Department Press Briefing – February 14, 2024

MR MILLER: Good afternoon, everyone.

QUESTION: Good afternoon.

MR MILLER: Happy Valentine’s Day, especially Happy Valentine’s Day to those of you celebrating with us on a flight somewhere over the Atlantic tonight instead of with your significant others. I wish you peace and tranquility at home. With that, no Matt – Shaun, you want to go first?

QUESTION: Sure. Happy Valentine’s Day to you.

MR MILLER: Thank you. Thank you.

QUESTION: I wanted to ask you about – to start off – the talks in Cairo that took place recently, that are (inaudible) in some form. I know there’s a limit to probably what you’re going to say about it, but do you have any assessment right now about how things stand? Is the U.S. still hopeful that there could be a deal for hostages and a pause in fighting?

MR MILLER: As has always been the case, I don’t want to kind of give a day-by-day, step-by-step update or assessment on the talks, or the status of them, or where they might stand; but we continue to believe that it is possible to achieve a deal. We continue to believe it’s in the national security interest of the United States to achieve deal. And we believe it’s in the interest of both Israel and, of course, the Palestinian people. So we will continue to work to try an achieve an agreement that would not just secure the release of hostages, but, of course, enable – allow a pause that would enable the delivery of humanitarian assistance that would alleviate the suffering on the ground in Gaza.

QUESTION: Sure. Not to jump around too much, but the – I was wondering if you could comment on today’s developments in Lebanon. There’s some strikes there from the Israeli side in particular. How dangerous is the situation in Lebanon? Do you have any reaction in particular to the use of force?

MR MILLER: We continue to be concerned about escalation in Lebanon. As you know, it has been one of our primary objectives from the outset of this conflict to see that it not be widened, to see that it not be escalated in any way. That continues to be a primary national security objective of ours that we will continue to pursue. And we continue to believe that there is a diplomatic path forward, and we will continue to push forward to try to resolve this issue diplomatically so both Israelis and Lebanese can return to their homes.

QUESTION: Is there active diplomacy in Lebanon right now?

MR MILLER: There is active diplomacy. There has been active diplomacy on this question for some time. I, of course, am never going to get into the underlying details of those diplomatic conversations, but we continue to pursue diplomatic resolution of this situation.

QUESTION: And just one more before I yield to somebody else. The – I’m sure you saw, and I believe the National Security Advisor was asked about it, but I wanted to ask you – the report from The Wall Street Journal on white phosphorus use in Lebanon. Is there anything you can say whether the State Department is actually looking into that?

MR MILLER: So as I said yesterday, we do continue – we are reviewing reports of human rights violations and civilian harm incidents through the CHIRG process that we set up last August. I’m not going to comment on the specifics of any one incident. We take these on a case-by-case measure and assess them to see whether, number one, civilian harm actually occurred; and, two, to identify any appropriate policy responses if it has occurred, to mitigate such – to reduce the risks of such incidents happening in the future. But we are going to make it as a kind of blanket policy not to confirm specific incidents that may be under review.

Said, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. I want to ask you a couple questions on Gaza, but first I wanted to ask you about what the Israelis did today – demolished a house for Fakhri Abu Diab – he’s an activist against demolition – to basically make room for a biblical theme park. Do you have any comment on that?

MR MILLER: We condemn the demolition of Fakhri Abu Diab’s home. He is a community leader in East Jerusalem. We believe that demolition not only obviously damages his home, and his family, and the lives that they have built there, but the entire community who live in fear that their homes may be next. This has been their family home for generations. Part of the structure dates back to before 1967. He has been an outspoken community leader, including against demolitions, and now his family has been displaced.

But I want to – I would also like to reiterate that the impact of these demolitions – this is obviously not the first – goes beyond just the impact on this individual family. These acts obstruct efforts to advance a durable and lasting peace and security that would benefit not just Palestinians, but Israelis; they damage Israel’s standing in the world; and they make it ultimately more difficult for us to accomplish all of the things we are trying to accomplish that would ultimately be in the interest of the Israeli people. And so we condemn them and we’ll urge them – continue to urge that they not continue.

QUESTION: Well, Silwan is really adjacent to my neighborhood so I know – I know the area. I know how many people have lost their homes, how many homes have been demolished, but the Israelis seem to have a methodical plan forward, going forward. I know that you condemn, but do you condemn saying “or else,” for instance?

MR MILLER: So —

QUESTION: “You must stop this”? And you – they should not demolish anybody’s homes, not even for – as a form of collective punishment if someone has done something from the household.

MR MILLER: So we condemn them, and let me tell you what we are offering as an alternative.

So the Secretary has made clear that after conversations with others in the region that there is a path forward – an alternative path to the one that Israel has pursued to date – to provide lasting peace and security for Israel, and it would include the establishment of two states. And we will continue to pursue that path. And we have made clear and other countries in the region, including Saudi Arabia, have made clear that there are enormous benefits on offer for the Israeli people should they pursue that path, including in further integration with the region, including security guarantees.

And so when it comes to all of these types of issues, what we will continue to lay out is the vision that we think is a better path – as I said, not just for the Palestinian people, but ultimately that provides greater security benefits for the Israeli people as well.

QUESTION: Now, on the looming or the expected attack on Rafah, I know that the President, the Secretary of State, you from this podium many times, however, warned against such a storming of Rafah. But on the other hand, I mean, one reads reports and so on that okay, by not doing anything, or by not saying that there will be consequences if you do this, you’re basically green-lighting – essentially giving a green light to the Israelis to go ahead. I mean, we just – we don’t like it, but we’re not going to do anything about it.

MR MILLER: I think that would be a significant misinterpretation of what we have said. We have made quite clear both publicly and privately that we cannot support any military operation in Rafah until such time as Israel has developed a humanitarian plan that can be executed, and that they have executed such a plan.

So I know people like to jump ahead far into the process and talk about what-ifs, but we’re not at the what-if stage right now; we are at the making very clear to Israel what we expect stage, and we have seen the Government of Israel ask the military for such a plan. We haven’t seen that plan yet; we don’t know what it’ll contain; we don’t know if it will be executable, as we have said. So we will wait before offering any prejudgments about what will, or may, or might, or might not happen. We’re going to wait to see what that plan looks like and then engage directly with the Government of Israel about it.

QUESTION: So you’re saying, yeah, you can do this, with the caveat that you have to make sure that the population, the civilian population, is not harmed or somehow moved from place to place. Now, remember, these people have already been moved there. They have been instructed by the Israelis to go to Rafah (inaudible).

MR MILLER: You don’t have to tell me “remember;” I’ve said that myself from this podium.

QUESTION: I remember. But this is the thing. I mean, it’s déjà vu all over again.

MR MILLER: Which is why we have made clear that there has to be a plan —

QUESTION: To quote Yogi Bera, “déjà vu all over again.”

MR MILLER: Look, there are – there are Hamas – there are – as I’ve said yesterday, there are two things that are true in this situation, right. One, that there are Hamas battalions that operate in Rafah, that exist in Rafah, that continue to pose a threat to the national security of Israel, Hamas battalions, part of an organization that attacked Israel and has made clear they want to continue to attack Israel. At the same time – so I’d say as a first matter of course, Israel has the right to take military action against those Hamas battalions that pose a threat to it. At the same time, they have an obligation to make sure that they only do so in a way that puts civilian protection first. And that is what we have made clear to them, and so we will see the plan that they will develop, and I will wait and pass judgment until we see that.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR MILLER: Alex.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) topics. I want to start with NATO, given the recent debate in this town. NATO today disclosed that its defense spending hit a high record – record high, 18 members —

MR MILLER: Eighteen.

QUESTION: — about to hit the 2 percent.

MR MILLER: Up from 11 I believe, right?

QUESTION: That was a target, not the goal – or they don’t owe anyone any money. But can you speak to this, the import of this development?

MR MILLER: We think it’s incredibly important. So look, we have made clear that there are targets that NATO countries have agreed to, that they would spend 2 percent of their budgets on national security. We have made clear that we expect countries to meet that target. There is often this misnomer that countries pay money to the U.S. and they’re in arrears; that, of course, is not factually the case. It’s not factually how it works. But there are defense spending targets that they are supposed to meet. As the secretary general announced today, a record number of those countries are now meeting those targets – 18, almost two thirds of the Alliance. And we continue to see progress from other countries towards meeting those targets, and we will urge those who have not yet met them to continue to take steps to do so.

But again, as I’ve said – as I said earlier this week, NATO is an Alliance that the American people derive tremendous benefit from, provides tremendous security to the United States. And that’s why we have seen durable, long-lasting, widespread support – not just in Congress, not just from leaders in Congress, but also from the American people, and we expect that to continue.

QUESTION: Thank you. A couple questions on the sanctions. The U.S. took part today in Brussels at EU Sanctions Coordinators Forum. This is the first time, if I – as far as I follow. There are reports that EU, on its end, is considering secondary sanctions against Central Asia, Türkiye, and other countries, or companies based in those countries, in its next batch. I know you don’t telegraph your sanctions, but can you at least assure us that —

MR MILLER: But would I do it in this case?

QUESTION: At least assure us that you —

MR MILLER: It’s okay.

QUESTION: — will not – you will follow unless you – once they put it out, or is it part of the conversation?

MR MILLER: Assure you that – assure you that what?

QUESTION: That the U.S. will not lag behind when Europeans move forward with this?

MR MILLER: I don’t think – if you look at the United States actions in this guard – in this regard, we have been a leader, we have been at the forefront at holding Russia accountable for its actions, and we will continue to be – to be a leader in this regard. But of course, as you I think knew by the way you framed your question, I am not going to preview any sanctions action that we may or may not take.

QUESTION: And on that line, Putin today signed a confiscation law, which experts believe that further complicates – endangers, if you want – foreign investment, including Americans. And this is something we discussed in this room before, that State Department recently updated its Business Advisory for Burma. Why not impose a same advisory on Russia?

MR MILLER: I just don’t have any update on where that stands.

QUESTION: And one – my final question, if you don’t mind —

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: — on Nagorno-Karabakh. Jake Sullivan today from White House podium announced that the conflict in itself – also support for the victims of the conflict – he said it’s part of the next package. Is the State Department looking for additional resources? I mean, in what form you are trying to get involved?

MR MILLER: Additional resources in what – in what regard?

QUESTION: In next package, he mentioned that the Congress should support supplemental, because it also covers, among other conflicts, he mentioned Nagorno-Karabakh. So what additional resources you are seeking right now?

MR MILLER: So there are additional resources that were in the supplemental request for humanitarian assistance. I didn’t see all of the National Security Advisor’s remarks. I believe that’s what he was referring to, or I suspect – I should say – that’s what he was referring to. But there was humanitarian assistance contained in the supplemental request that we put forward and in the bill that was passed the Senate that would – could be used by the United States for humanitarian response to conflicts all around the world.

QUESTION: Any update for me about additional efforts that U.S. wants to bring together the sides and to discuss the conflict? Anything about the next couple of days, weeks?

MR MILLER: I do not have any schedule announcements for you. I know what you’re getting at, but I’m not going to bite, Alex.

QUESTION: I want to go back to the Lebanese-Israeli border if you don’t mind.

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: Yeah. It’s clear now that Hizballah – Hizballah announced a few days ago, a couple of days ago, that his war activities or military activities or engagement in this conflict is linked to the war and military activities in Gaza. If there is a humanitarian pause, he will pause; if there is end of the war, he will end his activities. Is it the same diplomatic approach you are applying to this conflict of the northern border, or you are trying to push Lebanon to distance itself from the conflict, regardless of what happened in Gaza?

MR MILLER: We have had specific diplomatic engagements related to the situation at Israel’s northern border and to resolving that situation diplomatically beyond the efforts to secure a humanitarian pause. Now, that said, of course it is our assessment that achieving a humanitarian pause and an agreement to secure the release of hostages would help with the risk of escalation and help – might help lessen the risk of escalation. That’s one of the many reasons why we continue to pursue such an arrangement.

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: You touched on this yesterday, but with the Secretary heading to Munich, European security and the war in Ukraine a focus, does he find himself in a difficult negotiating position with aid, foreign aid, stalled in the House? And how does he plan to address this, and how confident are you that the aid will make its way through?

MR MILLER: So it’s not really a question of a negotiating position. I will say that, when it comes to our European partners, they have stepped up and made contributions to Ukraine I don’t believe because the United States has made contributions to Ukraine’s defense but because they see it in their own independent national security interest, and they have made their own assessments that it is the right thing to do, both on the merits, and that it is in their – in the interest of their particular countries. So it’s not a question of the United States needing to negotiate with these countries, though we, of course, always are encouraging countries to do more if they can do more.

But that said, we very much do want to see Congress act as quickly as possible to pass the supplemental. As you heard the President say yesterday, it’s not just in the interest of Ukraine, but, as I said, it’s in the interest of European countries. It’s in the interest of the United States, we believe, to do so. A lot of that money is spent here, helps develop the manufacturing base here in the United States.

And so we will continue to push for the passage of the supplemental bill, and ultimately we think – as the President said, the world is watching. And certainly I’m sure that when we are in Munich we will hear directly from foreign leaders that they are watching very much what Congress does. We know the Ukrainian people are watching. And as the President said, history is watching as well.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Yes. It’s on Pakistan elections, thank you. How is U.S. State Department tackling the pressure from some of the U.S. lawmakers who are asking the State Department not to accept the results of Pakistan election until and unless thoroughly allegations of rigging are investigated?

MR MILLER: So we have called for those allegations to be investigated. We think that’s appropriate step to take. That’s – that is our response to questions of irregularities not just in Pakistan, but when we see them anywhere in the world. We think that they’re thoroughly investigated and resolved. And so that – we will continue to call for that. But at the same time, it’s clear that the elections in Pakistan were competitive, and we look forward to working with the government, once it’s formed, that the people of Pakistan elected.

QUESTION: Can I just follow up?

MR MILLER: Yeah, Shaun. Go ahead. And then I’ll come back.

QUESTION: Sure, sure. Just on that – I mean, of course, as you’ve probably seen that there’s a coalition being formed in Pakistan that doesn’t include Imran Khan’s party – I know you’re probably loath to talk about the details of Pakistani politics, but – (laughter) —

MR MILLER: You’ve noticed.

QUESTION: Well, let me – but I want to —

MR MILLER: To be fair, loath to talk about the internal details of politics in any country, but —

QUESTION: Sure, sure, sure. But can I just ask you if the U.S. has an assessment on this, whether this is in keeping with democratic principles to have the largest winner being excluded from the emerging coalition?

MR MILLER: Look, that is ultimately an internal matter. You see this in a number of countries that have parliamentary systems of government, where no country has – or – I’m sorry – where no party has established a majority you see the kind of coalitions that are formed. Ultimately that’s not a decision for the United States to make. It’s a decision for Pakistan to make.

QUESTION: Follow-up, Matt.

MR MILLER: I promised her I would come to her next, so —

QUESTION: The Foreign Policy magazine —

MR MILLER: In fact, I was calling on her before Shaun interrupted, so anyway. So – and now I interrupted you, so I apologize for that. Go ahead. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: The Foreign Policy magazine published an investigative report last week which shows that a former drug trafficker, Mr. Bashir Noorzai, who was serving a lifetime prison here in United State, was later released to the Taliban in exchange for one U.S. citizen, now is started working closely with China in the mineral contract and doing money laundering for Taliban. What’s your reaction to Chinese for this kind of partnership with this former drug trafficker?

MR MILLER: You know, I have not seen that report. Let me take it back and get you a comment on it.

Now go ahead.

QUESTION: Happy Valentine’s to you, Matt.

MR MILLER: Thank you.

QUESTION: My next couple of questions are in the backdrop of former U.S. ambassador Mr. Ryan Crocker, who I believe served in – with both the Republicans and Democrats, so very well-respected diplomat. Yesterday while speaking to Voice of America, he said that the Biden administration policy towards Afghanistan is not good and he said not much importance has been given to the country, plus the education part has been neglected by the government.

In the backdrop of all this, I want to ask you: Now, when the PTI government is in a province which is right next to Afghanistan, is my assessment correct that in coming days we will – we are going to see Taliban further increasing as far as their strength is concerned, or no?

MR MILLER: So I do not want to make any predictions based on – about what may happen in the future, nor get into a question involving an internal political party in Pakistan. But with respect to our policy in Afghanistan, I think you heard me speak to this yesterday. We have been very – have been quite clear about our policy in – as it regards to Pakistan, including through the adoption of a UN Security Council resolution just in December.

QUESTION: And just —

MR MILLER: Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thanks —

MR MILLER: You want one follow-up? Go ahead.

QUESTION: One follow-up, please. There are quite a few citizens – U.S. citizens – right now on social media who criticize the Pakistan serving military generals, army chiefs; they curse at them. I tried to get a reaction from Global Engagement Center. What do you, as a State Department official – is it fair that the social media influencers just curse around at serving military? Does not – does that not affect the government relationship with each other? I —

MR MILLER: I think if I started trying to comment on the random postings of citizens on social media, I would be up here for the rest of the day and probably the rest of the week, so I’m going to pass.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thanks, Matthew. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Turner said that there’s information that’s been made to members of Congress regarding a serious national security threat. Is the State Department aware about this and – I’m – you’re probably going to say no, but is – what – do you know what is the threat?

MR MILLER: So the National Security Advisor did just speak to this, and as he said, he has scheduled a meeting with Chairman Turner and other members of the House leadership, and it’s not appropriate to speak to the matter any further from – in a public setting, and so I will leave it at that for now.

QUESTION: And following up on a question I asked yesterday regarding Ahlam Tamimi, who’s a terrorist wanted by the United States, did Secretary Blinken bring up that case in his meeting yesterday with King Abdullah?

MR MILLER: I don’t have any further readouts, other than the note we issued publicly.

QUESTION: And then finally, the House CCP Select Committee issued a report stating that some U.S. venture capital firms invested $3 billion into critical tech companies in China, some with ties to PLA and involved in genocide. What’s your reaction to that? And is the Biden – and has the Biden administration taken actions in the past to curb investments going into China, and does more need to be done?

MR MILLER: So I have not seen that report, so I do not want to comment on the details of the report. But of course, there are U.S. statutes that prohibit the U.S. business – U.S. companies from doing business with companies that are engaged in genocide, and you – in addition to that, on a separate note, I will say that the U.S. has imposed a number of investment restrictions as it relates to China.

Guita, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: Thank you. Matt, two natural gas pipelines blew up in Iran today, and the officials have called it a sabotage work. I was wondering if the Biden administration has any theory of its own on the cause of these explosions.

MR MILLER: I’ve seen the reports, and I just don’t have any comment on them.

QUESTION: When earlier one of the proxy groups of Iran attacked Tower 22 in Jordan, which led to the killing of three American servicemen, the Biden administration said that they were going to retaliate. Is it safe to assume that the retaliation will only be military or otherwise?

MR MILLER: I don’t want to speak to that. The – we have made clear that some of our responses would be seen and some would be unseen, and I think I’ll leave it at that.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you very much. The Russian Ambassador Antonov said last week that he held meetings with U.S. officials, including at the State Department, and that he discussed with them the crash of the cargo plane, the Russian plane with Ukrainian prisoners of war, in the Belgorod region. And he said that U.S. officials showed interest in considering Russian proposals on investigating the incident.

MR MILLER: I’m – sorry, go ahead. Didn’t mean —

QUESTION: Can you confirm that the U.S. is ready to investigate the incident?

MR MILLER: I cannot. I’m not aware of those meetings or able to comment on them in any regard. We obviously have an embassy in Moscow that does, at time, engage with the Russian Government, but I don’t have any readout of those meetings.

QUESTION: And one more question on the same issue. Vedant said last week that the U.S. doesn’t consider Russian claims about the incident as credible. At the same time, New York – The New York Times reported last week that some U.S. officials admit that it was Ukraine that shot down the plane using a Patriot missile system.

MR MILLER: I don’t – I seldom want to comment on claims made anonymously in any outlet, but we continue to engage with the Ukrainian Government about this question. We’ve seen their public comments, and we engage with them privately about it as well.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Excuse me. During the hostage negotiations, like, we see there is some obstacles. Like, from your perspectives, which party is, like, more flexible for making these deals happen, like Hamas or Israel? Because what we see in the media – yeah – that, like, Hamas submitted a full proposal, but, like, we see Netanyahu is kind of a stubborn guy somehow. How do you assess this?

And, like, last question, related to the Rafah. We see many protest in, like, Kerem Shalom border, like Israeli people preventing many aids to get in Rafah from their side. What is the action that you can take to facilitate this? Like, are you going to put some sanction? Like, what (inaudible) effort that you do to convince the Israeli Government to, like, let this protest stop and let this humanitarian aid get in the Rafah?

MR MILLER: So with respect to the first one, I think the only way I’ll answer that is that in the response that you saw come back from Hamas to the proposal that was put forward by the Government of Israel and other countries, you saw a number of issues that were obvious nonstarters. For example, the status of al-Aqsa is not going to be resolved in a negotiation over hostages, and I will leave it at that.

With respect to the second question, I will say we have seen the Government of Israel take steps to keep Kerem Shalom open. They declared the area around Kerem Shalom a military zone. The IDF has made – has moved forces in to police that crossing to ensure that it can stay open so much-needed humanitarian assistance, including humanitarian assistance that was supplied by the United States, can continue to flow into Rafah. And we think that’s important to do it. It is extremely unfortunate that, at times, that crossing has been blocked. We have engaged with the Israeli Government and made clear that it is the position of the United States that it ought to be – that it ought to remain open and they ought to take whatever steps they can to make sure that it remains open. And we’re glad that they have taken those steps.

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

MR MILLER: Go ahead. Go. I’ll come to you next, Said.

QUESTION: Thank you and good afternoon, sir.

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: I have a couple questions on Gaza. It’s been over two weeks since Israeli forces attacked Hind Rajab’s family, killing her aunt, uncle, and cousins, leaving her trapped alone in her vehicle. We heard her pleas to the Red Crescent Society. Two medics were sent, all to be blown up, allegedly by Israeli forces. I wanted to ask about the status of the inquiry into this just because it seems if the Israeli Government, which seemingly does have a pretty sophisticated operation, is prioritizing this – if they don’t already know which soldiers to interview, for instance, they have Red Crescent calls, timestamps, the location of the Red Crescent staff to question and rely on, planning material to figure out who exactly to inquire with and to figure out who to hold accountable.

So I want to first ask about the status of this investigation.

MR MILLER: Sure. So I think that question is appropriately directed to the Government of Israel. I will say, on behalf of the United States, we have made clear to them that we want that incident to be investigated. They have told us they are investigating it. It’s our understanding that investigation is not yet complete. You should direct questions to them about where it stands. But we want to see it completed as soon as possible, and as I said from this podium several days ago, if accountability is appropriate, we want to be – we want to see accountability put in place.

QUESTION: And then a follow-up to that before the second one. Just similarly, with regards to Al Jazeera cameraman Samer Abudaqa being left to bleed out while Israeli forces reportedly stopped medics from reaching him, I know that previously you have said there’s investigations into that. Is there any updates on that investigation?

MR MILLER: I don’t have – I don’t have any update on that. Again, we press the Government of Israel on these matters but – and at times I have – I’m able to comment on specific incidents from here where we’ve gotten answers. But ultimately, those are questions better directed to the Government of Israel.

QUESTION: Thank you. Okay, and then the last question.

MR MILLER: Go ahead.

QUESTION: As you’ve said repeatedly, the U.S. chose to be cautious as it suspended funding to UNRWA for allegations that 12 of its 30,000-person staff may have been involved in the atrocities on October 7th. And as you described yesterday, that’s kind of standard U.S. policy to have this type of caution with all sorts of entities. But as our colleagues have asked you over the please few months, there have been broad and specific human rights violations that we’ve been concerned about, human – attacks against hospitals and churches; targeting people with white flags, both Israeli hostages and Palestinians; torturing Palestinians; and now, of course, this attack on Hind Rajab’s family and then leaving her to die horribly.

And so I’m wondering, on all this you’ve said we’re looking into it and Israel is investigating. But in each of these cases, the U.S. doesn’t seem to be as cautious with its money and support as it is with UNRWA. It’s to the point that the ICJ and the U.S. court both say Israel may be plausibly committing genocide. Still, U.S. money is coming while the U.S. shut off UNRWA funding immediately. So I’m just wondering if you could explain that sort of difference.

MR MILLER: Let me say there is, I think, a false equivalency embedded in that question between members of a terrorist organization who went out and intentionally killed innocent civilians.

QUESTION: Right, right.

MR MILLER: This – no, that is the difference. When you have members of Hamas who participated in October 7th according to the allegations made by the Government of Israel, that I should say UNRWA itself found credible – those are allegations that UNRWA found credible of people intentionally participating in a terrorist action to murder civilians. That is different than a military campaign conducted in an environment where that terrorist organization hides behind human shields. And so we will continue to engage with the Government of Israel about how to minimize civilian casualties – there have been far too many over the course of this campaign – and how to prevent civilians from killed. But I think they are very different matters for the reasons I just articulated.

Said.

QUESTION: Just a follow-up to –

MR MILLER: Let me – Said, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR MILLER: Because I’m going to have to – I’m going to have to wrap in a minute to go to a meeting, so —

QUESTION: Thank you. Secretary Antony Blinken spoke yesterday about hostage diplomacy, and as an international security threat and so on. I want to ask you, the Israelis have arrested roughly 5,000 Palestinians from the West Bank – not in Gaza, from the West Bank. Almost none of them have been charged with anything since October. No charges. What do you call this? I mean, they come in the middle of the night. They take young men and women and so on. Many are children, as a matter of fact: 12, 13, 14 years old and so on. Isn’t this really something that a government, in this case, leveraging – leveraging the taking of people, incarcerating them out any charges, for maybe a future kind of a bargaining chip?

MR MILLER: So I’ll say two things about that: number one, that we want to see due process for those individuals, as we want to see for anyone; and number two, we will continue to encourage Israel not to take any steps that can increase tensions in the West Bank.

Let me go to Ksenija and then I’ll come back to you, and then I got to wrap because I do have a meeting. Sorry to – quick wrap today. Go ahead, Ksenija.

QUESTION: Thank you so much, Matt. So we say in this room that the word of the United States matter. But despite this, Prime Minister of Kosovo Albin Kurti has not been responding to the words, as you’re aware, of the United States to suspend his decisions, unilateral decisions. Immediately you had even James O’Brien going on record yesterday (inaudible) is happening. So besides words, what other tools do you intend to use next to compel Kurti to stop with his unilateral actions given that, in the end of the day, this is a question that concern the U.S. taxpayer?

MR MILLER: So I will say that we will continue to engage in diplomacy to resolve and – to resolve this matter, and we want both sides to return to the EU-facilitated dialogue. And beyond that, I don’t want to preview any specific steps from here.

Shaun.

QUESTION: And can you just say about —

MR MILLER: Shaun – I’m going to – only because I have to wrap and I said, Shaun, I’d go to —

QUESTION: Albania is tomorrow.

MR MILLER: What’s that?

QUESTION: Albania is tomorrow. I just want to ask if Secretary Blinken in Albania is going to talk to Prime Minister Edi Rama —

MR MILLER: The —

QUESTION: — about Kosovo issue in order —

MR MILLER: So let me just say —

QUESTION: — to compel him to reason with Kurti.

MR MILLER: — whatever the Secretary is going to say to the prime minister, I think I’ll wait and let him say it privately to them. He does have a press conference in Albania afterwards where he’ll talk about that meeting, so please tune in to that.

Shaun, go ahead and then I do have —

QUESTION: Can I just follow up on a statement that you had earlier on the elections in Indonesia?

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: I know it’s quite general, I know. In line with what you said about Pakistan – you’re not getting ahead of who is taking power – but Subianto has claimed victory in this. Of course, as you know, until recently he was barred from entering the United States on human rights ground – human rights grounds. I mean, that’s been resolved since. But do you think that there’s any lingering issue with – on human rights regarding a Subianto presidency?

MR MILLER: So you’re right, we did say we would wait for the results to come in. It does appear that he’s received the most votes, but I don’t want to get ahead of the process that still needs to unfold, the official process in Indonesia. We are committed to the Comprehensive Strategic Partnership with Indonesia that we have had, and of course our 75 year diplomatic relationship with Indonesia, and we are prepared to work with whoever the Indonesian people choose as their democratically elected leader, whether it’s Subianto or – as it appears to be, President Subianto.

QUESTION: Can I just very quickly —

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: The other statement that you had on the call with the Algerian foreign minister. Do you know if there was discussion about the Security Council resolution that the Algerians are putting forward about a ceasefire? Did the Secretary say it’s not a good idea or some other message?

MR MILLER: I don’t want to get into the private conversation other than what we already included in the readout.

With that, sorry for the quick wrap but I do have to go, so wrap for today. Thanks, everyone.

(The briefing was concluded at 1:35 p.m.)

# # #