Department Press Briefing – October 21, 2024

Article Index

• ISRAEL / PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES / LEBANONMOLDOVA
• RUSSIA / UKRAINE
• UKRAINE / RUSSIA / NORTH KOREA
• TÜRKIYE
• IRAQ
• ISRAEL / PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES / LEBANON
• PAKISTAN
• ISRAEL / PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES / LEBANON
• DEPARTMENT

1:08 p.m. EDT

MR PATEL: Sorry for making you all wait a little bit more than two minutes. I have just one very brief thing off the top, and then I'm happy to dive right into your questions.

So the Secretary will be wheels up later this afternoon, heading to Israel and other countries in the Middle East. In Israel, the Secretary will reaffirm the United States ironclad commitment to Israel's security and emphasize advancing enduring peace and security for Israelis and Palestinians alike.

Throughout the region, Secretary Blinken will discuss the importance of bringing the war in Gaza to an end, securing the release of all hostages, and alleviating the suffering of the Palestinian people. He will continue discussions with counterparts on post-conflict period planning and emphasize the need to chart a new path forward that enables Palestinians to rebuild their lives and realize their aspirations free from Hamas's tyranny.

The Secretary will also underscore that additional food, medicine, and other urgently needed humanitarian aid must be delivered to civilians in Gaza.

He will also discuss the need to reach a diplomatic resolution in the conflict between Israel and Hizballah that fully implements UN Security Council Resolution 1701 and allows civilians on both sides of the Blue Line to return to their homes.

And lastly, he will reaffirm the U.S. commitment to work with partners across the region to de-escalate tensions and providing lasting stability.

So with that, Matt, you want to kick us off?

QUESTION: Sure. Just on the trip real -

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: - briefly, what other countries is he going to?

MR PATEL: So Matt, I will let the travel team announce other stops as it relates to this schedule as the trip progresses. At this point, we'll - we can certainly share that he will be going to Israel, but additional stops are to be announced.

QUESTION: Okay. And then on this whole leaked document thing on the intelligence assessment of Israel's preparations for - is that going to - does that play any - is that a problem for him on this current trip? Is that an issue of concern?

MR PATEL: So I can't say that it has come up in any of the bilateral or diplomatic conversations that we've had. What I can say is that we have seen these reports as well. And as the President said earlier this morning, we're certainly concerned about them. But in terms of the specifics as it relates to this incident, I will let the Department of Defense, the Intelligence Community, and DOJ speak to it. And I certainly don't expect it to have any bearing as it relates to the Secretary's - not only his travels, but the objectives that the Secretary is bringing to this trip.

QUESTION: Okay. Thank you.

MR PATEL: Great. Simon, go ahead.

QUESTION: Yeah. So with the Secretary on his way following last week's death of Yahya Sinwar, would the - after his death, the administration came out very quickly saying we see an opportunity to bring an end to this war; we want to get a ceasefire deal. But in the intervening time, the Israelis seem to have sort of doubled down on their approach. There's been a lot of death in northern Gaza. They're also bombing Beirut. Do you feel like that message, that this is a time to take advantage of this moment to end the war, has been heard from the Israeli side?

MR PATEL: Well, Simon, that's exactly why he is going to the region to have these very important conversations with partners in Israel and counterparts in other countries as well. Let's not forget where we were just a couple of months prior, in which the Government of Israel had indicated that it had supported the bridging proposal that was in line with the contours of what President Biden had announced earlier in the spring when we were talking about what was needed to achieve a ceasefire in Gaza. And Sinwar continued to be an obstacle.

Obviously, we certainly are not going to speculate on the leadership of Hamas or what form that takes. And certainly the same decision that was in front of Mr. Sinwar, the - that same decision is in front of Hamas in whatever it's leadership will be, in that whether they want to end the suffering of the Palestinian people, if they want to end the suffering that has been brought about them.

So we expect the Secretary to talk about all of these issues. We feel strongly that there is an opportunity to move the ball forward as it relates to getting a ceasefire accomplished. I'm not going to speculate on any immediate end product or outcome, but we feel that it is important to engage, not just with the Israelis but also other partners in the region to continue to have these important conversations for all the reasons that you mentioned. There continues to be a need to address the humanitarian situation. We obviously want to ultimately see the violence to stop as well. So these are all things that we'll continue to discuss.

QUESTION: And at this point, just to - so we understand where we are, there isn't - like there isn't anyone who has emerged in Hamas who you are now negotiating with through the intermediary?

MR PATEL: Not to my knowledge. Of course, I will let our mediators speak for themselves and let them speak to what kind of engagements they may or may not have with Hamas. But Matt spoke a little bit about this on Thursday. In the aftermath of Haniyeh's death, you saw there was some sort of semi-public process in which Hamas had indicated who its new leadership was. I have no reason to think that a similar process would not take place in the ensuing time ahead.

QUESTION: And you mentioned the humanitarian situation. It seems like things have only got worse in northern Gaza. You had this 30-day ultimatum that you've given to the Israelis. I wonder if you can give us an update on - have they made any progress towards the - what the - what was laid out in the letter?

MR PATEL: So as we talked about last week, we have seen some progress on some of these things. We - as we saw, we saw the - last week, the reopening of the route from Jordan. We also saw the Erez crossing in the north reopen, talking about some of the efforts that we saw last week.

Look, certainly nobody in the U.S. Government is going to stand in front of you and say that we are satisfied or find the humanitarian situation in any part of Gaza satisfactory. And these are one of the things that we expect the Secretary to raise directly and discuss, not just with partners in Israel but other counterpart countries on what more can be done to get humanitarian aid into Gaza.

A number of border crossings, to answer your question specifically, Simon, are open. We are seeing truckloads enter the Gaza strip, and we'll continue to press for more. Absolutely more is needed - more food, more water, more humanitarian aid overall.

QUESTION: Just on the situation in northern Gaza, I mean, it doesn't seem like the humanitarian situation has improved dramatically, and there's been an increase of bombings, lots of deaths reported, and lots of airstrikes. I wonder if the people of Gaza, especially those in northern Gaza, based on your rhetoric after the death of Sinwar might have thought that this spelled positive news, but then the weekend probably hasn't left them with that feeling. So what would you say to those people who are saying: Well, why aren't we getting humanitarian aid in? Why are we still being hit with these airstrikes?

MR PATEL: Well, a couple of things. A couple of things, Simon. First, as it relates to the letter that Secretary Blinken and Secretary Austin sent to Israeli counterparts, it had a 30-day stipulation, and there were a number of factors in that letter, of course, in which that we have not seen the totality of progress achieved. That being said, we have seen some positive steps in the right direction from last week, and we have seen some of that continue broadly speaking. Of course, more needs to be done.

But the broader point here, Simon, is that entities in the region are faced with a choice now. Whatever the leadership of Hamas looks like - and Hamas as a whole, they have a choice on whether they want to engage meaningfully in continuing the conversations that had taken place earlier in the year, when we were talking about achieving a ceasefire in Gaza. We think that continues to be the best path forward in which we'll alleviate the humanitarian suffering of the Palestinian people but also allow the remaining hostages - of which there continue to remain seven American citizens are able to return home. And that continues to be an enduring priority for us, and I know it is for others in the region as well.

Leon.

QUESTION: Yeah, I understand the Secretary feels important to continue to engage in the region, as we you were saying. What do you think his leverage or the U.S. in general leverage is two weeks ahead of the elections going back to the region? Are his hands tied? Or is going to be listened to? Can anything happen or change?

MR PATEL: Leon, I kind of respectfully disagree with the premise of the question, and I'm going to invoke what many of you have heard Secretary Blinken say pretty regularly, is that in this department, in his role as Secretary of State, and I would say that extends to all of us that work for him, we don't do or engage in politics. We are engaged in policy. And what I can say unequivocally is that pursuing a ceasefire, as it relates to Gaza - pursuing a ceasefire in Gaza is in the interest of, of course, the Palestinian people, because it will allow an additional influx of humanitarian aid, create the conditions hopefully for further conversations to happen so that we can see a independent Palestinian state and a Gaza Strip that is no longer a springboard for terrorism on the Israeli people, and a Gaza Strip that is hopefully unified with the West Bank as an independent state.

It is in the interest of the Israeli people because, again, for far too many years they have been living under the threat of terrorism and proxy groups and malign actors in the region. It is of course in the interest of the United States and it's in the interest of the - of American citizens. First, the Middle East region is a region in which there are a number of American citizens who live there and call it home. But beyond that, the United States, the American people, it is in their interest to see a region pull itself out of these endless cycles of violence that we have seen for far too many years, that date back further than October 7th.

So it's not about leverage, Leon. It is what do we want to see that is the best thing that can happen for the region, that is in the interests of the American people. And pursuing a ceasefire in Gaza, continuing to have conversations with counterparts of what a post-conflict period can look like - all of these things are in the United States interest, and all of these things are in the interest of the American people. And that is true irregardless of whatever may come when it comes to our elections.

QUESTION: Yeah, I'm not so sure about that. But just to move on very quickly, Lebanon. Do you condone strikes against financial institutions that strike the affiliates to Hizballah? And there's now considerable, considerable damage in southern Beirut.

MR PATEL: So -

QUESTION: Is it going to become another Gaza?

MR PATEL: Look, Leon, we have been pretty clear and consistent about the fact that we do not want to see regular and daily strikes into Beirut. As it relates to these specific financial institutions that you're asking about, Leon, I've seen those reports, and I'd let the IDF speak to its current operations. I from up here could not offer any analysis on what kind of role they may or may not have had as it relates to Hizballah's broader infrastructure, whether it be financial or otherwise. I'm not saying that they did or didn't. I'm just saying I can't offer that assessment from up here.

Broadly, though, our call continues to be the same, that Israel needs to do everything it can to not target civilian infrastructure and abide by international humanitarian law, and in all of its operations needs to take every possible measure to minimize impacts on civilians and civilian infrastructure. This is something that Secretary Blinken has raised consistently with engagements that he's had with counterparts, but it's also something that President Biden raised with the prime minister earlier in the year as well.

Nick, go ahead.

QUESTION: There's new reporting that the State Department is investigating an IDF unit for alleged sexual assault of Palestinian detainees. Is that true? And if so, what additional detail can you provide on that?

And then separately, just wanted to ask if the State Department is still facilitating flights out of Lebanon.

MR PATEL: So on your first question, Nick, I just wouldn't speak to deliberative processes in detail. What I can say is that in any country where we have a security relationship, we of course have processes in place to assess and look at things when certain facts are raised or facts are brought to the United States. In all these places, it's our obligations to do so. But I - what I can say is that I have no news to share or anything to announce in the context of any sort of policy designation with respect to Israel, and as I said, we wouldn't speak to deliberative and ongoing processes.

And on Lebanon, so I appreciate your question. A couple of updates on that. So our most recent U.S. Government-offered flight was on Thursday of this past week, on Thursday, October 17th, to Doha, and we expect another flight to take place on October 23rd, this coming Wednesday. As many of you who have been following this issue closely, we will continue to organize flights based on demand. Obviously, with the next flight being on Wednesday, we have moved away from a daily cadence, but we will continue to look at what demand is and make adjustments to the contract as we need in either direction, and we'll continue to assist U.S. citizens with seats on commercial flights, which are available daily to a range of destinations.

Camilla.

QUESTION: Thanks. Biden's envoy, Amos Hochstein, is in Lebanon. He had said that UN Resolution 1701 is not enough and that Israel and Lebanon need to be working on a formula that brings an end to this conflict once and for all. Can you give any more details on what he was referring to, whether that's on-the-ground forces? Obviously, we know he's talking to political figures, and the goal for the U.S. is to get a political resolution. But is he talking more about the immediate terms in terms of troops, on-the-ground forces?

MR PATEL: So I think, if you look back at Special Envoy Hochstein's statement specifically, what he said is both sides simply committing to 1701 is not enough, and certainly we would agree with that. What we want to see ultimately in any diplomatic engagement is action, and then of course in the context of northern Israel and southern Lebanon, what we want to see is the effective implementation of 1701. Of course, a commitment to such a thing would of course not nearly be enough. What we want to see is something in action.

But that being said, we are continuing to work with the Government of Lebanon, the state of Lebanon, as well as the Government of Israel to get a formula that brings this conflict to an end for once and for all. We are ultimately seeking out a diplomatic resolution. Our North Star and our goal here continues to be creating the conditions that will allow civilians on both sides of the Blue Line to return home.

QUESTION: And can I ask about this Axios reporting earlier today? There was - it's reporting that the - that Israel gave a U.S. document - gave the U.S. a document saying what its demands are for ending the conflict with Lebanon, and part of that document was effectively saying that it can enforce, i.e. target, anywhere in the country as part of enforcing what it wants for ending the war. Do you have any -

MR PATEL: So I've not seen that reporting, and I certainly am not sure what that document is referring to. Again, in the context of Lebanon, we have been very consistent for many, many days and weeks now of what it is that we exactly want to see. We, of course, are not being naive about Hizballah, and they are in fact a terrorist organization, and they have had a stranglehold on much of Lebanon for quite some time now. And so we of course support efforts to degrade them, degrade their infrastructure. We want to make sure, though, that civilians are protected. We certainly don't want to see any daily, regular strikes of Beirut, and we want to see every possible measure taken to protect civilians.

But beyond that, we ultimately want to see a diplomatic resolution - of course, one that is in line with 1701, that we believe will allow civilians to return home. That continues to be our focus.

QUESTION: But the U.S. would not be okay with Israel being able to strike Lebanon?

MR PATEL: I just don't want to speculate around the context of this purported document because I truly have no idea what this reporting is referring to. What I can say now in the context of the ongoing kinetic activity is that we certainly don't want to see any kind of daily strikes or action into Beirut, certainly one that - ones that have the potential to impact civilians and civilian infrastructure on a regular basis.

Said, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you, Vedant.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: Now, you keep insisting that Israel has accepted the proposal suggested by the President on May 31 and in fact adopted in a UN - a UN resolution, a Security Council resolution, on June 10. So can we expect that during the Secretary's visit this time around that the Israelis will - the Israeli prime minister will say he adheres to the proposal as was submitted and adopted by the United Nations?

MR PATEL: Said, that is a question for the Israeli prime minister's office and the Government of Israel. And certainly we are not the spokespeople for them, and I will let them speak to whatever it is their approach is now in the - after - immediate afterdays of Mr. Sinwar's death. What I can speak to is what the United States approaches, and that, Said - and you heard me speak to Leon and Simon a little bit - in that for many, many, many months now, Mr. Sinwar had been the major obstacle to getting to a yes. Of course, time has passed since then, and there need to be continuing conversations that need to be had. Details as it relates to the proposal continue to need to be ironed out. And ultimately, this is a decision that only the Israelis can make and the Israeli prime minister can make.

But what the Secretary - the message that the Secretary will be bringing is that a ceasefire in Gaza, one that ends the conflict, one that allows an additional influx of humanitarian aid, one that creates the conditions for the remaining hostages - including the remaining seven American citizens - to return home - that is in the interest of the Israeli people, the Palestinian people. It is certainly in the interest of the United States and the American people. And that is what we will work collectively to pursue, but also in close coordination with partners in the region because the day-after period is also vitally important as well to make sure that we keep the region on track so it stops getting out of these endless cycles of violence.

QUESTION: Yes, but since it was an Israeli proposal to begin with, do you expect that the Israeli Government will come out and say, this is the proposal we accept?

MR PATEL: I'm not going to - Said, I'm not going to -

QUESTION: I'm just asking you.

MR PATEL: I'm not going to speculate on any announcements that may or may not come out of this trip.

QUESTION: All right. All right.

MR PATEL: I of course have no doubt that you'll be paying attention to the Secretary's trip closely, and I will let him and/or the Government of Israel speak directly.

QUESTION: Well, let me ask you about a massacre that took place on Saturday in Beit Lahia - a hundred people were killed, maybe more - many more injured. It was mainly civilians. I know Israel like to say under the pretext that there were fighters there, but we have seen the irrefutable evidence that Hamas fighters fight in twos and threes, as we have seen when their leader was fighting in twos and threes and so on, because it is more effective and it's safer for them. So why is it so difficult for the United States of America - that has always adopted and espoused high standards on human rights and so on - why is it so difficult to condemn the massacre of civilians in this very case?

MR PATEL: Said, when we have seen action that has impacted civilians, when we have seen actions that have impacted civilians in a disproportionate way, we certainly have spoken to it. And of course, in the context of Gaza, we have not - we have not been unambiguous about the concerns that we continue to have that - about its impact on civilians, both in the death toll but also in the humanitarian impacts. And these are one of the things that we expect the Secretary to raise and continue to engage on on his travels.

QUESTION: But you do condemn the deliberate and wanton killing of civilians, don't you?

MR PATEL: Of course we do, Said.

QUESTION: All right. Let me - let me just follow up on this very issue. Your ally, one of your strongest ally, is Jordan, and this is what Ayman Safadi said yesterday. He said, "The horror Israel is bringing on the entire population of northern Gaza [isn't human]. It is pure evil and a war crime that humanity should not tolerate." Do you agree with the foreign minister of Jordan, your good ally?

MR PATEL: So I've not - I've not - I've not seen Mr. Safadi's comments, Said, and certainly am not going to get into a public discussion or speak to private diplomatic conversations up here. What I can say is that we know that the - that Jordan shares the United States's commitment of what we want to see for the region, which is ultimately, of course, regional stability and as well protections for civilians. We all have a strong interest in trying to create an environment in which people involved in this conflict can return to their homes and live safely and securely. Certainly that includes the Palestinian people, and that is something that we are going to continue to work towards and it's something that we're going to continue to work towards in close coordination with our Jordanian partners as well.

QUESTION: Last thing - last thing I have - on aid, please.

MR PATEL: Uh-huh.

QUESTION: Yeah, now just to follow up on what -

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: - Simon asked.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: Now, your 30-day thing - I mean, Israel banned six organizations from getting aid into Gaza. Do you feel that Israel feels that it has this 30 days to do whatever it wants, that it can take whatever comfort that it can continue to prevent aid from going in? In the meantime -

MR PATEL: Said, I -

QUESTION: - you have 400,000 people that are being starved to death and now burnt to death.

MR PATEL: Said, I couldn't speak to what Israel thinks or doesn't think. What I can speak to is the approach that the United States is taking, which is that we want to see the humanitarian situation in Gaza significantly improved, and that of course - that 30-day thing that you're referring to was a letter from the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense laying out very clearly what expectations we had and what changes that we want to see. And I'll add it is simply just a reflection of U.S. policy. We are always going to appropriately enforce the laws that we are bound by, which is of course that in - when we have countries in which we have security relationships with, when we have humanitarian conditions as such, there are certain expectations and metrics that we need to see. And we will continue to push them to see those, and I have no doubt that the Secretary will raise this directly.

Alex, go ahead. Yeah.

QUESTION: Thanks, Vedant. A couple questions, just switching topic. Moldova.

MR PATEL: Uh-huh.

QUESTION: I was wondering if you have anything to add to what White House told us about the elections, if there's any lesson that you guys have learned about Russian meddling, tactics of Russian meddling, and any response, any punishment, any reaction from the West we should expect in the coming days and -

MR PATEL: So I - certainly, Alex, I would not preview any actions from up here. But we would commend the Moldovan people for their participation in the October 20th election and referendum. And as we approach the second round of presidential elections on November 3rd, we'll continue to support Moldova's commitment to ensuring a credible and democratic process.

As it relates to the second part of your question, we and other international election observers noted some reports of malicious cyber activity, disinformation, and other things that are consistent with what we've seen the Kremlin do elsewhere and what the Kremlin has supported in its intent to undermine Moldova's sovereignty. But in terms of the results as it relates to the referendum, Alex, we also congratulate Moldova for the passage of the referendum, ensuring the EU path in their constitution. Our viewpoint continues to be that Moldova's future is in Europe. As it relates to these allegations, we certainly would want them to be investigated and resolved through appropriate transparent legal processes, but I'm not going to speculate any more on that.

QUESTION: Thank you. Moving to Ukraine.

MR PATEL: Uh-huh.

QUESTION: I know my colleagues have asked about North Korea, but North Korea is sending troops into Russia to fight in Ukraine. White House told us this morning that you are still investigating that, but the topic came up two weeks ago in this room, and I'm just having trouble understanding: Why does it take this long? Is it an intelligence failure or is it lack of trust in your allies? There's Ukrainian intelligence, South Korea put it out there as public. Why is it taking this long?

MR PATEL: So, Alex, I'm certainly not going to get into or speak to ongoing processes that may exist to verify or ascertain certain information. But specifically to - as it relates to the question you asked, we have seen reports that the DPRK has sent soldiers to fight alongside Russian security services. We're unable to confirm whether these reports are accurate, but if true, it would mark for a dangerous and highly concerning development in Russia's war against Ukraine. And we'll continue to consult with allies and partners on the implications of such a dramatic move.

But - and I want to be very clear about something, Alex. If this is accurate, it would also demonstrate what we would view as Russia's growing desperation in its ongoing war of aggression. It is not hyperbole to say that Russia is suffering extraordinary casualties on the battlefield every day due to the effectiveness of the Ukrainian military. And if Russia is indeed being forced to turn to the DPRK for manpower, this would be a - certainly a sign of desperation on the part of the Kremlin.

Janne.

QUESTION: I mean, I've heard that line before. I mean, in fact, this is a line we have been hearing for two weeks now. Why do you guys want us to care about what it would mean, other than where it actually will happen or take and how to respond to it?

MR PATEL: Well, Alex, we're just not at a place to confirm whether these reports are accurate. I'm sorry that's not a swift enough process for you, but we try to work and act deliberately in the United States, and I would just point you back to all the other times that we have offered updates and assessments about Russia's operation into Ukraine and Russia's potential closening of the relationship with a - with an adversary. When we have been able to ascertain some of those facts and we're in a place to share them, we can and we will. I'm certainly not going to get ahead of the process on this one.

Janne, go ahead.

QUESTION: I have a last topic if - please indulge me - on the - on Azerbaijan.

MR PATEL: I'm going to let - Janne's patiently had her hand up.

QUESTION: Please come back to me later.

MR PATEL: Go ahead, Janne. Yeah.

MR PATEL: Thank you very much, Vedant. A couple of questions on Ukraine and North Korea. Ukraine President Zelenskyy and South Korea's National Intelligence Service released clear evidence, including a video of North Korean troops being dispatched to Russia, and it was revealed 12,000 soldiers in the special forces are training at the Sergeevsky training camp disguised in Russian military uniform and ID card. But why has the United States not yet confirmed whether this is true or not?

MR PATEL: So, Janne, look, I - just to echo again what I said to Alex, we're not yet at a point where we're able to confirm those reports and whether they are accurate. But I just want to echo again that if they are true, it's two things. One, it is a show of the desperation that the Kremlin has found themselves in, but it would also be a dangerous and highly concerning development in Russia's war against Ukraine. It also would be another example of the closening of relations that we see between Russia and the DPRK. But again, at this point, I don't have a assessment to offer from the United States in terms of whether these reports are accurate or not.

QUESTION: Follow-up: If the dispatch of North Korean troops to Russia is true and confirmed, will there be a change - change in support from the United States, EU, and NATO?

MR PATEL: Well, I'm not going to speculate at all, Janne. Look, when we have seen the Russian Federation closen relations with another country or rely on another country for its efforts in Ukraine - and an example that I can think of is the closening of relations that we have seen between Russia and Iran - you certainly have seen the United States take appropriate action, and we will certainly not waver when it comes to the support that we'll continue to provide our Ukrainian partners.

QUESTION: Quick last one.

MR PATEL: Okay. Go ahead. Then I've got to work the room.

QUESTION: Although the Middle East - although the Middle East issue is considered important, the Korean Peninsula issue is also important. What impact do you think the North Korean military's dispatch of troops to Russia will have on the Korean Peninsula in the future?

MR PATEL: I'm certainly not going to speculate on what impact it could have on the Korean Peninsula beyond just saying, again, if these reports are true, it certainly would be another example of a reckless and destabilizing action that we are seeing the DPRK participate in. But again, I don't want to - don't want to speculate.

Rabia, you've had your hand up patiently. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you, Vedant. I have a question on Türkiye.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: Fethullah Gulen, the leader of FETO, whom Türkiye has long sought to extradite for orchestrating the 2016 failed coup, died yesterday. Have you seen the reports, and does the U.S. have any comment on this considering this issue has been a major sticking point between those countries?

MR PATEL: So I've seen those reports but I have nothing to offer. I wouldn't comment on matters involving a - private individuals living in the United States. So I have seen those reports but don't have anything to offer.

Yeah, go ahead.

QUESTION: On that?

QUESTION: Yeah.

MR PATEL: Oh, on the same topic?

QUESTION: The same topic.

MR PATEL: I'll come back to you, Diyar. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Has Türkiye reached out for his body?

MR PATEL: I - again, we're talking about what would be a private individual living in the United States, so I just wouldn't get into that for privacy considerations. So I will leave it at that.

Diyar, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you, Vedant.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: Yesterday the Kurdistan Region held election and you observed this election very closely. So what's your comment on this process? Was it free, fair, and transparent election as you urged the political parties for that?

MR PATEL: Well, let me say a couple of things, Diyar. First, promoting democratic values is a key priority for the U.S. Government as it fosters global stability and it strengthens alliances. These are things that we think are integral to what our interests are in the Iraqi Kurdistan Region and beyond. We certainly applaud the role that civil society and the media had in this election in fostering political dialogue and amplifying the voices of Iraqi Kurdistan Region residents ahead of the election.

What we saw is high voter turnout and an election that proceeded without major security incidents. We saw some reporting of some logistical challenges at various polling stations, but overall from our viewpoint the process went forward fairly orderly. And our focus now, Diyar, is that we are strongly urging political parties to engage in a prompt and sustained dialogue to swiftly form a stable and representative government without delay. We think that is the next appropriate step.

QUESTION: Yeah. Vedant, forming a government without delay, this is what you are calling for. But as you may know, none of the political parties won enough seats to form that government. So will there be any U.S. engagement with the political parties to come together and form a government without delay?

MR PATEL: I'm certainly not going to preview any specific engagement, Diyar, but we call on Kurdish leaders to find a way to move past their differences and form a government. Our view is that there is more that unites Iraqi Kurdistan leaders than divides them, and its interest in the - it's in the interest of the people to move forward in an inclusive process and form a government as soon as possible.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR PATEL: Let me go to Prem. He's had his hand up. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you, Vedant.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: One follow-up on Simon and Said's questions.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: Last week, the U.S. sent that letter urging Israel to improve the humanitarian situation in Gaza and heed international law. In that time, the Israeli military has targeted a child and then bombed him and the people trying to help him, banned aid organizations, repeatedly bombed a refugee camp, attacked the remaining hospitals in northern Gaza, killed four engineers fixing water systems, rounded up people, tied them, blindfolded them, bombed an UNRWA shelter, and killed a 59-year-old woman as she harvested olives on her land in the West Bank.

What does it mean if the Israeli Government responds to U.S. requests to follow international law by committing possible violations of international law?

MR PATEL: So first, Prem, I just want to be very clear that as it relates to the specifics of some of these operations, I will let the Government of Israel and the IDF speak to that.

The point of the letter also was to provide a timeline of which - in which we wanted to see certain factors as it relates to the flow of humanitarian aid into Gaza and addressing humanitarian concerns addressed. The timeline for that is not - we are not at the end of that process, and so I am certainly not going to speculate or draw conclusions or assessments on that when we are still within that timeframe.

What I can say unequivocally is that we want to see the humanitarian situation in Gaza addressed. We - as Matt spoke about last week, we saw a couple of benchmarks move forward, specifically the opening of some crossings. That is of course a positive step in the right direction, not at all conclusive and certainly not as - not at all satisfactory to a lot of the things that we've laid out in the letter. There was also a couple of other things that we wanted to see, particularly as it relates to how evacuations are undertook and a couple of other efforts. That work certainly still remains and certainly there is still a lot of work that needs to be done as it relates to addressing the humanitarian situation. And I expect these are some of the specific things I expect the Secretary to raise.

And on top of that, we have been unequivocal that as these operations are conducted that every possible efforts needs to be taken to minimize impacts on civilians and civilian infrastructure.

And if you'll just allow me to address your last point about the woman who was harvesting olives in the West Bank, these reports are incredibly concerning. We understand that the IDF has taken some additional - initial steps, that the officer was suspended. The IDF has released a statement that an investigation has been opened by the military police, the commander has been suspended from her position until this investigation concludes. And our expectation is that Israel investigate this thoroughly, swiftly, transparently, and it seeks accountability in this instant as well.

And I will just note that we - it is not lost on our - on us that the annual olive harvest is major economic activity to Palestinian people and to the Palestinian economy, and we believe that Palestinians need to have access to their land to conduct these kinds of harvests when appropriate.

QUESTION: So that reminds me. After the killing of Aysenur Egyi about a month and a half, two months ago, the department mentioned how this shows that it seems that the Israeli military needs to really consider and reconsider its rules of engagement. What does it say that not only - and I know you mentioned that there's been accountability for the soldier, allegedly, who killed the 59-year-old woman. But there's that case - there's specifically this case of a child being targeted, and as he calls for help, as people descend upon him to help him, they get bombed. I know you said you won't comment on all of these operations, but is that an operation? That just seems like a killing.

MR PATEL: So I'm not going to, again, speak to these incidents in specificity. But I can say, Prem, that what we said before continues to be the case. And it continues to be that we want to see some changes when it comes to military engagement and the rules of engagement, particularly as it relates to the West Bank. That continues to be something that we want to see.

QUESTION: Okay. And then finally, just a -

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: - finer point. The department last week said the reason the U.S. gave Israel 30 days to improve the situation in Gaza was to give them enough time to cure the problem. You just said that this letter was also about affirming existing U.S. policy. So what exactly happens if the Israeli Government doesn't heed U.S. policy? Twenty-three days from now, if these bombings continue, these capturings, these killings, continue - as they have for the past 380 days - what specifically will the U.S. do?

MR PATEL: So I'm not going to - just I'm not going to speculate on what may or may not happen, Prem. I can say - and you had heard Matt say this last week as well - we, of course, will appropriately enforce what U.S. law is. We are bound by the laws that govern our government, and of course govern the security relationships that we have with any particular country. I'm not going to speculate what that process is. There is still quite some time before we're at that point.

QUESTION: Why (inaudible) -

MR PATEL: We hope that we want to - we hope that we don't have to get there.

QUESTION: Why -

MR PATEL: Our hope is that see some effective remediation in efforts surrounding humanitarian access and humanitarian aid. And we hope that we don't have to get to that point. So I will continue to let that process play out. I know that this is something that is important to the Secretary, and he'll be raising it with counterparts on this trip.

Go ahead, in the back.

QUESTION: Why hasn't it been (inaudible) up to this point?

MR PATEL: Go - yeah.

QUESTION: You mentioned earlier that, with regard to humanitarian aid, you've seen some positive steps over the past week. Is this a consequence of the timeline set by the U.S. in terms of improving humanitarian supplies?

MR PATEL: You'll have to speak to the Israelis and members of their government involved in the provision of humanitarian aid whether it is a byproduct of the letter or not. What I can say is that outside of, of course, the letter, which - as Matt spoke about - was intending to stay private, we have talked about humanitarian aid and the importance of it through relevant counterpart-to-counterpart and diplomatic channels. And so this is a round-the-clock effort, not solely just through this letter.

And so we consistently have raised concerns around humanitarian issues when we have seen things happen, whether it be crossings close or certain access points not be as easily accessible. We've raised those directly, and we'll continue to do so. So I'm not going to speculate on where those changes came from. It obviously was a positive step in the right direction. But as I said in speaking to Prem, we want to see additional steps taken.

QUESTION: If I can just - on another issue.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: There are several reports that the U.S. is investigating the actions of an Israeli unit, unit 100, which guards detainees from Gaza. Can you comment on that at all? Is there an investigation?

MR PATEL: This is what happens when you come to the briefing a little tardy. I spoke to this question already, so I will just - I'll point you back to the transcript, but just say broadly that we certainly would not speak to any kind of ongoing efforts that we may have or have not in place as it relates to any country in which we have security relationships with. We just wouldn't speak to that.

Jalil, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you very much, Vedant. Thank you very much. First, a quick thank you to the State Department for finally giving me a hard pass. I got it after 10 years, so thank you. (Laughter and applause.)

MR PATEL: Buckle up, everybody.

QUESTION: And a quick compliment to you and Matt, that these last two weeks before elections are left, and you guys are doing a wonderful job, so I just want to salute you on that.

MR PATEL: Thanks, I guess.

QUESTION: Quick three questions, sir. Number one, in Pakistan one of our journalists - Hamid Mir is like Anderson Cooper in Pakistan - he had reported many years ago that a big news media owner and a journalist writer himself had paid this much about - I think in those years it was like $4-5 million - to buy these member of parliaments, like horse trading was done. That gentleman was my father, by the way, that he was writing about.

During this weekend, a similar incident happened. But this time, the congressman, the female even congressman, whose video I had shared with your colleague - their kids were kidnapped. Even their handicapped kids were kidnapped. While they were standing in the senate, they were shivering.

MR PATEL: Okay. I -

QUESTION: Is this the democracy that you are - is this the democracy that you want to see in Pakistan?

MR PATEL: So Jalil, I have - I don't have anything to offer as it relates to what you laid out. If - of course, for anything - for any kind of kidnapping, that - certainly we would defer to local law enforcements. If that is true or not, I wouldn't get into from up here.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR PATEL: Simon, go.

QUESTION: So - just one question, please? One more?

MR PATEL: Go ahead.

QUESTION: Sorry, two more, but one more -

MR PATEL: You can do one more. And then Simon's had his hand up pretty patiently for a while now. Yeah.

QUESTION: Okay. An Oxford graduate running the biggest charity cancer hospital, running one of the biggest charity university in the country, for last one month his treatment has been - his two sisters are arrested; his wife is arrested; his nephew is arrested.

MR PATEL: Again, is there a question, Jalil?

QUESTION: Are there any human rights that your ambassador tells you that if on such level human rights are violated - do you know what is happening on like normal guys level?

MR PATEL: Jalil, we engage on human rights regularly and with all countries with which we have relationships with. That is at the forefront of our engagements. And in the context of Pakistan, of course, it is something that we raise directly through our ambassador and through others as well. I don't have any specifics to offer.

QUESTION: Can I just follow up? A small one on that.

MR PATEL: I - Simon's had his hand up for a while now.

Go ahead, Simon.

QUESTION: Just a small one on that. Come on.

MR PATEL: Go ahead.

QUESTION: I wanted to come back to one of your answers to Leon earlier -

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: - on the Hizballah financing. So this bank organization Al-Qard Al-Hassan has been under OFAC sanctions. Just - I just wanted to kind of go back to your answer to Leon though. Do - you talked about sort of civilian infrastructure should be avoided, but if the - Israel is like specifically saying they're going to go after this financial institution. Is that okay under the sort of terms that you guys have set out about this bombing campaign?

MR PATEL: So Simon, if there are, of course, Hizballah fighters or Hizballah infrastructure operating from such a facility, that would, of course - we'd support the degradation of Hizballah and the degradation of Hizballah infrastructure. The point that I was raising to Leon is the specifics in which how this institution may or may not ladder up or feed into Hizballah's financial network, I'm not an expert in that, wouldn't be able to speak to that from here. Perhaps OFAC might be a place to speak to.

But the broader point that I was making is that even when those kinds of operations are being undertook and those kinds of Hizballah infrastructures are being targeted that every possible measure needs to be taken to minimize its impact on civilians.

QUESTION: But when you talk about targeting Hizballah, does that include this financial infrastructure which also serves civilian purposes? It's kind of - it's straddling a line between a militant group and doing services for the public. So I guess you've given them sanctions for aiding Hizballah, which you consider a terrorist organization, but does that mean that banks that deal with funding for terrorism are now legitimate targets for airstrikes?

MR PATEL: So the - look, the - ultimately, Israel is a sovereign country and will make its own targeting decisions. Whether they're in any facility, in any - and this consistent - it's been our consistent approach is that in any facility or institution, whether it is - when there are civilians, every possible measure needs to be taken to protect and minimize civilians and the impact on civilians. However, much like Hamas, Hizballah is a terrorist group that operates within civilian infrastructure, has co-located itself within civilian infrastructure. And when that happens, civilian infrastructure can, unfortunately, becomes targets.

We want every possible thing to happen so that doesn't - isn't the case. And that is why we keep coming back to - one of the things we keep coming back to rather is 1701, because in that agreement in 2006, Hizballah was supposed to lay down its arms. And had they done so, we would not even be in this situation right now.

So again, I am not - don't have any specific thoughts to offer as it relates to this particular institution. Israel will ultimately make its own targeting decisions. But even when there are terrorist actors at or embedded within civilian infrastructure, appropriate measures need to and should be taken to minimize its impacts on civilians.

QUESTION: Right. They make their own targeting decisions, but they're using your weapons so you do have some legal requirements to have some influence on that. But just to be clear, what you - you mentioned Hamas as a kind of parallel to this. I think it's pretty clear that Israel's approach to Hamas has been every official - whether they're a militant, whether they've ever picked up a weapon, if they're part of an organization called Hamas is a legitimate target, right? That's been their policy in Gaza basically.

MR PATEL: I'll let them clarify their approach, Simon.

QUESTION: But if that's their -

MR PATEL: It's not for me to speak to.

QUESTION: If that's their policy in Lebanon, Hizballah is a slightly different organization. Hizballah has political representations. I'm not - I'm just - hypothetically, there could be people working for this financial organization who have no connection to militancy, in that they've never committed a violent act. But are you -

MR PATEL: Well -

QUESTION: Your position seems to be that it's okay for them to be targeted?

MR PATEL: Simon, Hizballah ultimately is a terrorist organization. Hizballah is a terrorist organization that has American blood on their hands, it has Israeli blood on their hands, it has Lebanese civilians' blood on their hands. And we, of course, support efforts to hold them accountable, to degrade, to degrade their infrastructure. While that - those operations are being conducted, we, of course, want to see every measure taken so that impacts on civilians are minimized.

I'm just not going to -

QUESTION: Seems to be a kind of meaningless distinction.

MR PATEL: I am just not going to - I don't have any other assessment to offer on this beyond that.

Jackson, go ahead. And then we'll probably wrap.

QUESTION: Thanks, Vedant. Is there any comment on reports of Israeli forces demolishing a watchtower and perimeter fence at a UNIFIL outpost in Lebanon yesterday?

MR PATEL: We've seen those reports, and we've asked our colleagues in the IDF for additional information, and I will let the Israeli ministry of defense answer any questions about those operations. But we have been clear with all parties that their needs to be protections of UNIFIL personnel and facilities. UNIFIL operates in Lebanon under a mandate from the UN Security Council, and these facilities and these individuals must not be armed.

Guita, I saw your -

QUESTION: And does the department have any comment about the arrest of U.S. citizen, journalist Jeremy Loffredo in Israel earlier this month? Last we heard, a district court ordered Mr. Loffredo to remain in Israel into October 20th for police questioning. What's his current status?

MR PATEL: My understanding is that Mr. Loffredo has left Israel.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR PATEL: Guita, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: Thanks, Vedant. The Commerce Department today removed the technology company Sandvine from its entity list, citing changes in the company's - that the company made to its corporate governance -

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: - and practices. Now, the company was added earlier this year to the list after evidence surfaced that Sandvine technology was used to conduct mass web monitoring targeting human rights activists. Now, I was wondering whether the State Department shares the Department of Commerce's view that Sandvine's remediations were significant enough for this action?

MR PATEL: So we strongly supported the original Commerce action to add Sandvine to the Entity List in February of this year. That's consistent with this administration's approach to countering the misuse of surveillance and other technologies as it relates to human right abuses. And we worked alongside Commerce over the past several months to closely monitor the reforms that Sandvine has undertaken in response to its entity listing, and we agree with Commerce that these significant remedial steps to its corporate governance and business practices were effective enough for the designation to be removed.

All right. Thanks, everybody.

(The briefing was concluded at 2:01 p.m.)

Tags