• Military Menu                       

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Industry
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• WMD
• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

Daily Press Briefing, August 10, 2015

John Kirby
Spokesperson
Daily Press Briefing
Washington, DC
August 10, 2015

Index for Today's Briefing

AFGHANISTAN/PAKISTAN/REGION
UKRAINE/RUSSIA
AFGHANISTAN/PAKISTAN/REGION
ISIL/TURKEY/SYRIA/REGION
CUBA
DEPARTMENT
SYRIA/REGION
IRAN
IRAN/SYRIA
SYRIA/ISIL
IRAQ
IRAN
DEPARTMENT
UGANDA
THE GAMBIA
RUSSIA/REGION
JAPAN
ISIL/REGION

 

TRANSCRIPT:

2:04 p.m. EDT

MR KIRBY: Just a – afternoon, everybody. A couple things at the top. I think you saw our statement on Saturday over the weekend deploring the terrorist attacks on the Kabul police academy and on Afghan national and NATO military bases. This morning’s terrorists – this morning, I’m sorry, terrorists detonated a car bomb at Kabul’s international airport. These attacks, all of them have resulted in now hundreds of casualties and at least 56 deaths, including children, and demonstrate again the insurgency’s complete disregard for the lives of innocent Afghans. The people of the region have suffered far too much at the hands of terrorists and violent extremists. The United States stands by the Afghan people and remains committed to working closely with Afghanistan, Pakistan, and other partners to achieve a stable, secure, and prosperous region.

Now is the time for the leaders of Afghanistan and Pakistan to work together to achieve the shared goal of defeating violent extremists. It is in the urgent interest of both countries to eliminate safe havens and to reduce the operational capacity of the Taliban on both sides of the border. Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families who suffered as a result of these attacks, and again, we call upon the Taliban and anyone supporting them to bring an end to the violence in Afghanistan.

On Ukraine, we are deeply troubled by a sharp rise in attacks in eastern Ukraine, particularly the heavy artillery assault on government-controlled Starognativka. In the last three days, three Ukrainian soldiers have been killed and 35 wounded. Today, Ukrainians reported 127 different separatist attacks, the most since Debaltseve – since the Debaltseve offensive in February. Russia and the separatists it supports cannot simultaneously talk peace and then fight. If they want peace, they must implement the full ceasefire that they agreed to in Minsk.

We are also deeply concerned about the arson attack over the weekend that destroyed four OSCE vehicles in Donetsk. We call on the separatists to provide security for the OSCE monitoring mission and allow it to do its vital work.

With that, Brad?

QUESTION: Before we go back to Ukraine, can we follow up on Afghanistan? Are you concerned the increasing attacks and the increasing lethality of these attacks will set back any efforts at negotiating a ceasefire, a longer term political reconciliation in Afghanistan?

MR KIRBY: Well, we certainly hope not, Brad. I mean, the goal has always been one of Afghan-led reconciliation with the Taliban, and that remains our goal and our objective. Obviously, these attacks underscore two things – Afghanistan remains a dangerous place and that the Taliban has not renounced the use of violence as a tactic and a terror device. So we certainly hope not. I mean, we want to see this – obviously, we want to see political reconciliation and a safe and prosperous and secure Afghanistan. And again, these attacks underscore that that remains a challenge.

QUESTION: Do they underscore as well that the forces within the Taliban that seek to foment further instability and violence are winning out against those elements within the Taliban that may be inclined to a reconciliation?

MR KIRBY: I think that’s difficult to say right now, Brad. I mean, perfect visibility into the inner workings of the Taliban is a difficult thing to have and to talk to. Again, I would go back to what I said before; we certainly want to see a political reconciliation process move forward. We want to see peace. And recent participation in those reconciliation talks as of a few weeks ago was certainly an encouraging sign, and we said at the time that it was very early – just beginning; we want to see this progress. So it’s difficult to say the degree to which these attacks – the effect that they’re going to have on the reconciliation process. Again, we hope that they don’t.

QUESTION: And then just lastly, your comment on Pakistan sounded eerily familiar to many, many, many comments over the years about now is the time for Afghanistan and Pakistan to work together. Why does this continue to be a problem? And I thought that you – there had been some progress, you believed, on this front.

MR KIRBY: Well, certainly – yes. So a couple of things. We applauded President Ghani when shortly after taking office he reached out to leaders of Pakistan, and they did have some constructive conversations about the shared challenge in that border region, which we all recognize as – remains a dangerous place and remains a safe haven for terrorists. And you probably have seen President Ghani’s comments earlier today talking about the threat that he believes continues to emanate from Pakistan. I will tell you Secretary Kerry spoke to President Ghani today. They talked about this, this issue of the safe havens and of the need for both countries to continue to work at this, to try to eliminate those safe havens. Nobody said it was going to be easy, and while we did cite progress, that doesn’t mean that anybody on either side is going to sort of let their foot off the gas on the need to continue to talk, to continue to try to deal with these safe havens.

QUESTION: But John, do – a lot of people are putting these increasing attacks on the leadership quarrel within the Taliban. Are – is that not what you guys are seeing?

MR KIRBY: Well, I wouldn’t get into intelligence matters up here, Lesley. I think I probably answered it as best as I could when I talked to Brad. I mean, it’s just too – it’s difficult to say exactly what’s behind and who exactly in the Taliban are behind these attacks. But we do believe they were by the Taliban, and certainly, as we have before, we condemn that violence and we want to see peace in Afghanistan, we want to see these attacks stop. We would like to see reconciliation – excuse me – an effort on reconciliation continue.

Yes.

QUESTION: Staying on Afghanistan. You said that Secretary Kerry spoke to Pakistani president. What is --

MR KIRBY: He spoke to President Ghani.

QUESTION: Okay, sorry. So you mentioned Pakistan in this. Has anybody spoken to Pakistani leadership? If yes, what is their --

MR KIRBY: I don’t have any calls to read out from this podium with respect to calls to Pakistani leadership recently. He did speak to President Ghani just a couple hours ago.

QUESTION: Yeah. No, but when you mentioned Pakistan in your statement, that means – do you have any substantial proof that Pakistan is involved? And is Pakistan doing anything to stop this?

MR KIRBY: Look, this is a continual challenge, the idea of the safe havens that exist on both sides of the border. And again, I’d go back to what I said at the outset: We call on both countries to continue to work together to try to eliminate those safe havens. I don’t have – nor would I if I did – don’t have specific intelligence regarding these particular attacks, the ones that happened over the weekend and this morning. Afghan security forces responded ably to the scene. Again, it’s a reminder that Afghanistan remains a dangerous place, and we all have to continue to work harder together on this shared challenge.

QUESTION: But this statement also raises the question that 2008 Mumbai attacks, and nothing has happened all these years. So how do you expect Pakistan to react? The six Americans who died in those attacks, in 2008 Mumbai attacks.

MR KIRBY: What do you mean, nothing has happened since then?

QUESTION: Pakistan has not done anything to apprehend the – they have been let – it’s an – it’s also an ongoing process.

MR KIRBY: Again, we continue to call on all the countries involved here to do what we can to kind of – to address this shared challenge.

Yes.

QUESTION: Turkey?

MR KIRBY: Sure.

QUESTION: Have you got any more information, comments about the attack on the U.S. mission there, and whether you think it’s related to the beefing up the presence at Incirlik or the fight against ISIS?

MR KIRBY: Well, I think you all know there was a security incident at our consulate in Istanbul. Nobody in the consulate was injured. We’re working with Turkish authorities as they investigate this, and I really wouldn’t go beyond that right now. I can tell you that the consulate will be open for business tomorrow.

Yeah.

QUESTION: Turkish police actually contend that the attack that carried out to U.S. embassy was done by the left-far organization DHKP-C. It called the Revolutionary People’s Liberation Army Front. Do you have any --

MR KIRBY: No. I’m going to refer you to Turkish authorities. This is their investigation. I have not seen that statement that you say they have put out. But I would let the Turkish authorities speak to this. This is their investigation.

QUESTION: Can I go to Iraq?

MR KIRBY: Sure.

QUESTION: So just to clarify – sorry. You said nobody in the consulate was injured. That means no consulate staff?

MR KIRBY: No U.S. consulate personnel, yes.

QUESTION: Okay. And – okay, and that includes local as well as --

MR KIRBY: I’m not aware of any injuries as a result of this.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR KIRBY: Yeah.

QUESTION: On Turkey.

MR KIRBY: Yeah.

QUESTION: Is the U.S. Government frustrated in any way with these – the retaliatory strikes against the PKK? Were you caught off guard in any way?

MR KIRBY: Well, we’ve talked about this before, recognizing that Turkey has a right to defend itself against terrorist attacks. And I would add that we continue to call for the PKK to cease their attacks, to return to a political process here. And we’ve made it clear that our expectation is that Turkey is going to take the necessary steps to prevent any civilian casualties and to act in accordance with international humanitarian law.

QUESTION: Was --

QUESTION: How worried are you – meaning you, the U.S. Government – that the Turks may be using the fight against ISIL as a reason to go after Kurdish fighters, particularly those who belong to the YPG, inside Syria? Is it complicating the efforts to defeat ISIL by having Turkey use the cover of its own security concerns?

MR KIRBY: Well, your question implies that that’s exactly what they’re doing. As I said, and we talked about this over a week ago, their attacks on PKK are as a result of attacks they are suffering by this terrorist group inside Turkey. I’ve already said we’ve called on them to do what they can to prevent civilian casualties, to act in accordance with international law, and we continue to advocate for a political process here between the PKK and Turkey. That is separate and distinct from the cooperation that we enjoy with Turkey against ISIL, and the Turks have made it clear themselves that certainly inside Syria, they’re focused on counter-ISIL activities.

QUESTION: Do you have an ironclad promise from the Turks that they’re not going after any Kurdish fighters, whether they belong to YPG or anyone else, who happen to be inside Syria?

MR KIRBY: I would just point you to what the Turks have said themselves, that their focus inside Syria is on counter-ISIL forces. They also have a right to defend themselves from the PKK when they’re attacked, and they’ve done that, and again, we’ve made clear what our expectations are with respect to their – to that retaliation.

QUESTION: But does the U.S. trust the Turkish Government when it says that it’s only going to go after those Kurdish fighters when they have been attacked and not use the pretext of attacks, such as what has happened today in southeastern Turkey, as a reason to go after Kurdish fighters inside Syria?

MR KIRBY: Again, Ros, the Turkish Government itself has made clear what their intentions are with respect to counter-ISIL operations in Syria, and what they – and where they’re going to focus their energies and their operations. They’re a strong ally, a good partner in this fight, and we have no reason to doubt that they’re going to do exactly what they said they’re going to do.

QUESTION: But given that Turkey is very much concerned about the ongoing Kurdish effort to try to establish its own state, what inducements has the U.S. offered to Ankara in order to basically make sure that their fight against ISIL doesn’t expand into other areas?

MR KIRBY: Their fight against ISIL expands in other areas – the Turks?

QUESTION: Yeah, right.

MR KIRBY: Again, everybody is focused on the ISIL threat inside Syria, and Turkey has said themselves that that’s where the locus of their energy is going to be applied. We continue to have conversations with them about how best to bolster security in the region and to achieve a common objective here. And we’ve also said – been very clear that we’re not interested in doing anything that’s going to change the territorial integrity of Syria.

QUESTION: What about the Kurds, the fighters inside Syria? What conversations has the U.S. had with them about making certain that their efforts are focused solely on ISIL and not on any larger ambitions of trying to establish their own nation-state?

MR KIRBY: There’s no support from in the coalition to do anything to change the territorial integrity of Syria. We’ve made that clear.

QUESTION: And how would you hold the Kurds accountable if they did try to take advantage of the situation to try to carve out their own nation-state?

MR KIRBY: Well, that’s a hypothetical that, I mean, I’m --

QUESTION: But it’s their ambition. It’s not a hypothetical.

MR KIRBY: I’m not going to speak for their ambitions. They have been proving – they have proven very effective against ISIL, which is why the coalition continues to support them from the air. We’ve made it clear the coalition’s goal and focus is against ISIL, period. It’s not about changing the map, it’s about going after ISIL. In fact, the only thing that – in terms of territory that we’re interested in changing is the territorial hold that ISIL has both in Iraq and in Syria, and we’ve made that clear. And everybody – anybody who is in the coalition and certainly anybody supporting the coalition, that’s the expectation. That’s what we’re focused on.

QUESTION: So my final one: So to make it very clear, the U.S. is not going to tolerate mission creep from any member of the coalition?

MR KIRBY: Well, I mean, your question implies that there’s people in the coalition that have some sort of idea about mission creep. Mission creep, by the way – mission creep isn’t about – mission creep is when the mission itself changes and becomes something bigger than it was at the outset. The mission here hasn’t changed. It’s about degrading and destroying ISIL. And when we have fighters on the ground in Syria who are going after ISIL – and they’re not all, by the way, Kurdish; there’s Arab fighters, there’s Turkoman fighters. When we have fighters on the ground – willing, effective partners who are willing and are executing operations against ISIL – we’re going to continue to support them. That’s the goal, not changing the map of Syria.

QUESTION: John.

QUESTION: John.

MR KIRBY: Yeah.

QUESTION: Can we go to Cuba?

QUESTION: Can I have one last one on Turkey and then move on?

QUESTION: Iraq?

MR KIRBY: Yeah, sure.

QUESTION: Has the U.S. Government assured the Turks that the Syrian Kurdish fighters will not enter the 68-mile strip along the border?

MR KIRBY: Say that again. You’re reading it really well.

QUESTION: I’m sorry. Has the U.S. Government assured Turks that the Syrian Kurdish fighters will not enter the 68-mile strip along the border?

MR KIRBY: I’m not going to talk about diplomatic conversations that we have one way or the other. What we are focused on, again, is getting after ISIL where they are, and where they are right now in Syria tends to be gravitating towards that northern strip of border area. And we’re going to continue to work with our partners at going after them there.

QUESTION: Is there a plan to increase security at the embassy or the consulate given these attacks in Turkey?

MR KIRBY: I’m not going to talk about security precautions that we take. You know that’s never a good idea. I think you can imagine that everybody’s taking the threat very, very seriously. The consulate – the embassy did put out a security message when the event was ongoing and we’re going to always do what we have to do to protect our diplomats and our people.

QUESTION: Have the diplomats been told to restrict their movements?

MR KIRBY: I’m not going to get into specific security measures. Again, you all should know that that’s not a wise thing for me to do from the podium. We’re going to do whatever we have to do to make sure that our people are safe.

Yeah.

QUESTION: John, a very quick one on Cuba: What’s your take on the arrest of 90 people yesterday in Havana?

MR KIRBY: Yeah. We saw those reports. Deeply concerned by this roundup of peaceful activists by Cuban authorities this past Sunday. Members of our embassy there in Havana have confirmed these reports. The United States will continue to advocate for the rights to peaceful assembly, association, and freedom of expression and religion, and we’re going to continue to voice our support for improved human rights conditions and democratic reforms in Cuba.

QUESTION: So how many are you saying were rounded up? Because it’s different numbers. I saw 118.

MR KIRBY: I don’t have a number for you.

QUESTION: You don’t have a number?

MR KIRBY: I’d refer you to Cuban authorities there. For us, it doesn’t matter whether it’s one or it’s 101. We’re going to continue to make – to call for support for peaceful assembly, association, freedom of expression.

QUESTION: Does the Secretary plan to meet with dissidents when he goes to Cuba?

MR KIRBY: I don’t have anything specific with his – on his schedule Friday when he goes down to Havana. We’ll – as we get closer to Friday, we’ll be able to give you more details about his visit.

QUESTION: There’s nothing on his schedule at all this week. What’s up with his schedule this week? What’s he doing?

MR KIRBY: What’s up with his schedule this week?

QUESTION: Yeah, because there was nothing on it, and that’s sort of unusual. (Laughter.)

MR KIRBY: Well, you all know Friday’s a big day.

QUESTION: Yeah.

MR KIRBY: He’s going down to Havana to formally open up and raise the flag at our embassy in Havana.

QUESTION: Check. Yeah, we got that.

MR KIRBY: Yeah.

QUESTION: What else is he doing?

MR KIRBY: Tomorrow he’s going to New York City. He’s got an event with Thomson Reuters – an on-the-record event to talk predominantly about the Iran deal. This is continuing our efforts to explain the benefits of the Iran deal and how it meets our security interests and the interests of our allies and partners. And then I don’t have anything else for the remainder of the week to read out.

QUESTION: On Wednesday and Thursday is he in Washington or is he --

MR KIRBY: Wednesday and Thursday, I believe he’s in Washington. I can get you more details on his schedule later. I don’t have a day-by-day right now with me.

QUESTION: On Syria?

MR KIRBY: Yeah.

QUESTION: The dissident that was freed – do you have any comment regarding the release of Mazen Darwish, who the Secretary has actually been calling for his release?

MR KIRBY: I don’t know if I do. Let me come back to you on that, Lesley.

QUESTION: Okay.

QUESTION: Syria also?

MR KIRBY: Yes.

QUESTION: This renewed effort on the part of the Administration to see if some kind of political process can be revived, which they’ve been pretty straightforward about or open about, saying that the atmosphere has changed for various reasons and people are more willing to have mature conversations, et cetera. Is there actually anything on the table at the moment that Mr. Kerry is discussing with Lavrov and other people, or is it just exploration?

MR KIRBY: Well, at this point I think it’s safer to say these discussions are explorative in nature. As you know, when he was in Doha last week he met with both Foreign Minister Lavrov and Foreign Minister Al-Jubeir from Saudi Arabia. It was the first time the three of them had gathered together for a discussion about Syria. That was the topic area. And they explored sort of the situation on the ground right now and they explored possibilities for trying to move forward to get at a political solution in Syria.

I think it’s safe to say that there are – there’s still a lot of work to do here, and this first meeting was encouraging (a) that they could have it; (b) that they could use it to discuss one topic, like a topic – so serious as what’s going on in Syria; and trying to get at a political solution. But I wouldn’t want to mislead you to think that there was a menu that came out of it or specific objectives that all agreed to and that all are going to pursue. I mean, it’s – it was a good first meeting and I know that there will be more. He met with Foreign Minister Lavrov on the sidelines of the ASEAN ministerial in Kuala Lumpur. Obviously, many topics were discussed in this bilateral meeting between him and Foreign Minister Lavrov, but it did include Syria and sort of following up on the discussion that they had had in Doha just a few days before. So a lot of work to be done here.

QUESTION: Are they aiming for something in particular? I know you’re saying they’re still discussing, but are they aiming for a conference or a --

MR KIRBY: Well, I mean, broadly speaking they’re aiming at trying to find a way to get to a political solution here in Syria.

QUESTION: But like another conference or --

MR KIRBY: No, I don’t have anything like on the schedule to announce. I think what they did agree was that the three of them need to continue talking and exploring these ideas, and they all three committed to that.

QUESTION: What has changed that makes the U.S. and Russia and the Saudis believe that this could be a moment to try to start pushing for a political solution in Syria? What has changed on the ground, as it were?

MR KIRBY: Well, first of all, nobody said that we’re at some moment now. I think everybody recognizes how thorny this issue is, how complicated it is, and that it’s going to take a lot of hard work. I also would say that it’s not as if we haven’t always been focused on trying to get to a political solution in Syria. I mean, this is – the conflict there has been going on for quite some time, so it’s not like they’re just – everybody is just kind of waking up to the need that we’ve got to get at this.

But it is also safe to say that conditions on the ground have continued to worsen, the Syrian people continue to suffer, and that – look, you can read it in the news yourself, I mean, but – the Assad regime is coming under increasing pressure from within and his security forces are continuing to struggle against the opposition, the resistance. So I wouldn’t say that we’re at a moment or an inflection point in time right now, Ros, but certainly it would be imprudent, it would be irresponsible, if Secretary Kerry and other leaders weren’t taking a hard look at what’s going on right now and trying to really continue to push for some sort of political solution.

QUESTION: Iran?

QUESTION: Did the Secretary ever get a sense during those conversations that there was any kind of change in the positions of the Russians towards Assad? And is the aim to bring him or to bring together all these parties – and I gather Iran would be invited too – to sit down and discuss a transition?

MR KIRBY: A transition?

QUESTION: Yeah.

MR KIRBY: I just don’t think we’re at that point right now, Lesley, and I’ll let the Russians speak to their views in terms of the Assad regime. I think, again, these were – this was an – this was a first-step effort here in terms of the three of them sitting down, and I think everybody recognizes that a political solution has to be found. The “how you do that” part is still what they’re working through and I think it’s just going to take some time.

QUESTION: Follow-up?

MR KIRBY: Yeah.

QUESTION: There seems to be also --

MR KIRBY: You’ve been very patient. I’ll get back to you. I know.

Yeah.

QUESTION: There seems to be also Iranian peace plan that will presented to United Nations next week, I believe. Are you aware of such peace plan and do you have any view --

MR KIRBY: A peace plan that’s being --

QUESTION: For Iranian peace plan. Iran will present peace plan.

MR KIRBY: No, I don’t have anything on that. I’d refer you to the UN.

QUESTION: And just to follow up your previous question, do you think the Iranian nuclear deal has anything to do with opening a political solution or for parties to get together?

MR KIRBY: About Syria?

QUESTION: Yes.

MR KIRBY: No. No, this isn’t about linking it to the Iran deal. The Iran deal was aimed at doing one thing and that’s preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon capability. Now, the Secretary’s been clear, and I don’t want to – by what I’m about to say I’m not changing at all or clarifying my answer to you; there is no connection between the two. That said, the Secretary has been clear that should, and that’s a big “should,” an Iran deal lead to different and more constructive Iranian behavior on a spate of other issues that we continue to have with that regime, well, that’s all to the better but that’s not the goal, that wasn’t the focus.

I think, back to my answer to Ros, I mean, current events clearly speak for themselves inside Syria: The conflict continues to go on; people continue to suffer; Assad continues to brutalize his own people; he’s facing increasing pressure. And I think Secretary Kerry’s view, it’s just irresponsible for them not to be able to try to sit down and try to work hard towards trying to find a political solution. But we’re at the beginning here and there’s a lot of work to be done.

QUESTION: Iraq?

MR KIRBY: Yeah, let me – can I come back to you? Because – go ahead. You’ve had your hand up for a while, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. Yeah. The former director of Defense Intelligence Agency Michael Flynn said it was, quote/unquote, the “willful decision” of the Administration to support and to coordinate arms transfers to the insurgents in Syria knowing, based on an intelligence report from 2012, that the major driving forces behind the insurgents in Syria were Salafists, the Muslim Brotherhood, and al-Qaida in Iraq, or what we know – what we now call ISIL. So that intelligence report from 2012 was released under FOIA and it also says, quote, “There is the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist principality in eastern Syria, and this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime,” end of quote.

Do you admit – would you admit, like Michael Flynn did, that in 2012 the U.S. supported the rise of the forces that we now call ISIL in order to defeat Assad?

MR KIRBY: I’m not going to speak to intelligence reports. I’m certainly not going to talk to an intelligence report that I haven’t seen. Let me just remind everybody what our positions are. We have been supporting a moderate Syrian opposition, and in particular, with respect to ISIL it’s been about help try – DOD’s program to try to train and equip moderate Syrian opposition fighters to go in there to fight principally against ISIL. We’ve also said and continue to believe that the rise of ISIL inside Syria was, in fact, helped by the Assad regime’s lack of legitimacy to govern effectively its own people and its own territory.

QUESTION: It’s not just somebody saying it. It’s the director of Defense Intelligence Agency at the time saying that it was the willful decision of the Obama Administration to coordinate arms transfers to the insurgents while having the intelligence about who they were, and that intelligence report from 2012 is available. It’s in public domain.

MR KIRBY: Yeah, I’m just not going to make a habit of speaking to intelligence reports here from the podium whether they’re in the public domain or not. I’m just not going to make a habit of doing that. We – and I won’t speak for the intelligence community. I won’t even speak for DOD, my former employer here, when it comes to support for the moderate opposition. But our position hasn’t changed.

QUESTION: But would you say that in 2012 --

MR KIRBY: Assad has lost legitimacy to govern. Right? It is through him, his brutality, that has helped ISIL fester and grow inside Syria. And it is against ISIL that the whole coalition is aimed at. Now, as far as the moderate opposition, there has been some support of them, and again, I would point you to DOD and the support that they are continuing to try to lend to a moderate opposition to go in and fight.

QUESTION: But the U.S. intelligence reports that the U.S. knew that those were not moderate opposition forces, that they knew --

MR KIRBY: I’m not --

QUESTION: -- and exactly the report said the major driving forces behind the insurgency in Syria were – that’s a quote from the report.

MR KIRBY: I know. This --

QUESTION: -- which Mr. Flynn says every – all the policy makers saw but they made, quote/unquote, the “willful decision” to continue with the policy of supporting those insurgents.

MR KIRBY: I would refer you to the intelligence community. I’m not going to talk about intelligence matter from – matters from this podium.

QUESTION: Iraq?

MR KIRBY: Yes.

QUESTION: So about Prime Minister Abadi’s reform initiatives, he has removed two of his deputies and two vice presidents, including former Prime Minister Maliki, from power. What is the U.S. take on that? Is it good for the country at a time when it’s fighting the Islamic State?

MR KIRBY: Prime Minister Abadi has presented a proposal to streamline the Iraqi Government. We note that these measures were unanimously approved by the Council of Ministers. This is an internal Iraqi matter, but we do commend Prime Minister Abadi’s initiative to promote improved government services and transparency.

Please.

QUESTION: So one more thing about – inside Iraq but inside, actually, the Kurdistan region.

MR KIRBY: Say again?

QUESTION: Inside the Kurdistan region in Iraq, there is another crisis going on nowadays. And according to the experts, this crisis over the presidency of Kurdistan has reached a particularly dangerous level with the opposition parties stressing that president should not seek a third term, and he’s not willing, apparently, to not seek a third term. And --

MR KIRBY: You’re talking about President Barzani?

QUESTION: President Barzani, yes. So isn’t that – like aren’t you worried that this region, which is very important in your fight against Islamic State, might destabilize as a result of this internal leadership crisis?

MR KIRBY: Well, I’m not going to – as I said to your first question, I’m not going to talk about internal political matters inside Iraq. I think broadly speaking, Iraqi political leadership understands the threat that ISIL poses to them and to the Iraqi people, and we’re going to continue to work with the Government of Iraq to deal with the threat that they face. So I think I’d leave it there.

QUESTION: Has the United States – I know Mr. Brett McGurk was in Kurdistan, I think yesterday. Has the United States been in touch with the Kurdish officials over this specific issue, the crisis over the presidency?

MR KIRBY: We don’t ever talk about the details of diplomatic conversations. Ambassador McGurk is in Iraq to have a wide range of meetings and discussions with Iraqi leaders about how we can all work together to combat and to degrade and defeat ISIL inside Iraq.

QUESTION: Just one more, John. Sorry. Today, actually, there are media reports that the ruling party, which is the KDP, has – had moved its armored vehicles and its armed forces inside the capital Erbil, as basically a deliberate attempt to show muscle inside the capital at a time when the region is facing this leadership crisis. Aren’t you worried while you’re arming, of course, the Peshmerga, which is an effective force against ISIS in the ground, that this – what these weapons might – might be used in domestic struggles by the Kurds?

MR KIRBY: Well, I’m not aware of the events that you’re detailing there. I’d just go back to what I said before. I think we’re certainly comfortable that leaders in Iraq share the same sense of urgency and purpose that we do about the threat ISIL poses internally to Iraq and the Iraqi people but also regionally, and frankly, they’ve got aspirations beyond the region. I think everybody has that same shared sense of purpose, and that our – that we are as a coalition directing our energies, our efforts, our resources, against that threat. And everybody understands that that’s the threat that’s most important right now.

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: Could I have a quick follow-up, please?

MR KIRBY: Sure.

QUESTION: On the Iraqi reform package by Prime Minister Abadi, I know you don’t want to talk about the Iraqi internal issues, but from this building you have said many times that the problem of ISIS and the Iraqi issue is not only security, it is also the problem of governance that led to the ISIS unfolding.

MR KIRBY: Right.

QUESTION: And also even President Obama said that --

MR KIRBY: Right.

QUESTION: -- several times. So do you think this reform package is part of the plan that you are hoping that Prime Minister Abadi will fix the governance problem, or this is something else, you don’t support it?

MR KIRBY: I applaud you for a very deft attempt to try to get me to actually go ahead and comment on internal Iraqi politics. (Laughter.) It was a very well-constructed question – (laughter) – that I am going to not answer. (Laughter.)

Look, these are internal Iraqi matters. But as I said at my outset, we certainly commend Prime Minister Abadi for the initiative that he’s taking to promote government – to promote improved government services and transparency. I mean, he has really moved with alacrity to try to get at better governance inside Iraq, to be more inclusive, to be more responsive to the Iraqi people. And nothing changes about what we’ve said before about the importance of good governance in Iraq and, frankly, in Syria with respect to permanently being able to sustain a defeat of ISIL.

QUESTION: Okay, one more on Kurdistan. I just want to follow up on what Namo said. Actually, Ambassador McGurk and Ambassador Jones, they were meeting with the Kurdish officials over the weekend, specifically on Saturday, and they have discussed, actually, the issue related to the President Barzani. I do have a response from Ambassador McGurk’s office about that, but I just want to have a clear answer about that, if there is something United States want to favor in – to say in the favor of President Barzani that he – that they want to stay – President Barzani to stay because of the ISIS effort, or this is something you don’t want to talk about it?

MR KIRBY: I’m not going to get into the details of conversations. I mean, these are internal Iraqi political issues that the United States is not going to insert ourselves into. But you’re right; Ambassador McGurk did meet with President Barzani and other leaders there. He reaffirmed the U.S. commitment to continued cooperation with Iraqi Kurdish forces in the fight against ISIL, and he commended KRG officials for their coordination with the Government of Iraq and coalition members in that same fight, and he praised the contribution of Peshmerga forces.

QUESTION: One last on Iraq and Iran. On the – over the weekend and also that other – last week, I think, also, that Iranian, I don’t know, spy, whatever, intelligence, tried to assassinate one of the Iranian Kurdish opposition leaders in Iraq. And two days ago, one of the Iranian spy also was captured by the Iranian opposition leaders in Sulaymaniyah that he was trying to plant 20 kilograms of TNT in their headquarters where there are civilians also living there.

So they have had a statement, official statement to the U.S. consulate and also to international community that Iranian is trying to use the U.S. – the nuclear deal to do more destabilization efforts. And they have said also over the past few weeks, after the deal was announced, the Iranian intensified their efforts to harass the Iranian Kurds where they are living peacefully in the Iraqi Kurdistan. Do you have anything on that or --

MR KIRBY: I don’t have anything on the details of the reports that you’re laying out there. I would just say broadly speaking that nobody in the United States Government is turning a blind eye to Iran’s destabilizing activities in the region – their support for terror, for the Houthis, for Hizballah, for the Assad regime. The Iran deal is about keeping them from obtaining a nuclear weapon, which we believe makes everybody in the region safer. But nobody has taken an eye off the other destabilizing activities they continue to conduct in the region writ large. So I don’t have anything specific on that, but I can tell you that we’re mindful and well aware of the threats that they continue to pose.

Brad.

QUESTION: A separate question on Iran. Do you have a comment on the end of the trial of Washington Post reporter Jason Rezaian?

MR KIRBY: I’m aware of the reports of his – of Jason’s court appearance today. We continue to call for his immediate release as well as that of Saeed Abedini and Amir Hekmati, and we continue to call for Iran to work with us to locate Robert Levinson so that all can be returned to their families.

QUESTION: Do you view it as a positive sign that this – at least we’re getting to a decision point, or do you have any indication that this will be resolved positively?

MR KIRBY: I don’t have anything beyond what I said, Brad.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR KIRBY: Yeah.

QUESTION: On Uganda?

QUESTION: Well, Iran?

MR KIRBY: Sure. I’ll come back to you.

QUESTION: The President said Iran’s nefarious activities might get a economic boost with the release of some of the Iranian funds, but he also said that it wouldn’t be a game changer. Is the Administration at all kind of minimizing the risk of the danger of that kind of money getting back into the – being released to the Iranian Government?

MR KIRBY: Well, Secretary Kerry has addressed this many, many times. Yes, there’s going to be some sanctions relief. That was the whole – the reason the sanctions regime was put in place was to get Iran to negotiate, which they did, and we have a deal. And as part of that deal, there will be sanctions relief.

But I would remind you, as Secretary Kerry has – Secretary Lew spoke to this – I mean, this is an economy that has an awful lot of need to the tune of about $500 billion or more of domestic priorities and infrastructure improvement that they need to make. And the amount of relief, when it comes – oh by the way, it’s not automatic. They have to implement their part of the deal before they see sanctions relief. There’s a lot better things for them to spend that money on.

Now, obviously, that’s their call, and Secretary Kerry has said as well that you can’t rule out that some of that money might not be used for support to terrorism or other nefarious activities. But if it is, we have other tools at our disposal to deal with that. We have our own sanctions regime against Iran and these activities. And we have plenty of other options available – the United States does – to deal with that, including a very robust military presence in the region. So again, nobody’s turning a blind eye to this.

QUESTION: No, but I think one of the issues has been that you’ve created a kind of binary between economic improvement and support for terrorism. But when the – one of the biggest, if not the biggest economic institution in that country is the Revolutionary Guard, even economic improvement could go to enrich an organization that commits what you say are acts of terror overseas. And how do you stop that if they’re living up to the deal and the rest of the world is still trading with them?

MR KIRBY: Because if they do conduct these activities, we’ll know about it and we have other tools at our disposal to deal with it. I mean, I can’t – as we’ve said, we can’t rule out that some of this money – which is theirs, by the way – could be used for some of this. But it’s not like we’re not going to know about it. It’s not like we’re turning a blind eye to what they’re doing now. I mean, even under the sanctions regime that they were – that they continue to face, they conduct these activities. So we’re going to continue to work hard at this and we’re going to have – we have tools at our disposal to deal with it.

Yeah, Justin.

QUESTION: I just wanted to change subjects, if I could, and forgive me if this was addressed last week. Senator Grassley’s office is asking if a State Department IG investigation into Huma Abedin goes beyond this issue of an overpayment, suggesting that it’s looking into other things as well and suggesting there’s a criminal probe of some sort. Is this something that you can comment on at all? Is there a criminal probe out of this building’s watchdog regarding Clinton’s aide?

MR KIRBY: Well, the IG, as you know, Justin, is an independent organization here at the State Department. I won’t speak for them. They’d have to speak for that. We are certainly aware of Senator Grassley’s concerns and we’re going to be responding to his correspondence appropriately – the way it should be, not in public.

QUESTION: Okay. Well, because just – but just the IG’s office isn’t saying anything, although I would point out they did something when it – when the question was directly related to Clinton, they did feel the need to put out a clarifying statement about her emails and that investigation. But I guess this one doesn’t raise to that level.

I would just want to know if you think that there is any reason to believe that there was any criminal behavior going on with her aides during her tenure. I mean, is that farfetched or what?

MR KIRBY: Well, again, I’m not going to speak to matters that the IG may or may not be looking into. It wouldn’t be appropriate. What our focus is, Justin, is on making public the 55,000 pages or so of more than 30,000 emails that former Secretary Clinton has provided us.

QUESTION: Yes.

MR KIRBY: The Secretary has made it clear that he wants to get those out and get those out as expeditiously as we can. We have a court-ordered timeline and we’re meeting that. That’s where our focus is.

Yeah – I’m sorry. Yeah, you had – (laughter) – you had questions.

QUESTION: Yeah, do you have any comment on the Uganda pride parade that happened this past Saturday in Kampala? And can you tell me if any U.S. officials took part in that from Embassy Kampala or other U.S. agencies?

MR KIRBY: Yes, actually I can confirm that some embassy officials from the public affairs and political sections were represented at those Wednesday events in Uganda.

QUESTION: And then a quick Africa – another follow-up to Africa – have you seen any reports that Gambian President Jammeh has threatened his nephew with imprisonment, or even execution, for posting a Facebook post in support of gay rights? He’s a student at the University of California in Santa Barbara. And there was a report that came out over the weekend that he had apparently threatened to execute or even – or imprison his nephew for life over this post. Have you seen that report?

MR KIRBY: I can’t speak to those reports. What I can speak to is our strong position, as we’ve repeatedly made clear, about being deeply concerned by continued reports of human rights abuses in the Gambia, and of course, our position on LGBTI rights. We believe – we’ve said it before – that gay rights are human rights and nothing’s changed about our position in that regard.

I’ve got time for just a couple more and then I’ve got to get going.

QUESTION: Haiti?

MR KIRBY: Wait, I’ve gotten you a lot, Ros.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: So the State Department launched a grant program to recruit Russian-speaking journalists in Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia, and under the title of counter-Russia messaging. What is behind the timing of this, and why those countries?

MR KIRBY: You’re going to have to let me get back to you.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR KIRBY: I’ll have to take that question.

Yeah.

QUESTION: On Japan? Japan has announced that it is going to be restarting its nuclear reactor the first time since the disaster in Fukushima. Do you have any comments on that?

MR KIRBY: I thought I did.

QUESTION: I think before you finish, can you check again on Mazen Darwish?

MR KIRBY: On what?

QUESTION: The Syrian opposition leader, Mazen Darwish, who --

QUESTION: The free speech campaigner (inaudible) --

QUESTION: She asked about it --

MR KIRBY: Yeah, I’m going to have to take that for a question, too.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR KIRBY: And as for you, the – we’ve seen those reports. That’s actually – that’s a matter for Japanese Government to talk to, not for us.

QUESTION: Time for a follow-up?

MR KIRBY: Yeah.

QUESTION: Under Secretary Gottemoeller was over the weekend participating in various commemoration ceremonies for Nagasaki, and before that for Hiroshima. What were the impressions of her visit?

MR KIRBY: I’m going to have to get back to you on that, too. I mean, I have not had a chance to talk to the under secretary since she came home. I know she felt honored to be able to attend and represent the State Department there.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR KIRBY: Yeah.

QUESTION: Can I get a follow-up on that?

MR KIRBY: Yeah.

QUESTION: Is there anything specific that came out of her meetings regarding denuclearization and disarmament?

MR KIRBY: I don’t have a readout of those meetings?

One more.

QUESTION: Yeah, just – do you have a reaction to al-Nusrah’s decision to pull back from its positions on the front line in the north? It says it’s doing that because Turkey’s joined the coalition and it doesn’t want to be allied against – with Turkey against ISIS, so it’s pulling back. But is this something that will be – help the U.S. and Turkey create this ISIS-free zone? Because Nusrah’s been attacking your guys there.

MR KIRBY: Well, a couple of thoughts there. I haven’t seen those statements by al-Nusrah with respect to what they are or not doing. And then secondly, I know people using this phrase “ISIL-free zone.” I mean, that’s not a term that we’re --

QUESTION: What is your phrase for that zone?

MR KIRBY: Well, there is --

QUESTION: It’s not a safe-zone you said, so what do you call it?

MR KIRBY: We don’t have a – (laughter) – we don’t have a term for it because we’re not referring to it has a zone. I mean, what we’ve said repeatedly is where they are, we’re going to be there, and we’re going to support those on the ground to try to degrade and defeat them wherever it is. And so we’re not – we’re not calling it a zone of any kind. And I can’t speak to what al-Nusrah may or may not be doing.

I just want to make a larger point and that – I think is important to keep making that the campaign is about going after ISIL. That’s the focus here, and we’ve got more than 60 nations in this coalition that are helping us do that in all manner of different ways. And it’s going to take a long time; it’s not going to be easy. We recognize that the situation inside Syria is very complicated, but that doesn’t change anything about our overarching goal which is about degrading and destroying this group inside Iraq and Syria.

Thanks, everybody.

(The briefing was concluded at 2:54 p.m.)