MR PATEL: Wow, packed house today. Jeez. Good afternoon, everybody. I don’t have anything off the top. Simon, would you care to kick us off? QUESTION: Sure. The supplemental that came out from the Senate,
some senators yesterday, included a line saying that the funding can’t go to the UN agency
UNRWA. And you’ve obviously suspended new aid to
UNRWA, but does the administration support sort of putting the language in the legislation
so that funding can’t be sent to this agency? MR PATEL: So look,
broadly as it relates to
the draft legislation, I think you saw the statement from the President over the weekend
about the overall package and the administration’s support for it. I am not going to get into sort of the back
and forth or the internal deliberations of how we got to what version of the text or
not. But I think to take a step back, Simon, the
United States is pushing for an immediate and serious investigation into the allegations
at UNRWA. We’ve been talking about those for a coup
le
of weeks now. As you know, the United Nations has already
launched an investigation. The secretary general this morning just announced
an independent review led by former French Foreign Minister Colonna on UNRWA policies
and procedures with recommendations. All of those things will be under review,
I imagine. From the U.S.’s perspective, we want to
see concrete results for these approaches. And meanwhile, we’re going to continue to
consult closely with other donors on how to continue to meet
urgent humanitarian needs
in Gaza. We also simultaneously – as you heard Matt
talk about, we of course want to be able to continue supporting the important work that
is happening in Gaza and the region, and we are looking at what options exist for supporting
civilians in Gaza through partners like the World Food Programme, UNICEF, and other NGOs. When it comes to the supplemental, all of
this of course is public information. The bill includes $10 billion in humanitarian
assistance that the Presi
dent requested. That 10 billion is for global needs, including
those impacted by the war in Ukraine as well as the conflict in Gaza. Of that 10 billion, we expect 1.4 billion
to be planned for Gaza. This is tangible money that we believe will
save lives and have a direct impact on Palestinian civilians. And we will redirect funding for UNRWA to
other partners to provide assistance in Gaza, some of those examples I gave – the World
Food Programme, UNICEF, and other NGOs. This is a process we’re g
oing to continue
to work through with appropriate regional interlocutors and other donor countries as
well. QUESTION: In terms of the importance of UNRWA
itself, yeah, you can divert aid through other agencies. But do you accept that doing so potentially
– if UNRWA, as officials in UNRWA are saying, is really short of money and potentially unable
to continue its operations, that’s going to reduce the impact of any other money you
send to Gaza in other ways, right, in terms of — MR PATEL: We have
not been naïve about how
critical we think UNRWA is both in Gaza but also the regional broadly, and the critical
work that they do to aid and get aid to Palestinian civilians. And that’s why this is something, one, as
it relates to the allegations we took so seriously and appreciate the seriousness at which the
United Nations is taking this; and two, as it relates to the supplemental, we believe
that we can continue to do important work through other NGOs and other partners, and
simultaneously
we’ll continue to have conversations with donor countries about supporting UNRWA
and ways that they can continue doing their important work in the region. QUESTION: And just to clarify, you referenced
this new independent – the assessment that’s going to happen, the review of UNRWA. Does – is the U.S. going to wait until the
outcome of that? That seems like that might take you a little
– quite a while before you make a decision on renewing the UNRWA funding. MR PATEL: I don’t have – I’m not goin
g
to preview a timeline from here. I think we just want to at first see a process
play out, and then we’ll go from there and take it step by step. QUESTION: Can I follow up on that? MR PATEL: Sure, Said. QUESTION: Thank you. MR PATEL: Yeah. QUESTION: I mean, let’s face it. UNRWA is a political issue. It’s being pushed by pro-Israelis and spin
and think tanks that actually sprung for this purpose, because they believe that cutting
off aid to Palestinian refugees will simply liquidate the Palestin
ian issue, that the
right of return that the Palestinians hang on would just simply disappear. So I want to ask you: Is the United States
of America committed to continued funding of UNRWA? MR PATEL: Well, Said, that the – (sound). Whoa, I wonder what that was. Said, obviously there is text in this pending
legislation that would preclude us from doing so. We are an administration that follows the
law. That being said, in this pending legislation
there is $10 billion for humanitarian assistance,
of which 1.4 billion is for humanitarian aid
for Gaza. This is an issue we take very seriously. We also believe, even prior to this conversation
about the supplemental, we have, as I told Simon, been unambiguous, in my opinion, about
the critical work that UNRWA does, not just in Gaza but in other parts of the region as
well. We think that the work they do is critical. They are an important vehicle for getting
humanitarian aid to those who need it. And we’re going to continue to work with
donor
countries and UNRWA, as well as – as they work through this investigation and work
through this internal matter that they’re dealing with, but also broadly to ensure that
the Palestinian civilians that rely on this kind of work are able to get it. QUESTION: Can I have a follow-up? QUESTION: This whole investigation seems to
have been launched because there’s allegedly 12 members of those who attacked on October
7th who are actually working with UNRWA – out of an employee population of 13,000. MR
PATEL: Said, it doesn’t matter — QUESTION: 13 – no, I’m – but — MR PATEL: It doesn’t matter if it’s two
or 12. QUESTION: That’s fine. MR PATEL: People participating in terrorism
— QUESTION: Right. That’s fine. MR PATEL: — in a terrorist attack in which
1,200 individuals were murdered is unacceptable to us. QUESTION: The point – the point — MR PATEL: And that is why we’ve called for
these investigations. QUESTION: I understand. I understand your point. MR PATEL: And we’ve called for – we’ve
temp
orarily put UNRWA funding on pause. But we also have said how important this issue
is, and we want to see it worked through because we know how vital their work is. QUESTION: So how are you responding to Lazzarini
and Guterres, who stated very clearly that UNRWA has funding only till the end of this
month – only till the end of this month, which is a very short month? MR PATEL: Well, that is why it is our hope
that this internal investigation and review is done so expeditiously and done so as qu
ickly
as possible so that there is – as Matt has spoken to previously, there is obligated funding
that the United States had not transferred yet. Simultaneously, we’re going to continue
to work with donor countries to ensure that they can continue supporting UNRWA so this
work can continue. QUESTION: So lastly on this point, so what
would be satisfactory to you in terms of how this investigation – where does it – where
is it leading to, or where should it lead to? MR PATEL: Said, we’ve spoken to
this — QUESTION: Arresting these people – arresting
12 people and so on, and that would be – we put the page behind us and that – is that
— MR PATEL: There of course needs to be accountability. We’ve spoken to this before. It’s not for us to be prescriptive here. We of course are going to look at the assessments
made from this internal investigation and go from there. One, we of course want to see accountability. We want to see steps taken and measures implemented
so something like this can’t h
appen again. And we want to see just an internal review
of policies and procedures to double make sure that something like this isn’t repeated. QUESTION: And on UNRWA, we heard that the
Israeli minister of defense just issued a threat or whatever you want to call it just
a few minutes ago that they are going into Rafah. You have any comment on that? You have any comment on what might happen
next in Rafah, where you have such a concentration of those who have been displaced? MR PATEL: So Said, I’
ve not seen those comments. And certainly, I’m not going to comment
or opine on every military strategy or tactic that we hear discussed or floated or is reported
on, as it relates to the Israelis conducting this operation. What I will just say is that we have been
pretty clear that Rafah is an important conduit for the flow of humanitarian aid into Gaza. It is an important conduit for foreign nationals,
including American citizens and LPRs, to be able to safely leave Gaza. It is also – it is al
so somewhere where
more than a million people are sheltering. And so we of course would want any operation
to be – being conducted in that in that region to take that into mind. But of course I am not going to opine on it
more specifically than that. Let me go to Leon. Nadia, I’ll come to you right after that. Leon, go ahead. QUESTION: I just wanted to come back to the
UNRWA issue. I mean, obviously I think the – well, the
legislation doesn’t look like it’s going to go anywhere. But aside from t
hat, the administration has
approved language to prohibit funding of UNRWA. So I don’t know – how do you reconcile
saying on the one hand that it’s doing a critical job, which you have said publicly,
on the other – also saying that you’re checking with other donors, basically washing
your hands financially of it and leaving it to other donors. How do you reconcile that and accepting the
language to prohibit funding, when you had announced a month ago or a couple of weeks
ago that you were suspen
ding funding? MR PATEL: Well, Leon, in the American system
Congress is a co-equal and a separate branch of government, and all of these things are
discussions, negotiations, deliberations. Again, as I said to Simon, I’m not going
to get into the specifics of how we got to the text that we got. I’m sure our colleagues at the White House
might be happy to walk you through some of that. But we’re not the only ones that have a
say here. And so when it comes to using the dollar of
the American taxpay
er and where it goes and the things that it funds and the things that
it supports, it is not only up to the Executive Branch. And so these are conversations that we have
and policies that we move forward in close coordination with our partners in Congress. I would point you no further than the transcripts
of the past I don’t know how many daily press briefings, where myself, Matt, Secretary
Blinken, have talked about the vital role that UNRWA plays in the region. And that is incredibly indicativ
e of this
administration’s point of view when it comes to their work. QUESTION: Precisely. MR PATEL: Now the text of this legislation
is – where it landed is, of course, a deliberation with Congress. And so simultaneously we’re going to take
steps to ensure that aid can flow through other appropriate partners who do work in
the region like the World Food Programme, like UNICEF, like other NGOs. And we’ll continue to have this conversation
not just with Congress but with donor countries as well.
And we also – I think it’s important to
take a step back. We also still need to see UNRWA work through
its own investigation and work through its process before the United States is ready
to unpause the funding that we have put on pause. This is still very much an active process. We have – while we certainly welcome the
developments that are coming from the United Nations and UNRWA, we’re not ready to announce
or share any change in policy at this time. Nadia, go ahead. QUESTION: Thank you, Veda
nt. Two questions. Since the ICJ ruling on January 26th which
clearly called on Israel to avoid civilian casualties, 900 Palestinians have been killed,
including women and children. So is Israel heeding the message that you
sent to them in terms of the casualties? And what kind of, like, pressure are you putting
on them trying to avoid – I mean, 900 in 10 days is a huge number. MR PATEL: Any number above zero, Nadia, is
heartbreaking. We strongly believe that far too many civilians
have lost the
ir lives in this conflict. Not just far too many civilians; far too many
women and children have lost their lives over the course of this conflict. And so at every step and at every turn, we
will continue to make clear with the Israelis that international humanitarian law needs
to be respected, steps need to be taken to minimize civilian casualties, additional steps
need to be taken to minimize civilian casualties. And I have no doubt that these are the very
kinds of things you are going to hear
Secretary Blinken raise with his counterparts on his
travels in the region right now. QUESTION: Okay. You were alarmed by the settlers’ violence
in the West Bank, to the degree that you put sanction on them. Are you equally alarmed and disturbed by the
Israeli army torture of Palestinians? There is emerging pictures that’s horrifying. I am sure you’ve seen this picture, but
one of them is basically an Israeli soldier – and this is what we know of through the
social media. You must have seen thi
s picture. This soldier has been identified as his name
is Yosee Gamzoo, and he is from the Nahal Brigade. This is an – this is a clear violation of
international law, of the Geneva Convention, et cetera. So just equally as much as the violence of
the settlers, this is the violence of an Israeli soldier. This is an Israeli army that’s an allied
of the United States. Are this is acceptable to you? And what do you do to hold these people accountable? This is what we know from the social media. Thi
s – the guy himself published this picture. Imagine the things that we don’t know. MR PATEL: Thanks – thanks for your question,
Nadia. So first, as it relates to our sanctions,
you’re absolutely right. Peace, stability, and security in the West
Bank is of utmost importance to us, and those participating in activities or actions that
detract from that, that make the West Bank more destabilizing and risk the security situation,
that is of course of great concern to us, and that’s why you saw the U
nited States
take appropriate action last week. In relation to the image that you shared,
I’ve not seen that image specifically. But obviously, it is – it’s deeply troubling. I have no knowledge or information as it relates
to the circumstances surrounding that incident, and I will leave it to the IDF to speak to
those specific situations. But we have been clear to them that the respect
for basic human rights, the respect for humanitarian law needs to be respected. And those who do not comply wi
th that need
to be held accountable. QUESTION: Vedant. QUESTION: So if I share this information with
you, would you raise it with the Israelis? MR PATEL: We — QUESTION: I’m happy to share it with you. MR PATEL: I’m not going to – I’m not
going to get into specific situations here, Nadia. This is not a operation that the United States
is conducting. But when it comes to the impact on civilians,
the treatment of civilians, the things that we see – not just in social media but elsewhere
in our conv
ersations with people on the ground, in our assessments with things on the ground
– we raise those issues with the Israelis, and we’ll continue to do so. QUESTION: Can I just follow up — QUESTION: Thank you. QUESTION: — on sanctions? MR PATEL: Go ahead. QUESTION: You’ve sanctioned these four individuals. The ideological leadership of these individuals
and of all of those people to harness – basically who want the forcible expulsion of Palestinians
sit at the highest levels of the Israeli Governm
ent: the finance minister, the national security
minister. There’s a fundamental contradiction, isn’t
there, in your policy, because you’re sanctioning the followers, but you’re backing the leaders? MR PATEL: We don’t back any leader, or don’t
back the leader of any government. That’s not our approach to this. This is an Israeli Government that we are
working with. And the makeup of any cabinet and any government
is a sovereign decision for that government to do. That’s not something that the Un
ited States
has a say or a sway in. And when we have seen rhetoric from some of
these ministers, from some of these individuals that make up this cabinet, when we see rhetoric
from any member of this particular Israeli cabinet that we think is not just a distraction
but an incitement or something that brings us further away from a two-state solution
or brings us further away from peace and stability in the region, we’ve not hesitated to say
so. QUESTION: But it’s not – it’s not just
rhetoric, be
cause arms transfers go, for example, to the Israeli border police. That is a department controlled by the national
security minister. Those border forces operate in East Jerusalem,
in the West Bank often – rights groups will say – hand-in-glove with these people that
are smashing up Palestinian property. So there is an arms transfer to the very department,
funded by the U.S. taxpayer, of one of these leaders in terms of the national security
minister who controls the border police. MR PATEL: An
d with every transfer of any U.S.
asset, we, of course, have been clear that any end user needs to comply with humanitarian
law, and those who are not should be held accountable. QUESTION: But are you checking that in each
case? MR PATEL: We are having — QUESTION: You’re being — MR PATEL: We – there are a number of vectors
and lines of work that lead into the work we do to assess situations and circumstances
on the ground to make sure that basic humanitarian rights are being protected and follow
ed. Willy, go ahead. QUESTION: Thanks, Vedant. Appreciate it. MR PATEL: Yeah. QUESTION: I was just wondering, Secretary
Blinken’s trip to the region comes on the heels of the French foreign – the new French
Foreign Minister Stéphane Séjourné. I was wondering if there was any sort of coordination
between the two countries? MR PATEL: Well, look, the French, of course,
have been incredible partners, not just as it relates to this conflict but much when
it comes to the United States’s approach to a
number of other areas. I don’t have any specific engagements or
meetings to read out, but throughout all of this you have seen the Secretary engage quite
regularly and with partner countries, allies, as it relates to the broader situation. And that’s something that we’re going
to continue to do. Janne, go ahead. QUESTION: Thank you, Vedant. Two questions. MR PATEL: Yeah. QUESTION: North Korea launched cruise missiles
four times this year at three days’ intervals. Isn’t North Korea cruise missile
launch
a violation of the UN Security Council resolutions? Is there any response from the U.S. itself? MR PATEL: These kinds of actions by the DPRK
are deeply destabilizing, and they are unhelpful and they contribute to greater risk in – and
risk in the region. And so we’ll continue to coordinate closely
trilaterally with the ROK and Japan when it comes to pushing back on some of these malign
and destabilizing actions. QUESTION: On Russia, the Russian ministry
of foreign affairs defended North
Korea and criticized the South Korea, saying the South
Korean Government had biased reporting on North Korea’s nuclear preemptive strikes. And Russia denied North Korea and Russians’
trade and warned South Korea about such report. How can you comment on — MR PATEL: Well, Janne, I’m not aware of
this specific report that you’re mentioning, but what we do know is that there is a deepening
relationship between the DPRK and Russia. We have seen that. We’ve seen that over the past many months,
includ
ing the transfer of munitions from the DPRK to Russia. And we believe that these kinds of actions
and activities are deeply concerning and destabilizing. And we’ll continue to work in close coordination
to fend off against those. Jenny has had her hand up patiently, and then
we’ll make sure to get to the room. QUESTION: Thanks, Vedant. MR PATEL: Go ahead. QUESTION: Prime Minister Netanyahu said earlier
today that he will not end his offensive in Gaza until the leadership of Hamas is destroyed. H
e said this could take months. We’ve seen this timeline shift over and
over and over again. I just wonder what the U.S.’s comment is
on the prospect of this taking many more months. MR PATEL: Our hope and one of the things that
the Secretary is continuing to work towards and work on is ending this conflict as soon
as we can. There is a convergence amongst all of us in
wanting to see that happen, including many and all in the Israeli system, and we’ll
continue to work in close coordination with t
hem to that goal. QUESTION: So it would be acceptable to the
U.S. if this continues for months longer? MR PATEL: I’m not going to prescribe – I’m
not going to prescribe a timeline and I’m not saying that any prescription of a timeline
would be acceptable to us or not. What I am saying is that we’re going to
continue to work with the Israelis to end this conflict as soon as possible, and over
the course of its duration, continue to push for the flow of humanitarian aid into Gaza,
continue to work
tirelessly so that the hostages can be released, and continuing to allow for
conditions so that foreign nationals who may be interested in departing Gaza can doing
– can do so while simultaneously working towards some kind of longer-term solution
here that gets us out of a endless cycle of violence. You’ve heard the Secretary talk about that
before, and we continue to feel strongly that a two-state solution is that solution forward. QUESTION: And you spoke a little earlier to
the importance of
Rafah. Do you have any updates on the amount of aid
getting in — MR PATEL: Yeah. QUESTION: — the number of Americans who
are leaving through that passage? MR PATEL: I have a couple of things. So first, since October 7th, the State Department
has assisted nearly 600 individuals, including U.S. citizens, lawful permanent residents,
and their family members with entry to Egypt from Gaza at the Rafah border crossing. We feel that the vast majority of U.S. citizens
who are seeking our assistance have
reached out to us already, yet – but we’ll continue
to engage appropriately through consular channels to any American citizen who might be interested
in departing. On some of the metrics on the humanitarian
questions that you raised, on February 4th, 207 trucks with food, medicine, and other
supplies entered the Gaza Strip through the Rafah and Kerem Shalom crossings. As of February 4th, more than 10,500 trucks
with humanitarian aid entered Gaza since October 21st. Again, you’ve heard me say th
is before:
This, of course, is not nearly enough, but we’re continuing to work with regional actors,
including the Government of Israel and the Government of Egypt, to do what we can to
increase flow, and that’s one of the things I expect the Secretary will continue to press
on in his travels. Nick. QUESTION: A couple of China-related questions. MR PATEL: Can I see if anybody else has anything
else in the region — QUESTION: Yeah, absolutely. MR PATEL: — before I come back to you? QUESTION: Follo
wing Jenny’s? MR PATEL: Okay, go ahead. Yeah. QUESTION: Following Jenny’s, you said that
you’re helping – you believe all the American citizens have reached out already. At one point the embassy and the Americans
were helping non-U.S. citizen Gazans who worked for U.S. media or U.S. NGOs, et cetera, and
you stopped that. Is there a reason that you stopped that, and
any chance of restarting it? MR PATEL: Look, our priority in these circumstances,
of course, are American citizens, legal permanent
residents, and their eligible family members. But I’m happy to look into if there’s
anything around that circumstance that we can share. Happy to follow back up with you. QUESTION: Can I follow up on that? MR PATEL: On the region? QUESTION: Yes, on the region. QUESTION: (Off-mike.) MR PATEL: Okay. All right, hold on, everybody. We’ll get to you. Guita. QUESTION: Thank you, Vedant. You just referenced the two-state solution. The Secretary has been following that up during
his trips. The Islamic R
epublic of Iran says that they
also want peace and security in the region. They want a country for the Palestinians. How do you see this claim by them? Is there common ground here? MR PATEL: If the Iranian regime is interested
in peace and stability, they could stop being the world’s largest exporter of terrorism. That would be a great starting point. Alex. QUESTION: To follow up on that — MR PATEL: Yeah. QUESTION: — what can you tell us about the
impact of the weekend strikes, particularly abou
t the – there’s a growing criticism
that if the aim is to stop Iran, then why going after two other nations instead of Iran
while simultaneously saying that you are not seeking to expand these tensions in the region? MR PATEL: Alex, it is of course about holding
these Iran-aligned malign proxy groups accountable. And so what these strikes were on Friday,
you saw the United States conduct strikes on more than 85 locations at 75 facilities
in Iraq and Syria. Three were in Iraq and four were in Syr
ia,
and these locations were used by the IRGC and affiliated militias to attack U.S. forces. These locations were carefully selected, and
there is clear and irrefutable evidence that the facilities targeted were used by groups
and individuals directly involved in the attacks on the Americans. They included command and control centers,
rocket, missile, and drone storage facilities, and other things of that nature and which
we have credible information to believe that they were directly involved i
n the attacks
on American personnel. QUESTION: Follow-up to — QUESTION: Can you just come back to me on
Russia later? MR PATEL: Okay. QUESTION: Related follow-on to that? MR PATEL: Okay. QUESTION: Follow-up. MR PATEL: Diyar, and then I’ll come to you,
Guita. Go ahead. QUESTION: Thank you, Vedant. On the same topic. MR PATEL: Yeah. QUESTION: The Iraqi Government says that we
have been not informed by the U.S. Government, but after the attack I was attending the press
call by John Kirby and he sai
d we did inform the Iraqi Government. So have you informed the Iraqi Government
prior to the attacks? MR PATEL: So Iraq, like every country in the
region, understood that there would be a response after the deaths of our soldiers. As for the specific response on Friday, there
was not a pre-notification. We informed the Iraqis immediately after the
strikes occurred. QUESTION: All right. And one follow-up. And how do you see the Iraqi reaction to that
attack? They summoned your chargé d’affaires,
the
U.S. embassy chargé d’affaires, and also they said this is an attack on the Iraqi Security
Forces and on the civilian residential buildings and citizens. Then how do you see that reaction? MR PATEL: So let me say a couple of things. First, our colleagues at the Pentagon are
continuing to do their battle damage assessment. But again, these targets were carefully selected,
and as I said, they included command and control centers; rocket, missile, drone storage facilities. We believe that these
were credible targets
and picked in a way to minimize and avoid civilian casualties. I’ve seen some of those allegations; allegations
of casualties among Iraqi Security Forces because of these strikes on these terrorist-operated
facilities are concerning. It would mean that these rogue Iran-aligned
militia groups are working in proximity to official Iraqi Security Forces. But again, these battle damage assessments
are still ongoing and I don’t have anything conclusive to offer from up here, and
I’m
sure my colleagues at the Pentagon would be able to speak more to that. Go ahead, Guita. QUESTION: Thank you. Reportedly there’s – there has been another
drone attack on a U.S. base in Syria today. There have been no U.S. casualties reported
yet, but six or seven Kurdish fighters have been reportedly killed. Now, the retaliation against the Islamic Republic
of Iran is in relation to killing of American troops. What about allies? Would the administration take any action when
it comes to kill
ing of allies? MR PATEL: I’m certainly not going to preview
any actions from up here. But look, we believe that all of these kinds
of activities are dangerous, they’re reckless, they’re incredibly destabilizing, and they
are unsafe. And so we’ll take appropriate steps to hold
those accountable. I don’t have any assessment to offer on
this specific circumstance, but I think you heard National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan
pretty clearly this weekend talk about how these initial strikes were – wo
uld be just
the start. So – but again, I’m not going to preview
anything from here. Michel, go ahead. QUESTION: Vedant — QUESTION: Yeah — MR PATEL: I’m going to work the room a little
bit, Guita, because a lot of people have their hands up. Michel, go ahead. QUESTION: Yeah, on Iraq, do you have any comments
on the assassination of Naji al-Kaabi, one of the Asaib Ahl al-Haq leader, in Iraq? And reports say that the U.S. was involved
in this assassination. Can you confirm that? MR PATEL: I don’t h
ave anything to offer
on that. I’m happy to look at that. I don’t believe it to be true, Michel, but
I will double-check. QUESTION: And do you have any reaction to
the drone attack on a base housing U.S. troops in eastern Syria that killed six SDF fighters? And do you consider this attack an attack
on the U.S.? MR PATEL: I think Guita just asked that question
right before. QUESTION: But do you consider it as an attack
on the U.S., or you’re not — MR PATEL: Michel, again, these kinds of actions
a
re incredibly destabilizing, they are unsafe, they are – increase risk and they put civilians,
servicemembers, including servicemembers of other partner forces, in harm’s way. And so we will take appropriate action, but
I don’t have anything to preview from up here. QUESTION: And what about the timing of this
attack? MR PATEL: I don’t – I’m not going to
speculate on the timing. I’m going to go back to Nick, who’s patiently
been waiting. QUESTION: Thank you. Thanks very much. MR PATEL: Yeah. QUES
TION: A couple of China questions. A report last night bringing some renewed
attention to the fact that Chinese nationals are the largest-growing ethnic group trying
to illegally cross the southern border. A major driver of that is because of the scaleback
of visas issued to Chinese nationals. What can you say about bilateral discussions
and increasing those visa numbers? And then separately, there are reports that
students, Chinese students with legal visas, have been getting harassed and inter
rogated
at airports coming back from the holidays, and some not being admitted. And the PRC ambassador called it absolutely
unacceptable. Have you had any discussions with PRC counterparts
about this or any comment? MR PATEL: Let me say a couple things. I think, Nick, for – on both of those questions,
I think the operational and technical details of that would be better answered by our colleagues
at the Department of Homeland Security. On the People’s Republic of China broadly,
look, people-to-p
eople ties continues to be a topic of discussion in our continued bilateral
engagements, and candidly, it’s an area where we believe there is opportunity for
shared cooperation. I believe the number – and someone will
have to fact-check me on this – we have about 300,000 Chinese students studying in
the United States. And so there is of course opportunity for
greater collaboration and cooperation in these spaces. As it relates to visas, our visa process is
quite rigorous and quite solid, and of
course we’re not going to – it is done so – without
speaking to anybody’s specific visa circumstance, the process is adjudicated in the utmost strict,
rigorous, and legal manner, and so don’t really have anything else to offer on that. Go ahead. QUESTION: Thank you. Two questions, India-related. MR PATEL: Sure. QUESTION: One, Assistant Secretaries of State
for South and Central Asia Donald Lu was in India and Maldives last week. I wanted to check with you – do you have
a readout of his trip to M
aldives? And what is the U.S. assessment of the situation
in Maldives right now? MR PATEL: I don’t have any readout from
here but let me check with the team and see if we can get back to you on that. QUESTION: And second question: A day after
the State Department notified the Congress about a decision to sell MQ-9B drones to India,
Senator Ben Cardin, chairman of Senate Foreign Relations Committee, issued a statement saying
that he had long negotiations with the State Department on that issue. C
an you give us a sense what his main concerns
were, and have all these concerns been addressed? MR PATEL: I’m not going to characterize
Senator Cardin’s comments. I would refer you to our colleagues at the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee to speak to that. But what I can say is that this sale, we believe,
will provide India with an enhanced maritime security and maritime domain awareness capability. It offers India outright ownership of these
aircraft, and this is something that we’ll continue
to deepen our cooperation with our
Indian partners on. Go ahead. QUESTION: Thank you. Thank you. MR PATEL: Yeah. QUESTION: Just a few days, sir, remain in
the Pakistani elections. There is a question mark on the fairness of
the electoral process as former prime minister and a popular leader Imran Khan behind bars,
not even allowed to contest elections. His political party symbol, a cricket bat,
is also banned. United States always stood up for the democratic
values and freedom of speech. What i
s your take on the scenario? MR PATEL: We’re continuing to monitor Pakistan’s
electoral process quite closely, and as we have said, we want to see that process take
place in a way that facilitates broad participation with respect for freedom of expression, assembly,
and associations. We have concerns of the – all incidents
of violence and restrictions on media freedom; freedom of expression, including internet
freedom; and peaceful and – peaceful assembly and association. We’re concerned by some
of the infringements
that we’ve seen in that space. Pakistanis deserve to exercise their fundamental
right to choose their future leaders through free and fair elections without fear, violence,
or intimidation, and it is ultimately for the people of Pakistan to decide their political
future. Go ahead. Yeah, go ahead. QUESTION: The UN secretary-general is convening
a conference this month to discuss about international and regional approach to Afghanistan. MR PATEL: Sure. QUESTION: Meanwhile Tal
iban have refused to
work with the new UN envoy in Afghanistan. Do you support this initiative? And what the U.S. is doing to support the
role of the new UN envoy for Afghanistan? MR PATEL: Look, we believe it is important
to be very clear about our State Department position is that we have no near-term plans
to return any diplomatic functions to Kabul. We engage with many Afghans, including the
Taliban, both inside and outside the country, but human rights and the return to school
for women and
girls are at the forefront of our engagement. And working with our allies and partners – which,
of course, the UN is a key partner – we’ll continue to press the Taliban to reverse these
discriminatory edicts, particularly those that disproportionately affect women and girls
and those that we believe will affect any normalization of relations. And it’s contingent on the respect for the
rights of all Afghans. Go ahead, in the back. Yeah. QUESTION: Thank you. On Russia, last week Russia presented
evidence
that Ukraine used a Patriot missile system to shoot down a Russian plane with 65 Ukrainian
prisoners of war on board. Are you aware of this? Are you going to look into this incident and
ask questions – Ukrainian partners? MR PATEL: Is it the same level of credible
evidence that makes Russia claim that they have Crimea or that all the territory that
they took from Ukraine is theirs? QUESTION: So you don’t believe Russian claims
that — MR PATEL: No, I’m just following up with
a question,
is if it’s the same level of credible evidence that the Russians have showed
when it comes to their track record on telling the truth about other things. QUESTION: Russia published pictures of the
Patriot missile system. MR PATEL: As it relates to the specific incident
that you’re referring to, I will let our partners in Ukraine speak to that. But when it comes to credible information
coming from Russia, they don’t really have a lot of legs to stand on given their immense
track record of disinfo
rmation, not just in the region but also broadly. QUESTION: One more question. MR PATEL: Go ahead, yeah. QUESTION: So the United Nations secretary-general
today condemned another Ukrainian attack that killed 28 people the other day, including
one child. An American-made HIMARS rocket was used for
this attack. Are you aware of this? Are you planning to condemn it or anything
else? MR PATEL: I’ve seen those reports. But again, given the track record that Russia
has, we have no way of independently
verifying that information, so – go ahead. QUESTION: Okay. MR PATEL: Yeah. QUESTION: Thank you, sir. MR PATEL: Yeah. QUESTION: Every day, the United States emphasized
the necessity of protecting civilians in Gaza and ensuring they receive their necessity
stuff. However, the commitment does not seem to translate
in action, especially after United States suspended funding UNRWA based on suspicions
only. This situation raised questions — MR PATEL: It wasn’t based on suspicions. I just want to be v
ery clear. There were credible allegations, so – I
don’t mean to interrupt you, but I think – I take issue with the premise of your
question. QUESTION: Even few member — MR PATEL: It doesn’t – as I said to Said,
it doesn’t matter if it’s two or 12. We think any participation in terrorism is
incredibly troubling and problematic. It needs to be held accountable, and that’s
why we were glad to see UNRWA take these steps to internally investigate into what happened. QUESTION: Isn’t United States tru
ly – and
I couldn’t imagine incapable to provide people with their necessary stuff, their essential
needs, and to protect them. Every day until now civilian bomb, the majority
of them children; yesterday, today, before. And also I have friends and cousins in Gaza;
they don’t have – there is huge shortage. They don’t have their essential needs. I can’t imagine that United States incapable
to do that — MR PATEL: So — QUESTION: — if it seriously or sincerely
wants to help civilian people in Gaza. M
R PATEL: — since October 7th, we have been
unambiguous about the importance of getting increased, regular flow of humanitarian aid
into Gaza. And candidly, it is because of American diplomacy
that we have been able to see aid trucks flow into Gaza helping the Palestinian people. And as I was telling Jenny, on February 4th,
207 trucks with food, medicine, and other supplies entered Gaza. We are looking at a total of 10,500 trucks
since October 21st. I’m not at all saying that this is enough,
by a
ny means. We need more and we will always continue to
push for more. But this is at the forefront of the Secretary’s
mind, it’s at the forefront of our mind, and we continue to believe that UNRWA does
vital, integral, and important work in the region. And that is why we’re going to continue
to engage closely with donor countries, but also we look forward to seeing UNRWA work
through its – this investigation, through the UN as well. QUESTION: Look, my second question is: What
human rights violati
on will Israel commit before America stop funding the IDF? Everything is targeting in Gaza, even the
dead people. MR PATEL: I spoke a little bit to this when
answering Jenny’s question. We believe that every possible step needs
to be taken to minimize civilian casualties. That’s something we’ll continue to press
the Israeli Government, and we continue to believe that when international humanitarian
law isn’t complied with that there needs to be accountability. Jackson, go ahead. QUESTION: Thanks
, Vedant. What’s your reaction to Speaker Johnson
and House GOP leadership saying the supplemental is dead on arrival in the House? What message does it send to the rest of the
world? And Buckingham Palace just announced that
King Charles has been diagnosed with cancer. Any reaction to this news surrounding his
majesty? MR PATEL: I just – I didn’t see that report
before coming out. So certainly first and foremost, our thoughts
are with the king. That’s really – with the king and his
family. That
’s incredibly sad news, and hope that
– actually, that’s just – that’s very sad, and I’m very sorry for the king and
his family. On your first question, I think to quote Secretary
Blinken, there is no magic pot of money. There is no alternative path here. This funding is critical not just – it’s
funding for a number of areas. It’s – it’s critical for continuing
to support Ukraine as it fights for its sovereignty and territorial integrity against Russia. It is critical to our partners in Israel a
s
they continue to work to hold the Hamas terrorists accountable for these October 7th terrorist
attacks. And as I said a little bit at the beginning,
it is critical to humanitarian aid that we believe is needed in all corners of the world,
including those impacted by the war in Ukraine as well as the conflict that’s ongoing in
Gaza as well. So we’ll continue to work with our partners
in Congress. We believe that it’s necessary. And as the Secretary said, there is no – there
is no magic pot of m
oney. Go ahead. QUESTION: Thank you, Vedant. Two quick question, if I may. MR PATEL: Sure. QUESTION: May I know the – may I know the
status of implementing visa restrictions under 3C visa policy for those who undermining elections,
given the concern that the recent election in Bangladesh did not reflect the will of
the people of Bangladesh? MR PATEL: So I don’t have any updates or
changes to offer when it comes to policy. My understanding is that these policies don’t
sunset just because the elec
tion is over, but I don’t have any updates to offer. QUESTION: Still that policies exist? MR PATEL: That is – yes. There is no change in policy. QUESTION: Yeah. One more on the ruling regime in Bangladesh
has filed a fresh corruption charge against Nobel laureate Professor Muhammad Yunus. The government is restricting his ability
to travel abroad through another court order. A coalition of 243 global leaders, including
125 Nobel laureates, expresses concern over the judicial harassment of Profes
sor Muhammad
Yunus; 12 bipartisan U.S. senators, led by Senator Dick Durbin, call for an halt to all
harassment. How does the State Department view the prime
minister political vendetta against Professor Muhammad Yunus? MR PATEL: Look, we share concerns voiced by
other international observers that these cases may represent a misuse of Bangladesh’s labor
laws to – as a way to intimidate Doctor Yunus. And our hope is that we would encourage the
Bangladeshi Government to ensure a fair and transpare
nt legal process for Doctor Yunus
as the appeals process continues. Alex. QUESTION: Thank you, Vedant. Do you have anything on this debate in Hungarian
parliament about Sweden’s NATO bid? Orban’s MPs didn’t show up. What do you think why Orban is doing what
he is doing? MR PATEL: Hungary is the last NATO Ally to
ratify NATO’s membership, and we are glad that Hungary’s parliament held that session
today. At the same time, we are disappointed that
the ruling party blocked the opportunity for a vot
e by boycotting the session. Hungary has said that it supports Sweden’s
NATO accession, and it has also said that Sweden has fulfilled its commitments and is
ready to become a NATO Ally. We believe the matter of Sweden’s NATO accession
has been settled, and our hope is that we can work through this final process expeditiously. QUESTION: Thank you. And going back to Russia, if I may — MR PATEL: Uh-huh. QUESTION: Putin is expected to visit NATO
member Türkiye next week, and according to Turkish of
ficials President Erdogan is planning
to focus on a new way, quote/unquote, to allow Ukrainian grain exports through the Black
Sea. What is the department’s view on the trip
and the topic? MR PATEL: So first, I will leave it to our
Turkish partners to speak to their own engagements and their own foreign policy. If any country is able to play a meaningful
role in stopping Russia from some of its malign behavior, we certainly would welcome it. And then the topic of Ukrainian grain, Alex
– you know
, as someone who has followed this the whole time, that Türkiye was instrumental
in the – in getting the Black Sea Grain Initiative accomplished when it was in existence,
and so we continue to feel that it’s critical that Ukrainian grain get to the places that
it needs to go. And if there is credible progress that can
be made in that space, it certainly would be a welcome one. Ryan, you had your hand up. QUESTION: One more question on — MR PATEL: I’m going to work the room, Alex. You’ve gotten a
couple questions already. Ryan, go ahead. QUESTION: Quick question on sanctions. When you guys implemented sanctions on Yemen,
you announced kind of extraordinary carveouts to make sure that you didn’t exacerbate
the humanitarian crisis there. When you warned that Venezuela may soon be
getting hit with sanctions on its oil industry, there was no kind of – there was no application
of those same carveouts. That includes the recent sanctions that were
applied to Venezuela. So if the goal is to mak
e sure the humanitarian
situation doesn’t deteriorate in any country, why not make the carveouts from Yemen kind
of universal to sanctions applications? MR PATEL: So I’d have to check the technical
specifics, Ryan. But just broadly speaking, when it come to
our approach to sanctions, export controls, things like that, we have been very clear
to try and leave carveouts so that humanitarian aid, lifesaving aid, is not impeded. That’s just not the case in Yemen – it’s
also the case in Russia, other
places as well. But I am happy to check into the technical
specifics of this circumstance and see what we might have to offer on this? Jalil, and then let’s close it out. Or – then we’ll come back to Simon, then
we’ll wrap. Go ahead. QUESTION: Thank you very much, Vedant. MR PATEL: A quick one, my friend. QUESTION: A little different interesting question
for you. Today – today AFP reported that ElevenLab
created this voiceover of President Biden, and today Wall Street has reported that a
Twitte
r big financer is a LSD and some other drugs user. So as big social media platforms are playing
a big role in the electioneering in the U.S. and internationally, how difficult is it making
your job, this whole social media influencing and the money that is spent there behind promoting
and downplaying leaders? And the same thing just happened with President
Biden just recently, so how is the State Department handling this whole issue? MR PATEL: So as it relates to your second
question, I really d
on’t have any comment for you. But look, when it comes to social media, especially
the dis- and misinformation that can exist on social media in foreign countries, that
of course is something of grave concern to us. And that is exactly why we have the Global
Engagement Center. It’s something Special Envoy Rubin is immensely
focused on. Under Secretary Liz Allen is working immensely
on this as well. And we have a number of lines of efforts across
the department, including through the Secretary, i
n which we’re working to combat mis- and
disinformation in places around the world. Simon. QUESTION: Just one follow-up, please. MR PATEL: All right. QUESTION: Recently, Israeli Prime Minister
Netanyahu had an interview with French TV and he made this two comments. I see that the U.S. and Israel of course are
very close partners. He made these two comments. One was that this is a battle of civilization. Doesn’t this sound very extremist from a
leader like — MR PATEL: I’ve not seen the prime mini
ster’s
interview, and I will leave it to his office to clarify his comments. Simon, go ahead. QUESTION: Yeah, I want to ask about events
in Senegal. MR PATEL: Sure. QUESTION: Do you have any response to the
events that happened over the weekend there? And I wonder, and more broadly, the Secretary
just came back from a trip to that region. I know the U.S. has been pretty concerned
about the sort of spate of both coups and undemocratic things. Do you classify this as a coup, as I think
some people
have? And how does this speak to your broader strategy
for that region when countries kind of keep going down this path? MR PATEL: Sure. So first, we are deeply concerned about the
situation in Senegal and are closely monitoring developments. Senegal has a strong tradition of democracy
and peaceful transitions of power. And while we acknowledge allegations of irregularities,
we are concerned about the disruption of the presidential election calendar, and we urge
all participants in Senegal’s po
litical process to engage in – peacefully, to engage
peacefully in the important effort to hold free, fair, and timely elections. We also call on Senegalese authorities to
restore internet access immediately and to respect freedom of expression, including for
members of the press. I will also just add, since you asked, Simon,
in terms of how the U.S. supports the Senegalese people’s commitment to democracy in a number
of ways, we’ve got lines of effort through technical and financial support as
well as
working directly with election authorities and civil society. QUESTION: And too early to say whether – whether
it’s a coup or not? MR PATEL: I don’t have any assessment to
offer for you on that. QUESTION: (Off-mike.) MR PATEL: All right, thanks, everybody. Thanks, everybody. QUESTION: Thank you.
Comments