Daily Press Briefing
Mark C. Toner
Deputy Spokesperson
Daily Press Briefing
Washington, DC
November 16, 2015
Index for Today's Briefing
DEPARTMENT
FRANCE/ISIL/SYRIA
IRAQ
ISIL/RUSSIA/SYRIA/REGION
SAUDI ARABIA/YEMEN
ISIL/SYRIA/REGION
ISIL/RUSSIA/TURKEY
SYRIA/ISIL/TURKEY
JAPAN
BURUNDI
SECRETARY'S TRAVEL
TRANSCRIPT:
2:07 p.m. EST
MR TONER: Hey, everybody. Welcome to the State Department. Just a couple things up top, and then I'll get to your questions.
Very quickly, I just wanted to note this week the International Partnership for Nuclear Disarmament Verification meets in Oslo, Norway for its second plenary meeting. Assistant Secretary for Arms Control, Verification, and Compliance Frank Rose will serve as the head of the U.S. delegation. And just briefly, the partnership brings together over 25 nuclear weapon and non-nuclear weapon states to tackle some of the technical issues we are certain to face in verifying future nuclear arms control agreements and treaties. Partnership is another example of our efforts to advance President Obama's vision of a peace and security – a world without nuclear weapons, as we also work to build our – build a secure – security environment, rather, conducive to further arms reductions.
Do want to give a shout-out to the back of the room. We have a group of journalism students from American University's Washington Semester Program. So these are the people you aspire to be like someday. (Laughter.) Sorry. No, I'm just kidding. These fine professionals in front of me will now, no doubt, grill me for hours because of my comments. But anyway, these are folks from – these students are from several states, five countries – very quickly: Germany, Norway, UK, South Korea, and Japan – here to study journalism and new media for one semester. And this program introduces them to innovators in American journalism, right here in front of you, and communications, hones their writing and digital production reporting skills. So thanks, guys. I'm happy to talk to you afterwards, after – if I survive.
That's all I got. Brad?
QUESTION: I'll yield today the first question to my colleague from –
MR TONER: Makes me nervous.
QUESTION: -- Agence France-Presse.
QUESTION: No, it's a tribute to my colleagues back in Paris. I'm going take the first question today, as AFP did at the President's press conference today.
MR TONER: That's a nice touch.
QUESTION: Yes. Yeah, we thought that up just now. The – I see the Pentagon has – well, European Command has announced that U.S. military personnel have been banned from 50 kilometers radius of Paris while they are off duty. Are there any additional State Department security measures for your personnel in the Paris area or in France or Belgium?
MR TONER: Well, first of all, we wouldn't talk necessary about the security posture of the embassy. Obviously, we assess that, and we have assessed it since the terrible attacks of Friday night, November 13th. But we did send out an alert to Americans living in Paris. Essentially, what we did was inform them to follow the advice of local authorities and, obviously, keep close to a radio or other news sources, rather – I'm dating myself by saying radio – but other news sources, just to follow events closely, if things should change on the ground, and to, frankly, just to follow good and sound smarts, street smarts, about what's going on around you; be vigilant, be aware of local events, take appropriate steps to bolster personal security, including limiting movements to essential activities.
QUESTION: And on the subject of vigilance, there was a – are you aware of a video that was released by the Salah al-Din branch of the Islamic State organization, in which they said that Washington, D.C. was the next target on their list after France?
MR TONER: Sure, I –
QUESTION: And any comment on that?
MR TONER: I'm aware of the video. I haven't seen it. Look, the President spoke to this from Turkey this morning – or not specifically to this video, but to the fact that we're well aware of the threat that ISIL poses. They have made claims before that they want to attack Western targets, including the United States. Since Friday, certainly since Friday, we've taken additional steps to protect and enhance our security measures for folks coming into the United States, but also in various cities and locales throughout the United States. I would refer you to the Department of Homeland Security for more information about that.
But it's the world we live in today. We all operate under a heightened sense of security and awareness, and certainly the terribly tragedy and events in Paris have only heightened those concerns.
QUESTION: And do the additional checks you talk about also – are they also reflecting additional checks that are being demanded for refugees?
MR TONER: Well, certainly refugees – and I appreciate you bringing that up. Again, the President spoke, I think quite forcefully, about the refugees and the fact that many of these refugees from Syria, from the region, are fleeing precisely the type of senseless violence that did occur on Friday night in Paris, and that closing the door in the face of these individuals would be a betrayal of our values.
That said, it's also important to emphasize that these refugees are subject to the highest level of security checks of any category of traveler to the United States. It's an interagency or multiagency screening process and involves the National Counterterrorism Center, the FBI's Terrorist Screening Center, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Department of Defense. And particular to Syria, these Syrian refugees go through an extra yet additional forms of security screenings.
So all that said, again, we remain steadfastly committed to the President's plan to resettle at least 10,000 Syrian refugees in the United States in FY 2016. We think we can do this safely and in a way that represents the best of American values, which is accepting these people who are fleeing violence, many of them vulnerable, many of them the victims of this violence, but in a way that ensures the safety and security of American people.
QUESTION: Have you reached the cadence that would allow you to bring 10,000 in this fiscal year?
MR TONER: We've talked a little bit about this. And we believe we can do that. At the same time as – at the same time we maintain the --
QUESTION: Are you admitting X --
MR TONER: I don't know what the current --
QUESTION: -- (inaudible)?
MR TONER: The goal is to, in 2016, is to be able to admit 10,000 – at least 10,000 additional refugees.
QUESTION: So 250 a week.
MR TONER: It's a high bar, but we believe we can --
QUESTION: Are you anywhere close to that yet? Because so far, you've --
MR TONER: I don't have --
QUESTION: -- been about 12 a week in previous fiscal years.
MR TONER: Sure. I mean, I don't have an exact figure to give you today. All I know is that we're standing behind the fact that we can do that at the same time as we maintain this stringent security process to admit them.
QUESTION: Or tomorrow.
MR TONER: (Inaudible.)
QUESTION: We heard a lot in the President's comments today about what you're not going to do after Paris. Can you kind of summarize exactly what you're doing that's new or enhanced as a result of these attacks?
MR TONER: Well --
QUESTION: And not what you're not going to do.
MR TONER: Sure.
QUESTION: What you are going to do.
MR TONER: Sure. Well, a couple things to – just to – on that question. First of all, we already have a strategy in place. We've talked a lot about this over the past months. We've been enhancing that strategy in the past weeks, frankly, to the inclusion of putting special forces contingent on the ground, accelerating our support for these groups fighting in northern Syria. But at the same time, I think also – and we've talked a lot about this – there's essentially a number of different tracts that we're pursuing in Syria. The effort to destroy and degrade ISIL, which – obviously, the urgency of that was made – or made yet again very clear, but also that is hand in glove – or that goal, rather, is in conjunction with our other efforts, which is to bring about a political resolution to the civil war there between Assad and the moderate Syrian opposition.
So, if I could put it this way, there's three goals: defeat Daesh or ISIL; stabilize the region; and support a political transition to end the civil war. And none of these are in priority order, but they're all mutually reinforcing. So we've already been, as I said, working on accelerating our support for these groups that are fighting ISIL in northern Syria. And we came out of Vienna on Saturday with real progress being made on the effort to find a political resolution to the civil war there. We've got specific steps, for the first time, to advance a ceasefire and to put forward a political process.
So there was already an urgency here, a sense of urgency. That's been redoubled or that's been, obviously, underscored by events in Paris. We're going to look for ways we can increase our efforts across the board as we go forward. But we're already applying a lot of pressure on ISIL, but we've got to do better, obviously. Sorry for the longwinded answer.
QUESTION: The – yeah. And I don't know if it was quite clear in what that means in terms of new after 130 people were killed in Paris. But be that as it may, the French took strikes in Raqqa based on what all sides are saying was U.S. intelligence. Can you explain why the U.S. hadn't already acted on this intelligence, if it had it?
MR TONER: I can't. I mean, I can't speak to some of the operations that have taken place. I'd refer you to the Department of Defense on that specific strike. I mean, we do cooperate and share intelligence with French forces. But as to that particular airstrike, I don't have any details.
QUESTION: But you've been taking the position that you've been doing everything possible to defeat – ultimately defeat, however you want to say it – ISIL. How would there have been new targets all of the sudden that you had after this attack?
MR TONER: Well, I don't know if I would describe it as necessarily new targets. Look, I mean, Brad, we've – we're – the --
QUESTION: We're you saving them up or – I mean --
MR TONER: Not necessarily. And again, I don't want to get in, necessarily, to the operational details. It's not really our place to talk to that here. But I do think we're constantly looking at targets of opportunity in support of the forces that are fighting ISIL on the ground in northern Syria. France has been flying missions against those – or in support of those forces for many months now. That's going to be accelerated in the days to come, as we seek to apply more pressure on ISIL. But specifically, I mean, we continue to share intelligence with French forces, as we do within the coalition.
QUESTION: And then can I just ask a couple on the refugees and the reaction here in the United States?
MR TONER: Sure thing. Yeah.
QUESTION: There's a number of states, including the Secretary's home state of Massachusetts, talking about blocking Syrian refugees from being resettled. Do states even have the right to do this?
MR TONER: So a couple of thoughts on that. First of all, there's been a lot of misperceptions over the last few days surrounding the issues of refugees, which is why I was glad you guys brought it up – who they are, why they're coming. The President obviously has spoke very eloquently about this earlier today on this issue. But it's incumbent on us, moving forward, as we strive to reach this target of at least 10,000 for Fiscal Year 2016, to work with state and local governments to address their concerns about our resettlement program. We already consult extensively with these state and local governments across the country, from governors' offices to local law enforcement, schools, social services, et cetera. And over 180 cities and towns nationwide have accepted these refugees, welcomed them, and recognized the positive contribution these refugees make to their communities.
As to your specific question, whether they can legally do that, I don't have an answer for you. I don't. I think our lawyers are looking at that. But --
QUESTION: Let me ask it another way then.
MR TONER: Yeah, please.
QUESTION: Given that refugees who are resettled here are given permanent residency status and they're put on a citizenship track, do states have the right to enact border controls to check people if they are refugees and kick them out of their borders? How would this even be possible for states not to allow permanent residents of the United States to visit their states? I mean, I don't know of anything in modern history that's quite like that. Do you?
MR TONER: Well, again, we've seen – as you've said, several states have expressed their concern about accepting some of these refugees. We take their concerns seriously. The way we're looking at this right now is we believe it's incumbent on us to sit with them, consult with them, explain to them the process, the stringent security review that goes into accepting these refugees. And also – and the President – again, he spoke very eloquently about this, that accepting these refugees speaks to who we are as Americans and the fact that many of us are the sons and daughters of immigrants. So all of this, I think, is something we need to work harder at in the days and weeks to come to ensure and reassure the American people that these refugees are actually – will have a positive contribution to society.
Now, as to the legal aspects, we're looking at all of that stuff. I just don't have a clear and definitive answer for you at this point.
QUESTION: I have one last one.
MR TONER: Sure thing.
QUESTION: It's a parallel question --
MR TONER: Yeah.
QUESTION: -- regarding blocking of funding for refugee resettlement. My understanding is that the State Department – and I think you went into this a few months ago when you made your request to Congress – requests funding for all of your resettlement operations, and not broken down by nationality.
MR TONER: That's correct. That's my understanding, yeah.
QUESTION: Can Congress conceivably carve out Syrians and deny funding for that? Or would it have to block the entirety of the U.S. resettlement program?
MR TONER: It's a good question, a fair question. I don't want to necessarily get into hypotheticals, and that's really a question for Congress. You are correct, that is how it works is that we don't segment or divide up these incoming refugees according to nationalities in terms of funding and et cetera. But I don't want to get ahead of what we're dealing with right now. Again, what our focus on right now is to work with Congress, work with these state and local governments, and try to allay their concerns about refugees.
QUESTION: There are regional targets or quotas, though.
MR TONER: Correct, there are regional ones, but not --
QUESTION: Not Syria-specific.
MR TONER: -- specific to – Syria-specific.
QUESTION: But there must be a Middle East tranche. Is that some --
MR TONER: Yeah, I'm not sure how they're divided, but it's --
QUESTION: But is it divided for funding purposes or just as your targets?
MR TONER: I believe both.
QUESTION: So they could conceivably --
MR TONER: If that's wrong, I'll --
QUESTION: -- just knock out the Middle East as a source of refugees?
MR TONER: Again, I don't want to get ahead of what we're talking about today, which is governments, local governments expressing concern about that.
QUESTION: Well, do you worry that these local – state governors could interfere with your goal to get to 10,000 next year?
MR TONER: We are – again, we're aware of these concerns. We're looking at them and we're going to work with local governments to address them.
QUESTION: So they could potentially interfere?
MR TONER: We remain committed to our goal of 10,000 --
QUESTION: Do you know how many --
MR TONER: -- or of at least 10,000 for next year.
QUESTION: Okay. Do you know how many have been submitted so far? There – I mean, we've been on this website. It's a little jammed up today. But --
MR TONER: You're talking about from states, state governments?
QUESTION: Yeah. Well, how many Syrian refugees has the United States taken in since the start of the conflict? Do you know?
MR TONER: Since the start of the conflict – that's a good question.
QUESTION: We're on 1,800 at the end of last fiscal.
QUESTION: Right.
MR TONER: Yeah, but let me --
QUESTION: Well, that was the goal.
MR TONER: I've got – you're talking about specifically Syrian refugees?
QUESTION: Yes.
MR TONER: I think we're talking about 3- or 4,000, I think is what we thought. But I'll have to confirm that. I can take the question.
QUESTION: These are all Syrians who applied before the conflict even started, correctly, or mostly before the conflict even started?
MR TONER: That's right. I'll take the question.
QUESTION: And then you keep saying that you want to work with state governments and legislators on the Hill, but it seems like many of them don't want to work with you, otherwise they wouldn't be announcing on their own state bans that whether they're practical, reasonable, legal or whatever, they wouldn't be doing this, because they'd be working with you on this. Correct?
MR TONER: Again, I'm not going to speak to their motivations, Brad. All I can do is say, as the State Department, we take their concerns seriously. We disagree that these people, individuals, many of them, frankly, the most vulnerable out there from Syria and from the region, represent any kind of real threat. And I would add that any of these refugees, as I just said to Dave, undergo the most stringent security process for anyone entering the United States. It's not something we take lightly; it's something we've perfected over – since 1975, that we've increased some of the security measures in the past years. We've got additional security measures in place particular to Syrian refugees coming in. So we stand by our process.
QUESTION: Given that at least one of the attackers appears to have come in with refugees or posing as a refugee or however, do you think Europe needs to take similar security precautions and vetting procedures as the United States?
MR TONER: Look, I think we've talked a little bit about this before. The European Union in general has – or not in general. The European Union has been seeking to find a common strategy or common policy about these incoming refugees. But certainly, as we saw in the course of the summer and into the fall, there was a major influx of refugees that they struggled, frankly, to deal with. But I think going forward they've – clearly they have legitimate security concerns about all these individuals. And I can't speak to what they – what steps they may take, but --
QUESTION: But you understand that if everyone took the vetting procedures that the United States took, these refugees wouldn't be able to go anywhere, pretty much. Just a tiny trickle would be able to go anywhere because --
MR TONER: Well, a couple of – a couple of --
QUESTION: Well, that's statistical truth. I mean --
MR TONER: -- comments about that, Brad. No. What we've long said about his, and made this point over and over again, is the preponderance; the vast majority of refugees are in the region, both within Syria – internally displaced – or in Lebanon or in Turkey or in Jordan. Those countries have been dealing with this influx of refugees for years and have, frankly, done admirably well in welcoming these refugees. And the United States has been the long – largest humanitarian assistance donor. As we've seen, as the summer progressed, many of these refugees out of frustration have sought refuge farther afield in Europe. That's even, I think, added to a sense of urgency for many countries that we need to resolve the overall situation. And that's ultimately the endgame here; that's the goal here, is the only way to really resolve this situation is to end the conflict in Syria, destroy and defeat ISIL/Daesh, and allow these people to return to their homes.
QUESTION: Mark?
MR TONER: Please, sir.
QUESTION: On the refugees, are you able to resettle them if the authorities in the states don't agree on --
MR TONER: No, Michel, Brad --
QUESTION: I know, but it's not --
MR TONER: -- asked a variation of that question. I don't have a clear answer for you. I know our lawyers are looking at that. That's the most honest answer I can give you. But as I said, our approach to this is, "You have concerns. Let's have a dialogue. Let's consult. Let's talk this through. Let's try to address your concerns and alleviate those concerns." We take very seriously the national security of the United States and the security of the American people.
QUESTION: And on Vienna --
MR TONER: Yeah.
QUESTION: -- agreement or statement, in your understanding, the whole process will take 18 or – 18 month or two years to be fulfilled since the beginning of the talks till the elections?
MR TONER: Right. So first of all, all these dates are target dates. I think we're talking about the need to begin formal negotiations or talks on or around January 1st, and that's between the Syrian opposition and regime representatives under UN auspices, and that's in accordance with the Geneva communique. And then moving forward, we do support a Syrian-led transition process, and that's within a target of six months that will establish credible, nonsectarian governance, set a new constitution drafting schedule, and determine – excuse me – voting and candidacy eligibility for elections.
And then, as you said, that 18-month date – within 18 months – again, these are target dates – but free and fair elections would be held within 18 months. And that would, again, be under – sorry?
QUESTION: Within 18 months of what?
MR TONER: That's within 18 months of --
QUESTION: Now?
MR TONER: -- I believe now. Yeah.
QUESTION: Okay.
QUESTION: That means --
MR TONER: And that's --
QUESTION: -- the whole process will take 18 months, not two years?
MR TONER: Again, these are target dates --
QUESTION: I know.
MR TONER: -- but my understanding is that. If that's wrong, I'll --
QUESTION: So that's six months plus 18 months?
MR TONER: No, my understanding is --
QUESTION: Both clocks start ticking soon?
MR TONER: Just checking my notes here.
QUESTION: On January 1st.
MR TONER: Within 18 months.
QUESTION: Of --
MR TONER: Of --
QUESTION: -- the agreement in Vienna?
MR TONER: Of the – yeah.
QUESTION: No, since the beginning of the talks between the two parties.
MR TONER: No, no, no, I would say from Saturday – from Saturday's meeting.
QUESTION: Okay.
MR TONER: What are you talking about? From the six-month date?
QUESTION: Yeah – no.
MR TONER: I'll clarify that.
QUESTION: Starting in January, when they start talking about the new government, and then --
MR TONER: Anyway, I'll clarify whether it's from Saturday or from six months from now.
QUESTION: Okay.
MR TONER: I'll get that answer for you.
QUESTION: And on the elections – when the statement talked about elections, what elections? Parliamentary elections, presidential elections?
MR TONER: Again, that's all, I think, to be decided. And that's something that the Syrian opposition and Syrian – representatives from the Syrian regime are going to have to – working within – under UN auspices are going to have to figure out.
QUESTION: And the statement didn't mention anything about the future of President Assad. What does that mean?
MR TONER: Well, I think, first of all, our position on Assad has not changed. But we recognize that others feel differently than we do. But Secretary Kerry has been very clear about saying that that should not in and of itself be a roadblock or an obstacle we can't get around that prohibits us from moving forward on a political process or a political resolution. We believe that this is an issue that can be resolved as these other processes move forward, as we move toward a ceasefire, as we move toward a political process that leads to a new constitution. We believe the question of Assad can be decided in the future.
QUESTION: And my last question on this.
MR TONER: Yeah, sure.
QUESTION: When there is no mention for President Assad future, does this mean that he's allowed to run for presidency at the end of the process?
MR TONER: Well, again, this is a process that will need to be fleshed out, formalized, agreed upon by members of the Syrian opposition – and frankly, identifying who those people are is one of the first steps, and the Jordanians are looking at that and leading that process – but between the moderate Syrian opposition and the regime representatives. That's all going to have to be fleshed out by them. This needs to be – to be successful, needs to be a Syrian-owned, Syrian-led process.
QUESTION: And your position – do you want --
MR TONER: My position that he should be – or that we should be – not my position, but the position of the U.S. Government about Assad? I said our position hasn't changed about Assad. But bearing that in mind, we're trying to work together with our stakeholders – with the other stakeholders, rather – to create a process that leads to a political resolution and a transition in Syria.
Please, sir.
QUESTION: Last week, Kurdish forces, Peshmerga, retook Sinjar or Shingal. The question is, do you have any immediate plans with KRG to help return the refugee to the city?
MR TONER: No, and I don't – no, I don't want to be too overly – you're right that they have been – I think they still are continuing to clean up or to mop up in Sinjar. I don't have an operational report for you or an on-the-ground report to give to you. I know we continue to support the Peshmerga-led offensive there, and this is – they've made tremendous strides and great success. I don't know if the – if Sinjar is yet fully liberated. I'd leave that to folks in the field who can speak to that. But certainly, as – if we look forward and we are able to – the Iraqi Government is able to reestablish control of the city, we always look to that end to reestablish good governance and to allow refugees to return.
Please, in the back.
QUESTION: Thank you.
MR TONER: Yeah.
QUESTION: It's about ISIL funding. So U.S. officials told The New York Times that --
MR TONER: I didn't hear – what was your first – I apologize, I just didn't hear what you said. ISIL --
QUESTION: About ISIL revenue.
MR TONER: Okay.
QUESTION: A few questions here. U.S. officials told The New York Times that U.S. warplanes for the first time attacked hundreds of trucks on Monday that the extremist group has been using to smuggle the crude oil it has been producing in Syria. Why for the first time? Why hasn't the U.S. hit them before?
MR TONER: Again, that's an operational detail that I would just refer you to the Department of Defense to speak to.
QUESTION: So you cannot confirm that the U.S. hit the trucks with oil?
MR TONER: No. We talked about that a lot here. We don't – I mean, there's folks over at Department of Defense who can much better speak to the day-to-day operations. We can give you totals of airstrikes, that kind of thing, but it sounds to me like you're looking for a level of detail – why this target on this day and what was the target aiming at – that I can't give you from here.
QUESTION: Has the U.S. targeted ISIL's oil operations before?
MR TONER: I talked a little bit about this on Friday. I don't think you were here. That's always been one of the lines of effort that we've been pursuing: How do we cut off ISIL's financing? And the fact is that they do gain some of their – a large chunk of their financing through this operation of refineries or oil production. So I believe those have always been a matter of targeting of these airstrikes. As to the specific one you're mentioning --
QUESTION: Yes.
MR TONER: -- I'm not sure about why that place then. I just don't have the answer for --
QUESTION: What has the U.S. – aside from hitting the trucks, which you cannot confirm, what has the U.S. done to date to curb ISIL financing – funding?
MR TONER: Well, again, it's a particular line of effort for the anti-ISIL coalition is how to cut off financing for ISIL. One of those is, again, going after their infrastructure, and we have been hitting. I don't have numbers of airstrikes and statistics in front of me to give you that, but – or to give to you, but that's been a line of effort since day one: How do we choke off ISIL's financing and, frankly – and how do we keep it from moving money around? It's all part of the cutting off the supply of money to these terrorist organizations.
QUESTION: Yes, about moving – I'm sorry --
MR TONER: One last question, okay.
QUESTION: Has the U.S. sanctioned any banks – any Iraqi banks – suspected of carrying out transactions for ISIL?
MR TONER: Any Iraqi banks? Have we sanctioned any Iraqi banks?
QUESTION: Iraqi banks – any banks.
MR TONER: Or any banks. I'd have to look into that. I don't have the answer in front --
QUESTION: Have you --
MR TONER: Please.
QUESTION: -- had discussions with Russia about getting the Assad government to stop buying oil from ISIS?
MR TONER: Have we had any discussion with the Russian --
QUESTION: About putting pressure on the Syrian Government to stop buying oil from --
MR TONER: Well, I know that – as you've heard, the Secretary has spoken to this, that there's this – he calls it a symbiotic relationship between Assad and ISIL where one buys resources off of the other. And certainly – I can't speak to specifically in the last weekend or so or on Saturday or in recent discussions, but this is something we've raised with the Russians before because they have access to and can influence Assad.
QUESTION: Here's another symbiotic relationship: The Syrians get money from the Iranians, who have extended their credit to them multiple times. Have you spoken to the Iranians about also putting pressure on the Syrian Government to stop them from transferring money to the Islamic State for oil?
MR TONER: Again, without getting into the details of some of the – our diplomatic conversations at the Vienna talks, we – I would say we express our concerns about these sources of funding. We know that Iran continues support the Assad regime – I mean, that's no surprise – and one of the goals, as I said, coming out of Vienna is we move to a ceasefire, we move to a process. And again, all the stakeholders, but including Russia and Iran, can apply pressure – appropriate pressure – on Assad to be part of that process.
QUESTION: It seems to me it would be easier to stop the flow of money to ISIS from the oil trade by getting the one country that's buying the oil from them to stop buying it, instead of trying to bomb every single truck. So why hasn't this – the Syrian Government, the Russian Government, and the Iranian Government all say they're opposed to the Islamic State and to them getting more and more funds. Why haven't you guys agreed on this yet?
MR TONER: Well, that's a very good question to ask them.
QUESTION: Maybe we should ship them oil (inaudible). (Laughter.)
MR TONER: Go ahead.
QUESTION: On Saudi Arabia, can you give us some detail about this U.S. approval of the $1.29 billion sale of bombs to Saudi, which to my understanding has been jammed in the Senate for a while?
MR TONER: Yes. You're talking about the air-to-ground munitions?
QUESTION: Yeah.
MR TONER: So yes, we have made a determination approving the possible – a possible foreign military sale to the Government of Saudi Arabia for air-to-ground munitions and associated equipment, parts, and logistics support. And that's at an estimated cost of 1.29 billion.
QUESTION: On ISIS?
MR TONER: Sorry.
QUESTION: The campaign has been criticized widely. The United Nations has said that thousands of civilians have died. You're about to ship Saudi Arabia --
MR TONER: You're talking about – you're talking about air --
QUESTION: -- 19,000 smart bombs in --
MR TONER: You're talking about --
QUESTION: The air-to-ground munitions.
MR TONER: Yeah. Well, we talked a little bit about this before, I mean, and about Saudi Arabia's military campaign in Yemen. We have long held that there can be no military solution to the conflict there. We call on the Houthis to cease harassing and attacking Saudi citizens and Saudi territory, and we support the UN process there for a peaceful resolution.
QUESTION: On ISIS?
MR TONER: Yeah, sure.
QUESTION: Thank you. So I'd like to start with a quote from the Secretary Kerry on Friday. He said – he basically seemed to suggest that ISIS had been degraded shortly before the attacks in Paris. He said, "Not long ago, Daesh controlled more than half of Syria's 500-mile-long border with Turkey. Today it has a grip on only about 15 percent." And he went on to suggest that ISIS had been degraded over the past year due to – because of, at least partly, the U.S.-led strategy. Are you still confident that ISIS has been degraded after that --
MR TONER: Right. I think you're referring to --
QUESTION: -- that attack in Paris, or is that the wrong measure of to degrade ISIL, just losing some territory in Iraq and Syria? Can you call that degrading, really?
MR TONER: Okay. First of all, I think it was the President. I don't know if you – I thought you said the Secretary stated it, but that's okay.
QUESTION: The Secretary Kerry at USIP.
MR TONER: Let me – let me finish. So I'm not aware that the Secretary said that. But regardless, what he was talking about, and legitimately so, was the fact that on the ground in Iraq and in Syria, in northern Syria, ISIL has been degraded. They've lost territory. And progress has been made in terms of their – the amount of territory that they control. We've cut them off. We've won back significant cities and towns, including, as we talked about earlier, Sinjar. That's going to continue. But you raised a very valid point about what happened in Paris. The President was very clear about that as well, and others, including the Secretary, have been very clear. That's also an element of ISIL that – and the President was very frank about this – when you've got three or four individuals with weapons who are willing to die for their cause, they can inflict a lot of damage. And how we root them out and how we go after them and how we cut them off and how we prosecute them and arrest them and stop them and thwart these efforts, that's a challenge and that remains a challenge. And I don't think anybody was trying to downplay that challenge going forward.
QUESTION: Is there any review of your policy that perhaps it hasn't been as effective as you would hope against the Islamic State? Because one would hope that ISIS, after being bombed – hundreds, thousands of bombs being dropped on their hideouts in Iraq and Syria – it wouldn't be in a position to carry out an attack like the one it did in Paris.
MR TONER: Sure. I think that this is – and we've been, again, very frank and transparent about the fact that this is going to be a long struggle. And one of the areas I think we do need to improve when you're talking about the threat of ISIL beyond the region is the flow of foreign fighters from Syria, from Iraq, northward through Turkey and other places. So we've got to get a better system in place to track these individuals and prevent them from flowing into Europe and into other parts of the region where they can create havoc. That's a piece of the overall effort. The other, as we talked about earlier, is about finance, and you've got to choke off ISIL's financing and deny it the funds that it needs to keep itself afloat. These are all ongoing efforts and ongoing lines of effort. And we've also got to grow the capability of Iraqis' forces so that they can effectively defend their homeland against ISIL. And then finally, we've got to figure out and solve what is a very complex and very bloody and costly internal struggle in Syria. And so this is a difficult problem. Nobody is denying that, but we do have a strategy in place.
QUESTION: Just one more question.
MR TONER: Sure.
QUESTION: Today Vladimir Putin said in Antalya that at least one member of G20 is dealing with ISIS or is turning a blind eye to ISIS, however he said it. Do you agree with his assessment that there's a member of G20 that is actually dealing --
MR TONER: I honestly don't know what he's – I'm sorry, I'm not trying to be clever. I just don't know what he's – who he was referring to.
QUESTION: One more?
MR TONER: Sorry, I don't mean – I just don't have – I'm not sure --
QUESTION: Well, I mean, many people expect or assume that he referred to Turkey because it hasn't been the kind of partner, NATO ally, that you expect – like, it has been bombing the Kurds more than --
MR TONER: I mean, the United States, we think – sure.
QUESTION: -- bombing ISIS, has been bombing the worst enemy of ISIS more than ISIS.
MR TONER: I mean we have – we fly out of Turkey's airbase. That brings us closer and allows us to hit ISIL more quickly and more forcefully than we could. And we've been in ongoing dialogue with Turkey about ways to protect its border. And, as I mentioned earlier, Turkey's received a major influx of refugees, Syrian refugees – excuse me – and dealt with them for over a period of four years and has also dealt with spillover violence from the conflict in Syria.
So Turkey is a frontline state in this conflict. And so we believe they're a capable partner and ally and that this is – that ISIL is as much an existential threat for Turkey as it is for any of us.
Please?
QUESTION: Mark, Turkish Foreign Minister said today that Assad will not stand for elections. He will turn over his powers at the end of six-month period, transition period. Is this also your understanding?
MR TONER: Michel, I saw those reports. I'm not sure they're accurate. And I'm not trying to – I just – I know what you're talking about; I saw those news reports. I think they were somewhat modified later. But I would refer you to Turkish authorities for what he meant by that.
Again, the process, as we understand it, is what I laid out for you, except with the – I'm not sure whether it's 16 months from –
QUESTION: Eighteen –
MR TONER: -- six months or eighteen months from – anyway, but I'm not sure what he was referring to. I don't think those were accurate; I think they walked those back a little bit, or clarified them.
Yeah, in the back, please.
QUESTION: It's about --
MR TONER: Or how about – I'm sorry, just – I just got – I answered you. Please, she gets it. Please.
QUESTION: Mine is also on ISIL.
MR TONER: Okay.
QUESTION: So I want to kind of go back to the Syrian refugee issue. I have two questions on this.
MR TONER: Sure.
QUESTION: Some of the states that are coming out and saying that they are no longer willing to accept refugees are some of the states that have accepted the highest number of Syrian refugees in the past, if you're looking at the Wrapsnet data, which the State Department has referred to many times: Texas, the second-highest number of any state; Arizona, high up there; Illinois, high up there; Michigan, high up there. Given this reliance on these particular states to accept Syrian refugees in the past, how can this not put the overall goal of 10,000 into question?
MR TONER: I just don't want to – again, let's not get ahead of ourselves here. We have seen some of these letters, some of these public remarks. We're going to engage with these governments, with these localities. We are going to talk to them about their concerns. We are going to try to address their concerns, alleviate their concerns. We feel that we can do that. We feel very strongly that we have a process in place that allows for the safe resettlement of Syrian refugees. We stand by that process. It's rigorous, it's effective, and, frankly, it's – it allows some of these – as I said, some of these most vulnerable victims of the violence in Syria a chance for a new life.
So we're going to continue to push that, push on that policy, push on that point going forward, and work with them to try to alleviate these communities' concerns. As we said, you're absolutely right; many of these states have accepted a large number of Syrian refugees and other refugees for some time. And we're looking for that same level of cooperation and that same willingness going forward.
Yes, sir?
QUESTION: Well, can I – I just have one more on this --
MR TONER: Yeah, please.
QUESTION: -- that kind of goes into what you were just saying. Can the U.S. continue to be as rigorous in its vetting process, given that it's seeking to increase the number of refugees from Syria so dramatically in this next year?
MR TONER: Sure. We've talked a little bit about this, but we are trying to set in place – and, frankly, increase our resources in order to do just that. I mean that's – we wouldn't, to be perfectly honest, try to do – try to increase the number of refugees if we couldn't ensure that they were safely vetted coming into the United States. So --
QUESTION: Can I follow up on refugees?
MR TONER: Please.
QUESTION: Yeah. And then me.
MR TONER: Yeah. Sure thing, Brad.
QUESTION: I know you were asked while I was out that – about whether the states have legal authority to bar the resettlement of refugees within their state borders. Now you said your lawyers were looking into it. Did you agree to take that question? And, if not, can you take it?
MR TONER: Sure.
QUESTION: Thank you.
QUESTION: This is --
MR TONER: I don't know if I – but, I mean, I say that in the full expectation that I may not have something for you in an hour or even today.
QUESTION: No, I --
QUESTION: This is related to --
MR TONER: I think it's ultimately something we are going to have to answer.
QUESTION: Related to that question, my understanding – or can you tell us how you determine where refugees go? I thought it was refugees and the U.S. Government work together to decide where they want to go and where you might be able to help them. It's not that you tell them they have to go somewhere or another.
MR TONER: Oh, no, certainly. No, we don't – yeah. No, I think that's correct. We work with – but we work with groups. And again, my – I can get you better information about this, but my understanding is once they are vetted, and then we work with local groups and organizations –
QUESTION: Right.
MR TONER: -- throughout the country where we resettle them to. My understanding is that's not –
QUESTION: It's not forced.
MR TONER: -- "you go here," or – yeah, right, exactly.
QUESTION: Right.
MR TONER: That's my understanding. But we rely on some of these local communities or local organizations to help resettle these people.
QUESTION: Correct. So let's say a Syrian refugee comes and says, "I want to move in with my cousin in Dearborn, Michigan," or wherever. You would never say, "No, we think you should go to Arkansas."
MR TONER: I believe that's the case, yes.
QUESTION: So how --
MR TONER: I don't think we – we don't force-resettle people into certain regions.
QUESTION: And since these refugees are allowed into the United States as permanent residents with the same rights of freedom of movement as American residents and citizens, what validity can there be to barring these individuals from certain states? This is – it seems to go to the heart of the issue.
MR TONER: Sure. I understand –
QUESTION: It's not just about states saying –
MR TONER: I understand the question. I understand the question, Brad.
QUESTION: It's not just about states saying they don't want them; it's about states saying, "No, we want to deny them equal rights."
MR TONER: I understand totally the question, but I just don't want to give you an off-the-cuff answer until we've had an opportunity to really study all the legal aspects of it, and then I can give you a definitive answer.
QUESTION: I mean it sounds like, to say the word, "segregation."
MR TONER: I – again --
QUESTION: Does it not?
MR TONER: Again, it's a valid question. I just don't want to give you an off-the-cuff answer.
Please, sir.
QUESTION: President Obama in his presser said that along with military activity, humanitarian assistance and diplomacy would be sort of the pillar against the ISIL. So when France says that they're enhancing airstrikes to the Syrian region, does that sort of mean that there should be a way to enhance diplomacy and humanitarian assistance? And if so, is there actually a way to put more weight into that?
MR TONER: Are you saying in terms of France, or are you just saying in terms of across the board?
QUESTION: The latter one, across the rest of --
MR TONER: Well, the latter – look, I mean, to the point I'm sure that some of these folks in this room are tired of hearing me go on about it, but since – really since UN General Assembly, Secretary Kerry has been leading efforts to create the momentum, political momentum, to reach a ceasefire and a political process in Syria. All of that is on the diplomatic front. He – we recognize, as a government – the President recognizes – you've got to be able to defeat and degrade – degrade and defeat ISIL at the same time as you create an end to the conflict between Assad and the Syrian opposition or the Syrian people. You've got to be able to do both. So I mean, that's – the diplomatic piece of that certainly is the coalition against ISIL, but there's a military component there as well.
But there's no military solution to what's going on between Assad and the Syrian people. That has to be – and we've long maintained that that has to be resolved through a political process. And we now, coming out of Vienna, coming out of this second meeting of the stakeholders, we believe that that process is now underway.
You, and then I'll get you in back. But first, you.
QUESTION: I want to talk about Okinawa, if that's okay.
MR TONER: Do you have an ISIL-ish question?
QUESTION: ISIS. Yes.
MR TONER: Yeah. One more.
QUESTION: Yeah, so later on.
MR TONER: Sorry. Then I'll get to you. Please.
QUESTION: So last year, the U.S. Treasury said ISIS cells smuggled oil to Turkey. Has that stopped? Has the U.S. done anything to stop that?
MR TONER: You said that Treasury has said that ISIL has --
QUESTION: Yes.
MR TONER: -- smuggled oil to Turkey?
QUESTION: Yes. Is selling the oil --
MR TONER: I don't have an update. Sure.
QUESTION: Yes.
MR TONER: I don't have an update for you. I know that there's an area of the border – and we talked about it here – that we're trying to close, we're trying to seal up. We're trying to get security on that border. We've tried to cut off most of the major supply routes that ISIL has had, and have made success in cutting off those routes to Turkey and elsewhere. I think that remains a little bit of an ongoing challenge, but certainly one that we're looking at.
QUESTION: But can you --
MR TONER: But you're talking about oil smuggling. I don't have any update for you.
QUESTION: But can you give any details as to what the U.S. is doing to curb ISIL financing?
MR TONER: I get – I mean, I tried to speak to this earlier. I thought I answered your question. I mean, it's one of the lines of effort. We've got all the coalition members, some 65-plus members of the coalition, who are all taking efforts to strangle ISIL's access to foreign markets, to any banking systems. We're looking at how we cut off within, through airstrikes, what ISIL relies on in terms of oil production or selling oil or smuggling oil. We're looking at how to cut off all those supply lines. That's an absolutely essential part of defeating and degrading ISIL. That's --
QUESTION: Yes. But despite doing all of that, ISIL is still getting its funding. What are the difficulties in curbing ISIL financing?
MR TONER: Well, I mean, the black market and the fact that, as Brad mentioned, that Assad is one of the problems here, that there's a symbiotic relationship where they – where Assad relies on ISIL oil and et cetera. That's a tough thing to completely squelch altogether. But it's something we're working hard to do.
Please.
QUESTION: So as we've talked --
MR TONER: Oh, Okinawa, right.
QUESTION: -- numerous times about this, as you know, there's a lot of back and forth between the central government and the governor of Okinawa on the relocation of Futenma.
MR TONER: Sure.
QUESTION: And the latest iteration is that the central government is saying that they're going to bring this matter to the high court because the governor is so intransigent. Do you have any comment about that? I understand it's a domestic issue, but at the same time it's related to the alliance, so --
MR TONER: Well, it certainly is. And we obviously take all these kinds of reports seriously. I mean, our essential position doesn't change. We appreciate the longstanding – or rather we share an unwavering commitment to the construction of the Futenma replacement facility, and we believe it's the only viable and agreed-upon solution that addresses the operational, political, and financial and, frankly, strategic concerns and avoids continued use of Marine Corps Air Station Futenma.
As to how this issue is being worked at within the Japanese legal system, that's something for the Japanese authorities to answer.
QUESTION: Are you still confident that the Administration will be going through with this?
MR TONER: Yes.
QUESTION: Thank you.
QUESTION: A follow-up?
MR TONER: Sure.
QUESTION: Okay. About Futenma, does the United States Government think about this construction suspended to – during finish the trial?
MR TONER: The drilling?
QUESTION: Suspending to the construction the new air base and the finishing the – during the finishing to the trial?
MR TONER: I mean, you're talking about within – on Futenma?
QUESTION: Yeah.
MR TONER: I'd have to – I'm not sure – I'll take the question, if we have any position change.
Please.
QUESTION: The situation in Burundi hasn't gotten any better. In fact, it seems to have gotten worse over the weekend. What – who are you talking to at the moment about the next stage in that? Is it going to be African Union-led? Is the United Nations – is there some kind of international response that can stop the descent into chaos in Burundi?
MR TONER: Well, you're absolutely right. We are very concerned about the situation in Burundi. I know – or you may be aware the President actually issued a – or put out a video message where he expressed our level of concern. And we're consulting with the international community, we're consulting with regional leaders, I know, including the African Union, on the best path forward. Obviously, it's critical that all parties respect their commitments to internationally-mediated dialogue. I would note last week that the UN Security Council resolution calling on the Government of Burundi to protect human rights and cooperate with regional African mediators to immediately convene an inclusive and genuine dialogue among Burundians and affirm the importance of UN and AU contingency planning, and that would allow the international community to respond quickly to the situation – any further deterioration of the situation.
So right now our focus is on encouraging and supporting the region in this push for dialogue, as well as, frankly, contingency planning if the situation worsens.
QUESTION: Mark, Secretary Kerry is in Paris. What's the purpose of the visit?
MR TONER: Is he?
QUESTION: That's what I've learned.
MR TONER: Do you have that reported? Yes, he is. So he just landed in Paris. I guess I can confirm that now. He is going to go, I think – believe he's going to head to the chancery, the embassy, for an event there. And then I believe he's got – he has a bilateral meeting tomorrow with Foreign Minister Fabius. And then he's going to, I believe, have additional meetings among the embassy staff there. That's all I know about his schedule there.
QUESTION: Is he returning home at any point in the near term?
MR TONER: Yes, I believe later tomorrow.
All right, guys. Thanks.
(The briefing was concluded at 3:00 p.m.)
DPB # 190
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
