UNITED24 - Make a charitable donation in support of Ukraine!

Military

Daily Press Briefing

Mark C. Toner
Deputy Spokesperson
Daily Press Briefing
Washington, DC
October 5, 2016

Index for Today's Briefing

SECRETARY TRAVEL
DEPARTMENT
HURRICANE MATTHEW
SYRIA
MIDDLE EAST PEACE PROCESS
UKRAINE
IRAQ/REGION
UNITED NATIONS
HURRICANE MATTHEW
IRAN
TURKEY

 

TRANSCRIPT:

2:26 p.m. EDT

MR TONER: Hey, guys. Apologies for running a little late.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR TONER: (Laughter.) Yes. But I was early yesterday. Anyway, let's get started. I'm happy to make this as quick as you want.

So let's start off with the end of the Brussels conference today. Secretary Kerry is, of course, en route back to the United States. He concluded his participation in the Brussels Conference on Afghanistan earlier today. He reiterated the U.S.'s commitment to Afghanistan's stability, progress, and prosperity. The conference reaffirmed the international community's steadfast support for Afghanistan's continued development, and at the conclusion of the conference, the international partners confirmed their intention to provide $15.2 billion in support of Afghanistan's development priorities from 2017 to 2020.

Also wanted to note today the United States joins more than 40 nations to issue a Joint Declaration for the Export and Subsequent Use of Armed or Strike-Enabled UAVs, unmanned aerial systems. The declaration's a political commitment by its signatories that underscores growing international consensus that UAVs are subject to international law and stresses the need for transparency about exports and represents, we believe, an important first step towards comprehensive international standards for the transfer and subsequent use of UAVs. This joint declaration will serve as the basis for discussions on a more detailed set of international standards for the export and subsequent use of armed or strike-enabled UAVs, which the United States and its partners will convene in the spring of 2017. These discussions will be open to all countries, even if they chose not to join the joint declaration.

QUESTION: Mark --

MR TONER: Yes, sir.

QUESTION: -- can I ask you about that?

MR TONER: Of course.

QUESTION: Are you physically unable to pronounce the word "drone?"

MR TONER: (Laughter.) "Drone."

QUESTION: There you go. Okay. Thank you. (Laughter.)

MR TONER: As a world leader in the development and deployment of military UAVs, the United States seeks to promote efforts to ensure the responsible export and subsequent use of this rapidly developing technology.

Finally, I know many of you were on the call earlier today, but regarding the effects of Hurricane Matthew, we obviously continue to track its path very closely. President Obama spoke to the impact of the hurricane this morning, and as I noted, we held an on-the-record call. The – earlier today the U.S. Agency for International Development announced an additional $1 million in humanitarian assistance, including food vouchers, food rations, cash transfers, and meals at evacuation shelters for communities in Haiti that were affected by Hurricane Matthew. This brings the total USAID humanitarian assistance for regional Hurricane Matthew relief efforts to 1.5 million.

This new funding comes the day after USAID activated its Disaster Assistant Response Team in the Central Caribbean. This team has deployed to Haiti, to Jamaica, and to the Bahamas, where they're continuing, with the governments of the affected countries and the humanitarian organizations on the ground, to bring vital humanitarian assistance to those in need.

We continue to advise U.S. citizens in affected areas to make preparations immediately to shelter in place in a secure location and to follow the emergency instructions provided by local authorities. Matt, I don't know if you got up-to-date information about the embassies that you'd asked about yesterday.

QUESTION: I did.

MR TONER: You're good? Okay. If anybody else is interested, Embassy Nassau closed for routine consular services October 5th through 7th. The airports in Nassau and Freeport remain open. In the Dominican Republic, Embassy Santo Domingo is open with limited operations October 4th, and American Citizen Services has officers present to assist any U.S. citizens. And finally, Haiti – Port-au-Prince is closed for routine consular services October 4th and 5th and has advised U.S. citizens to shelter in place.

I think that's all I have. So over to you, Matt.

QUESTION: All right, let's just start with Syria first.

MR TONER: Sure.

QUESTION: So the Russian foreign ministry says that Secretary Kerry and Foreign Minister Lavrov spoke again today about Syria. Is that correct?

MR TONER: They did, earlier today.

QUESTION: All right. I'm very, very confused. I thought --

MR TONER: Don't be confused.

QUESTION: -- just two days ago you said that they – that this bilateral contact had been suspended. That's a quick suspension unless the situation on the ground has changed.

MR TONER: No – look, Matt.

QUESTION: I mean, do you guys actually do anything that you say? (Laughter.)

MR TONER: Come on, Matt.

QUESTION: What?

MR TONER: No, I mean, look. Engagement remains – so what we talked about the other day was bilateral engagement with regard to Syria. That remains suspended, but it certainly doesn't preclude the two foreign – the two – well, the Secretary of State and Foreign Minister Lavrov from talking.

QUESTION: That's – you don't consider that to be engagement?

MR TONER: That's not. And we've been very clear --

QUESTION: Well, what did they do, then? Yell at each other?

MR TONER: Well, not at all. But look, first of all, it would be irresponsible for us, given what's happening in Aleppo, not to touch base with Foreign Minister Lavrov periodically. But also I can say in the last 24 hours Secretary Kerry has spoken to his counterparts in the UK, in Germany, in France – or not France; rather, in Germany, Turkey, the EU, and Qatar. And as you know, Under Secretary Tom Shannon is in Berlin today attending that meeting.

I would say the conversation, which also touched on Ukraine – I'm talking about the conversation he had with Foreign Minister Lavrov – also touched on Ukraine and North Korea, but it was part of those multilateral efforts now that are going to continue because we recognize they've got to be part of the conversation.

What happened the other day, the suspension, had to do with that particular bilateral cooperation that we had thought we had reached a conclusion on on September 10th in Geneva. That effort is suspended, but that doesn't preclude us from talking.

QUESTION: Well, okay. Then I --

MR TONER: What's your – go ahead.

QUESTION: I don't get it. I mean, usually when a government comes out and says that it's not going to talk to another government anymore about something, that means you don't talk to them anymore. So --

MR TONER: That's not true, Matt. And in fact, I would argue --

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR TONER: I would argue to the contrary, that it would almost be irresponsible for us not to have any conversations with Foreign Minister Lavrov and with the Russians going forward about the situation on the ground in Syria.

QUESTION: Well, yeah, but what – but Victoria was in Moscow today.

MR TONER: Of course.

QUESTION: Yeah, I know. But I mean, this is the big one.

MR TONER: To talk about Ukraine.

QUESTION: Right, but the big thing here, the big bilateral engagement that was going on was between the Secretary and the foreign minister.

MR TONER: Right.

QUESTION: So if you – when you come out and you say two days ago that you're going to suspend the engagement, and then 48 – less than 48 hours later the engagement has resumed without any change in the situation on the ground, it just looks kind of odd. No?

MR TONER: No, because --

QUESTION: Okay, it does to me.

MR TONER: -- it doesn't change the facts on the ground, as you note. We don't have a cessation of hostilities. We don't have humanitarian access. We don't have any of the elements, the core elements of that September 10th agreement in the process of being implemented or implemented. There's no – going to be no Joint Implementation Center. None of the, if you will, carrots either for Russia – or at least what Russia proclaimed to want, that Joint Implementation Center – is moving forward as well. But I think – and I tried to stress this yesterday – while that particular bilateral channel is now suspended, we're not going to just walk away from what's happening in Syria. We're going to try to – on the multilateral front, try to coordinate with likeminded partners and allies and stakeholders, and that includes Russia and Iran. Unfortunately, that does include them.

QUESTION: All right. So this, then, you would characterize this conversation as a bilateral engagement in a multilateral setting? Is that what you're trying to say? Kind of like --

MR TONER: In a multilateral effort.

QUESTION: Effort?

MR TONER: Yeah.

QUESTION: Kind of like the way you used to talk to the North Koreans? Bilaterally, as part of the Six-Party Talks? Is that – I mean, I'm just trying to figure it out, because it's very --

MR TONER: No, no, no, I understand it. I understand it. I – look, I --

QUESTION: I just don't understand if you --

MR TONER: Yeah.

QUESTION: -- you tell the Russians one thing and then you turn around and don't follow through on it. I mean, that's what it looks like to me. So I appreciate your argument that that's not what it is, but I just think it's very confusing.

MR TONER: Well, optics aside, what it is was simply a call. They talked about a number of issues. They did talk about the situation on the ground in Syria. My argument back to you would be it would be irresponsible for Secretary Kerry not to raise what's happening in Syria and make our concerns clear about what's happening there. But that doesn't mean that --

QUESTION: Right, yeah, it may be irresponsible --

QUESTION: I know, but --

QUESTION: -- but it's not a suspension. That means that the contact hasn't been suspended. So that's what I'm saying.

MR TONER: I don't agree.

QUESTION: I'm done, so --

QUESTION: The Russians --

QUESTION: French Foreign Minister Ayrault is going to Moscow.

MR TONER: He is.

QUESTION: Is he going there bilaterally as part of this multilateral --

MR TONER: (Laughter.) Look, all right, I get it. But I mean, Foreign Minister Ayrault is trying to pursue a French proposal. I'll leave it for them to talk about the details of it. But I think in the wake of the failure of us to implement in any meaningful way the December – or the December – the September 10th agreement, other options need to be looked at, both internally – by that I mean within the interagency in the U.S. – but also externally with all of our multilateral partners. So we're talking to the ISSG and we're talking to other likeminded partners and allies, and that's pretty much the – what's happening today in Berlin.

QUESTION: But we shouldn't expect there to be fewer calls between the Secretary and the foreign minister?

MR TONER: I can't predict the frequency of their contact.

QUESTION: So around about three or four a week?

MR TONER: Again, how I would characterize this is we're not going to stop talking altogether. We were very clear about this is a suspension of bilateral cooperation with regard to Syria.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR TONER: But the --

QUESTION: But then they were on the phone talking about bilateral cooperation in Syria just today.

MR TONER: That's not at all – that's not at all true. They did talk about Syria briefly, the situation on the ground. Again, the Secretary would be remiss, frankly, not to raise our concerns about what's happening there. But let's go back to what we were talking about with bilateral cooperation. It was a nationwide, credible, cessation of hostilities. It was this Joint Implementation Center, which would have had us working with Russia to carry out strikes against Nusrah and al-Qaida. All that's suspended right now.

QUESTION: But, Mark, you've been talking to the Russians for four years and we've seen the results this week.

MR TONER: I can't argue that the Russians seem intent on carrying out the strikes they continue to carry out in support of Assad against – or – yeah, against the civilian population of Aleppo, and we're going to continue to raise our serious concerns about it.

QUESTION: Why the timing now to talk about Ukraine and North Korea? I mean, is there something urgent?

MR TONER: I mean, with regard to Ukraine, certainly as Matt stole my thunder, but Assistant Secretary Victoria Nuland, is in actually Moscow I believe today. She may be wheels up. I'm not sure. But specifically there --

QUESTION: (Inaudible) the embassy in Moscow stole your thunder not me.

MR TONER: Just joking. But she's there specifically to work on what we've made a priority, which is implementation of the Minsk Agreements.

QUESTION: Did you talk about the harassment of the U.S. diplomats?

MR TONER: I don't know. I don't know if that came up.

QUESTION: And on Berlin meeting, do you have any readout?

MR TONER: I don't. I tried to get a readout. It's just wrapping up, frankly, so I'll try to get it. If we have something meaningful to say about it later today, we'll get that to you guys.

QUESTION: And Secretary Kerry when he comes tomorrow, he will receive the French foreign minister. He will see him here or --

MR TONER: I'm not sure if we've confirmed that or announced it yet, so.

QUESTION: Russia today announced it's suspending or terminating two more cooperation agreements with the United States as follows the decree by Vladimir Putin on Monday. What do you have on that? And what does this say about the deteriorating state of U.S.-Russian relations right now based on everything else we've discussed here today?

MR TONER: Yeah. I think you're talking about some of these reports we've seen. We've just seen, frankly, media reports on this so far, so we've yet to receive official notification from the Russians about the suspension of an agreement on cooperation in nuclear and energy-related scientific research. If they're accurate, we would regret the Russian decision to unilaterally suspend cooperation on what we believe is a very important issue that's in the interest of both of our countries.

QUESTION: And how do you assess the current state of U.S.-Russian relations?

MR TONER: How do we assess it? I think our assessment is while we have failed to cooperate meaningfully in this recent effort on Syria, we continue to disagree where we disagree with Russia, and that's on Ukraine, certainly with what's happening in Syria right now, and in other areas. But where we can cooperate constructively, such as nuclear agreements – and in fact, the other day they suspended this Plutonium Management and Disposition Agreement – that's a real tragedy, because these are areas that we had successfully cooperated in the past. And again, it's in the interest of our both our countries to continue those efforts.

QUESTION: Mark --

MR TONER: Please.

QUESTION: -- on Syria. Regarding the options that U.S. Government is discussing, are you getting close to the decision? Any meetings that you can talk about?

MR TONER: I don't want to necessarily preview some of our internal U.S. Government meetings. I'll just say that we continue our efforts to look at different options in the range of what I talked about yesterday.

Yeah, please.

QUESTION: The pro-Kurdish party in Syria, the PYD, now controls significant areas of northern Syria, and they're going to hold a conference, they've said, this weekend to announce the establishment of a federal system in the three cantons that they're now administering. What's your position on this?

MR TONER: Well, our persistent – position rather, excuse me – has been that the future of Syria should be decided by Syrians consistent with the political transition and election process that was outlined in the UN Security Council Resolution 2254, and that resolution states that the Syrian people will decide the future of Syria and that the Geneva Communique should be the basis of a Syrian-led and Syrian-owned political transition. Put more simply, we support the territorial integrity of Syria and we also support a unified, democratic Syria in which the rights of all groups are protected.

So in direct response to your question, we'd urge Syrian parties – all Syrian parties to work together in a manner consistent with UN Security Council Resolution 2254 in order to advance that political process. So what we don't want are groups working on the margin creating their own systems or their own de facto states. This all needs to be worked out to a political transition that's enshrined in UN Security Council Resolution 2254.

QUESTION: That sounds like you don't support this.

MR TONER: (Laughter.) I said what we do support. I tried to be affirmative in my description.

Please, in the back. Michael.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR TONER: Sorry.

QUESTION: One more Syria?

MR TONER: One more Syria.

QUESTION: Did you see this report by experts that were working with the ISSG about the strike on the aid convoy? Their claim – the report is claiming that it was a well-prepared stage, refuting reports that it was an airstrike.

MR TONER: Yeah, Michael, I did see those reports, and we've been very clear laying out what we know occurred in that strike against a humanitarian convoy, and that any bogus reports to the contrary don't refute that.

QUESTION: Have you received this report, analyzed it?

MR TONER: We've actually seen no signs of any kind of report like this. I have no idea where that came from. Again, what we have said has been based on our best intelligence estimates of what – assessments, rather, of what happened. And I just would strike down any kind of bogus reports to the contrary.

QUESTION: On – just one more on this, on Aleppo. Have you seen reports or are you aware of certain groups from either side preventing civilians from leaving the city or – the eastern part of the city?

MR TONER: By any groups – I have not.

QUESTION: Well, I mean either by the moderate rebels that you support, by Nusrah, by the government, by --

MR TONER: That are actually preventing Syrian – citizens, rather – civilians, rather, from leaving?

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR TONER: I've not, no.

Please go ahead.

QUESTION: I don't know if you've already spoken about this, but what is the U.S. perspective on the idea of the UN Security Council adopting criteria to restrain members from using a veto when there are concerns about them having committed war crimes?

MR TONER: I haven't actually seen that and I don't want to necessarily preview how we would vote, but certainly, we take those – it's an important issue. We take those kind of questions into consideration, but I don't have anything to kind of preview.

QUESTION: All right. Move on?

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR TONER: Are we – yes.

QUESTION: This will be quick, I think.

MR TONER: Yeah, sure, go ahead.

QUESTION: I just wanted to ask you about the statement on the settlement.

MR TONER: Oh, yeah, of course.

QUESTION: It's pretty clear that you're unhappy about this announcement – both what the announcement was and the timing of it – timing of it for two reasons. So my question is one that's been asked many times before, but if, in fact, you feel this strongly about settlements and if, in fact, all of your previous denunciations and condemnations of them have gone to – have gone unheeded or un-listened to, what is the point of coming out with these statements repeatedly and expecting a change in behavior?

When, if you think it's this important, is there actually going to be a – even a threat of a consequence?

MR TONER: Sure. First of all, you're talking about the statement we issued a short time ago. I do want to condemn, though, the fact that we've seen reports of rocket file – fire, rather – from Gaza into Israel. We would strongly condemn rockets and other attacks from Gaza into Israel and urge all parties to avoid any escalation.

I think with respect to your question, Matt, starting from the fundamental principle that our commitment to Israel's security is unshakeable – and we just concluded, obviously, the memorandum of understanding that was alluded to in the statement. And that commitment stands, but when we see Israel carry out this kind of action – new settlement activity, announcement of new settlement activity – that, frankly, contradicts its stated goal to have or to achieve or pursue a two-state solution, it raises serious concerns and we have to publicly and privately convey those concerns to the Government of Israel.

I recognize your question and the – is that our comments have no effect. We still believe it's important to make clear how we view the situation on the ground and the effects of these kinds of actions are having on Israel's long-term viability as a democratic state in that region and a Jewish state in that region. This stuff only sets us – sets back the two-state peace process, a two-state solution, and makes it harder.

QUESTION: Okay. So your comment just now, does that – that's an acknowledgement from the Administration that you have no leverage with Israel, despite the fact that you give them billions of dollars every year? You just --

MR TONER: Again, we believe – we believe --

QUESTION: You just said that --

MR TONER: Well, no, first of all --

QUESTION: -- that your words have no effect. So is – are you acknowledging or is the Administration acknowledging that it doesn't have any sway, any pull with Israel?

MR TONER: What I would say is – and it's important that we continue to convey to Israel – when we see actions that we believe are counter to Israel's long-term security interests and counter to their stated goal of pursuing a two-state solution. And when we see that, we're going to call it like we see it and we're going to convey that.

QUESTION: But you don't actually expect them to do anything about it. Is that --

MR TONER: I can't speak for what – whether their behavior is going to change or how their behavior is going to change.

QUESTION: No, I mean the Administration. You say these things but you don't actually expect them to act on them?

MR TONER: Well, of course. We wouldn't say them unless we were mindful and hopeful that they would absorb them and act in a way that was consistent with, as I said, their long-term interests and, frankly, in the long – in the even short to midterm goal of creating the kind of climate on the ground that is – would even lead to the possibility of negotiations and a two-state solution.

QUESTION: Well, since you – since you started, since the United States starting – started opposing this kind of activity decades ago --

MR TONER: And you're right, decades ago in --

QUESTION: Yeah.

MR TONER: -- Republican and --

QUESTION: Under both administrations.

MR TONER: -- as I'd say.

QUESTION: Yes, yes, I know. You read through the whole thing. Has it ever – have you ever seen – have you ever had any success?

MR TONER: Well --

QUESTION: There's been --

MR TONER: Yeah.

QUESTION: I realize there have been short-term freezes, but it just seems to me that if you feel --

MR TONER: There have been short-term freezes.

QUESTION: -- this strongly about it to come out with a statement like this that talks about the MOU that was just signed and President Peres's death – if you come out with a statement that strong, don't – I mean, don't you expect it to have some kind of an effect?

MR TONER: Yes, we do.

QUESTION: You clearly feel strongly about it.

MR TONER: Of course we do.

QUESTION: But you – you do expect it to have some kind of effect, but you know that it won't?

MR TONER: You're saying that – I was simply responding to your question that we don't have – we're not going to take any action. What I was trying to make clear --

QUESTION: Is that correct? You're not going to do anything?

MR TONER: Well, again, we – our action is that --

QUESTION: Other than trying to make them feel bad?

MR TONER: No, but our action is that we convey to them both publicly and privately and to the world when we see Israel conducting itself in a way that runs counter to its security interests.

QUESTION: A follow-up just on the --

QUESTION: Mark, I'm curious, with respect to yourself and to the podium, you issued this statement from a spokesman. Now, your language has got tougher over the past few months, but isn't it time for Secretary Kerry or for President Obama to be using the kind of language that you're using from the podium today?

MR TONER: Well, there have been times in the past when it has come – these kinds of words have come from either Secretary Kerry or President Obama, and the message is always the same, which is we view settlements as counterproductive and counter to Israel's interests. We're going to keep up with that message and we're going to keep conveying it to the Israeli Government when they take these kinds of actions. I think this one was, as we noted in the statement, particularly exceptional in the fact that it came mere days after we had concluded this memorandum of understanding, and also in the wake of one of Israel's leading statesmen, Shimon Peres's death.

QUESTION: Let me just press the point that Matt did --

MR TONER: Yeah.

QUESTION: -- a bit further, because you tie it, you say – you talk about the memo of understanding, you talk about the largest deal you just concluded. And in fact, again, towards the end, you say how this will only draw a great deal of criticism and, basically, condemnation from the international community and distance Israel from many of its partners. Why not, then? Why not go to the Security Council or the United Nation, where you can have an international – some sort of a decision that can impose sanctions. I mean, you've imposed sanctions on others that, basically, do not adhere to international law by any measure.

MR TONER: I mean, look, with regard to the UN Security Council and any action at the UN, our position hasn't changed. We're always concerned, frankly, about one-sided resolutions or other actions that could be taken within the UN, and we're always going to oppose those kinds of resolutions that we believe delegitimize Israel's – Israel and undermine its security. But we're going to carefully consider our future engagement, if and when we reach that point, and determine how to most effectively pursue and advance the objective that we all at least claim to share, which is that of achieving a negotiated two-state solution. That work is going to continue with our international partners and we're going to continue to make clear when we have concerns, such as we do today, with regard to Israel's actions. We're going to make those concerns clear to the Israeli Government.

QUESTION: But you have done that time and time again. I mean, obviously, you believe that Israel is addicted to the expansion of settlements. Isn't that in a way – and you keep pumping money – isn't that in a way like someone giving their son --

MR TONER: Well --

QUESTION: -- drug money to continue doing what they're doing? Don't you want to stop at one point and say, "Enough is enough?"

MR TONER: Well, look, I would --

QUESTION: Because you're saying when you get to that point – it's been 50 years --

MR TONER: Said --

QUESTION: -- since this occupation has taken place.

MR TONER: Said, so let's just separate the two issues. So our ironclad commitment to Israel's security is both in Israel's security – national security interests, but it's also in the U.S.'s national security interests. The U.S. is safer when there is a safe and secure Israel in the region. But that's particularly why we find its actions so befuddling, when it takes actions such as continued settlement activity that run counter to what we're all trying to achieve here. And so we're going to continue to press that case to them. We have a very close and very frank and candid relationship with Israel. We're going to continue to call it like we see it, and when we see this kind of activity that we believe is counterproductive, we're going to say so.

QUESTION: Is it because it feels good? Because you feel that you would like to say it or because you --

MR TONER: No, I mean – Said, we – you know this around the world; there are issues that we constantly raise, whether it's in the realm of human rights or whatever. It doesn't preclude us from having cooperation with any government in any other area, but we're also frank when we see something that we believe runs counter to their interests and our interests, that we make that clear.

QUESTION: I appreciate you indulging me, but --

MR TONER: Sure.

QUESTION: -- you keep saying that the UN is a forum that is somehow inherently opposed to Israel, while in fact, it was created through that UN organization. But let me ask you this: I mean, if it's – this is in occupied territory, which you acknowledge, and there are laws that pertain to what is – what is the occupying power's rights and privileges or obligations under international law, why not push forward, put your weight behind what is internationally lawful in this case, and bringing Israel to bear on these issues – holding it to account?

MR TONER: Look, I'm just going to say we're working on this bilaterally. We're working with other international partners. We're just not convinced that the UN is the right venue for that.

QUESTION: My last one.

MR TONER: Sure.

QUESTION: You said that "when the time comes." When will the time come? When do you – in your opinion? When no longer there is any kind of land to establish a Palestinian state on? Is that, like, maybe at 10 percent more of the land? 20 percent more of the land?

MR TONER: Well, and – Said, we said as much in the statement that was issued, that it's getting to the point, especially given the geographic location of this latest settlement announcement where a Palestinian – a viable Palestinian state becomes increasingly difficult to imagine.

Please, sir, in the back.

QUESTION: Ukraine.

MR TONER: Ukraine.

QUESTION: I actually have two questions.

MR TONER: I'll get to you --

QUESTION: So the first one is regarding detention of Ukrainian journalists in Russia. So the international community, including European institutions and international organizations, concerned about this arrest, and two days ago the Department of State said that there is no a lot of details to say about it. And do you have any statements now?

MR TONER: I don't have much of an update to provide. We're obviously monitoring the situation very closely. I'd refer you to Russian and Ukrainian governments for the latest on this. I don't have an update to what you just mentioned in your question. I apologize.

QUESTION: Are you in connection with Ukrainian Government on this issue?

MR TONER: I'm sure we're discussing it with them. We're – again, we're always concerned when any journalist anywhere in the world, but certainly Ukrainian journalists in Russia, is arrested or detained. We're monitoring it closely, but I'd refer you to the Russian authorities for more details.

QUESTION: And the second question: You said that Secretary Kerry and Minister Lavrov said today about Ukraine, they have a conversation on this issue, and Assistant Secretary Nuland is in Moscow. Could you comment, what is the current position of the United States regarding developments in Ukraine?

MR TONER: Well, as we noted, or you noted in your question, Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland was in Moscow. She was joined by National Security Council senior directors, both Celeste Wallander as well as Charlie, or Charles Kupchan, and they did meet on October 5th with Russian officials. I think the focus of their trip was in making progress on Ukraine, what are the next steps that need to be taken in order to get the Minsk agreements fully implemented. Just because we suspended cooperation in other areas, our bilateral engagement or – with regard to Ukraine is going to continue. And let there be no confusion about that.

The Minsk agreements remain really the only viable way to restore peace and stability in eastern Ukraine, and we're going to continue to support and to push for their full implementation, which requires, as you know, a real ceasefire, full and unfettered access for OSCE monitors, elections under Ukrainian law that meet OSCE standards, and the withdrawal of foreign forces and equipment, and finally, the return to Ukraine – and this is an important one – return to Ukraine of control of its side of the international border.

Obviously, a lot of work still needs to be done in this regard, but we still believe that this process, the Minsk process, represents the best way to get there.

Please.

QUESTION: Iraq.

MR TONER: Iraq. I'm sorry, you – apologize. Yeah.

QUESTION: The AFP, Agence France-Presse, reports that a U.S.-led coalition strike, quote-unquote, "most likely killed some 20 pro-government Sunni tribal fighters near the city of Mosul as they were mistaken for ISIL militants." Considering the fact that the U.S. helps coordinate Iraqi forces gearing up for a Mosul offensive, how could this happen?

MR TONER: I'm aware of reports of that. I honestly – I would just have to refer you to the Department of Defense. I don't know the specifics and what has been reported. I'm sure that there's an investigation underway looking into the --

QUESTION: Just more broadly --

MR TONER: Yeah.

QUESTION: -- when the U.S. hit the Syrian military on September 17th, officials said they didn't have good intelligence, they didn't know where they were hitting. Would you say in Iraq the U.S. has good intelligence, especially with partners on the ground?

MR TONER: I mean, I'm not an intelligence officer, to put it as bluntly as that. I really would point you in the direction of someone who can speak about the level of our intelligence cooperation with Iraq or – and certainly I would make the assessment, though, that our cooperation with the Government of Iraq militarily is obviously much closer than what we have on the ground in Syria. While we have a de-confliction mechanism in place with the government of – or the ministry – between our Pentagon and the ministry of defense of Russia, that only pertains to de-conflicting our operations in order to protect the safety of our airmen and airwomen.

But with regard to intelligence on the ground, Syria's a difficult case because of a lot of factors that we've talked about on numerous occasions. That said, when we assess our intelligence, we make every effort to ensure that it's valid and credible before we would carry out any airstrike. If that airstrike mistakenly targets the wrong individuals or hits civilians, we own that and we conduct a thorough investigation and we're as transparent as we possibly can be about it.

QUESTION: About these reported mistakes, given several apparent mistakes within the past month, including a strike in – strike last week in Somalia where the U.S. targeted al-Shabaab militants but ended up reportedly killing 22 Somali soldiers, would you say U.S. targeting in these anti-terrorist operations is precise?

MR TONER: We have taken out numerous members of al-Qaida and ISIL's senior leadership in both Iraq and Syria and elsewhere – Libya as well – and so I think that speaks somewhat to the precision of our strikes. We're not barrel bombing civilian targets, hospitals, schools, civilians, infrastructure. So while on any battlefield errors do occur, I would hold our record up with anyone.

Please.

QUESTION: Yesterday Iraqi parliament passed a motion to ask Turkish forces to remove from Iraq, and today Iraqi Prime Minister Abadi also called on Turkish forces to leave the country, and the Turkish foreign minister again said basically Iraq parliament does not represent all of Iraqi people. And it looks like it's going to stay there, Turkish forces. What's your position on that?

MR TONER: In general, with regard to Iraq, we've said this before: All of Iraq's neighbors need to respect Iraqi sovereignty and territorial integrity. That's the premise of the counter – the global counter-ISIL coalition that it operates under in Iraq, and we expect all of our partners to do the same.

QUESTION: So Turkey argues that they – Turkish forces are there to help the upcoming Mosul operation. Do you think that the Turkish forces are helpful there? Do you have any recommendation on that front?

MR TONER: Well, again, I think part of our ongoing dialogue with Turkey, with Iraq, with other forces on the ground, with Kurdish forces with regard to Mosul and the upcoming operation is coordination and making sure that we're all focused on the same goal here and that everyone's working in strong coordination with everyone else to achieve the objective, which is, obviously, liberating Mosul and driving Daesh out of Iraq.

QUESTION: So in that context, Turkish forces are helpful in the coordination, or they are coordinating --

MR TONER: I would refer you to – so no, I'm not trying to be coy here. I'm just trying to say I think it's up to the Iraqis and the Iraqi Government to speak to Turkey's role in Iraq. And it's important, as I said, that whatever Turkey's role is in Iraq, that it's coordinated with the Iraqi Government.

Yeah.

QUESTION: I wonder if I could just ask you a question about the UN. Seems that the Security Council --

MR TONER: I didn't hear what you said. Iran?

QUESTION: I said – no, not Iran.

MR TONER: UN. I apologize.

QUESTION: I'm sorry, the UN.

MR TONER: Oh, UN. Okay.

QUESTION: It seems that the Security Council just – may have just chosen Portuguese diplomat Antonio Guterres to succeed Ban Ki-moon. Do you have any comment on that?

MR TONER: I do. We can confirm that today's straw poll exercise in the UN Security Council resulted in the clear identification of Antonio Guterres as the preferred candidate to be the next UN general – secretary-general. We anticipate that the Security Council will hold a formal vote tomorrow to confirm his nomination. So that's the next step, and then, obviously, after that would be for the full UN membership in the form of the General Assembly to consider that nomination. So there's a few steps remaining. We would expect the full membership to approve the Security Council's actions, but we'll wait and see. But we're very pleased to have been a part of this new selection process that gave member states and civil society opportunity to engage directly with the candidates in open fora. We welcome the opportunity to be part of these discussions. So --

QUESTION: Are you in any way disappointed that – there were 12 candidates; six were women. Are you in a way disappointed that not – a woman was not chosen for this post?

MR TONER: Well, look, the United States as a matter of longstanding policy does not make its voting preferences known on secret ballot elections. We are, however, well acquainted with Mr. Guterres for his many years working on the international stage and can state with confidence that he possesses the leadership qualities that'll be crucial to serving in this vital post. This was an election, and so as such, in the selection process, I think what's always important is that there is a number of candidates, a diverse set of candidates – there were, in this case – and that there was an open fora to discuss the qualifications of each one.

QUESTION: Well, wait a second.

MR TONER: Yes, sir.

QUESTION: How can you say – you clearly supported him. I mean, all 15 Security Council ambassadors --

MR TONER: I – I know.

QUESTION: -- came out and said they had a consensus.

MR TONER: I understand.

QUESTION: If you had not supported him then there wouldn't have been a consensus. So what – I mean, what is this? Plus, the General Assembly vote – isn't that public?

MR TONER: That is.

QUESTION: Yeah, they all go to their little buttons and push the – and then push them --

MR TONER: Yes.

QUESTION: -- and – so what is this, you don't make a practice of talking about your voting preferences?

MR TONER: We don't make a practice of talking about our voting preferences.

QUESTION: So --

QUESTION: So if it had been 8-7, you wouldn't say which you were coming down?

MR TONER: (Laughter.) No.

QUESTION: Well, it is said or alleged that you opposed Bulgarian diplomat Irina Bokova very strongly. Is that true?

MR TONER: I'm not going to speak to our voting preferences, Matt.

Please.

QUESTION: Different subject?

MR TONER: Yeah, please.

QUESTION: I just have one – last one on that, just for fun. (Laughter.) You've mentioned --

MR TONER: Because we don't have enough fun in here.

QUESTION: Well, because you mentioned his broad international experience. Is this the first time you've backed the chairman of the Socialist International for an international post?

MR TONER: You've caught me out. I don't know.

QUESTION: How many other have there been?

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

QUESTION: It probably is the first time, isn't it?

MR TONER: I'd have to google that one. (Laughter.) Sorry.

QUESTION: Do you have any information you're able to share about any Americans who were injured or directly affected by Hurricane Matthew?

MR TONER: I do not. I don't know if we talked about this in the call earlier today. My apologies if it was brought up. I don't think we've got – but again, this is the kind of assessment that's going to take – not – we don't have an initial – we do have an initial assessment, but as we've seen in the past, natural disasters like this, we may not have a full picture for some time. I don't believe – let me quickly look through here and see if we have any.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR TONER: Well, there you go. I've got to start listening to those calls.

QUESTION: I didn't hear the – directly the – (inaudible) that --

MR TONER: Is that it, guys?

QUESTION: No, no. I've only got one more.

QUESTION: Wait, I have one more on --

QUESTION: Just --

MR TONER: Okay.

QUESTION: -- I don't know if you've seen the --

QUESTION: Can I just do one more on this one?

QUESTION: Yeah.

MR TONER: Call me out again, that I didn't read the transcript of this morning's call? (Laughter.)

QUESTION: It wasn't in there. I don't – I was on the call. I didn't hear anything directly about that.

MR TONER: All right. We'll have this out afterwards.

QUESTION: We'll have it out after. Do you have any intention of creating a working group similar to the one that existed after the earthquake in Haiti with regards the hurricane?

MR TONER: How so? In terms of prevention or for future events, or kind of --

QUESTION: The State Department had a --

MR TONER: Right.

QUESTION: -- they had a working – yeah, to look at the effects after. I didn't know if there --

MR TONER: Yeah.

QUESTION: -- had been discussion of creating a similar --

MR TONER: I mean, honestly, it's a fair question. I'm pretty sure that given the frequency of hurricanes and tropical storms in that part of the world, that a lot of research and a lot of examination's already been done and evaluation. I think in the days and weeks to come we'll have a better assessment of probably steps that can be taken to avoid damage. And again, it's going to be country to country, because some of these countries don't have the kind of preparations you might see in some of the other countries with regard to materials available to protect them and et cetera.

QUESTION: It's probably too early for this as well, but Haiti, as a result of the hurricane, has abandoned its attempts to hold a presidential election next week.

MR TONER: "Suspended" is what I heard, yeah.

QUESTION: "Suspended," yes. And they have been suspending their presidential elections or canceling them fairly frequently over the past three or four years. You've regretted, in the past, suspensions of their elections. This obviously is a natural cause.

MR TONER: I think we'll give them the benefit of the doubt here that they're recovering from a natural disaster.

QUESTION: Well, that was in the --

MR TONER: Sorry?

QUESTION: That was in the clause.

MR TONER: That was a – (laughter). Matt, you had one more?

QUESTION: Yeah, I did. And I don't know if you've seen this warning that Iran has given to the Saudis about its ships approaching Iranian waters or territory. It's quite similar to – or I believe it's similar to ones that they have told the Fifth Fleet or you guys, as well, and I'm just wondering if you see this as any kind of an escalation. They say that they will intercept, board, whatever, the Saudis in particular.

MR TONER: So I haven't seen the actual statement. We'll take a look at it. But certainly, if it is as you appear – as you have stated it to be, I don't know if we'd view it as an escalation, but it's certainly unhelpful, and we support freedom of navigation in that part of the world as we do everywhere.

QUESTION: Just one question on Turkey, Mark. I know this question was asked two days ago, but since then, there are several more media outlets shut down. There are about 121 journalists in Turkey right now. There are very few critical media outlets left in country. I am wondering, as ally of Turkey, what's your assessment of the two and a half months since the coup about the Turkish administration's policies regarding freedom issues?

MR TONER: Well, I think our concerns remain the same, which is we obviously saw the Turkish Government react strongly to what was a coup attempt and conduct – carry out an investigation into the causes and who was behind that coup attempt. But we've been very clear from the early hours afterwards that that should not directly affect Turkey's democratic institutions, freedom of the press, freedom of expression, and kind of the core tenets of Turkey's constitution. So that's a message that we continue to convey to the Turkish Government.

Thanks.

QUESTION: Thank you.

(The briefing was concluded at 3:14 p.m.)



NEWSLETTER
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list