Daily Press Briefing
Mark C. Toner
Deputy Spokesperson
Daily Press Briefing
Washington, DC
October 13, 2015
Index for Today's Briefing
MALAYSIA
BOKO HARAM
ISRAEL/PALESTINIANS
IRAQ
MALAYSIA
SYRIA
IRAN
JAPAN
SYRIA/REGION
TRANSCRIPT:
1:20 p.m. EDT
MR TONER: Hey everybody. Sorry for the slight delay. Welcome to the State Department. Happy – I almost said Monday. It's Tuesday. I apologize. I hope everyone had a pleasant long weekend. Just a couple of things at the top, and then I'll go to your questions.
First, I just wanted to say a few words about the Dutch Safety Board's final report on the shoot-down of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17. We welcome the important findings of the Dutch Safety Board in its final report on the shoot-down of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17. This report is the result of an independent, transparent, and rigorous 15-month investigation completed in accordance with Annex 13 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, and includes contributions from a wide array of experts from many countries, including the United States.
This report validates what Secretary Kerry first said more than a year ago, and that's that MH17 was shot down by a Buk surface-to-air missile. Secretary Kerry also made clear that the United States detected a missile launch from separatist-controlled territory at the moment of the shoot-down, and he drew attention to the verified conversations among separatist leaders bragging about shooting down an aircraft in the immediate aftermath of this tragic event. We would take note of the findings of the Dutch Safety Board's recommendations regarding the handling of the airspace during armed conflicts, and we're, of course, looking and studying them closely. And then finally, our sympathy and thoughts remain with the family and friends of the MH17 victims.
And then just one other thing at the top. I did want to strongly condemn – the United States strongly condemns Boko Haram's brutal attacks this past weekend in Baga Sola, Chad, and in northern Cameroon, as well as attacks last week in Niger and in Nigeria. We send our condolences to the families and loved ones of the dozens killed as the latest victims of this group's unabated and horrific campaign of violence throughout the Lake Chad Basin region. Boko Haram's use of children to conduct these brutal attacks is particularly heinous. The United States continues to support the governments and the people of the Lake Chad Basin region in their ongoing struggle to degrade and defeat Boko Haram.
Matt, over to you.
QUESTION: I'm going to get back to MH17 in a minute --
MR TONER: Yeah.
QUESTION: -- but I want to start with the Mideast – in the Mideast --
MR TONER: Sure.
QUESTION: -- and the statement that was put out earlier about the continuing violence, the statement that you guys put out.
MR TONER: Yeah.
QUESTION: You say you're in regular contact with the Israeli Government and the Palestinian Authority. Can you be more specific? Has there been any contact, senior-level contact over the course of the past several days? And when you are in contact with the Israeli Government and the Palestinian Authority, can you tell us what – what is it that you tell them?
MR TONER: Sure. Well, answer to both questions – I was going to say "answer to your first question," but I'll answer both at the same time. The Secretary spoke separately with Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Abbas over the weekend to express our deep concern over the recent wave of violence and offer support for efforts that restore calm as soon as possible. He reiterated the importance of strongly condemning violence and combating incitement, as well as taking affirmative steps to reduce tensions. And the Secretary stressed the importance of upholding the status quo in word and in deed at Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount, and of preventing inflammatory rhetoric and actions that will increase tensions. So in essence, the same message that we've been delivering for some weeks, but obviously we've been watching the ongoing violence with increasing concern. And that was a message he conveyed.
QUESTION: And he delivers that message, that same message to both Israelis and Palestinians?
MR TONER: That's correct. That's correct.
QUESTION: So he calls up Prime Minister Netanyahu and says, "Hey, Bibi, I want to stress to you the importance of strongly condemning violence and ending incitement?" Does the United States believe – does the Administration believe that Israel is inciting or not condemning violence?
MR TONER: I think what we've been very clear about saying is that we want to see both sides take affirmative steps, affirmative actions that reduce tensions in the region, and that we've seen – frankly, we've seen horrific attacks, obviously, today. You saw our statement earlier condemning those attacks. But we've seen also attacks on Palestinians that remain – the investigations remain ongoing – that have taken place now three or four weeks ago. But overall, we need to lower the temperature; we need to reduce these kinds of incitements or inflammatory actions and calm things down.
QUESTION: But that message is delivered to both, not just to one – so the U.S., the Administration sees both sides at fault here. Is that correct?
MR TONER: Again – I mean, you're asking – you're – the phrasing of your question, "at fault" – I think what we're saying is that both sides need to, as – their leaders need to express the fact that both sides need to decrease the tensions that are leading to ongoing incidents of violences – violence. But you're asking me to assign blame, and I don't think that's the case. I think what we need to see is just a reduction in the tension, reduction in the actions that we've seen over the past couple of days.
QUESTION: I'm not – no, no --
MR TONER: But – go ahead.
QUESTION: Well, I'm not asking you to assign blame. I'm asking if your message to both the Israelis and the Palestinians is the same, and you said it is. So take – carrying on from that, can you explain what it is that you're not satisfied with from the Israeli Government in terms of condemning violence and combatting incitement?
MR TONER: It's not – I mean, you're saying that we're not satisfied. I think that our consistent --
QUESTION: (Inaudible.)
MR TONER: -- I can't remember what your – sorry.
QUESTION: Well, I mean, if the Secretary is calling up both Abbas and Netanyahu and has the same message for both of them, it would suggest that you think that both of them need to do more today. And I'm just trying to figure out what is it you would want the Israelis to do more --
MR TONER: Well, for one thing --
QUESTION: -- in condemning the violence (inaudible).
MR TONER: For one thing, upholding – for one thing, as I said, upholding the status quo in Haram al-Sharif and Temple Mount.
QUESTION: But has there been a suggestion that the status quo was going to be changed?
MR TONER: But also we don't want to see – just to continue – sorry, to finish. But again we've seen ongoing incidents of violence today, the attacks on Israelis. And so we're trying to be consistent but also drive home the point that both sides need to take actions that – affirmative actions that reduce tensions in the region. I think that's – in the area. I think that's self-explanatory, and I don't think it's necessarily saying that we're dissatisfied with either one party or the other. We're just saying that to the end the current cycle, both sides need to take action.
QUESTION: So you're satisfied with both sides then?
MR TONER: Again, we're recognize --
QUESTION: Do you think --
MR TONER: -- that the situation right now is --
QUESTION: Okay. Let me break this down a bit.
MR TONER: Yeah.
QUESTION: Do you think the Palestinian Authority, President Abbas, needs to do more to combat incitement and condemn violence?
MR TONER: Again, I think that both leaders need to convey that message, need to urge both sides to avoid inflammatory actions. That's where I'd leave it.
QUESTION: But you can't – well, do you think the Israelis need to do more to condemn -
MR TONER: Again, Matt, it's --
QUESTION: -- violence and to combat incitement?
MR TONER: I mean, look --
QUESTION: Well, I'm trying to figure – what is the message of the Administration to both sides in this case? If it's the same message to both, it suggests that --
MR TONER: I think it's a consistent message that both sides need to take actions to reduce tensions, to stop the cycle of violence that's currently taking place, and as I said, to uphold the status quo of Haram al-Sharif and the Temple Mount. I don't know that we're – you're asking me to say that we're giving one side a different message. It's not the case.
QUESTION: Well, okay. Well, that – then that answers my questions.
MR TONER: Okay.
QUESTION: So you're not happy with the cycle of violence. You think it's bad, clearly. But you think that the message to both sides needs to be the same. That's correct, right?
MR TONER: Yes, in the sense of – I mean, and our statement, frankly, said as much. We condemn, obviously, today's in the strongest possible terms the attack against Israeli civilians – it was the murder of three Israelis, and left others injured. But we also mourn the loss of any innocent – any loss of innocent life, Israeli or Palestinian.
QUESTION: All right.
MR TONER: I don't know how that can be more plainly put.
QUESTION: Well, I suppose it can't, but I would just – my question was whether the message to both sides is the same. And if it is – and you say that it is – why is the message to both sides the same? Do you think that both are lacking in – or not doing enough to do what you want them to do?
MR TONER: I think – and again, my answer to that – I regret if I haven't been clear enough – is that we're deeply concerned that there's escalating tensions on both sides, so we want to see both sides take affirmative steps to decrease those tensions.
QUESTION: But Mark, can I (inaudible)?
MR TONER: Yeah, sure.
QUESTION: Clearly, the situation's not getting better because Secretary Kerry's been calling both sides for several weeks now. Is it perhaps – does this – does the U.S. believe maybe there's additional steps that need to be taken, maybe something from the regional point of view? I mean, the Jordanians have always been quite involved in this. Do you believe that maybe something bigger and broader needs to take place here?
MR TONER: Well, I think we're always, obviously, open to additional efforts and always looking at additional steps that can be taken from a regional perspective. Certainly, I think you saw over the weekend the Quartet envoy's scheduled meetings with Israeli and Palestinian leaders this week was postponed simply at the request of the Israeli Government given the circumstances on the ground. But that said, I think we want to see those meetings, particular meetings, be rescheduled as soon as possible. And as I said, we're receptive to other efforts to ratchet down the tensions.
Please, Said.
QUESTION: Yes, I just wanted to ask you: Do you believe that Mahmoud Abbas exercises enough control over the security situation where he can actually affect or impact the situation in occupied East Jerusalem?
MR TONER: We wouldn't be – I mean, the Secretary wouldn't be calling him; we wouldn't be dealing with him, if we didn't believe that.
QUESTION: Well, I mean, you guys shepherded these security arrangements or coordination between the Palestinians and the Israelis, yet do you have any – do you have a belief that basically this does work both ways, that the – the Palestinians can pursue Israeli perpetrators and West Bank settlements as Israelis have been pursuing Palestinians in West Bank refugee camps? You follow what I'm asking?
MR TONER: I follow what you're asking. I'm not going to address that question other than to say that we, in all of these attacks and all of these incidents, we're aware that – or we believe that Israeli authorities have the full capacity and capability to investigate them thoroughly and transparently.
QUESTION: Let me ask you another – the same question I asked John on Friday. Do you believe that the Israelis are using excessive force in quelling these demonstrations?
MR TONER: Well, again, I think that – I mean, I think look, we're obviously deeply concerned about the recent violence, as I went back and forth – in my tortured back and forth with Matt – (laughter) --
QUESTION: Tortured.
MR TONER: -- I tried to make clear – perhaps on my side. No, I mean, obviously, Said, we're concerned about recent violence, escalating tensions. We obviously condemn the violence on both sides against Israeli and Palestinian civilians, and so we call on both sides to take affirmative steps to reduce these escalating tensions. I mean, that's how I would leave it. So I mean, we want to see both sides make efforts to calm the situation.
QUESTION: Just to follow up on Lesley's --
QUESTION: Are there any (inaudible)?
MR TONER: Again, I mean look, what we're engaged in right now is diplomacy, but we believe that – I mean, obviously, we've got a strong relationship, ironclad relationship with Israel. And we're able to discuss all these kinds of issues with Israel because of the strength of that relationship, and we believe our voice is heard and considered. Similarly with President Abbas, we believe that – first of all, that he shares our concerns, as does Prime Minister Netanyahu, and it's in both their interests to reduce tensions. As to any specific actions that might be taken, we're just not at that point.
QUESTION: Just to follow up on Lesley's point --
MR TONER: Okay. Yep.
QUESTION: Absent any sort of hope on the horizon for restarting the talks or ending the occupation that has gone on for so long, I mean, how do you see this situation unfolding? I mean, you have predecessors that go all the way back to 1967. Are you expecting your successors for the next 40 years and so on to deal with this issue day after day? Maybe the message that you ought to send out it is time to end the occupation, has it?
MR TONER: Well, look, I mean, I don't think you're ever going to hear from me or anybody else in the State Department to say that this is an easy task – Middle East peace. And yet there's no reason not to pursue it. We believe – continue to believe that peace is possible between the Israelis and Palestinians, that it's necessary, it's just. And it's in the national security interests, frankly, of the United States, so we're going to continue to pursue that.
We're trying to – where we're at is, as I said, trying to look for affirmative actions that can take us back in the direction of possible talks or at least set the framework or set the groundwork, if you will. We're not there. We realize that.
QUESTION: Is this issue likely to go into deep freeze for the next 15 months, at least from the Administration's point of view? Is it likely to be on hold for the next 15 months?
MR TONER: How so? I mean, why – what would --
QUESTION: I mean your engagement. As far as your engagement.
MR TONER: Not at all, no. Not – no, absolutely not.
QUESTION: Could you share with us anything that is really active or tangible that is ongoing now, perhaps behind the scenes?
MR TONER: Well, I mean, we continue to, obviously, engage on a bilateral level with both the Palestinians and Israelis. We're – we continue to meet regionally. All of the work continues to try to set the groundwork, as I said, for eventual return to talks. But we're not there yet. I mean, I don't have anything to announce. It's --
QUESTION: Mark, are you --
MR TONER: Yeah, please.
QUESTION: -- is the Secretary thinking of sending somebody?
MR TONER: Nothing to announce.
QUESTION: Nothing to announce?
QUESTION: Mark --
MR TONER: Yes, sir.
QUESTION: -- two extremely briefly on this.
MR TONER: Yeah, please.
QUESTION: One, there – I asked John last week, when – after he was asked whether the U.S. believed these attacks were terrorism, he said yes. And I know there was an incident in Dimona in which an Israeli stabbed some Arabs. And I'm just wondering – he didn't want to make that conclusion that that was terrorism at the time. Have you made that determination?
MR TONER: I apologize. I don't have an update on that specific incident. But his words stand in terms of what we'd seen before.
QUESTION: Okay. And then secondly, in answer to --
MR TONER: I'll check on that, Matt, though.
QUESTION: -- Lesley, I think you said that you believe that President Abbas shares your concerns about the escalating tensions and about the importance of condemning violence and combating incitement. Is that correct?
MR TONER: I mean, yes. We think that – and again, it's obviously incumbent on him to take – to urge his people, to urge Palestinians to take a step back.
QUESTION: Has he done that, do you believe?
MR TONER: Again, we continue to see the violence escalate. I'll just leave it there.
QUESTION: So – well, so the answer would be no? Or – I'm just trying to get a straight answer.
MR TONER: Yeah, that's okay. It's all right. I'm not trying to be – I'm just --
QUESTION: Do you think that he's done what you've asked him to do?
MR TONER: I think we need to see – and all I would say is, since we can see – since we saw today a continuation of violence, the brutal attacks and murders of Israeli citizens, that we haven't seen enough.
QUESTION: Okay. But you believe that he shares your concerns and that he --
MR TONER: I mean --
QUESTION: -- understands the need to do more, he's just not doing it. Is that right?
MR TONER: I think – I mean, again, there's not a switch that can be turned. But I think both sides need to make an effort to reduce tensions. That's what we're looking for.
QUESTION: New topic?
QUESTION: No.
MR TONER: Please. Go ahead. That's okay.
QUESTION: I just wanted to clarify. So have – has Secretary Kerry spoken with Prime Minister Netanyahu or President Abbas since Saturday, when the statement was released?
MR TONER: No. I don't believe so. I think Saturday, over the weekend, is what we referred to.
QUESTION: And also, the prime minister's speech this morning – do you believe or does the U.S. believe that his words can – took the advice of not inciting violence and reducing tensions?
MR TONER: I mean, what specifically are you referring to in his speech? I hate to parse these things up here at the podium.
QUESTION: At taking additional security measures, doing everything they can to --
QUESTION: All means necessary.
MR TONER: All means necessary.
QUESTION: All means necessary.
MR TONER: I mean, look – I mean, there's a definite security threat that Israel feels, Israelis feel. And certainly that was manifested in today's attacks on Israeli citizens. But looking at this more broadly, as I said, there's been this steady escalation of violence and we need to see both sides work to or look at ways that they can affirmatively take action to reduce that violence. I'll leave it there.
QUESTION: Some of --
MR TONER: Go ahead. One more.
QUESTION: Some of the additional measures included sealing off neighborhoods in East Jerusalem and making it easier for Israeli citizens to obtain permits for guns. Would you, the U.S., consider that to be part of not inciting violence or --
MR TONER: I mean, we've spoken before about the sealing off of certain neighborhoods. I would only say that we hope that any such measures would be temporary.
Please.
QUESTION: Iraq. Mark, are you following the recent events in Iraqi Kurdistan, the violence, especially the closure of the – my TV channel's office in both cities of Erbil and Duhok by KDP affiliated forces, basically KRG, but it is more KDP forces?
MR TONER: Sorry, you're specifically asking about – one more time now.
QUESTION: In the – the NRT TV's offices in Erbil and Duhok is closed by force and the staff were expelled to different city. And it is – basically, the coverage of NRT TV is – in certain part of Kurdistan, which is controlled by more KDP forces, is not allowed. And citizens – I think there were restriction also on Facebook. Are you – do you have any knowledge about that?
MR TONER: I apologize. I'm not aware of these specific actions so I'd have to look into it. I mean, in general, with – in general, as long as – we're – obviously support a free and independent media and its right to broadcast and to report on events, wherever that is throughout the world. I don't know the specifics behind these cases. I'd have to look into them.
QUESTION: What about the – yesterday's event of the denying access to the speaker of parliament by security forces, that he was not allowed to get into Erbil because of the tensions and violence that happened in the other cities?
MR TONER: Yeah. I mean, I'm aware of the – some of the protests that took place and some of the actions that – around those demonstrations. I mean, we urge demonstrators in general to be peaceful, and for security's – security forces to ensure their safety. And we would urge all the parties to continue to work in a constructive manner to resolve differences as quickly as possible. But specifically denying – you're --
QUESTION: Denying the access. The speaker of parliament was in a different city. He was trying to come back to the capital region, Erbil --
MR TONER: Yeah.
QUESTION: -- and to just start a session of parliament. He was denied by the security forces, which he – the speaker of parliament in that press conference, he said the force was escalated with the KDP and Barzani's forces, and he – they basically didn't let him in. It's just like you don't allow speaker of Congress to get in.
MR TONER: Again, I apologize. I don't know the specifics. In general, though, we would ask --
QUESTION: Is that because --
MR TONER: -- we would ask security forces to act with necessary restraint and – but I can't speak to the specific case. I just don't know the details.
QUESTION: But it's been a week. Is that – does that mean that you are not paying attention to what's going on there, or it's just – it's too early? It's, like, been five days.
MR TONER: Sure. We're not ever not paying attention to what's going on, obviously, in Kurdistan and other regions. I'm just not aware of the specific cases you referred to. And I can speak to them in generalities, but I don't have any of the details.
Please, go ahead.
QUESTION: Mark, on the same topic, there is an unfolding political turmoil in Kurdistan now. Washington Post says the region is on the brink of collapse because the speaker of parliament has been purged by one political party, which is the ruling party, without explaining the legal basis. A few ministers have been purged by the same ruling party without explaining the legal basis. And that ruling party receives the lion's share of the U.S. armed military and political support. So you must have something about this, which is really threatening the stability of one of your key partners against the Islamic State.
MR TONER: I mean, again, I think we would ask all parties to work together to resolve any differences, and to find a political way forward. But I don't have anything specific about the different instances that he gave me about the speaker of the parliament. I just don't have the details on that.
QUESTION: But people in my region could take that as U.S. silence towards their – everything, their lives, towards whatever happening. Five people have died.
MR TONER: What we want to --
QUESTION: Several offices have been torched --
MR TONER: Sure.
QUESTION: One political party is doing everything that it wants without explaining any legal basis. And the United States is showing full support for that political party, which is led by President Masoud Barzani.
MR TONER: Again, what we would like to see is for these – this political turmoil to end, for the different parties to work in a constructive manner, and to recognize that they need to work together in order to confront the real enemy, which is ISIL, in the region, and that they need to keep an eye on that – I would say – greater enemy and work to resolve any differences between them so that a political process can move forward.
QUESTION: Have you sent this message to the ruling officials in Erbil?
MR TONER: We're in, I would say, constant, daily contact with the leaders in Kurdistan.
QUESTION: ISIS and Syria?
MR TONER: Sure. Did we miss – let me just – because I got you, Said. I swear to God I'll get back to you.
QUESTION: Sure. Yeah, go ahead.
MR TONER: Please.
QUESTION: On Asia?
QUESTION: By all means.
MR TONER: Sorry.
QUESTION: No, that's okay.
MR TONER: Okay.
QUESTION: Circling back to the Malaysia Airlines, you said --
MR TONER: Yeah, please.
QUESTION: -- at the top that you – the State Department welcomes the findings of the Dutch probe. Do you believe there is any validity, though, to Russian claims that the report is biased? And secondly, Russia is also saying that there is a possibility that the missile system that hit the plane was an older model that might have fallen into Ukrainian hands years ago. Is there any effort underway to check the validity of that claim?
MR TONER: You'd have to speak to the Dutch authorities to look into those allegations. I've seen them. I don't have anything to – necessarily to say about them. To be perfectly honest, we've seen various attempts by Russian officials to obscure some of the events leading up to that takedown of the aircraft, of the MH17. I think, yes, we believe that the final report, in answer to your first question, is a result of an independent, rigorous, and transparent 15-month investigation. It was completed in accordance with Annex 13 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation. It was composed of experts from not just the Netherlands, but Malaysia, Ukraine, the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, and also the Russian Federation. So we believe it's a credible, transparent, and as I said, rigorous investigation.
There are two investigations. This is into the – into the – or to determine the causes of the crash, but then there's also a second criminal investigation that's charged with determining who's responsible for the crash.
QUESTION: So are you saying there's no validity to the Russian claims?
MR TONER: I just can't speak to it. I don't have anything to – I mean, I'm aware of the claims. I would speak – or I would refer you to the Dutch investigating team to answer those charges.
QUESTION: Are --
MR TONER: But as I said, we have seen instances in the past, efforts in the past by the Russians, to obscure some of the details of this. I can't speak to these specific claims though.
QUESTION: As you pointed out though, the report does not apportion blame --
MR TONER: It does not.
QUESTION: -- or state who was responsible.
MR TONER: It does not.
QUESTION: And yet you in the statement that you read earlier said that you believe it supports your theory.
MR TONER: Yes.
QUESTION: How can it possibly support your theory if it doesn't – if it doesn't make a determination as to who actually did it?
MR TONER: Because it does say that the MH17 was shot down by a Buk missile fired from separatist-controlled territory in eastern Ukraine, and we've said that from day one that --
QUESTION: Well, you've gone a step further though and said actually that the separatists were the ones who fired it.
MR TONER: We have, and that's our belief and that remains our belief.
QUESTION: I know, but that – you acknowledge that is not supported by – that part of the U.S. theory is not – is not --
MR TONER: Right, it does not assign blame. No, absolutely. No, that's fair, Matt. Yeah.
QUESTION: So --
MR TONER: But we said it's – we believe it supports our overall argument that we've made, frankly, since day two of this.
QUESTION: Right.
MR TONER: Yeah.
QUESTION: Syria?
MR TONER: Syria, please. I'm sorry. Yeah, go ahead.
QUESTION: Okay, thank you. According to a recent Amnesty International report, PYD has forced thousands of civilians to displace and burnt their houses. They have – they talked to eyewitnesses and they have some satellite images too as their source – in northern Syria, of course – which is considered as a war crime by the Amnesty International. So do you think that the U.S. – and the U.S. has announced that it will provide to – weapons and equipments to some groups in northern Syria, which includes PYD. So do you think --
MR TONER: I'm sorry. Just the last part of your question, I didn't quite hear that. You said the U.S. – I apologize. Just let me try and --
QUESTION: The U.S. has announced last week that it will provide some equipments and weapons to some groups in northern Syria, which includes probably PYD too. So do you think that the U.S. is contradicting with the international law and some ethical values by providing weapons to those groups which commit war crimes?
MR TONER: Sure, sure. Let me – okay, that's a big question with lots of different parts to it, so I'll attempt to answer it, and if I miss anything please let me know. So first of all, you're talking about the Amnesty International report.
QUESTION: Yes.
MR TONER: Well, we'll – and the process of looking at some of these allegations and accusations, certainly we take them seriously and we want to be able to make sure that they're true or whether they have any credibility. We call on those who actually are or will participate in administering these areas to do so inclusively and with respect for all groups regardless of ethnicity, and we've been very clear about that for the past five, six months in speaking about the YPG and its actions in northern Syria as well as the case of Syrian Arabs and other groups and Turkmen who are fighting to – against ISIL there. We believe it's essential that anti-ISIL forces make concerted efforts in other liberated areas to administer inclusively, protect local populations and property, set conditions for the return of – eventual return of refugees, which is our ultimate goal here, and promote and protect human rights. And this is critical in order to hold and to stabilize this territory that's been retaken from ISIL.
But I would just say more broadly speaking to your question about the allegations, we take these allegations quite seriously and we've made clear to all the actors that these – such behavior, frankly, is unacceptable. And we'll look closely at all these accusations to determine whether there's any veracity to the claims.
You did mention, though, briefly at the top your question that we were providing arms to or ammunition to the YPD. I just want to draw a distinction there. We have provided some ammunition to some of the Syrian Arab groups that are fighting there, but not specifically to the YPD. I apologize.
QUESTION: No --
QUESTION: (Inaudible) transfer weapons from Iraqi Kurdistan, which were essentially American weapons in Kobani, to the PYD?
MR TONER: Well, we have not done ammunition drops. I don't know what you're referring to, frankly.
QUESTION: There was shipments of ammunition dropped --
QUESTION: 2014 October.
QUESTION: -- in Kobani.
MR TONER: I'm not – what I – what I thought she was referring to was the arms drops over the weekend to Syrian Arabs that was – that took place. And that was ammunition that was provided.
QUESTION: You did it before. Last year, 2014 October, you did for once dropped – airdropped some weapons or ammunition to defenders of Kobani, including YPG as well.
MR TONER: We did – when you're talking about – yeah, when you're talking about – I'm sorry, you're talking about Kobani. Yes, we did provide – well, let's be clear. In 2014, October, Kurdish and Syrian opposition forces defending Kobani were running dangerously low on supplies, and that was necessary for them to keep fighting ISIL. And we did resupply those defenders by air with supplies that were provided by Kurdistan Regional Government authorities.
QUESTION: But that means you are not going to provide weapons or ammunition --
MR TONER: But we did not – but she referred to over the weekend. At least – maybe I misheard that – that this latest ammunition supply was to the YPD.
QUESTION: But U.S. considers – sorry. But U.S. considers PYD as a reliable key partner on the ground, right?
MR TONER: Well, we consider them a very effective fighting force against ISIL, and as such, we've supported them with airstrikes and other supplies, but not ammunition.
QUESTION: Are you going to control those weapons or the equipments that you are going to send? I mean, will they have some restrictions – technological restrictions – or what kind of weapons are you going to send there?
MR TONER: Well, I'm not going to get into the specifics, but we obviously vet all the leaders and all the groups that we provide weapons to or ammunition to.
QUESTION: Mark, a change of subject?
QUESTION: Mark, early last week there were – there was talk about the Toyota trucks, or the United States has asked Europe to investigate how ISIS has come to have so many Toyota trucks and so on. And then there were reports towards the end of the week that part of the nonlethal aid that you have given – the State Department has given included 43 of these trucks. Can you confirm that? Are you aware of those reports – that ended up in ISIS's hands?
MR TONER: Again, I'm aware of the investigation into the Toyota trucks. I've just – what I've seen on the news. I'm not aware that there's any link between vehicles that we may have provided.
QUESTION: But the State Department did provide trucks --
MR TONER: I don't know that.
QUESTION: -- as part of its nonlethal aid?
MR TONER: I don't know that. I'd have to look at it.
QUESTION: Mark --
MR TONER: Look into it, rather.
QUESTION: Are you aware of the creation of the new opposition forces in Syria named Syrian Democratic Forces, and do you support them?
MR TONER: I'm sorry, one more time, Michel? I apologize.
QUESTION: During the weekend, they announced in Syria – several factions announced the creation of the Syrian Democratic Forces. They are consisted from Kurds, Arabs, and Christians. Are you aware of this or not?
MR TONER: I'm not aware of that particular piece of news, so I'd have to obviously – I mean, we work with a variety of – as you well know – of different actors, different groups who are fighting in northern Syria, but I'd have to look into the particular composition of this group. I just don't know.
QUESTION: Mark, a change of subject, please.
MR TONER: Yeah, please, Lesley. Yeah, sure.
QUESTION: So the White House just said that there's strong indication that Iran's test of a new precision-guided ballistic missile on Sunday violated a UN Security Council resolution. Was that your assessment as well, and what are the implications of this?
MR TONER: So yes, obviously agree with what the White House just said. We just – starting from point one and then moving forward, these kind of missile tests are not a violation of the JCPOA, which had been some of the questions that we've gotten about this, because the focus of the JCPOA clearly is on Iran's nuclear program. But any conventional arms transfers or missile activity is currently prohibited by existing UNSCRs, or U.S. – UNSC resolutions, or prohibited in the future by UNSCR 2231 would be violations of Iran's UN obligations and should be dealt with through the appropriate UN channels.
QUESTION: So --
QUESTION: What --
QUESTION: -- that's – so what's the next – how soon do you call --
QUESTION: Yeah.
QUESTION: -- the Security Council meeting to put new sanctions on?
MR TONER: So we're going to raise – so we're going to raise – sorry, in answer to your question: So we're going to raise the incident at the UN, and then we'll continue to do this for any and all Iranian violations of UN Security Council resolutions. I mean, we've seen for the past years that Iran has consistently ignored UN Security Council resolutions. And so obviously, it would be – it's deeply concerning that this latest violation does appear to be a violation of UN Security Council Resolution 1929. And we'll obviously raise this at the UNSC, as we have done in previous launches.
QUESTION: To what end?
MR TONER: Well, that's a --
QUESTION: I mean, are you calling for --
MR TONER: The Security Council will then --
QUESTION: Yeah, yeah. But, I mean, does the United – does the Administration believe that Iran should face new sanctions because it violated this Security Council resolution?
MR TONER: No, I mean, there's already --
QUESTION: No?
MR TONER: I mean, there – no. But there's existing --
QUESTION: So there's --
MR TONER: -- mechanisms through the Security Council --
QUESTION: So there's no consequence to them just flouting the resolution and doing --
MR TONER: No, not at all. In fact, frankly, we've got a lot --
QUESTION: So you're saying you're agreeing, that there isn't any.
MR TONER: We have a --
QUESTION: Or you --
MR TONER: No. There are mechanisms in place – come on, Matt.
QUESTION: Well, I --
MR TONER: No, there are --
QUESTION: The way you answered the question made it sound as if you agreed.
MR TONER: There are lots of unilateral and multilateral tools to continue to counter Iran's ballistic missile program.
QUESTION: Okay. And the fact that – what you said is that – you said that Iran has – what did you say? – consistently ignored UN Security Council resolutions --
MR TONER: Ignored, yeah.
QUESTION: -- deeply troubling, deeply concerning. And if that fact didn't – doesn't give you any pause at all about whether they'll stand by and abide by the JCPOA?
MR TONER: No, because the JCPOA is not, frankly, predicated on any hoped-for change in Iran's behavior. It's --
QUESTION: Well, right. But the JCPOA is an agreement between Iran, the Security Council members, and Germany.
MR TONER: Right. But let's --
QUESTION: And the UN Resolution 1929 is the entire --
MR TONER: But let's be very clear.
QUESTION: -- is Iran and the entire world.
MR TONER: But let's be very clear.
QUESTION: And if they're going to ignore the entire world, are – don't you have any concern that they're going to ignore six?
MR TONER: Let's be very – well, going into it we had those concerns. That's why the JCPOA was structured in a way that will hold Iran's feet to the fire, so to speak, and it will not get any sanctions relief. If it wants to benefit from sanctions relief, it needs to comply with the JCPOA. And let's not – let's not forget that it didn't – it did abide by the interim joint action – Joint Plan of Action.
QUESTION: Okay. But shouldn't – but if it wants sanctions relief, shouldn't it also abide by the other Security Council resolutions? I mean, let's remember, in several years from now, presuming this all goes through, those missile – the ballistic missile sanctions are going to be dropped. So until that point, if there's no punishment for – or there's no consequence for --
MR TONER: Which is --
QUESTION: -- them doing these tests, they're – why should they stop doing it?
MR TONER: But there is. I mean, we're raising this at the UN Security Council. We believe at least it appears to be a violation of 1929, of UN Security Council Resolution 1929, and we're going to take appropriate action. But it's – that's at the level of the Security Council. But --
QUESTION: Does 1929 include automatic sanctions in the case of a breach, or is it just --
MR TONER: I don't know. I'd have to look. I'd have to get back to you on that. But we do have a lot of unilateral tools at our disposal as well to --
QUESTION: Okay. So when can we expect to see those tools being implemented?
MR TONER: We'll look at it very closely. We're looking at whether – looking to confirm this. As I said, we believe it was, and we're going to continue to – or not continue, but we're going to look at it closely. Once we've determined if it was in violation, then we'll take appropriate action.
QUESTION: So the toolbox is still in the shed. Is that what you're saying? It hasn't been taken out and not yet – you haven't yet opened it up to see what --
MR TONER: That's a tortured metaphor. We do have --
QUESTION: I'm just trying to find – I mean, it seems --
MR TONER: We do have a toolbox.
QUESTION: -- pretty cut and – pretty clear that there was a violation here. And if the response is minimal, then there's not going to be a --
MR TONER: It's not minimal, Matt.
QUESTION: Well, but if it is, if it – and it doesn't sound like people are really seized or just think of this as some kind of an urgent thing where there needs to be a Security Council meeting today on it, then it might give people – it might raise questions about whether – how you would deal with any potential violation of the JCPOA.
MR TONER: Okay. So first of all, to try to clarify my answer to you about what action will be taken, if these tests constitute a violation of existing UN Security Council resolutions, we would take appropriate action at the UN. But in addition, we have distinct domestic authorities to take action as appropriate against entities and individuals involved. And likewise, the Security Council and its Iran Sanctions Committee could take action to investigate the matter, engage Iran, and condemn the violation. And so let's let this process play out before we --
QUESTION: I have one more Iran question.
MR TONER: Yes, please.
QUESTION: And that is the Jason Rezaian trial.
MR TONER: Yes.
QUESTION: I know that it's – the process was opaque and you don't know a lot, but is there anything that you can tell us?
MR TONER: Not much from beyond what we said yesterday, and I apologize, but we just haven't gotten any official confirmation of the verdict or specific charges or any further information.
QUESTION: But have you got – can I ask that?
MR TONER: Yeah, go ahead.
QUESTION: Have the Iran – because the Iranians don't recognize dual citizenship, they're treating him as an Iranian citizen, not as an American citizen.
MR TONER: Right.
QUESTION: So have you ever had any official notification about – at any stage of this process?
MR TONER: I'd have to – I mean, in terms of what the charges were being brought against him or --
QUESTION: Well, right. I mean, isn't it – it's correct, right, that that Swiss hadn't --
MR TONER: I mean, it's always been an opaque process.
QUESTION: But the Swiss had not been able to – the Iranians don't regard him as an American so they're not giving him the consular – not giving the Swiss consular access. Is that correct or no?
MR TONER: Well, it's correct in the sense that – I mean, this has always been – as you correctly noted, it's been an opaque process --
QUESTION: Right.
MR TONER: -- partly perhaps because of that but also because of just the --
QUESTION: Right. But when – but what I'm getting at here is when you say you haven't had any --
MR TONER: -- lack of transparency in Iran's judicial system. Sorry.
QUESTION: What I'm getting at is that when you say you haven't had any official notice or official --
MR TONER: Well, I'm just saying that --
QUESTION: -- confirmation, have you ever had any official confirmation from the Iranians at any stage of this?
MR TONER: I'd have to go back and look. I'd have to go back and look at whether we had specific information about the charges filed against him, but I believe we did.
QUESTION: Okay.
MR TONER: But we haven't seen any kind of here's what he is being charged for, here is what the verdict is. We've just seen, as I've said, reports that he was convicted --
QUESTION: Right. Okay, so there is --
MR TONER: -- without any kind of follow-up.
QUESTION: So there is precedent for the Iranians actually communicating directly with you about this – this legal process?
MR TONER: Well, again, as we've said many times, I mean, the Secretary and everybody from the U.S. Government who has interactions with the Iranians have consistently raised these cases.
QUESTION: Right, no, I understand that --
MR TONER: Yeah.
QUESTION: -- but I mean about the actual procedure.
MR TONER: Yeah, I mean, I – again, I can't speak to what we may get from the Iranians in terms of clarity on this, but I can say we don't have clarity yet. But regardless of that, we want to see him come home yesterday.
QUESTION: Different topics?
MR TONER: Yeah, please. Go ahead.
QUESTION: Yeah, topic is about the Futenma relocation plan. And Okinawa governor on Tuesday revoked approval for work needed to the relocation of the U.S. air base. Japanese Government suspended construction now and they also – governor is set for legal battle with the Japanese Government. So how does U.S. Government think that? And also, how do you think that Japan and United States can overcome that gridlock?
MR TONER: Well, I would just say I'm aware of those developments and news reports. I can say that both the U.S. and the Japanese Government remain committed to implementing the relocation of Marine Corps Air Station Futenma to Camp Schwab on Henoko Bay. As we said multiple times from this podium and elsewhere, it's – this construction of the Futenma Replacement Facility at Camp Schwab is a meaningful result of many, many years of sustained work between the U.S. and Japan. It's a critical step towards realizing our shared vision for the realignment of U.S. forces on Okinawa. So we remain in close communication, as we have been, with officials from the Government of Japan. And in terms of other details, I would just refer you to the Government of Japan.
Please, sir. Yes.
QUESTION: Thank you. Can I go back to Syrian Kurd and your airdropping weapons? Did you just said you have not airdropped any ammunition to Syrian Kurds?
MR TONER: So what I'd say is – and the Department of Defense is obviously the better source of information about this, and I believe they've confirmed that on Sunday C-17 aircraft dropped a small arms ammunition – or rather – I apologize – dropped small arms ammunition to Syrian Arab groups fighting ISIL in northeastern Syria, which was my – was the reason why I said that it was directed to these Syrian Arab groups. And as I said, this airdrop was to provide ammunition to these groups, these Arab groups, these – whose leaders were appropriately vetted by the United States and have been fighting effectively ISIL in northern Syria. And this seeks to build on some of the successes that those forces have had in clearing Syrian territory and supported by coalition airstrikes. So --
QUESTION: That was in this case. Do you rule out dropping them to the PYD in the future?
MR TONER: I'd have to refer you to the Department of Defense to give more details about future plans on that.
Is that it, guys?
QUESTION: Were you staying away from the Kurdish forces because of the Turkish concerns regarding PYD?
MR TONER: Not necessarily. I mean, we've said before that we think the YPD have been effective against ISIL. But we've also been very clear that we don't recognize any kind of PYD semiautonomous zone or self-rule in that area. We remain committed to the unity and territorial integrity of Syria.
And we're also, frankly, in constant dialogue and discussion with Turkey. We understand its own concerns, its own security concerns along its border, and we continue to have those discussions.
Yeah, please.
QUESTION: What is the reason why you are not recognizing self-autonomous, which is going to be inside Syria? And they are – it's not a separation.
MR TONER: Well, again, I would just say we remain committed to the unity and territorial integrity of Syria.
QUESTION: And that's PYD also. I mean, they are asking for self-governance inside Syria, not as separatist thing --
MR TONER: Right. But what we want to see it in areas that are newly liberated – and we've talked about this a lot – we want to see inclusive government that doesn't – that doesn't allow – frankly, some of the refugees have been replaced – displaced, displaced by the fighting that allows them ultimately to return.
QUESTION: It seems that you are consulting with your Turkish ally, which is a really different country and it's not a Syrian – I mean, it seems like Turkey is deciding for Syrians what to do, because Bashar al-Assad is --
MR TONER: That's not – no, that's just not true. Again --
QUESTION: But you take the Turkish concern on this matter very seriously.
MR TONER: We talk about and continue to talk about – I mean, Turkey is a NATO ally, a strong partner in the region. They're allowing us now to carry out airstrikes from Incirlik. In fact, they've carried out their own airstrikes in northern Syria against ISIL. But of course, we take their security concerns seriously, and of course, we have a dialogue and discussion about them. But that's not to predetermine what the future of Syria looks like politically, which is what you're implying in your question.
What we want to see ultimately resolve the situation in Syria is a political resolution. And that's something we've talked about in terms of the Geneva communique.
QUESTION: Okay. But why it should be a security concern or national security threat for Turkey in Syria – the Kurdish areas in Syria, which is not their country and it's a different country, and also you call them a very effective force against ISIL? And what is the problem with Turkey if it's a different country? It's not part of Turkey.
MR TONER: Again, I think I've – I feel like I answered this many times today already. But what – it's two different issues. But what we don't want to see is for the YPD to develop semiautonomous zones within Syria. We want to see --
QUESTION: What would the reason?
MR TONER: Because we want to see the areas that are liberated have inclusive governments and civil society return so that all displaced people can return to those areas.
QUESTION: Right. But displaced needs at least a minimum governance. It's a political fact --
MR TONER: Of course, that's what we want to see: inclusive governance return.
QUESTION: Right. But it is – it's a political vacuum in that area. And it is the same thing – the Kurdish region in Iraq.
MR TONER: I think I've answered your question. We're having a political debate now.
QUESTION: Thank you.
MR TONER: Thanks.
(The briefing was concluded at 2:11 p.m.)
DPB # 168
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
