Daily Press Briefing, August 13, 2015
John Kirby
Spokesperson
Daily Press Briefing
Washington, DC
August 13, 2015
Index for Today's Briefing
RUSSIA/UKRAINE/SYRIA/IRAN
CHINA
BURMA
RUSSIA/SYRIA/SAUDI ARABIA
RUSSIA/IRAN
IRAN
IRAQ
SYRIA
IRAQ/SYRIA/TURKEY/ISIL
CHINA
CUBA
DPRK
AFGHANISTAN/PAKISTAN
DEPARTMENT
CHINA/TAIWAN
JAPAN
TRANSCRIPT:
2:08 p.m. EDT
MR KIRBY: Afternoon, everybody. What’s with the front row here? This isn’t church. (Laughter.) It’s not church. Come on down.
QUESTION: We’re giving you a buffer zone. (Laughter.)
MR KIRBY: Now that’s a good one. Hi guys. No, we’ll wait for you guys to get settled. Just tell me when you’re ready.
A couple things at the top. As you know, and I put out a statement earlier today, Secretary spoke with his Russian counterpart, Foreign Minister Lavrov, earlier this morning. In that call, he expressed our grave concern about the sharp increase in separatist attacks in eastern Ukraine and he urged an immediate ceasefire and full implementation of Minsk obligations. These are points he has obviously made before.
On Syria, the Secretary and the foreign minister agreed to continue exploring options for a political solution to that conflict. The Secretary also raised concerns about the travel to Moscow by IRGC Commander Qasem Soleimani as well as legislation in Russia that would limit the activities of non-governmental organizations.
I want to switch to China real quickly. First, we wish to express our condolences to the Chinese people over the explosion in Tianjin. Our thoughts are with the victims and their families and with China’s first responders, who are working to help recover from this terrible tragedy and to assist those who were hurt.
Also on China, as you know, today we held the U.S.-China Human Rights Dialogue here at the State Department. This dialogue reflects the importance of human rights in our bilateral relationship and provides an opportunity to continue discussions of key human rights issues that were raised during the Strategic & Economic Dialogue, you might recall, from late June. And of course, these are issues that will be addressed during President Xi Jinping’s state visit in September. The talks are being led on our side by Assistant Secretary for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor Tom Malinowski, who I think will be making himself available to you at the end of the day today to sort of read out the meeting, so I won’t get ahead of what he’s going to say, since the dialogue is ongoing.
I do want to note that the Secretary made some opening remarks at the top of the meeting. He certainly welcomed what we all believe will be a very successful visit by President Xi next month. He extended his condolences as well for the explosions in Tianjin. He also highlighted that when the United States and China are able to stand together, whether it’s on climate change or the Iran nuclear negotiation, both our countries profit and so does the world. He certainly highlighted the importance of safeguarding human rights, including the freedoms of speech, religion, assembly, and association as an international responsibility and essential to deepening our bilateral cooperation.
With that, we’ll open it up to questions. Lesley.
QUESTION: I wanted to talk to you about Myanmar, or did you want to go to Soleimani?
QUESTION: Go ahead.
QUESTION: On Myanmar, the developments overnight – does the U.S. believe this is a heavy-handed approach by the security forces? Is it a – is too much of a heavy-handed approach?
MR KIRBY: Which exactly --
QUESTION: In Myanmar, in Burma.
MR KIRBY: The – is this about the leadership changes?
QUESTION: Correct.
MR KIRBY: Yeah. So we’ll --
QUESTION: So the security forces were brought in, surrounded the headquarters --
MR KIRBY: Yeah, right.
QUESTION: -- and the ruling party chief was basically ousted.
MR KIRBY: Right. So we’re aware of those reports and we’re monitoring that. I really don’t have more detail on the conduct of it at this time, but we do continue to urge the government, state security forces, political parties, and civil society in Burma to work together peacefully to ensure the upcoming elections are credible, inclusive, transparent, and free from interference by security forces. But again, we’re still monitoring this.
QUESTION: But John, the U.S. Embassy in Bangkok, which I was – which actually looks after this situation has asked for a clarification of the actions taken on this. Are you – is that the general request from the government?
MR KIRBY: Well, I mean, the – our embassy there is an extension here of the State Department. As I said, we’re monitoring this, and certainly as we get more information – and we certainly would like more information – we have a better sense of what happened here, I think we’ll be able to comment a little bit more specifically.
Yes.
QUESTION: Can we go to – can we go back to General Soleimani, since you started with that?
MR KIRBY: Sure.
QUESTION: First of all, did you raise also your concern with the Iranians about this trip to Moscow? And could you give us a little bit of context of your reaction? Because our understanding that there is a lot of diplomatic activity around Syria, and don’t you consider this trip to Moscow as part of searching, looking for a diplomatic solution to the conflict?
MR KIRBY: Well, again, I don’t want to speak for the Russians with respect to this. And as I said, the Secretary raised it. I’ll let the Russians characterize their reaction to that.
Separately, though, as we’ve noticed – as we’ve noted, Secretary Kerry continues to want to work towards a political solution to the conflict in Syria, which means having discussions with Russian leadership and with Saudi Arabian leadership. We talked about this in Doha last week. Everybody agreed that a political solution to the conflict in Syria is what’s needed, and there continue to be discussions trilaterally, certainly, between those three nations to try to explore those options. And that was – again, that was a topic of discussion this morning when Secretary Kerry and the foreign minister spoke.
And then you had – your first question I don’t think I answered. What was it?
QUESTION: Did you raise your concern directly with the Iranians?
MR KIRBY: Well, I don’t have any readout of discussions to talk about with respect to – with Iran over this.
Yeah.
QUESTION: On Qasem Soleimani, so we can understand. He is not wanted, he’s just – he’s sanctioned but not wanted by, let’s say, law enforcement agencies anywhere, is he?
MR KIRBY: If the travel happened – and I’m not in a position to confirm it – if it happened, it would be a violation of Security Council resolutions, and certainly then a matter of serious concern to the United States.
QUESTION: So he is not on, let’s say, the Interpol list that – as someone who ought to be seized upon landing anywhere?
MR KIRBY: I don’t have – I’m not a judicial expert here. I can tell you that his travel would be a violation of Security Council resolutions.
QUESTION: Now, he’s accused of being responsible for the killing of U.S. troops. Can you give us which period was that? Was that, let’s say, giving advice to the Mahdi Army, for instance, and bad days of the civil war? Was it afterwards? When was that period where he commanded or gave orders to kill American troops?
MR KIRBY: Well, he’s still a commander of the IRGC, and we’ve talked openly about the threat that that force continues to represent and their involvement in nefarious activities and acts of violence over many years. I don’t have a dossier on what General Soleimani has – what operations he’s commanded or not. He is the leader of the IRGC. We’re going to maintain sanctions on the IRGC and the Qods Force and its leadership, including Soleimani.
QUESTION: But – sorry to press the issue, but they talk about figures like 500 or something – I mean, some large figure. How did they establish these figures that – that General Soleimani himself is actually responsible for the killing of these troops?
MR KIRBY: I haven’t seen those figures, Said, and so I’m not in a position to quantify them. I’d refer you to DOD. I mean, we’re all well aware of the activities of the IRGC.
QUESTION: Would you say that there is a political angle to floating this issue now by some groups?
MR KIRBY: A political angle to floating of what issue?
QUESTION: Yeah, by someone who is trying to basically undermine the deal with Iran and so on. They looked at the Soleimani angle --
MR KIRBY: Well, if he --
QUESTION: -- as possibly a – some sort of a tool that could be used to undermine the deal.
MR KIRBY: If he indeed traveled – and as I said, I’m not in a position to independently confirm that – it is a violation, it is of serious concern. The motivation for that travel, again, should it be – should it have occurred, I wouldn’t begin to be able to speak to.
QUESTION: Can we stay on the Iran deal, unless someone wants to --
QUESTION: Just a clarification – so the readout of the discussion with Secretary Kerry expressing concerns is not confirmation that the travel did happen? Are you guys saying still at this point you cannot confirm the travel?
MR KIRBY: That’s right. But he certainly has seen the reports of the travel and expressed his concerns about those reports.
Yeah.
QUESTION: I just wanted to follow up on a question that I asked Mark yesterday. You were present during the Reuters meeting the day before yesterday. And the Secretary expressed confidence that the deal will go through; that’s why he did not have a plan B. Is that because of – he has spoken to his former colleagues in the Senate and so on, considering that only democrat thus far, Senator Schumer, has spoken that he would – has announced that he would vote against the deal? Is that – does he have the figures sort of worked out where he’s confident that the deal will go through?
MR KIRBY: The Secretary, number one, is very confident in the merits of the deal. And he was, I think, very clear about that the other day up there in New York City. And he wants the deal examined on its merits. And when you look at it from the facts of it, when you really read it, it clearly demonstrates that by preventing Iran from possessing nuclear weapons capability, it makes the region safer, it makes us safer. It certainly makes our allies and partners safer.
And so that’s what he wants the debate and discussion to be about: the merits of the deal. And he has said not just in this week but previously that he’s confident that when it’s examined on its merits, it will pass muster in Congress. And I think he said as recently as the other day that he’s confident that it will, that it will get the approval that it needs in Congress. But he’s also – I also think he said he’s not taking any vote for granted. And that’s why he continues to engage with members of Congress and will continue to engage right up until September. He’s not taking anything for granted.
QUESTION: But the fact that no other senator has announced opposition thus far is a good sign, isn’t it?
MR KIRBY: I think so far, yes. I think as you look at who has come out publicly for and against, it certainly reaffirms the Secretary’s confidence that it will get the approval that it needs from Congress. But again, he’s going to continue to work the phones, he’s going to continue to answer questions, he’s going to continue to communicate with members of Congress to address whatever remaining concerns there may be. And he’s not going to take anything for granted.
QUESTION: Iraq.
MR KIRBY: Yeah.
QUESTION: The Iraqi Kurds have claimed that ISIS has used chemical – may have used chemical gas against their fighters near Erbil. Is that – have you seen those reports?
MR KIRBY: I have not.
QUESTION: Just one more question. Yesterday – I think just yesterday General Odierno said at the Pentagon that – I’m not going to ask you for military analysis, but he said the partition of Iraq might well be the only solution for the country because of the Shia-Sunni problem which he thought that will be there for a foreseeable future and that, of course, the Kurdish-Arab problem as well. Do you share his opinion on that?
MR KIRBY: I’m not going to speak to the general’s personal views. That’s for him to speak to. I don’t – my reading of his comments was it was more qualified than that. It was that he didn’t see that as a need now. What I’ll tell you is – from the State Department is that certainly it is not our policy and not our view and not the future that we seek for Iraq. We continue to support the Iraqi Government in Baghdad under Prime Minister Abadi. We want to – helping him as he deals with the very real challenges inside his country. And it is the sovereign government of Iraq that we support, and only that government.
QUESTION: John?
MR KIRBY: Yeah.
QUESTION: But General Odierno, who really knows Iraq and was there for a long time and knows the makeup, was a bit more emphatic on the issue of division. But my question to you is: Is the United States – he also – because he worked it into the context --
MR KIRBY: Yeah.
QUESTION: -- the context of the reforms that were introduced by Prime Minister Abadi and the head of the parliament, which did away with the vice presidency, did away with the deputy prime ministers, and so on. Are you guys in support of this doing away with the vice presidents and so on?
MR KIRBY: Well, we talked about this the other day.
QUESTION: Right.
MR KIRBY: I mean, these are specific decisions for Prime Minister Abadi to speak to.
QUESTION: Right.
MR KIRBY: We welcome the leadership that he has shown, the energy that he has demonstrated in terms of getting his government up and running, and making changes to try to make Iraq – the Government of Iraq – more responsive and more inclusive and more representative of the Iraqi people. And so we’re going to continue to work with him as he continues to try to lead his country through this difficult transition period. But we’re not going to take a position on every single decision that he is making.
QUESTION: But because – I remember back under Paul Bremer, when he basically put this formula into action – so many for the Shia, five for the Sunni and five for the Kurds and so on – as a way – as a step towards national reconciliation. Do you feel that doing away with these positions compromises national reconciliation efforts?
MR KIRBY: Well, again, Said, I’m not going to comment on each and every decision that he’s making. We support him in his efforts to reform and to help the Government of Iraq transition through this very difficult period. And I think I’d leave it at that.
QUESTION: Syria?
MR KIRBY: Yeah.
QUESTION: Yesterday also General Odierno talk about Syria. And he said that Syria has changed forever. We don’t know if we will have same Syria again. Is this statement, which mostly taken as the military’s view as opposed to his personal view – do you think this contradicts with the State Department’s position that Syria has to be protected, its territorial integrity has --
MR KIRBY: I didn’t see those particular comments. And I think you can understand that I’m going to allow General Odierno to speak for himself. Our view of what’s going on in Syria has not changed. Secretary Kerry, as all of us do at the State Department, continue to work very hard to try to find ways and to explore options for a political transition in Syria, which is the ultimate solution here – a government that is responsive to the Syrian people who have suffered greatly and gravely at the hands of Bashar al-Assad – continue to suffer, I might add. Now, that’s the real endgame here for Syria, and that’s what Secretary Kerry is focused on.
QUESTION: Today – today on Syria – today the opposition said from Moscow that they will not – they reject the Russian plan basically, the Russian plan to have some sort of process going based on Geneva I. They reject it; they will not deal with Assad in any capacity. Do you support their position?
MR KIRBY: Well, we have routinely been working to better support the opposition inside Syria. I think we’ve also long said that Bashar al-Assad has lost legitimacy to govern. He continues to commit acts of brutality and violence on his own people, including barrel bombing, which continues. So I don’t think anybody sees a future in Syria which leaves him and his regime in power. What we do want and what the Secretary continues to try to pursue – and this was reflected in his meeting in Doha with Foreign Minister al-Jubeir of Saudi Arabia and Foreign Minister Lavrov of Russia – is to work towards a political solution there, and he’s going to continue to do that.
We know that in order to achieve that goal, there’s going to have to be continued work with opposition groups. And it’s how do you get at that and how do you plot a framework forward with the opposition to bring that about, and there’s just no easy answers right now.
QUESTION: So despite the fact that maybe Assad controls the largest portion in Syria compared to the other groups – I mean, they each control so much area – he is out of any future formula?
MR KIRBY: We – nothing’s changed about our position with respect to the Assad regime and its future in Syria.
Yeah.
QUESTION: Do you have any update on yesterday’s Atima camp strike by the coalition? Mark did not have any details yesterday. But reportedly, there were more than half a dozen civilian casualties.
MR KIRBY: No, and I would point you to DOD for an update on a tactical airstrike issue. We’ve seen the reports. Obviously, we remain deeply concerned by any potential civilian casualties. But this is really something for DOD to speak to.
QUESTION: Do you have any number of how many people were killed in that attack?
MR KIRBY: No. As I said, I would point you to DOD for details of a tactical airstrike. I don’t have that kind of level of information.
QUESTION: And generally, how U.S. or the coalition determines a particular target to strike? I mean, like for example for Atima strike, how the coalition was determined to strike in that particular --
MR KIRBY: You have to talk to the Defense Department about how they conduct tactical operations. This is not the appropriate podium for me to speak to that. I will say just more broadly that nobody takes the protection of civilians more seriously than the United States, certainly, than the United States military, and the coalition in general, not – because it’s not just U.S. aircraft. I mean – just hang on a second.
QUESTION: I’m sorry.
MR KIRBY: Everybody is focused keenly on trying to avoid civilian casualties and civilian damage, which is obviously not the goal for a group like ISIL, which continues to just commit utter depravations and violence against civilians in Iraq and in Syria. But as for the details, I would definitely point you to DOD. It’s not appropriate for me to comment about that.
QUESTION: There was an article in The Wall Street Journal that says basically the United States doesn’t want Turkey to strike ISIS until the agreement that you have with Turkey is fully written out, basically.
MR KIRBY: Well, I mean, I would --
QUESTION: Is that true?
MR KIRBY: Yeah, what I’d say is we have requested Turkey not to undertake independent counter-ISIL strikes in Syria until Turkey is fully integrated in coalition operations, to ensure safe air operations for the coalition in very dense airspace. And the Turks have agreed to that.
Yeah, go ahead.
QUESTION: What is your expectation when, do you think, this coordination can establish and Turks can start striking?
MR KIRBY: I’m sorry. Say the first part of your question.
QUESTION: Do you have any kind of timetable for this coordination to get established?
MR KIRBY: No, I don’t. I mean, we’re continuing to work with Turkish authorities about how best to get at the threat of ISIL across that border, what that’s going to look like. But I don’t have any updates for you on that. And again, that’s more of a DOD question.
QUESTION: In this same article, some American officials expressing concerns over Turkey’s legitimate and self-defensive airstrike against PKK, and saying that Turkey used the Incirlik agreement as a hook to attack PKK bases, which actually PKK killed over 30 security officers – Turkish security officers just last month. So do you agree with those views or --
MR KIRBY: The last part I did not get.
QUESTION: Do you agree with those views that Turkey used Incirlik agreement as a hook to attack PKK locations?
MR KIRBY: Absolutely not, and I’ve said that before. I said it as recently as Monday, and I think we’ve said it even earlier than that. Look, Turkey’s an important ally, a NATO ally, a close friend, and a strong partner in this coalition. We welcome their decision to open their bases to U.S. and coalition members participating in air operations against ISIL. Beyond those operations, we’re going to continue our dialogue with Turkey to evaluate options on the most effective means of countering ISIL on its borders in a manner that promotes Turkey’s security and regional stability as well.
What we’ve said before is they have a right to defend themselves against terrorist attacks, and that is a separate and distinct matter than the discussion that we had with Turkey about their continuing cooperation.
QUESTION: But it looks like there are some officials in there – out there, most possibly defense officials, disagreeing with you and talking to American press. Is just something that shows that you have disagreement within the Administration over these strikes?
MR KIRBY: Well, who are these officials? You got names on them?
QUESTION: Yeah.
MR KIRBY: No, you don’t.
QUESTION: But that’s the question.
MR KIRBY: They’re anonymous sources, and I’m not going to speak to the credibility of anonymous sources. I just told you what our position is with respect to the cooperation that we’re getting from Turkey and will continue to get and the relationship that we’re fostering – continue to enjoy with Turkey.
Look, this is a dangerous, complex issue, and it’s a dangerous and complex time. And you have a coalition now of more than 60 countries. Every member of that coalition is contributing what they can, where they can, when they can. Turkey is contributing. And now they’re contributing even more and we’re grateful for that.
It doesn’t mean that in any bilateral discussion you have with them – a coalition member – that you’re going to necessarily agree on everything. But we’ve got a good, strong relationship with Turkey. They are cooperating. They’ve now allowed us use of these air bases to continue to go after ISIL and we’re grateful for that.
QUESTION: Can I ask you on Cuba what you --
QUESTION: Can we finish Syria?
QUESTION: No, I’m sorry. Go ahead.
MR KIRBY: Yeah, go ahead.
QUESTION: Are you still communicating with those U.S.-trained Syrian opposition forces, which about 54 of them – do you know where are they?
MR KIRBY: Great question for DOD. Are we done with Syria? Looks like we are.
Back here, behind Said.
QUESTION: So on China, is the U.S. helping at all or supporting any of the relief efforts after the explosion?
MR KIRBY: No, there’s no request for – from Chinese authorities for any assistance at this time.
Yeah.
QUESTION: Can I follow up? Is there any indication that any U.S. citizens were injured, affected due to the explosion?
MR KIRBY: Did I do – I just did that, didn’t I? Sorry. No, we don’t have any indications right now.
QUESTION: Now, some information circulated in the social media in China is saying that the explosion of the chemicals has radiation. Given the proximity of Tianjin to Beijing, only few of – they are very close. Is there any concern of the severity or if – is there any information from the U.S. Embassy in Beijing (inaudible)?
MR KIRBY: No, I don’t have any more detail for you on this. I’d point you to Chinese authorities who are both responding to this devastating explosion and investigating it, and it’s really for them to speak to.
Yes.
QUESTION: Cuba, just a technical question. Am I right that Cuba is the only place in the world where it is against U.S. law to be a tourist?
MR KIRBY: Is it the only place in the world where it is against U.S. law to be a tourist? I don’t know; I’m going to have to take that one. I’m going to have to take that one.
Yeah.
QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. Kirby.
QUESTION: Can I follow on Cuba? Sorry.
MR KIRBY: Sure.
QUESTION: Today – I mean, which you’re getting ready to go to tomorrow.
MR KIRBY: Yes.
QUESTION: Today, former President Fidel Castro said that the United States ought to pay reparations for all the harm that it has inflicted on Cuba over the past decades. Would that something that would be considered?
MR KIRBY: I haven’t seen those comments, Said. Look, we’re just now re-establishing diplomatic relations with Cuba. Tomorrow’s a historic day. The Secretary very much looks forward to his visit down there. There are lots of issues – and I’m not saying this is one of them, I’m just saying there’s lots of issues that in the process of normalization I suspect will be discussed.
I have seen nothing that would indicate that that’s one of them, but let’s focus on what’s really important, which is this very historic restoration of diplomatic relations and the formal opening of our embassy down there in Havana. And again, we’re very much looking forward to this.
QUESTION: Any information on plans to meet with President Castro?
MR KIRBY: There are no such plans, no.
QUESTION: But it could happen, right?
MR KIRBY: It’s not on the agenda for tomorrow.
Yes.
QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. Kirby. On North Korea, recently North Koreans’ landmines explodes at the DMZ, and two soldiers has been injured. In this regard, do you think a UN Security Council resolution will put additional sanctions against North Korea?
MR KIRBY: I wouldn’t speak for the UN on this. That’s really a question for them to speak to.
QUESTION: And second question: Last week, North Korean Deputy Ambassador to UN Jang Il Hun said that North Korea will not come back to any table for the discussion their nuclear issues. Can you comment on that?
MR KIRBY: Again, I haven’t seen those comments. Our position has not changed that the United States and international community continue to call on the North to comply with its international commitments and obligations, including by taking concrete steps to abandon its nuclear program in a complete, irreversible, and verifiable manner and to cease all nuclear activities immediately.
QUESTION: Do you think it’s still optimistic about the Six-Party Talks?
MR KIRBY: We’ve long said that the onus is on North Korea here. We stand ready to resume the Six-Party Talks. But the onus is on North Korea to commit to be willing to do that, and they haven’t.
Yes, Goyal.
QUESTION: Afghanistan.
MR KIRBY: Yeah.
QUESTION: Two questions on the region. One, at least two generals have been speaking this week – one General Campbell at the Brookings Institutions, and yesterday General O’Connor on the future of Afghanistan. And both, of course, said that progress is being made and the future looks bright and international community should support the dialogues and the new government in Afghanistan.
My question is here. According to the press reports and also – it’s been now two years Omar Mullah was killed, and now, according to the reports, he was being treated and killed in a Karachi, Pakistan hospital. My question is that that means just like Pakistan was saying about Usama bin Ladin for 10 years that they don’t have him, he’s not there, so you think this is the second time that Pakistan has misled or stabbed at the U.S. on Omar Mullah’s whereabout?
MR KIRBY: Well, I think you saw Pakistani authorities denying those claims. I have nothing to add one way or the other about where he was treated. Our focus, Goyal, is on continuing to support the Afghan people and Afghan National Security Forces as they continue to secure their own borders and their own people, and that’s what the Resolute Support Mission is all about. And we’re a contributing nation to that and we’re going to continue to focus on those needs inside Afghanistan.
QUESTION: But as far as dialogue is going on between Afghanistan and Pakistan and both sides of the Taliban, how much can you trust now Pakistan, you think, on this dialogue?
MR KIRBY: Look, I think we welcome the dialogue that continues to occur between Afghanistan and Pakistan. And I would draw your attention to meetings as recently as today with counterterrorism officials from both countries talking and discussing ways to bolster security in both countries. And as we’ve said before, this is a common, shared challenge in that – across that border and in that border area.
So it’s encouraging. It’s promising that they’re having, again, discussions today. And again, we welcome that, because we’ve long said that cooperation and communication between the two will only – can only lead to positive results if it continues and if it really leads to some sort of tangible, shared commitments.
QUESTION: And finally, on Tuesday, 11th of August, U.S. – United States International Commission on Religious Freedom, they had an op-ed or wrote in Foreign Policy magazine that August 11th was declared by the founder of Pakistan, Mr. Jinnah, that that will be the religious freedom day in Pakistan. But according to this commission, the minorities are under attack in Pakistan and U.S. should – they have recommended that United States should do more and press for the freedom of all kinds in Pakistan which has been deprived of the minorities and others inside Pakistan. Have you spoken or talking about these all things, and how much seriously do you take this commission’s report and recommendations?
MR KIRBY: I haven’t seen the commission’s report or its recommendations. I think you know our position. Secretary Kerry’s position is very clear when it comes to the practice of religion and freedom of speech and assembly. We take those basic human rights extraordinarily seriously. I mean, I just talked to you about the dialogue we’re having with Chinese authorities today on human rights, the whole day just devoted to human rights. So it’s obviously a top priority agenda for Secretary Kerry. It will remain so with all countries around the world, but I don’t have anything specific with respect to this report.
It is something we bring up routinely. And everywhere he goes we find opportunities – we look for opportunities to talk about the importance of human rights.
QUESTION: Thank you, sir.
MR KIRBY: Yeah.
QUESTION: John, thank you. I have two quick questions on Secretary Clinton’s server. Has the State Department been able to determine whether each of the four classified emails sent to Secretary Clinton’s server originated within the State Department or whether they originated within another agency?
MR KIRBY: I don’t have any updates for you in terms of original sourcing on those emails.
QUESTION: And secondly, has the State Department been able to determine whether any classification markings may have been stripped from any of those documents from anyone within the State Department?
MR KIRBY: We have no indications that there were any – that there was at all any stripping of classification markings on these.
Yeah.
QUESTION: Yeah, China and Taiwan. Deputy Secretary Blinken and Assistant Secretary Daniel Russel are meeting with Zhang Zhijun, who is the minister of China’s State Council Taiwan Affairs Office. What is the nature of this meeting, and is the presidential election of Taiwan among the topics being discussed? Can we have – please have a readout afterwards?
MR KIRBY: Well, I don’t know that I’m – I’ll check and see if we can give you a readout. I don’t have an agenda to give you right now.
QUESTION: Okay, let me put my question this way. A recent article published in The Diplomat – let me quote – indicate that the United States – it’s regarding the presidential election in Taiwan. The article quotes, “U.S. defense planners cannot help but wonder if the DPP” – which is a opposition party in Taiwan – “will seek to entrap the United States in a cross-strait crisis in an effort to achieve its dreams of independence from China.” And, “Tsai Ing-wen,” who is a “DPP presidential candidate, has done little to assuage such fears.” Do you share such observation? And the article also point out it’s time for the United States to review the policy toward Taiwan. Is there any discussion within this building to review the policy toward Taiwan?
MR KIRBY: No.
QUESTION: What is the status of U.S. security commitment toward Taiwan?
MR KIRBY: I mean, we remain committed to fulfilling our responsibilities under the Taiwan Relations Act. Key priorities with Taiwan include ensuring it has the ability to defend itself, and remain free from coercion or intimidation. When free from coercion, Taiwan has increasingly engaged China with confidence. That’s our position on it.
QUESTION: Could we have a readout after the meeting today?
MR KIRBY: I’m not going to guarantee readouts at this point. I take the question, and we’ll see.
QUESTION: John. John, on Japan.
MR KIRBY: Yeah.
QUESTION: It is reported that Japanese Prime Minister Abe may visit to North Korea coming up at the end of this month. Can you comment on that?
MR KIRBY: No. I make it a point never to comment on the travel of other --
QUESTION: If he did it --
MR KIRBY: -- of foreign leaders. I can talk about Secretary Kerry’s travel, but that’s about it.
QUESTION: Do you have any information that the Japanese are discussing with his visit to North Korea?
MR KIRBY: I honestly am not going to speak for Mr. Abe’s travel. I just – it would be inappropriate for me to do that. I’m not going to comment on that.
Yeah, back here.
QUESTION: So Prime Minister Abe is slated to give his statement on the 70th anniversary of World War II tomorrow. Does the State Department have any expectations of what he might be saying?
MR KIRBY: Again, you’re asking me to get ahead of comments that Mr. Abe hasn’t made yet. So that’s a better question – questions about what he’s about to say are really better placed to him and to his staff.
QUESTION: Do you think, though, that this statement would be an opportunity for him to build better relations with his neighbors?
MR KIRBY: I’m going to let Mr. Abe speak for himself. And again, we’ve – we have a deep alliance and friendship with the Japanese people and the Japanese Government. And we’re always looking for ways to make sure that we keep that alliance and those security commitments strong. As for what he’s going to say or not say on this particular anniversary, I’d leave it to him and his staff to speak to.
QUESTION: Have you been in communication at all about the wording or the type of message that --
MR KIRBY: We don’t suggest talking points to foreign leaders one way or the other, and that – so no.
Okay. I’ve got time for one more.
QUESTION: Sorry, John, one last one.
MR KIRBY: Yeah.
QUESTION: It’s actually the helicopter crash on Okinawa.
MR KIRBY: Yeah.
QUESTION: And we were a bit confused because we read Mark Toner’s sentence yesterday, and he said that the helicopter crashed in international waters, but it actually crashed eight miles off the island. And so we’re not sure – is that international waters or not?
MR KIRBY: I’m going to refer you to DOD. This was an Army helicopter that apparently had a hard landing on --
QUESTION: Right, but then they referred back to you, which is why I’m asking.
MR KIRBY: I’m sorry?
QUESTION: They referred back to you. They referred back to State.
MR KIRBY: About the crash?
QUESTION: Whether it fell in international waters or not, yeah.
MR KIRBY: Again, I’m not an expert on this particular incident.
QUESTION: Okay.
MR KIRBY: As I understand it, it happened on a USNS ship, which is a naval – a U.S. naval support ship. And as for the details of it, I would be – it would be inappropriate for me to --
QUESTION: Okay. It just seems a bit contradictory, which is --
MR KIRBY: Yeah, I just – I don’t have the details on this.
QUESTION: Okay, okay.
MR KIRBY: And it would be inappropriate for me to speak to a military mishap from the State Department’s podium. It did – I know that it happened aboard a U.S. naval ship, but all the where and how, that’s really for DOD to speak to.
Okay, thanks everybody.
(The briefing was concluded at 2:47 p.m.)
DPB # 139
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
