Daily Press Briefing
Mark C. Toner
Deputy Spokesperson
Daily Press Briefing
Washington, DC
April 26, 2016
Share
Index for Today's Briefing
DEPARTMENT
CUBA
SERBIA
SOUTH SUDAN
NORTH KOREA
IRAQ
NORTH KOREA
SYRIA
BANGLADESH
MISCELLANEOUS
JAPAN
PAKISTAN/AFGHANISTAN
LIBYA
SOUTH SUDAN
UKRAINE/RUSSIA
IRAN
DEPARTMENT
UKRAINE
TRANSCRIPT:
2:22 p.m. EDT
MR TONER: Welcome, everyone, to the State Department. Happy Tuesday. Just a few things at the top and then I'll get to your questions.
First of all, I did want to introduce – with World Press Freedom less than a week away, the department is launching its fifth annual Free the Press Campaign. And beginning today and over the course of the next six days we're going to highlight emblematic cases of reporters from around the world who are imprisoned, harassed, and otherwise targeted for doing their jobs, just by reporting the news.
To mark the fifth anniversary, the department will highlight journalists and media outlets that we have identified in previous years that were censored, attacked, threatened, imprisoned, or otherwise oppressed because of their reporting whose situations have not yet improved. And we're going to spotlight these various cases in three ways: one, by raising them from behind the podium at the top of each daily press briefing; two, by spotlighting them on www.humanrights.gov and social media; and then third, by using the hashtag #freethepress to spread the word and message on Twitter.
And the campaign's goal is straightforward. It's to call the world's attention to the plight of these reporters and to call on governments to protect and promote the right to promote – to – let me do that again – call on governments to protect and promote the right to freedom of expression.
For our first case for World Press Freedom Day, we'd like to highlight Jose Antonia Torres, who's a journalist for Granma, the official communist daily newspaper in Cuba. And he was arrested on February of 2011, after Granma published his report on the mismanagement of a public works project in Santiago de Cuba, and subsequently sentenced to 14 years in prison for allegedly spying.
This is the kind of reporting that promotes transparency and makes government accountable to its people. We take this opportunity to call on the Government of Cuba to release him. You can learn more about this case and others involved in Free the Press on our website, again, www.humanrights.gov.
I know John got the question yesterday. We did want to note and congratulate the people of Serbia on holding national, provincial, and local elections on April 24th, and the OSCE international observer mission and the U.S. embassy observers assessed that election day procedures were conducted in accordance with the law.
Through this election, the Serbian people have expressed a clear support for Serbia's path toward further integration with Europe, so we look forward to continuing our close work with Prime Minister Aleksandar Vucic and his government on efforts to reach this goal, including justice reform, the normalization of relations with Kosovo, regional reconciliation, and on strengthening, of course, bilateral relations between the United States and Serbia.
And then lastly – apologize for all this at the top, but one last item. It's on South Sudan. The return of Riek Machar to Juba and his swearing-in as first vice president today represents an important step towards formation of a transitional government of national unity and a second chance to reclaim the promise that this young nation deserves. We welcome the statements by President Salva Kiir and First Vice President Riek Machar calling for cooperation, reconciliation, and peaceful coexistence.
South Sudan's leaders now need to complete formation of the transitional government, fully respect the permanent ceasefire agreement, facilitate humanitarian access to all areas of the country, and begin implementing the reform agenda of the peace agreement according to the timeline established by the parties. We express our appreciation to the Joint Monitoring and Evaluation Commission Chairperson President Festus Mogae as – of the African Union, the United Nations Mission in South Sudan, and the member-states of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development for their efforts to support the implementation of the August peace agreement.
Over to you, Brad.
QUESTION: I wanted to – I think we'll maybe get back to South Sudan, but I wanted to ask you about the reports out of Korea that the North is prepared for a fifth nuclear test. One, does this square up with your understanding of the activity in North Korea right now? Two, what is your message to the North as it considers undertaking this?
MR TONER: Well, first of all, obviously we're closely monitoring the situation on the ground, on the Korean peninsula to be more specific, in coordination with our regional allies. I mean, in terms of President Park's specific comments, I would refer you to him and to the Government of Korea.
But specifically, you asked what is our assessment. I mean, we have seen a pattern here over the past several weeks. I believe just last week, on April 23rd, we had another missile launch or attempted missile launch by North Korea. So we take these kinds of threats or comments very seriously. We call on North Korea to refrain from actions that further destabilize the region and focus on what it needs to do, which is take concrete steps toward fulfilling its commitments and its obligations to denuclearize. The United States remains steadfast in its commitment to the security of the peninsula and to its allies, the defense of its allies, and we're going to continue to coordinate with Japan, with South Korea, and our other allies and partners.
QUESTION: What is the consequence that you're laying out for North Korea if they go ahead and do this?
MR TONER: Well, we did pass, just a month or so ago, really the most stringent set of sanctions that we've ever had in place before on North Korea, obviously – which is always the case with sanctions. The real punch, if you will, comes with implementation and stringent implementation of those sanctions. And so we're working to, in fact, implement those to make sure that North Korea feels them – the regime in North Korea.
QUESTION: But you're going to do that anyways.
MR TONER: Exactly.
QUESTION: So what's the --
MR TONER: I don't have anything further to announce. I mean, you obviously saw last week we did – when the DPRK foreign minister was in New York, we restricted his movements right after the previous missile launch. That was partly out of an abundance of caution, given the circumstances of his trip. But we're going to look at other options as we move forward if North Korea continues with this kind of behavior.
QUESTION: On Iraq?
MR TONER: Yeah. Sure, Michel. Iraq it is.
QUESTION: Do you have any (inaudible) the partial cabinet reshuffle today and the demonstrations by the followers of Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr?
MR TONER: Well, I'll start with the protests. And we obviously – we support the Iraqi people's freedom of expression and assembly, just so long as these are peaceful protests. Peaceful protests are an integral part of a functioning democracy, and it is our understanding that, up till now, these protests have been, in fact, peaceful. Moving forward, the security for the international zone is the Government's of Iraq's responsibility, so they can probably answer best any further questions about security around these protests. But we obviously support the Iraqi people's right to express themselves nonviolently.
In terms of the cabinet reshuffle, I'd obviously refer you to the Government of Iraq to comment on the specifics. But Secretary Kerry said when he was in Baghdad just a few weeks ago that it's important to have political stability, to have a unified and functioning government as rapidly as possible, in order to move forward so that Iraq's efforts to combat and defeat ISIL are not affected and not interrupted. So we urge all parties to work in tandem and work together to move the political process forward in ways that advance the interests and the aspirations of the Iraqi people and in accordance with the Iraqi constitution.
QUESTION: Mark --
MR TONER: Yeah, sure.
QUESTION: Mark --
MR TONER: It's fine. Let's stay on Iraq.
QUESTION: No, I wanted to go back to North Korea.
QUESTION: Actually --
MR TONER: Is that – no, I don't know how that – we usually – let's finish with Iraq and then I'll come back to North Korea for you. Thanks.
Yeah, man.
QUESTION: About – thanks, Mark. Regarding Muqtada al-Sadr --
MR TONER: Yeah.
QUESTION: -- is there any concern at this point in this building about his influence in Iraq? On multiple occasions in the last three months, he's been able to swiftly get well over 100,000 people into the streets of Baghdad. He's also overseeing one of the more influential and successful Shia militias in the country in the fight against the Islamic State. He seems to have reemerged as a major player there. I wonder if you can comment on that and whether that's a good thing or are there concerns here.
MR TONER: Well, I think, just answering your last question first, I mean, it's a perfectly fine thing, as long as he wants to be a part of the political process and not work against it. I would just – you're certainly right that he is able to still wield tremendous influence within Iraq. That's clear by these current protests. And again, as we often say about these kinds of environments is that, if you're willing to quote/unquote "play by the rules" and be a voice for positive change within a society, then that is part of the democratic process and we support that. So certainly we, again, recognize his influence. We recognize that he's still an influential figure in Iraq, but we just encourage that his influence remain, as I said, positive and peaceful.
QUESTION: Is there some indication that it's not at this point?
MR TONER: No, I just – I mean, look – I mean, just in the past we've had concerns. And going forward --
QUESTION: We actually had a target on his head for a few years.
MR TONER: Well --
QUESTION: And he was – I don't know if he was ever indicted --
MR TONER: I'm not sure about that either. But all I'm saying is --
QUESTION: But his forces at one time were at war with U.S. forces occupying Iraq.
MR TONER: That's correct.
QUESTION: I know that was a long time ago.
MR TONER: No, I understand that. That's why – and partly – that's part of my caveat. I mean, that's why I say what I say, is that I think as Iraq evolves politically there is, in many countries that are evolving politically, an opportunity for some of these individuals to transition, if you will. But we view always this transition with caution.
QUESTION: Another on Iraq?
MR TONER: Yeah. Please, let's stay on Iraq.
QUESTION: There was some confrontation between the Shia militias and the Iraqi Security Forces and the Peshmerga in Diyala. Do you have anything on that?
MR TONER: I don't. I – well, I mean, a little bit. We don't have much details. We've been obviously watching it closely. There have been ongoing, I believe, skirmishes between Kurdish Peshmerga forces and these, as you said, the Popular Mobilization Forces in the northern Iraq town of – forgive me, I'm going to mispronounce it, but Tuz Khurmatu. Both these forces have played important roles, frankly, against – in the fight against Daesh. When we view this kind of infighting, to put it that way, we view it with concern, because we obviously want to see the focus on the real enemy in Iraq, which is Daesh. And Iraqis forces, whether it's Peshmerga, whether it's Popular Mobilization Forces, need to stay united.
QUESTION: Can we go back to North Korea?
MR TONER: We can go back to North Korea.
QUESTION: I just want to pick up on what you said earlier about the U.S. will consider other options if North Korea does go ahead with the next missile launch. What other options are you talking about? Were you specifically talking about the high-altitude area defense mechanisms --
QUESTION: THAAD.
QUESTION: -- THAAD?
MR TONER: Well, I mean – THAAD you're talking about. I mean, look, that's – those are ongoing consultations that we're having with the Republic of Korea. We're committed to the defense of the peninsula. I don't have anything particular to announce. We're always looking at, as I said, strengthening our sanctions. We did a big lift in that regard at the UN. But I think it's pretty clear that as North Korea continues to make decisions that we believe are counterproductive, that we've got to also continually look at what our options are in terms of response and – both, one, to ensure the security and safety of our allies and protect the peninsula – security of the peninsula, but also to make every effort that – to convince North Korea to come back to serious discussions about its program.
QUESTION: So you're talking about options other than sanctions when you said "other options"?
MR TONER: I don't want to – again, I'm not – I don't want to get in front of any processes that are – or any discussions that we're having. I'll – I just don't have anything to announce at this point.
QUESTION: So you are --
MR TONER: We're always looking at --
QUESTION: So you are considering options other than sanctions?
MR TONER: I mean, again, we talked about THAAD --
QUESTION: THAAD, yeah.
MR TONER: -- and I don't want to, again, lean too far forward on this, just only to emphasize that our concerns here and our aim here is twofold: again, how do we put additional pressure on North Korea to come back to the table, so to speak; and then secondly, how do we ensure that our allies are protected?
QUESTION: Go to Syria?
MR TONER: We can go to Syria. I'm happy to go to --
QUESTION: Can we stay on (inaudible)?
MR TONER: Oh yeah, I'm sorry. I apologize. Sorry, David.
QUESTION: Hello. Last week, Deputy Secretary Blinken was just in Asia, and then he had a – he said in Tokyo, quote, "We are certainly looking at what additional steps could be taken in the event of further provocation from North Korea, including another nuclear test," unquote. So after he said that, we see another test from the North Korea. Could you elaborate, what other steps are you considering?
MR TONER: Well, again, I didn't elaborate in my answer to Lesley because – (laughter) – and she was kind enough not to push me too hard on it. But --
QUESTION: I mean, when you say other "other" --
MR TONER: No, I understand what the point is. I just – I mean, we don't want to announce anything before it's been fully formed and fully vetted, except to say the fact that we always are consulting with our allies and partners in the region and fellow members of the Six-Party Talks about ways we can increase pressure on North Korea. There's a number of ways to do that. I mean, you all know the various means. One, obviously, are sanctions; one are increased security measures. But I don't have anything particular to announce at this point.
QUESTION: What else can be done? I mean, in your estimation, do you think China is losing its influence or leverage, or what else can be done?
MR TONER: Well, that's – that's for the pundits to debate. We have been very clear in our discussions with China that they need to exert whatever influence they have on North Korea. They have, as you know, historically had a measure of influence on the regime in North Korea. To date or recently, we have seen actions on the part of the North Korean regime that appear to indicate that that's – again, that it's under no one's influence or that it's acting on its own accord. That's of concern, obviously, to us. It's of concern to China. It's of concern to other partners and allies in the region. So I think we're all looking at how do we convince North Korea through various means and methods that it needs to address seriously the international community's concerns about its nuclear program.
QUESTION: But Mark, it does sound like – I mean, you keep repeating and it keeps bringing up more questions, because you're saying you don't want to announce anything before it's been fully vetted. So there --
MR TONER: I'm just – I sorry, I'm not trying to --
QUESTION: There seems to be other --
MR TONER: Yes.
QUESTION: There seems to be some plan that seems to be in an advanced stage.
MR TONER: Again, I do not want to indicate that there's some kind of – we're about to pull the curtain off of a brand new plan or approach to North Korea. All I'm simply saying is that when we talk to our allies and partners, when we look at the problem of North Korea, we're looking at different ways to approach it. Deputy Secretary Blinken spoke to this last week, as Nike noted. I don't have anything to announce, and it would be irresponsible for me to announce anything before it was – that's what I meant by fully vetted or fully --
QUESTION: Okay.
QUESTION: Syria, then. The --
MR TONER: Well, let's go to Syria and then I'll go back to Japan.
QUESTION: Yeah. The President said over the weekend that the cessation of hostilities needed to be reinstated. Is there a cessation of hostilities today?
MR TONER: That's a very good question. I think in all honesty it has – we recognize that the cessation of hostilities has undergone a number of challenges in the past week or so, especially in and around Aleppo. That said, in other parts of the country it does remain in place, and what I think we need to see moving forward is that the cessation needs to be reinvigorated and solidified, and that's going to be the focus in our discussions with the other members of the ISSG in the coming days, is to – how can we work with the various parties on the ground – and Kirby spoke to this yesterday – to do just that, to get them to pull back, to get them to restrain themselves, and to get them to abide by the cessation of hostilities. But without doubt, it's been severely weakened over the last week or so, especially, as I said, in and around Aleppo.
QUESTION: Do you – but do you consider that the cessation of hostilities is holding in some places but not in others?
MR TONER: I mean, it's our assessment – again, and I'm not --
QUESTION: What point in the war has every place in the country been under attack simultaneously? I don't understand the notion that --
MR TONER: Yeah, I --
QUESTION: -- you can't attack every place at the same time simultaneously --
MR TONER: I understand what – I --
QUESTION: -- so you can never have the cessation of hostilities broken ever --
MR TONER: No, that's --
QUESTION: -- by that definition.
MR TONER: No. And nor, Brad, have we ever said that this is a 100 percent legitimate ceasefire. I think what we have said is that we – and we saw and credibly report that there was a significant cessation of hostilities. I think we talked about 70 percent reduction in violence in the country. Again, I – you're right in the sense that you can never have or we have not had a full cessation of hostilities. We never had that since this came into play, but with that 70 percent reduction, it allowed Syrians to live more safely and allowed humanitarian aid to get to --
QUESTION: Right.
MR TONER: -- some of these places that have been besieged. So all in all, it's been a good thing and we want to see --
QUESTION: And now that – and now that the violence is back up, do you still consider this – I mean, what point does the cessation of hostilities have to (inaudible) --
MR TONER: No, no. But my point is – I understand what you're – I understand your question. I guess my --
QUESTION: -- for you to consider it broken?
MR TONER: I guess my point to Dave was we're just saying that it's not – it has not broken down all across the country, that – but that especially we have seen a degradation – I don't know how else to put it – in and around Aleppo where there has been a sharp increase in violations and in fighting.
QUESTION: But you consider --
QUESTION: The regime has chosen Aleppo as its --
MR TONER: But I don't think we're ready to --
QUESTION: You consider it a living --
MR TONER: No, I don't think we're ready to declare the cessation dead.
QUESTION: You consider it a living agreement?
MR TONER: Yes.
QUESTION: If the opposition were to make any attacks, and actually have made attacks --
MR TONER: We would call on --
QUESTION: -- you would consider those violations?
MR TONER: We would – yes. And we would call on all sides to show restraint and to abide by the ceasefire – or the cessation, rather.
Yeah.
QUESTION: Yeah, but Aleppo has been – is the city the regime has chosen as its current target. It could choose another one.
MR TONER: It could, that we don't – I mean, or we can hopefully see a return to restraint, and as I said, an end to the violence. And there's a, obviously – and we've talked about this before – it's up to the task force and it's also up to the various parties – Russia, namely – to exert whatever influence it has on the Syrian regime, just as it is on us and other members of the ISSG who have influence on the opposition to ask them to abide by the ceasefire, otherwise it doesn't hold.
QUESTION: Given that Russia reportedly is involved in some of these attacks by providing air cover and launching airstrikes, who is investigating this reported ceasefire violation? Does that go to the task force of which Russia is co-chairing?
MR TONER: It still goes to the task force, but that task force is made up of all members of the ISSG. There is a process in place.
QUESTION: How do you – how do you – what's the process for --
MR TONER: I honestly can't --
QUESTION: Do you ask them to self-investigate themselves? Is that the process?
MR TONER: I would imagine that's not the case. I think – but again, I don't --
QUESTION: I wouldn't be so sure.
MR TONER: Look, Brad, I don't – I don't have a window inside. What I understand it to be is that these allegations, credible allegations, are vetted among the various members of the ISSG, and then there's decided that – what action will be taken. Okay?
QUESTION: Has the --
MR TONER: Yeah.
QUESTION: -- task force to date come up with any certified conclusions about violations and provided adequate response? Has it done anything, essentially? You've talked about it a lot, but --
MR TONER: Well – no, no, I understand and it's a fair question. In terms of whether it has publicly reported or given out a list of, it has not in my understanding.
QUESTION: Has it done it privately?
MR TONER: It has, I believe, vetted these and then, again, approached the culpable parties, I guess, whether it's the regime or whether it's opposition forces. Again, we've seen the preponderance of these kind of violations on the part of the regime, but that said, what happens is then they are taken – they are – go to these various parties and then they speak to them and try to get them to, again, abide by the cessation of hostilities. And we talked about this – look, this is what it is. I mean, you can --
QUESTION: I just don't understand what the value of it is.
MR TONER: You can decide tomorrow that if you're a party to this cessation of hostilities, whether you're the regime or the opposition --
QUESTION: Right.
MR TONER: -- you can decide tomorrow, "The cessation be damned, we're going to begin fighting again." Then you clearly are not party to that cessation. It's self-policing in that sense.
QUESTION: But it seems like they're doing that anyhow, but they're just not saying that. So --
MR TONER: I understand your point.
QUESTION: -- you're left saying, well, we think you're abiding by – except in the cases you're not, and we can't do anything --
MR TONER: I guess, Brad, how I would put it is we're not ready to declare this thing dead. We believe it is, outside of Aleppo, largely holding. We acknowledge that within Aleppo and around Aleppo that there have been multiple or ongoing instances or incidents that, frankly, cause us grave concern. That's why we're trying to coordinate with Russia; that's why we're trying to coordinate with other members of the ISSG; and that's why we're trying to convey to the parties involved that they need to back off.
Please, sir.
QUESTION: I was looking to change topic, unless somebody has a follow-up on this.
MR TONER: Happily. Yeah, sure. Unless it's a difficult one, then I don't want to. No, I'm just – (laughter).
QUESTION: In Bangladesh, Kirby addressed --
MR TONER: Oh yeah. Yes.
QUESTION: -- a question yesterday about whether or not this was considered a terrorist attack or a hate crime, or how you might want to characterize this. And today an al-Qaida affiliate apparently claimed responsibility for the attack. So does that change your description or analysis of what occurred here?
MR TONER: Sure, Justin. So what we have seen is, as you note, a claim of responsibility by Ansar al-Islam, which does identify itself as an al-Qaida affiliate in the Indian subcontinent. And it does state that its attack was motivated out of hatred and out of intolerance against these individuals because of their activism on LGBTI issues, and was directed against the LGBTI community in Bangladesh. We don't have any reason to believe this was not the case. We don't, obviously, have any reason to confirm it absolutely at this point.
QUESTION: Okay. And then on something separate: The story in the Daily Caller about Secretary Kerry and wife Teresa Heinz and their offshore investments through Teresa's trust.
MR TONER: Yeah.
QUESTION: And the allegation here essentially is that the Secretary is taking advantage of tax havens. I'm sure you've seen the story.
MR TONER: Sure. I have seen the story.
QUESTION: What would you like to say about it?
MR TONER: Well, I appreciate you raising it, because – and I like the way you framed it, because you noted that he has not, nor has he ever been, a beneficiary of Heinz family and marital trusts. He doesn't have any offshore investments. He has no decision-making power over these trusts, since they're entirely controlled by independent trustees. And I think that was completely misconveyed in the story, to be honest. As I said, he is – I would just add that his – all of his finances – as you guys all know in this room, he's not new to the political world or to the government, so all of his finances are a matter of public record, and he and his family have worked pretty diligently, I think, to ensure complete transparency in that regard.
QUESTION: And it's safe to assume that the trusts have paid all applicable taxes and are not evading taxes in these over-shore – overseas investments?
MR TONER: That is correct. And again, it's – all this stuff, as I said, he's been – I don't know how to say it more – he's been thoroughly vetted as a public official, as an Administration official, but also as a politician. And again, all of his – none of these – what the article refers to, none of them are his investments. They're all controlled by the Heinz family.
QUESTION: None of this – just to be clear --
MR TONER: Sure.
QUESTION: -- came as a surprise to the State Department or the White House, these --
MR TONER: No, not at all. Not at all.
QUESTION: Yeah. Nobody was alarmed by this?
MR TONER: Not – categorically not at all. Nobody is surprised by it. And only surprised by, as I said, kind of the misleading slant of the story.
QUESTION: And there's no suggestion here that anything here is immoral or --
MR TONER: No, uh-uh. Or illegal, no.
QUESTION: -- or illegal?
MR TONER: Not at all.
Yeah, please, in the back.
QUESTION: The mayor of Ginowan, Okinawa --
MR TONER: Yeah.
QUESTION: -- was meeting with representatives here in this building today. Do you have a readout of that meeting?
MR TONER: I do, I do. Well, I can confirm that he was here in the State Department today. And he met with the Office of Japanese Affairs Director Joe Young. And in the meeting we did express our gratitude to the people of Okinawa – of Ginowan, rather, apologize – as well as all those on Okinawa for their contributions to the U.S.-Japan alliance and for the warm reception or greeting or – sorry, friendship, rather, that they've extended to so many U.S. servicemen and women. And we also underscored that both the U.S. and the Japanese Governments remain committed to the relocation of the Marine Corps base Futenma to Camp Schwab on Henobo Bay – Henoko Bay, rather, excuse me.
QUESTION: Was there a sense of urgency in terms of closing the Futenma facility that was discussed? I mean, because it's on hold now given the court decision earlier this year or the – abiding by the --
MR TONER: I don't know if it's a sense of urgency. I mean, we obviously want to move forward with this project and we're committed to moving forward with this project, and that remains our position even before the court ruling and certainly now. We believe it's in the best interests of Japan and we believe it's supported by the Japanese Government. Now as to, frankly, the local politics, we respect the people of Okinawa, we respect the local government of Okinawa, but those are internal issues for the Japanese Government.
Please.
QUESTION: (Inaudible.)
MR TONER: Yeah, sure.
QUESTION: The mayor is – of Ginowan also demand that they reduce the U.S. military base in Okinawa. So could you tell me what the Japan – the answer that this – his request?
MR TONER: How to answer his request about what? I apologize. I missed just the first part.
QUESTION: He requested that they reduce the U.S. military burden in Okinawa.
MR TONER: In Okinawa?
QUESTION: Yeah. He also – he --
QUESTION: (Off-mike.)
QUESTION: And he also requested to the --
MR TONER: (Laughter.) That's my wife.
QUESTION: -- Futenma should be returned as – as soon as possible, so --
MR TONER: You're talking about – right, whether there was specific discussion about – what, about downsizing – is that what you're talking about – the military presence?
QUESTION: Yeah.
MR TONER: I'm not sure, frankly, that that came up. I will check. Again, we're committed with maintaining good relations, obviously, with the local communities on Okinawa, and we certainly listen to them and listen to their concerns and try to address their concerns as best we can to mitigate the impact of our military presence. We've done things like aviation relocation out of the training – rather – have relocated that, relocation of assets and to bases not on Okinawa and the return of land and the commitment to early return of additional pieces of land. Those are all kind of steps that we're – are all steps that we've been taking along the way. I'm not sure anything specifically was put forward to that.
Please, sir, in the back.
QUESTION: Thank you.
MR TONER: Yeah.
QUESTION: Jahanzaib Ali from ARY News TV. Sir, Pakistan has terror suspect Abdul Rehman, a member of al-Qaida who allegedly assisted Ahmed Omar Sheikh in the killing of American journalist Daniel Pearl. Sir, how much you appreciate this arrest? And will United States ask Pakistan to hand over him to --
MR TONER: You're talking about the arrest of one of the individuals involved in the death of --
QUESTION: Daniel Pearl. Sir, Daniel Pearl, the American --
MR TONER: Oh, Daniel Pearl, yeah. You know what? I – honestly, I apologize. It's the first time I'm hearing of that news. I mean, obviously, his murder was a terrible act. We condemn it and continue to condemn it as an act of terrorism. So certainly, we would welcome any announcement that there was progress in this case in bringing the perpetrators to justice. I just need more specifics on what exactly happened and whether this was indeed – they found or they've arrested the man who was guilty.
QUESTION: Sir, they just announced that U.S. Department of State launched Free the Press campaign to mark the importance of free and independent media. So, sir, if we talk about Pakistan and journalists continue to be targeted by radical groups, Islamist organizations and few others – so how United States watching the situation regarding the free media in Pakistan?
MR TONER: Well, Pakistan obviously has a very free and independent and vital media. It's absolutely critical to covering culture, politics – politics, rather, and life in Pakistan. And certainly, these individuals are under threat – we've seen this throughout the years by terrorist organizations – and prevented from doing their work. We obviously watch very closely and make every effort to protect these individuals, and certainly would encourage the Government of Pakistan to do likewise.
But the fact is, is given the climate in some parts of Pakistan in order to cover this story – and that speaks to, frankly, journalists around the world who take tremendous risk just to cover the story and who go beyond where they can be safe in order to get the truth and report the facts to the people. And there are Pakistani journalists who do that, there are U.S. journalists who do that, there are journalists from every country around the world. That's something we take very seriously. We look at how to protect journalists better in the field when they're in combat situations, but as I said, also in places where they're under threat from radicals or terrorism or extremists. We all need to do better and that's one of the reasons why we're trying to highlight some of these cases moving forward.
QUESTION: Sir, one last question about Afghanistan, please, if you allow me, sir.
MR TONER: One --
QUESTION: One last question.
MR TONER: One last question. All right.
QUESTION: Thank you very much, sir. Sir, a couple of days ago, a delegation of Taliban from Qatar reached Islamabad to participate in the fifth round of peace talks soon to be held in Pakistan somewhere. Sir, can you say, despite Taliban deadly attacks, the international partners are yet not ready to give up their efforts for the peace process? So what are the new hopes, or any new strategy for that?
MR TONER: You're talking about the --
QUESTION: Afghan peace process, sir. The meeting is going to be held next week, I think in Islamabad.
MR TONER: Right. I mean, our policy hasn't changed. I mean, we want to see an Afghan-led, Afghan-owned process. We welcome Pakistan's role, the positive role that Pakistan has played in trying to get these peace talks started. For us, it is – and we believe, and I believe the others who are part of this believe the same thing, which is if we can get a credible peace process going, talks going, that this is ultimately the – going to be the solution to Afghanistan's ongoing conflict. It's in the interests of everyone in the region to do that. So we would encourage these talks to move forward. Thus far, it's been really the Taliban who have lagged behind in leading the efforts for these or in participating in these talks, so we're going to encourage them. It's their decision; the ball is in their court – however you want to put it. But this is ultimately the way forward, we believe.
Please.
QUESTION: Can we stay in Pakistan, just one more quick follow-up.
MR TONER: Of course.
QUESTION: I wonder if you have anything to respond to Afghanistan president's remarks recently. He said that he's calling the Pakistan to battle the Taliban rather than bring into the peace talks. Do you think it --
MR TONER: He called on the Taliban – I'm sorry, I missed that.
QUESTION: He's calling on Pakistan to battle against Taliban rather than bring into the peace talk. Do you think such remarks is – do you have any comments? Do you think it's a deviation?
MR TONER: So I have not seen his actual remarks, so I'm hesitant to react to them. We have also called on Pakistan to go after Taliban or terrorist groups that are using its soil to launch attacks on Afghanistan. That's been an ongoing conversation or dialogue or discussion that we've had with Pakistan, and we've tried to enable them to have the kind of capabilities that they can to take the fight to these groups.
QUESTION: I got one about Afghanistan. What about the Afghan vice president who can't get a visa? What's up with that?
MR TONER: What's up with that? (Laughter.)
QUESTION: Why can't he get a visa?
MR TONER: I'm sorry. (Laughter.) Well --
QUESTION: What is up with that? (Laughter.)
MR TONER: Sorry, I --
QUESTION: Thank you. (Laughter.)
MR TONER: It sounds like a – anyway, sorry. All right, you're talking about the Vice President Dostum, right?
QUESTION: Yeah.
MR TONER: Yeah. Okay. Well, first of all, I have to put out there that I cannot talk about – I cannot tell you what's up with that, because these records are confidential under U.S. law, so we can't comment on individual cases. That said, I understand that he did put out a statement or spoke to the media and said that he chose not to travel to – at this point, given the security situation in Afghanistan. So I'd refer you to him to – frankly to talk about --
QUESTION: Is he welcome in the United States?
MR TONER: Well, I mean, we work with him as needed. He is the vice president of Afghanistan. We obviously work with him as needed in his official capacity --
QUESTION: Right.
MR TONER: -- as the democratically elected vice president of Afghanistan.
QUESTION: But is he welcome here?
MR TONER: Again, he is the vice president of Afghanistan. We will certainly work with him in that capacity. I'll leave it there.
QUESTION: Mark, can we turn to Libya?
MR TONER: Yes, sir. Yes, ma'am – sorry.
QUESTION: I wonder whether the ship carrying oil – I know that John Kirby has reacted to it. I know – he's basically said he's concerned about it. But have you specifically – has there specifically been a message put out that nobody needs – should be buying this oil that is illegally shipped in the eyes of the U.S.? And also, what can you say about the UAE's involvement in – given that the company – I know it's an Indian flag tanker, but the company – it's ordered by a company called DSA Consultancy, which is registered in the UAE.
MR TONER: So first of all – yes, so we do understand that Libya's permanent representative to the United Nations has expressed to the UN Libya Sanctions Committee the Government of National Accord's objections to an attempt to export Libyan oil illicitly via this, as you note, Indian-flagged vessel, the Distya Ameya. I'm sure I'm mispronouncing that, I apologize. We're closely following the situation. We have engaged with our partners and allies in the region, and we certainly support the Government of National Accord and Libya's legitimate institutions. We are very concerned about purchases of Libyan oil that are outside of these legitimate channels.
Now, your question talked about the UAE's role or possible role in that. I don't have any more clarity on that. If we get more clarity, I'm happy to speak to it. I just don't have any more details on that right now.
QUESTION: And then what is the – what is the possibility of somebody buying this oil?
MR TONER: Well, I mean --
QUESTION: Or have you told – I mean, it's on its way to Malta.
MR TONER: That's correct, but I --
QUESTION: Would you – would you then expect that they don't --
MR TONER: Again, and I'm not – sure.
QUESTION: -- that they don't allow the oil to get onto land with that or (inaudible) --
MR TONER: So I'm unclear. I mean, this is obviously --
QUESTION: -- transferred?
MR TONER: This becomes a UN Security Council issue. I'm unclear what the next steps would be in terms of this illicit transportation of oil. We would again call on all those in the region to refrain from enabling this kind of activity, but I don't have details on what next steps might be in terms of stopping this or actually any way voiding it or stopping its transfer of oil to another – to a buyer. I'll just get more – if I get more details, I'll let you know.
QUESTION: Have you --
QUESTION: (Sneezes.)
MR TONER: Bless you.
QUESTION: Do you have any idea what – is there any clarity yet what the money from the purchases of this oil is going to be used for or anything?
MR TONER: No.
QUESTION: Can I follow up on South Sudan as well?
MR TONER: Of course.
QUESTION: You said earlier that the – that Machar is – he's now the vice president and that his return is a important step towards the formalization of the unity government. Do you – what gives you confidence that this actually is going to become a real thing, this unity government, given the long problems that this country has faced?
MR TONER: Sure. Well, I mean, look, I don't want to be over optimistic about – as you note, this has been a difficult process, to put it mildly. I think, though, that we do see this as an important step. I mean, there was – as we saw over the last few days, he was prevented from returning at one point. So he has made it back to Juba and he was sworn in, so that's a significant step forward and we're obviously welcoming that step.
But it's important now for the south – for South Sudan's leaders to take additional steps, which is form the Transitional Government of National Unity, to make progress on the core agenda of peace – of the peace agreement, according to the timeline that was established by this commission, the Joint Monitoring and Evaluation Commission. So there's additional steps that need to be taken in the coming days. We're going to keep encouraging them to take those steps. We've also seen – we also have a – as I noted in my statement at the top of the briefing, the African Union, the United States – or United Nations Mission in South Sudan and the Intergovernmental Authority on Development are also on the ground and helping encourage the various parties to take these steps and to solidify today's progress.
QUESTION: What kind of response is the U.S. – I mean, as you know, there's a lot of famine in that area. There's, I mean --
MR TONER: Yeah.
QUESTION: -- the economy is in collapse. What kinds of steps is the U.S. going to take to try to help this government on its feet once it's formed, if it's formed?
MR TONER: Sure. I'm looking right now just in terms of what we've been able to do. I mean, we have, obviously – we are the lead donor to South Sudan. We've provided almost 1.5 billion in emergency assistance since the conflict began. And clearly, as you noted, the humanitarian situation there remains dire, and so we're going to continue to work with them.
Forming the transitional government's not going to be easy, but it is the best hope for the people of South Sudan achieving peace. We'll – we're going to work closely with them on the reforms, as I've noted, in the first several months of this transition. We're going to review the security sector. They're going to lay the groundwork for the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and they're going to establish the parameters for a hybrid court in collaboration with the African Union as well as increase accountability in terms of South Sudan's economic governance.
So I guess you're asking how we're going to help, and we're going to help them take the kind of initial steps as much as we can and as much as the other actors on the ground – the international actors on the ground – can help them take these kind of initial steps to solidify the transitional government in the economic sphere, in the political sphere, and certainly on the security sphere – and then obviously provide whatever we can in terms of immediate humanitarian assistance.
QUESTION: But obviously you first want to see the unity government form before anything else goes on, right?
MR TONER: Of course, of course. Of course, yes. Of course that's the first --
QUESTION: (Off-mike.)
MR TONER: Increasing the transparency and accountability of South Sudan's economic governance.
QUESTION: Okay. But you're not interested anymore in accountability for the people that were killed.
MR TONER: Well, I mean, it's always obviously – no one – I'm not trying to bury that or gloss that over. I mean, certainly – and it's in the long-term interests of the South Sudanese people to have that kind of understanding or reconciliation.
QUESTION: But there's no – you don't think there's a – there's no need for Machar or Kiir or anybody else who led all these forces that did all the killing --
MR TONER: Well --
QUESTION: -- to see some sort of justice?
MR TONER: Well, no. I mean, I would – look, part of the peace agreement is this creation of a commission for truth, reconciliation, and healing, and that will look at the root causes of the conflict and lead a national effort to reconciliation. And I'm not trying to in any way diminish that. There's a lot of work that – or steps that need to be taken, as Lesley noted, before we get to that point.
QUESTION: (Off-mike.)
MR TONER: Hey, Andre. Hi.
QUESTION: Hi. A similar question in a different context, in the context of Ukraine.
MR TONER: Sure.
QUESTION: May 2nd marks the second anniversary of an atrocious event in modern history in Ukraine where some peaceful protestors were driven into a administrative building and basically burned alive – 48 people lost their lives, hundreds were injured; the U.S. condemned the event. My question is, first, what has been done, if anything, to make sure that those responsible are brought to justice?
And then the second question is about the commemoration this coming May 2, but that's the next question.
MR TONER: Okay, no worries. No, obviously, there is the – we are coming up on, as you note, the two-year anniversary of the fire and the deaths that killed I think more than 40 people. And we – first of all, we can extend our condolences to the people of Ukraine on the second anniversary of this horrific event that, as you note, occurred on May 2nd, 2014. We did, obviously, condemn it strongly at the time. I believe Secretary Kerry condemned the violence and said that that includes the violence of anyone who lit a fire and caused the death of those 38 people or more in the building in Odessa, and that "all of this violence" – and I'm quoting Secretary Kerry – "is unacceptable. And Russia, the United States, Ukrainians, Europeans, and the OSCE, all of us bear responsibility to do everything in our power to reduce the capacity of militants and extremists to carry out these kinds of violent activities and terrorist activities."
In terms of – as you note, we did call for a thorough investigation, as did other governments at the time, into the – those actions on Odessa. I would refer you and have to refer you – I can't speak on behalf of the Ukrainian Government – on how that investigation has proceeded and who ultimately has been found culpable for the actions in Odessa.
QUESTION: I'm afraid not much has happened about that, and my question was what, if anything, the U.S. could do to speed the process along --
MR TONER: Sure.
QUESTION: -- or maybe to bring it to a resolution that would be at least understandable to the victims --
MR TONER: Of course.
QUESTION: -- to the relatives of the victims.
MR TONER: Well, sure, Andre. Well, in any case like this, as I said, it's – it was a horrific event, and in any kind of event like this there needs to be a resolution, there needs to be closure. And so that's what an investigation and, again, bringing those who were – carried out this act to justice would bring to the victims of the attack and the families of the victims of the attack. We'll continue to make that message or convey that message to the Ukrainian authorities, but I would refer you to them for more details on that investigation.
QUESTION: All right. And then secondly, the coming up anniversary will be marked by people there who just remember those who they lost. But the opposite side, quote-unquote --
MR TONER: Of course.
QUESTION: -- the people who do not want those commemorations, are already threatening that they will disrupt the proceedings. They will physically prevent the events from happening. My question to you is: If – is the U.S. Government ready to do anything – to do anything in its power to prevent another outburst of violence in Odessa on May 2nd? And what can you do? You have diplomatic presence, right?
MR TONER: In Odessa? No, we don't.
QUESTION: You don't. No consulate?
MR TONER: I don't believe so. No, I don't believe so. I'll double-check on that, but no, we don't.
QUESTION: Okay. So --
MR TONER: But that said, we do have, obviously – look, Andrei, I mean, broadly speaking, over the past several years we've had an ongoing partnership with law enforcement authorities in Ukraine where we've done extensive training with them on how to handle, among other things, civil unrest. But look, the most important thing to stress here is that we would obviously support any commemoration of this event, but as with any commemoration, it needs to be done nonviolently and we would certainly condemn any threats in the run-up to this – these events or this commemoration and call on all sides to show restraint.
Please, in the back. Last question.
QUESTION: If I may, just --
MR TONER: Yes, last question.
QUESTION: If I – I just wanted to – yes, to end on this subject.
MR TONER: Yeah.
QUESTION: Are you aware that the group of human rights and antiwar activists are traveling there from the U.S. as well as from other countries? Will – do you support --
MR TONER: I'm not aware.
QUESTION: Would you support such a mission?
MR TONER: I don't know anything about the group, Andrei. I'd have to find out more details about what – who they are and what their intent is before I would comment on it.
QUESTION: Ukraine?
MR TONER: Yeah, let's make this the last question, guys.
QUESTION: I got --
QUESTION: Today Russian --
MR TONER: Ten or twelve?
QUESTION: No, they're short.
MR TONER: Okay, good. Fair enough.
QUESTION: Today, Russian authority in Crimea declares the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People as an extremist organization and banned its activities. The Department of State previously paid attention to this issue, but there is no positive decision from the Russian side. What is your reaction now and what specific steps are you going to do?
MR TONER: I apologize. You're talking about the ban on Crimean Tatar's --
QUESTION: Mejlis.
MR TONER: Mejlis, right, exactly. Well, we did put out a statement on April 21st and we called on the Russian Federation to reverse its – the ministry of justice's recent decision to designate this – the Mejlis, as you note, as an extremist organization as well as a decision by de facto authorities in Crimea to suspend this democratic institution. We're obviously disturbed that – by the reports banning the Mejlis council because, frankly, it removes what little representation and recourse that the Tatars have left under Russian occupation. The Tatars face oppression, they face repression, they face discrimination in Russian-occupied Crimea. Almost 10,000 of them have been forced to flee their homeland and those who remain have subjected – been subjected to abuses, beatings, arbitrary detentions, et cetera. And these brutalities and human rights abuses must end.
As to what next, you know that we have sanctions in place. We do not accept Russia's occupation of Crimea. Those sanctions will remain in place until Crimea ends its occupation of Crimea.
QUESTION: (Inaudible) Russia.
MR TONER: What did I say? I apologize.
QUESTION: "Crimea ends its occupation."
MR TONER: I apologize. Until Russia ends its occupation of Crimea. And we also reaffirm our support for Ukraine's sovereignty.
Please, Matt. Yeah, please.
QUESTION: Two brief ones on Iran --
MR TONER: Yeah, sure.
QUESTION: -- and then another – a different subject. One, you may have seen that the Iranian foreign ministry summoned the Swiss ambassador to hear a complaint. Did – you didn't go over this while – I missed it (inaudible)?
MR TONER: No, I didn't – no, you didn't.
QUESTION: Okay. I'm just wondering if you've heard back from the Swiss yet about what --
MR TONER: We have not. No, I was actually trying to monitor this before. We're just – we've obviously seen the media reports that they did summon him in, as you note, but we don't have any kind of readout yet. I – we can certainly try to share what they convey, but I'm not sure how much I can share.
QUESTION: Right, okay. And then I don't know if you saw this interview with Zarif that was published in The New Yorker yesterday --
MR TONER: Yeah, read a little bit of it.
QUESTION: But in it, he said that he and Secretary Kerry are talking two to three times a day about implementation of the nuclear deal. Is that accurate?
MR TONER: I don't want to --
QUESTION: I mean, that's an awful lot of phone calls.
MR TONER: I don't want to – no, I don't want to --
QUESTION: I mean the question was, "What, do you talk two to three times a week?" And he said sometimes two to three times a day. Now, my understanding was that they did speak like two or three times a day during the whole incident with the sailors, but I don't --
MR TONER: Correct. I mean, there have been --
QUESTION: But the impression that's left though --
MR TONER: So – yeah.
QUESTION: The question that he left though is that he and the Secretary are talking on the phone sometimes two to three times a day on implementation of the Iran deal. And I just want to know if that's accurate.
MR TONER: No, I mean, look, as with any – there are certain points, as you note, with the sailors and also late last week when he was in New York where they might have consulted. I don't know if it's ever been two to three times a day. Again, I'm not trying to --
QUESTION: All right. I'd just be kind of curious --
MR TONER: -- counter his --
QUESTION: -- because that seems like an awful lot.
MR TONER: What he said – but no, I don't think --
QUESTION: I mean, maybe it's necessary but it seems like an awful lot.
MR TONER: I think that's a – maybe a bit of an embellishment.
QUESTION: All right.
MR TONER: But look, they have – they're able to reach each other when they need to and talk.
QUESTION: Okay.
MR TONER: Yes.
QUESTION: And then the last one is have you seen this statement from Judicial Watch about the emails? One email in particular that was – that they just got a hold of it, you just put it out.
MR TONER: I did. This is with – involving Secretary Clinton?
QUESTION: Correct.
MR TONER: Yeah, I did. And I'm sorry, we just found out about it before coming out here.
QUESTION: Okay. Well, the specific question --
MR TONER: Yeah, please.
QUESTION: -- that I'd like answered is --
MR TONER: Yeah, go ahead.
QUESTION: -- the allegation is made that the State Department was hiding this email or had hidden this email --
MR TONER: Yeah. I'm aware of that allegation.
QUESTION: -- because it would have led to the discovery of the – of former Secretary Clinton's private email server well before it became public. And I'm wanting to know, one, if this is an accurate – is an allegation that has – that you accept, that you think has substance to it; and secondly, how was it that this email was not turned over --
MR TONER: So to your first question, I would, without knowing all the details yet because we just found out, be highly suspect that there's any truth to this allegation that we were trying to bury this or somehow hold it back, hold it – keep it from getting out because it would somehow lead to a discovery of her private server.
QUESTION: Right. But the whole thing is highly suspect, is it not?
MR TONER: The second – the second part of your question, I don't know what the – and I was looking into what the delay was caused by. So let me get more facts and more details about that and I'll share that with you.
QUESTION: Okay. It doesn't look like it was a delay. It looks like it was being held back.
MR TONER: Being held back, yeah. No, so let me get more details on what happened.
QUESTION: All right. Thank you.
QUESTION: Mark, one up – follow up that last thing --
QUESTION: (Inaudible) because the State Department never released a single email during her four years that ever had her email address on there. I mean, this was --
MR TONER: Again, let me get – let me get more details. This was – yeah.
QUESTION: This is throughout the entire four years, not one email ever.
MR TONER: During --
QUESTION: She had not one responsive email --
MR TONER: During her tenure --
QUESTION: -- to any FOIA request that was responsive.
MR TONER: During her time at the State Department is what you're saying?
QUESTION: During her time at the State Department.
MR TONER: I'm just trying to specify. Okay. Well, I mean, partly that she was a sitting secretary of state at the time, so --
QUESTION: And – so?
MR TONER: Well, I mean, there are --
QUESTION: There's nothing in the FOIA procedures that says sitting secretary of state's private emails are censored. That's not – it's not a FOIA category. I'm sorry.
MR TONER: But they might have been, I mean, I given the subject matter. I don't know what the subject matter is. I mean, you're asking me to definitively answer a question that I don't --
QUESTION: You – if you can take the question.
MR TONER: I will, thanks.
QUESTION: Mark, may I ask one last thing (inaudible)?
MR TONER: Sure.
QUESTION: On Ukraine, I'm a rare guest. I'm glad to see you too. You look great.
MR TONER: Please, hurry up.
QUESTION: Mark, Nuland and so forth --
MR TONER: Yeah, yeah.
QUESTION: -- are supposed to be talking on Ukraine. Have they had a meeting lately? And if not, are they planning to have a meeting shortly?
MR TONER: Nothing to announce on that front. I'm – obviously, they have met in the past but nothing new to announce on that, Andrei. Thanks, man.
QUESTION: Okay.
MR TONER: Thanks, everybody.
(The briefing was concluded at 3:21 p.m.)
DPB # 70
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
