Daily Press Briefing
John Kirby
Spokesperson
Daily Press Briefing
Washington, DC
November 18, 2016
TRANSCRIPT:
2:09 p.m. EST
MR KIRBY: Hello everybody.
QUESTION: Hello.
MR KIRBY: Happy Friday to you. Just a quick topper on Haiti elections. The United States looks forward to transparent, credible, and peaceful elections in Haiti on the 20th of this month. Only through elected leadership can the country make full strides in strengthening its democratic institutions and addressing the many issues in need of urgent attention. We recognize the commendable effort that the Government of Haiti and the Provisional Electoral Council undertook to organize elections despite the challenges that Hurricane Matthew left in its wake. We urge all Haitian actors to ensure that the election is peaceful and fair to allow citizens to cast a vote for their future and for that of the country.
Matt.
QUESTION: Thanks. Do I even have to ask the question, or can you anticipate it and give me the answer?
MR KIRBY: I can confirm that members of the president-elect's transition team, the team that will be working here at the State Department, have arrived today. They're here.
QUESTION: All of them?
MR KIRBY: I don't know that. I know several are here.
QUESTION: Okay.
MR KIRBY: I don't have an exact number and I couldn't tell you whether that would be a complete team. As I said yesterday, sometimes you'll see an initial batch and then additionals come later. I just don't know what their plans are.
QUESTION: Do you know what they – who they have met with from the --
MR KIRBY: I don't know. They've only, honestly – as far as I know, only been in the building for about an hour or so. So I don't know who, if anyone, that they've met with. Obviously, we – staff from Counselor Kenney's office have been responsible for ushering them in. But I suspect at least some of the time has been spent in the logistics of getting into the building and that kind of thing. But I just don't know.
QUESTION: That would mean – and forgive me for being – this getting really into the weeds, I know, but does that mean, like, getting --
MR KIRBY: Yeah.
QUESTION: -- a pass or a badge?
MR KIRBY: Getting a badge, getting a pass, that kind of thing. I mean – but I honestly don't know what's transpired over the last hour. I just know that they've only recently arrived.
QUESTION: Okay.
QUESTION: Can --
QUESTION: So no indication of where they're going to begin? Like, is there any kind of – has Counselor Kenney come up with a plan on kind of how this is all going to work?
MR KIRBY: It's really up to them, Lesley, how they're going to manage their time here at the State Department and how they're going to manage the information flow that they require. It's not really up to us to do that. Counselor Kenney's been responsible for making sure that the spaces were available, that they had a place to work, and that everything was in order. And today mainly just focused on getting them into the building and getting them – getting their physical access to their office spaces facilitated. But as far as their agenda and what they want to focus on, what meetings they want to have, what briefings they want, what material they need, that will all be determined by them, and I wouldn't speak to that.
QUESTION: I was going to say – and would you speak for them, or they would speak for themselves to members of the press?
MR KIRBY: I don't know – well, it – I won't be speaking for the transition team. So that's one. Number two, in terms of whether and how they communicate with members of the media, that's really, again, for them to decide. And I wouldn't know the answer to that. Okay?
QUESTION: John, I want to ask you about the vetting process. Is that something that is exclusively the domain of the incoming administration, or is it something that the current structure has something to do with it?
MR KIRBY: The vetting process for whom?
QUESTION: Those who are --
MR KIRBY: The vetting process for whom?
QUESTION: I'm sorry?
MR KIRBY: The vetting process for whom, Said?
QUESTION: Vetting process for those who are joining the department, those who are coming to join the department to fill in all these positions and so on. Are they – is that in the exclusive domain of those who are coming, the vetting process, or is it something that you are involved in in any way, shape, or form?
MR KIRBY: Do you mean the vetting process for the transition team?
QUESTION: For – no, not for the transition team; for those who are coming to fill in all these positions that we talked about yesterday. You have, like, 3-, 400 – we don't how many. But how are they vetted? Is it exclusively their thing, or do you have something to do with it?
MR KIRBY: Well, I mean --
QUESTION: Do you look at all these potential employees and say, okay, well, we have – you know this about this? You know what I mean.
MR KIRBY: The responsibility for filling staff positions in the new administration --
QUESTION: Right.
MR KIRBY: -- however many they are, will be up to the president-elect and his transition team. And then post-inauguration, it won't be a transition team anymore; it'll be the administration, the new administration. They'll be responsible for deciding and determining, interviewing people for whatever various positions they want to fill. But that's – that'll be – obviously, those decisions will be theirs to make.
QUESTION: John, could you tell us exactly how you are going to work with them? Are you going to talk about any issue? Are you going to work on each issue, each policy, each country, each regional issue? How does it work?
MR KIRBY: Well, we are certainly prepared to be that thorough if that's what the transition team desires. But really, the information flow both in terms of quantity and content will be up to them to determine. So as I've said several times this week, we are prepared, ready, willing, and able to offer them whatever context and information, whatever briefing materials, whether they're in paper form or in meetings, that they require. I mean, we really want to serve them and to serve their needs. And so we've – we are ready to go. The bureaus have been preparing for weeks now to have material ready for them to look at if they want it, but it really will be determined by their appetite for information in terms – what they really want.
QUESTION: So --
QUESTION: On – sorry. On one specific issue, on the Iran nuclear deal, we talk about it earlier this week or last week. Are you more concerned than you were with the nomination which occurred this morning at the NSC and at the head of the CIA? Are you worried about the possibility that the incoming administration would change its policy regarding the nuclear deal?
MR KIRBY: Well, as I've said many times, Nick, we're focused on pursuing the foreign policy agenda and priorities of this Administration. We only have one president at a time, and our focus is on continuing the foreign policy agenda of President Obama. That's what Secretary Kerry is committed to, and a part of that is obviously continuing to meet our obligations under the JCPOA. We still believe in the soundness and the importance of and the criticality of the Iran deal and the security that it provides not just to the region but to the world. So we're going to stay committed to that.
I cannot speak for the foreign policy agenda or priorities of the incoming administration. That is for them to speak to and only them to speak to, as well as to whatever personnel decisions – kind of gets back to Said – whatever personnel decisions they make, that – those are their decisions and for them to speak to. Okay?
QUESTION: Can you just tell us: Who greeted them? I saw them coming in, but I don't know the gentleman who greeted them from the State Department – the transition team.
MR KIRBY: You're asking me who the gentleman was that greeted them at the door?
QUESTION: Yeah. Who greeted them at the door?
MR KIRBY: I don't know. I can --
QUESTION: Okay. And then --
MR KIRBY: I can try to find out. I think it was probably somebody on Counselor Kenney's staff, but I don't know that for sure. Since I wasn't in the lobby like you, I just don't know who was there.
QUESTION: I just happened to be there. So – and who did they meet – who are they going to meet with first? The counselor or --
MR KIRBY: I don't know. As I said, I don't know what their agenda is for the afternoon, and again, that's for them to determine. And I'm just assuming – that's a dangerous thing to do from this podium, but --
QUESTION: Yeah.
MR KIRBY: -- my guess is that --
QUESTION: Anywhere, really. (Laughter.)
MR KIRBY: Well, not if you're Matt Lee. (Laughter.) I think in general – I mean, it's only been an hour or so, so I suspect that the initial time that they've spent here is just really getting security passes and badges and getting familiar with the office space and that kind of thing. But I just don't know.
QUESTION: And when is the Secretary expected back? And you expect them, obviously, to meet with him, right?
MR KIRBY: The Secretary will be back in town this evening. He's already wheels-up from Lima and heading back, so he'll be back early this evening. I do not know what plans – what his schedule looks like in terms of meeting with the transition team. And I want to stress again that the – we are driven and he has made it clear that he wants us all driven to making them feel welcome and meeting their needs, and so I will not be from this podium making it a habit to read out what they're doing and who they're meeting with. That's really not for us to speak to. So I just want to lay that out right at the outset that I'm not going to be providing a daily tick-tock of their activities.
More critically, their agenda, their time is really for them to fill the way they see – deem fit. And we are – we're going to, again, make them feel welcome. We're going to handle this transition in a professional, seamless, effective way, and that means that – that means we need to be dedicated to fulfilling their needs. And again, that's where the Secretary wants everybody's head – heads to be and that's where they are.
QUESTION: Can I just – it's somewhat related to this. I'm wondering if you know if – whether or not you have heard from the Japanese Government about the meeting between the president-elect and the prime minister that --
MR KIRBY: To my knowledge, there has been no such contact with the Japanese Government after the meeting.
QUESTION: And is – is that something that you would have expected or would have wanted or appreciated?
MR KIRBY: No, I don't think there was any expectation --
QUESTION: No? Okay.
MR KIRBY: -- here that we would have heard from them.
Yeah.
QUESTION: Can we go to Syria?
MR KIRBY: Yeah.
QUESTION: Okay. First of all, could you update us on the phone call between Secretary Kerry and Foreign Minister Lavrov?
QUESTION: It wasn't a phone call.
QUESTION: Was it a meeting? I'm sorry, I take it back – a meeting.
MR KIRBY: They met briefly --
QUESTION: They met briefly.
MR KIRBY: -- yesterday, and we issued a – well, we didn't issue, but they did a little communication with reporters after the meeting. The transcript that we released talked about what they spoke about, which was obviously largely Syria. And both of them indicated that Aleppo was on the topic – on the agenda list of topics discussed and how we can continue to try to still work towards a cessation of hostilities.
QUESTION: Let me follow up on the issue of the hospitals. A spokesman for the Russian ministry of defense said that these hospitals – to quote him – "were only in your imagination." Do you have a response to that? He said three days later, "We don't know where these hospitals are. We don't know what their location is." And so on.
MR KIRBY: Yeah, look, I've seen the comments, and they don't – they – they don't even merit a response by me. As we've talked about the last couple of days, it isn't John Kirby saying that hospitals are being hit.
QUESTION: No, I understand that.
MR KIRBY: It is respectable aid agencies that are reporting this on their own, not – proactively. And so, as I said yesterday, I can't speak for the Syrian military or the Russian military. I don't know whose airplanes are hitting these hospitals. What I can say is we've got credible claims from legitimate, well-established agencies that are reporting this. And they are hospitals, and they are patients – people that are trying to get well are in fact being bombed. And frankly, it doesn't really matter whose airplane is dropping the bomb – it's either the Syrians or the Russians or both – the fact is it's got to stop. It needs to stop.
And that in addition to this violence – against, again, health care facilities mind you – no aid – none, zero – has gotten in in recent months to the people of Aleppo. And I talked about it yesterday and I – or not yesterday, I think a week ago – but we continue to see residents of Aleppo tying – picture this in your mind, tying ropes around their abdomens to stave off the hunger pains. These health care facilities, the same ones that are being bombed, doctors in there are reporting using unsanitary equipment and gear because they can't get supplies in to operate and to work on people – unsanitary. People are going to unsanitary sources of water. They're eating weeds and seed stock as well as their own livestock to try to survive. Eighty percent of households in Syria, according to information I saw this morning, about 80 percent of them – they're also having to sell off their assets, whether it's furniture or dishware, just to try to find some kind of resources with which to feed themselves.
And I do want to read a quote now. This is a quote from an Associated Press story. So I'm quoting from a press report. I understand that. But an AP story that talked about hospital workers being forced in Aleppo to rush to evacuate infants from a hospital that was being bombed. And this doctor is quoted – now he's texting, apparently, this correspondent, and this is the doctor's text: "Now it is being bombed" – the hospital. "I am sorry, I have to go transfer the children." He's the head of the pediatric hospital. This is a text and a message to the AP. "And as we drove out with the ambulance war planes were firing and artillery was shelling, but thank God we were not hurt." Infants in incubators having to be taken out of a hospital because it's being bombed --
QUESTION: My last one --
MR KIRBY: So it's completely reprehensible and without any justification whatsoever.
QUESTION: My last one is on the aid. The UN is saying that all sides – the Russians, the Syrians, the opposition – they are all preventing aid from going in. So everybody is party to this kind of thing. Do you concur? Do you agree? Do you dispute that?
MR KIRBY: The information that we have is that by far, the vast majority of obstacles that are being put in place to aid getting in by the Syrian regime and their Russian backers. Now, I talked about this a few days ago. It's not that we haven't seen reports that certain opposition groups have also caused a problem. We've seen those reports and they're deeply concerning to us, as I said the other day, and we have communicated that concern to opposition groups and to other nations who have influence on other opposition groups. So I'm not saying that it's not in the realm of possibility, that there are other obstacles being put in place. But by far, without question, every bit of information we're getting is that the obstruction of aid getting in is being caused by the regime and their backers.
QUESTION: Just one small point here. The Russian foreign ministry says that the Secretary and Foreign Minister Lavrov did speak by phone today. Are you aware of that?
MR KIRBY: Yes. Yes, but I thought you were referring to yesterday.
QUESTION: That's what I was referring to.
QUESTION: So --
MR KIRBY: Yeah, they did have a brief conversation today.
QUESTION: So after meeting in person yesterday, is there anything new after this phone call?
MR KIRBY: I don't have a full readout of the conversation with the foreign minister. It apparently happened pretty recently. I suspect that the topic was again Syria, but I just don't have a full readout of it. But yeah, they talked today. Yeah.
QUESTION: Turkey's main opposition party, the CHP, has announced that it's so opposed to Erdogan's proposed constitutional amendment that would establish a presidential system that the CHP will begin a series of rallies against it. And of course, the second largest opposition party, the pro-Kurdish HTP – HDP, whose leadership Erdogan has imprisoned, opposes it too. What is your view of this proposed change in Turkey to a presidential system? Do you see it as anti-democratic?
MR KIRBY: I've seen reports on this as well. I'm not going to speculate at this point, and this is really a matter for Turkish officials to speak to. It's a matter for them to clarify and discuss. I just don't have enough information right now to speculate one way or the other.
QUESTION: About the constitutional amendment that Erdogan is --
MR KIRBY: That's right. I don't have enough information and – on it to speculate at this point. This is an issue for Turkish officials to speak to.
QUESTION: Do you see that's – any inconsistency between your readiness to talk about Haitian elections and not really talking about what's going on internally in Turkey?
MR KIRBY: No.
QUESTION: No?
MR KIRBY: I mean look, I'm not trying to be glib, but there's a big difference for me welcoming Haitian elections which have been long delayed and obviously were set back by a hurricane than it is to get me to speculate on some proposed constitutional amendments in Turkey that I don't have full visibility on and information on. And so I'm just – it's – one is an election that we know we have a date on the calendar. The second issue is a completely different one. It's a proposed amendment to the constitution that, as you rightly noted, is only just today been announced and spoken to. I just don't have enough information to speculate.
That doesn't mean that Turkey's democracy doesn't still matter to us, and we've said that time and time again, or that we want to see Turkey's democratic institutions survive and thrive and succeed. All that is the same, but I'm just not in a position right now to speculate for you on it.
QUESTION: I remember that Deputy Secretary Blinken did emphasize the importance of the rule of law in Turkey and spoke against some of the measures that the Turkish Government had taken – 36,000 imprisoned people now, 100,000 people having lost their jobs. And for some of us analysts and journalists, it seems that there is a relationship between this proposed amendment and the human rights abuses that we're seeing in Turkey now.
MR KIRBY: Again, I think I've gone about as far as I can on this today. Okay?
QUESTION: Iraq? A few questions on conflicting statements coming from Iraq. Masoud Barzani, the President of Iraq's Kurdistan Region says, that he has an agreement with the U.S. and the Iraqi Government that Kurdish forces would not withdraw from the lands that they reclaimed from ISIL before the beginning of the Mosul operation the U.S. ambassador to Iraq says he is confident that they will withdraw. Iraqi officials say the Peshmerga will have to leave. Earlier this week, Ambassador Silliman had a meeting with Masoud Barzani, and you now have these really conflicting statements coming out. Did they or did they not have the agreement that Masoud Barzani is talking about?
MR KIRBY: So we've talked about this a couple of times this week. I don't have anything further to add than what we've said before about this.
QUESTION: Which is?
MR KIRBY: Both in terms of the ambassador's visit and the comments by President Barzani. The only thing I would add, and I know I said this before, but – is that the Mosul campaign is an Iraqi-led campaign. It has been Iraqi-planned and it is being executed by Iraqi forces. Yes, the coalition is supporting and obviously we train, advise, assist, and with air power, but it is an Iraqi campaign. And the order of battle, to use a military term, and the organization and the way it's going to be prosecuted – those are Iraqi decisions. And so I'm going to defer to the Iraqi Government to speak to that.
QUESTION: Do you know if they, at the meeting, they spoke English? Could this be something that was lost in translation?
MR KIRBY: I do not know – I honestly don't know the answer to that. And – but I don't want to – by saying I don't know it doesn't mean that I'm agreeing with the premise that there was some sort of translation issues here. We can check to see if there were translation facilities provided in the meeting. But again, we've already spoken to the ambassador's visit, we've spoken to the meeting itself, and I would just stress again that this is an Iraqi-led campaign and therefore these have to be Iraqi decisions.
QUESTION: And related to that – I have one more. So I would like to quote Barzani at the – he sounds really adamant about it. So he said, "These areas were liberated by the blood of eleven hundred, five hundred – 11,500 mortars and wounded from the Peshmerga. It is not possible, after all these sacrifices, to return them to direct federal control." And I want to ask: Does it even matter for the U.S. whether there is an agreement with the Iraqi Kurds? And a related question: Can the coalition afford to ignore the Iraqi Kurds' plans and ambitions?
MR KIRBY: What matters to us is that Mosul gets liberated, Daesh gets kicked out. What matters to us is that that campaign is under the chain of command of the Iraqi Government in Baghdad under Prime Minister Abadi. What matters to us is that Prime Minister Abadi and the Iraqi Government make the final decisions about not only how they're going to execute this campaign, but how their forces are going to be organized. And we know that Baghdad and Erbil have been in close communication in the months leading up to Mosul and certainly as it's now being prosecuted. And we would encourage that dialogue to continue, but these are decisions that they have to make and they have to speak to.
For the United States, our role, our part, is in supporting Prime Minister Abadi's efforts. We do that militarily, primarily through training, advising, and assisting Iraqi Security Forces. And we have done that and we'll continue to do that, because there's going to be more work to be done when Mosul falls. And of course, we've been supporting not just the United States, but certainly we've been a leader in terms of the air support that is provided to Iraqi Security Forces on the ground.
QUESTION: So do you --
MR KIRBY: That's what our focus is.
QUESTION: I understood. Among the things that you said what matters to us, there was no agreement with the Iraqi Kurds that – does that matter to the U.S. to have such an agreement?
MR KIRBY: An agreement?
QUESTION: To be in agreement with the Iraqi Kurds on this specific issue, because they seemed really adamant about this.
MR KIRBY: Well, again, I've already spoken to the ambassador's visit. I've already spoken to these comments here. What matters to us is, again, that this is – that this campaign is led by Iraqi Security Forces, that it's all under Prime Minister Abadi's chain of command. That's what matters most to us. There is no doubt that the Peshmerga have been and continue to fight bravely against Daesh – no question – as have the Iraqi Security Forces in the south. And what matters, we believe, not just to us but to the entire coalition, including Iraqi leaders, is that Daesh gets defeated, that Daesh gets thrown out of Mosul. And that campaign is progressing. And we don't talk about it much, and you know I don't like getting into battlefield updates, but we're hearing that it's still progressing, that they're making progress. And so that's what we're going to be focused on. Okay?
QUESTION: A follow-up?
QUESTION: There's a --
MR KIRBY: Yeah.
QUESTION: Yeah. Is the implication of what you're saying that if Baghdad and Erbil reach an agreement that would change the boundaries between the Kurdistan Region and the rest of Iraq from what they were before – if that's an agreed – agreement reached between Baghdad and Erbil, that would be acceptable to you?
MR KIRBY: I'm not going to hypothesize or speculate about boundary changes here. That – I'm not going to go there. What we have seen is Baghdad and Erbil communicate and have dialogue about what's going on particularly there in Mosul. We want to see that dialogue continue and we want the issues between them to be worked out between them. Our role – the United States – in leading this coalition is to support them from the air and to make sure that we continue to train, advise, and assist Iraqi Security Forces as they press the fight against Daesh.
QUESTION: But you know that President-elect Trump is very positive about the Kurds. He said they've been – they're proven the best fighters, they're the most loyal to us, they have a great heart, and he says we should be working with them much more than we are. So what I take from his appreciation of the Kurds is that by the time these issues come to a resolution – which is going to be some months from now because this is an ongoing military campaign – it will be President Trump. And perhaps the new – and likely the new administration would be more favorably inclined than maybe the current one to some sort of changes in these borders that Baghdad and Erbil might reach together. Do you think that's a reasonable way to look at things?
QUESTION: You might have the luxury of being able to predict and speculate about what's going to happen under President-elect Trump's administration. I don't. I can tell you that we continue to be focused on supporting Prime Minister Abadi and his efforts to prosecute this campaign. That won't change.
And as I've said – I just said it a few minutes ago and I've said it many times – there's no question that Peshmerga forces have fought bravely, courageously, and continue to do so. And we respect that. Likewise, Iraqi Security Forces have also fought bravely and effectively and continue to do so. As I have, I think, articulated many times, the focus is we want to defeat Daesh. The whole coalition is designed to defeat Daesh. And to the degree that everybody's efforts are aligned with that and focused on that, we'll have success and we'll have it – it will come faster and it will be more sustainable. And so that's, again, where U.S. leadership is really aimed at. Okay?
QUESTION: APEC?
MR KIRBY: Huh?
QUESTION: APEC?
MR KIRBY: Sure.
QUESTION: Do you have a readout about the meeting between the Secretary and the Taiwanese representative, Jim Soong?
MR KIRBY: I do not.
Yep.
QUESTION: South Asia. Thank you, sir. Two questions. One, India has now a new ambassador Mr. Navtej Sarna in Washington, and he was in the building presenting his – whatever the required papers to the State Department before presenting his credentials to the President. He comes at the time when we will have here a new government and new president in Washington. I mean, of course, President-elect Donald Trump. Mr. Sarna has been known for the last over almost 20 years in Washington at the embassy for press spokesman and also spokesperson for the conflict between India and Delhi. And before coming here, he was the high commissioner to UK where he fostered the UK-India relations. And his mission here, also same thing, to foster the U.S.-India relations.
My question here: How do we deal here with a new ambassador, with a new president, with new government in Washington? So – because Mr. Trump has been saying that under his administration India-U.S. relations will be greater than ever we have seen.
MR KIRBY: Again, I can appreciate everybody's interest in speculating about what the new administration will do foreign policy-wise. I cannot speak to that, Goyal. I just don't know. All I can tell you is that we greatly value and respect the relationship we have with India today and the one that we have worked very, very hard at improving and strengthening. And we're going to stay completely focused on that for the remainder of this Administration. We welcome the new ambassador and we look forward to working closely with him as he settles into his new duties, but I can tell you that nothing's going to change for the remainder of Secretary Kerry's tenure about the very keen focus that we're going to continue to place on our bilateral relationship with India. What happens after the inauguration of our new president is really for the new administration to speak to. But there's no question that India remains and will remain a key partner in that part of the world and that strong bilateral relations will need to continue. But how that – what it looks like, the form and content and shape, that's – I couldn't possibly predict what that is.
QUESTION: And second, as far as fighting against terrorism --
MR KIRBY: Are you okay?
QUESTION: -- in the region, President-elect Trump was very much against the terrorism or fighting against terrorism, root out terrorism from around the globe, and including from South Asia. But also, at the same time, do you see any policy change as far as fighting under his administration against terrorism --
MR KIRBY: Goyal, I --
QUESTION: -- especially for U.S.-Pakistan relations? Because where this problem is existing still today and chaos is going on in the region.
MR KIRBY: Goyal, I cannot speak for the incoming administration. I can't. I've seen some comments that they've made about a counterterrorism focus. That's for them to address. Nothing changes about our focus on the importance of regional, collaborative, and effective counterterrorism operations and to our interest in seeing all the countries in the region likewise expend a great deal of energy and effort and leadership on that. I just can't speculate about the future and I wouldn't do that, okay?
QUESTION: Well, can I just quickly ask you in the same thing: Do you --
MR KIRBY: If it's the same thing about the new administration --
QUESTION: No, no.
MR KIRBY: -- my answer is going to be very much similar to what I just gave you.
QUESTION: No, no, not the new administration, currently going on. Does this Administration or this building or Secretary favors Pakistan to name as the state sponsor of terrorism? Because a bill going on and online signatures have reached to the White House and State Department, and there was a bill in the Congress that it's time to send a strong message to Pakistan: Stop terrorism.
MR KIRBY: Look, I'm not going to get into a discussion about that. We routinely discuss with our Pakistani counterparts the importance for continued focus and energy on the counterterrorism efforts and the terrorism threat, particularly along that spine between the two countries. Our focus on this and the focus that we want to see Pakistan expend on it, that's not going to change.
QUESTION: Thank you, sir.
MR KIRBY: Said.
QUESTION: Yes. Sir, can we go to the Palestinian-Israeli issue?
MR KIRBY: Sure.
QUESTION: And we have some Palestinian journalists in the back from Gaza and the West Bank.
MR KIRBY: Welcome.
QUESTION: Welcome, yeah.
MR KIRBY: Good to have you here.
QUESTION: Okay. Very quickly, the PA – the Palestinian Authority – is increasingly using its police forces to quash peaceful protests of Palestinians. And in fact, they conduct raids and so on into Palestinian camps, into Palestinian neighborhoods. Are you concerned that this – a force that you have trained and financed and so on is conducting itself in this fashion?
MR KIRBY: Well, I've seen those same reports. I'm not going to comment on specifics. I think you know I won't do that, but obviously, we're always concerned and we will always want to caution everyone to avoid violence, to use restraint, and to maintain calm.
QUESTION: Because I think there is a feeling there is some sort of a vacuum in the next couple months and so on, and as the gap gets wider between the governed and the government --
MR KIRBY: A vacuum in the next couple of months?
QUESTION: No, it's a vacuum in terms of direct American influence, possibly, in the peace process, which lets, like, those in control – the PA --
MR KIRBY: Because there's two months left in the Administration?
QUESTION: No, man, because you're busy. I mean, I'm not saying that you guys are --
MR KIRBY: Yeah, and one of the things that we're busy on is continuing to focus on this issue.
QUESTION: Well, let me put it this way: The peace process is off the radar screen for the time being. Would you agree with that? Would --
MR KIRBY: No, I would not agree with that. Look, I mean, the Secretary continues to spend a lot of energy and effort on this and so does the President. I mean, there's not – nobody's taking a foot off the gas here, because there's too much left of the Administration, particularly on this issue. So I would absolutely refute the notion that there's some sort of vacuum here or lack of attention being paid to it.
QUESTION: Well --
QUESTION: Well, wait a second. Are you saying that you still think in two months that you can put together a --
MR KIRBY: I didn't say that.
QUESTION: -- peace process and --
MR KIRBY: I didn't say that, but I --
QUESTION: -- achieve a result?
MR KIRBY: But I didn't – no, I didn't say that. What I said was we're not going to stop focusing on this. We're not going to – there's not going to be a vacuum here --
QUESTION: Yeah, but every administration, you realize, at some point is going to have – has to realize that time has run out.
MR KIRBY: I think everybody realizes --
QUESTION: It was literally the day after the election in 2008 when a bunch of us flew with Secretary Rice to the Middle East to – basically for her to announce that the Annapolis process wasn't going to result in anything. It sounds as though --
MR KIRBY: I think everybody realizes that – first of all, we're mindful of the calendar --
QUESTION: All right.
MR KIRBY: -- and the clock. Everybody realizes the challenges with respect to the time left here. But that doesn't mean that the Secretary is not going to continue to stay focused on this.
QUESTION: Well, then let me ask you this: that some Israeli officials are mulling granting settlers protected population status. It was the attorney general and the Justice Minister Shaked examining three possible solutions to legalize settlements in the West Bank, including defining settlers as local population like the Palestinians, and that would allow to them to expropriate Palestinian land. Have you seen the report and can you comment on that?
MR KIRBY: We've seen the reports and again, Said, our policy and view on settlements has not changed. It remains absolutely the same.
QUESTION: But we have seen in this past week alone an acceleration of these measures that are designed to sort of embolden the settlement processes and so on. In fact, there was an editorial today in The Washington Post that speaks about this and so on. So I know you've given a strong statement at the beginning of the week on settlements, but that is not really deterring the Israelis, is it?
MR KIRBY: It's not what?
QUESTION: It's not deterring them, is it?
MR KIRBY: Well, I can't speak to Israeli decisions here. But again, let me reiterate that our policy on settlements is absolutely clear and it's consistent. We believe they are corrosive to the cause of peace and that legislation such as what we talked about earlier in the week and other decisions to advance settlements, they are endangering prospects for a two-state solution, absolutely.
Okay?
QUESTION: (Inaudible) I'll go last.
MR KIRBY: I think he's done.
QUESTION: No one else? I just wanted to ask you very briefly about this vote yesterday in the UN on the Third Committee, the vote on the resolution opposing Nazism – neo-Nazism. You don't have anything on this?
MR KIRBY: I don't, no, no, Matt. Let me take that question for you.
QUESTION: So – well, let me ask it and then you can – maybe take the question and --
MR KIRBY: Yeah, no, I --
QUESTION: You guys were one of three countries to vote against this. And I realize why you did it from the explanation of vote that was read by your representative --
MR KIRBY: Yeah.
QUESTION: -- saying that it – it infringes on freedom of speech and freedom of expression and you think that it was being used as – by the Russians who proposed it to be – to interfere politically in other countries. But at the end of the explanation of vote, it said that the United States is going to oppose this, as it has done in years past, and we urge other states also to oppose it. Well, only three countries opposed it: you, Ukraine, and Palau. So I'm wondering, one, was this just an epic failure on the part of – on your behalf to get anyone else to agree to vote no? And two, you obviously felt strongly about it, because you voted no instead of abstaining. And most of your European allies – NATO members, members of the EU – abstained. And I'm just wondering, why was it that you felt so strongly that you voted no along with only two other countries instead of abstaining like most of your allies? That's --
MR KIRBY: All right. Well, let me get back to you on that.
QUESTION: Thank you.
MR KIRBY: Thanks, everybody. Have a good weekend.
(The briefing was concluded at 2:48 p.m.)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
