps.
MS. HARF: Okay.
QUESTION: It was reported by Sharyl Attkisson in The Daily Signal that now-retired Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Raymond Maxwell witnessed then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton staff trying to conceal damaging information in advance of the State's independent investigation into the 2012 Benghazi attacks.
MS. HARF: The ARB had full and direct access to State Department employees and documents. Any accounts to the contrary, like that one you mentioned, are completely without merit, completely ill-informed. It was – these reports show a complete lack of understanding of how the ARB functioned. It collected its own documents directly from anybody in the Department. There was a Department-wide call for information to be given directly to the ARB; that's what happened. The ARB's co-chairs, Tom Pickering and Admiral Mike Mullen, both public servants of impeccable credentials, have both repeated several times that they had "unfettered access" to all the information they needed, period.
Thank you.
(The briefing was concluded at 2:02 p.m.)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
