Department Press Briefing – March 18, 2024

12:34 p.m. EDT

MR PATEL: Good afternoon, everybody.

QUESTION: Hello.

MR PATEL: Happy Monday. I don’t have anything off the top, so – I see our friend is tardy, so Shaun, go ahead.

QUESTION: Sure. I guess there’s a few places to start, but – Russia. Vladimir Putin has won, according to Russian officials, a very resounding victory. Does the U.S. have any comments on – either on the margin of victory or more generally on the election conduct?

MR PATEL: Shaun, I was on the edge of my seat. It was such a nail-biter.

No, look, in all seriousness, to be very clear, the Russian people deserve a free and fair election and the ability to choose among a group of candidates representing a diverse set of views. Russians, like everyone else, deserve access to impartial information to help them choose the leadership that they so desire and help them determine the future of their country. And that was clearly not the case in these elections, which were neither free nor fair.

And as you all know, the Kremlin has imprisoned political opponents and prevented others from running. They’ve denied anti-war candidates, among other things. And as you also all know, that leading Kremlin critic Aleksey Navalny recently died in custody following years of harassment, abuse, and imprisonment.

So this election occurred in an environment of intense repression and imprisonment, and ultimately, though, Vladimir Putin is likely to remain the president of Russia, though recognizing that is certainly not any excuse for his autocracy.

QUESTION: Just the last part – recognizing that is not an excuse – recognizing that he’s – just to – on the —

MR PATEL: Recognizing that he – it is likely that he is going to remain president of the Russian Federation.

QUESTION: Sure. I mean, some in the dissident community have been saying that the United States should hold off of formally recognizing the victory, in whatever shape that means. I mean, does the United States recognize that he is re-elected? Obviously, he is president of Russia, but is the United States recognizing the results?

MR PATEL: Well, Shaun, it certainly was an undemocratic process, and I think it is safe to say that there certainly won’t be any congratulatory calls coming from the United States of America. But like I said, he is likely to remain the president of Russia, but that does not excuse him of his autocracy.

QUESTION: I’m sorry, what does that mean, “he is likely to remain the president of Russia”?

MR PATEL: He will remain the president of Russia. I think it’s fair to say that.

QUESTION: Well, why do you keep saying “likely”? You’ve said it, like, four times now.

MR PATEL: He is going to remain the president of Russia. But again –

QUESTION: All right.

MR PATEL: — I think the bigger point here, Matt, is that, as I said, this was an incredibly undemocratic process, and certainly him being president of Russia does not excuse him of his autocracy.

QUESTION: All right. And I’m sorry, I —

MR PATEL: Do you want to – coming back to you?

QUESTION: Go ahead. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Well, I was late, so I don’t know. Have you done other subjects, or does – is this what it started on?

MR PATEL: No, you just walked in.

QUESTION: All right. I have other subjects, but since I was late, I’ll let others go first.

QUESTION: Well, in the spirit of politeness, I’ll – and democracy, I’ll defer to (inaudible).

MR PATEL: Anything else over the —

QUESTION: Haiti. Haiti.

MR PATEL: Okay. Before we pivot away to a different topic, I will go back to the Associated Press in case – since —

QUESTION: Oh.

MR PATEL: — unless anybody else has elections on Russia, which is the last thing we were talking about.

Okay. So, go ahead.

QUESTION: Well, I have questions on Haiti, but I also have questions on Niger, so – let’s just start with Haiti. What’s the latest situation with the evacuation flights?

MR PATEL: So some of you, we were in touch with about this over this weekend, but on Sunday, March 17th, the department facilitated the safe departure of over 30 American citizens on a U.S. Government charter flight from Cap-Haïtien, Haiti to Miami International Airport. As you all know, that – Haiti has been at a Level 4 Do Not Travel state since March of 2020. U.S. citizens should not travel to Haiti and those in Haiti should depart immediately, using commercial or other private transportation options when available and safe to do so.

QUESTION: Well, okay, but are there more flights planned?

MR PATEL: This is – we’re taking this process step by step, Matt. This is a fluid and quickly evolving situation on the ground. We are continuingly staying in touch with American citizens and those who may either be interested in hearing from embassy operations or interested in potential assistance in departing, and we’ll be in touch with them should additional measures materialize. But I don’t have anything – any updates to offer at this moment right now.

QUESTION: All right. And on the political situation and the agreement that the Secretary helped broker last week, the beginning of last week?

MR PATEL: So it is not hyperbole to say that this is one of the most dire humanitarian situations in the world. Gang violence continues to make the security situation in Haiti untenable, and it is a region that demands our attention and action. I understand that Haitian stakeholders are very close to finalizing membership and remain in active discussions with CARICOM leaders as it relates to the makeup of the transitional presidential council. I expect them to have an update hopefully as soon as today, and refer you to them in CARICOM. But the announcement of this council we believe will help pave the way for free and fair elections and the deployment of the Multinational Security Support mission, and the TPC’s goal is to work for and improve the lives of all Haitians. And we’re seeing gang members do the exact opposite.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: I’m trying to understand the sequencing here. On Thursday, Matt stood where you are and said there were no plans now or in the future to evacuate Americans. And then it was less than 48 hours we then heard there was a charter flight that took Americans out. So wondering what transpired in the – what changed in those hours.

MR PATEL: Let me – so first let me – let’s take a little bit of a step back. First, I would say that when it comes to the safety and security of American citizens, especially those abroad, especially those in dangerous, untenable security situations, that is – we have no higher priority when it comes to that. I will also say in question to Matt’s – in response to Matt’s question about will there be potentially other movement like this for American citizens, that it is a very fluid and dynamic situation on the ground and circumstances change quite rapidly. And the commercial options that are available are either nonexistent or quite, quite limited. And so a decision was made to conduct this kind of – pull this kind of plan together.

But I will also add that we are the United States of America; this is what we do. And in countries around the world where we have diplomats, where we have American citizens, we have contingency planning, feasibility planning always in the works to rely on should the circumstances on the ground warrant it.

QUESTION: So is that – are – so are you saying that the – I’m not trying to put words in your mouth, but just to understand, the situation on the ground (inaudible) —

MR PATEL: The assessment was made – an assessment was made by us that the situation on the ground, both when it came to the security circumstances on the ground as well as the feasibility of commercial options made it such that we thought it was in the interest of the American citizens who can make their way to Cap-Haïtien that such an avenue be – for departure be made available to them.

QUESTION: And then a quick follow-up.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: Thirty-some American citizens seems like a very small number considering Matt also told us on Thursday that there are several hundred who had reached out to State through the portal to register interest in trying to get out, or – not interest, but asking for more information, indicating they would like to get out. Are you – how concerned are you about the safety of those hundreds of Americans that are still there?

MR PATEL: This is a fluid situation, and the number of individuals who have reached out to us through the crisis intake form is approaching a thousand, and we’re continuing to monitor the situation closely and evaluate the demand of U.S. citizens, evaluate the overall security situation, evaluate what is feasible when it comes to commercial transportation options, what is feasible for other transportation solutions. So I am just going to say that that work is ongoing, and we have no higher priority than the safety and security of American citizens; that we certainly recognize the security situation is untenable, and we’re continuing to look at what might be possible.

Camilla.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: Are you able to clarify if the American citizens who got out over the weekend – are they all American citizens? Are there any local permanent residents? Is it non-American family? Can you just clarify those —

MR PATEL: So I don’t have a – I don’t have a makeup to offer of the passengers on Sunday’s flight beyond what I said, which is that – the departure of over 30 U.S. citizens. Our priority right now continues to be American citizens. We will take a look at individuals of other categories based on availability, resources, demand signals, and things like that. But right now our priority continues to be American citizens.

QUESTION: And can you say if most of the Americans who have signed up to the crisis intake form – you’re saying that this is approaching a thousand – are they mostly in Port-au-Prince? Are they – can you give an idea on location, to —

MR PATEL: I’m not in a place to offer that kind of breakdown. I think an important thing to remember, Camilla, is that when people register with our crisis intake form, it is for a variety of reasons. Many, we assume, are in a circumstance where they are ready to fully depart the country per se; others may be more interested in just getting status updates, getting information on what avenues might be available to them. It is hard to paint this entire population with a single stroke.

QUESTION: And can you just – one more – can you just clarify on – there’s been reports about Guantanamo Bay and its possible usage in this crisis in Haiti. Are there any State offices, departmental offices, based in Gitmo at the moment?

MR PATEL: Not to my knowledge. And I think the Department of Homeland Security may be happy to speak to you about any contingency planning that they are doing as it relates to potential migration activities. I will just note that from our perch and vantage point, irregular migration levels in the Caribbean continue to be low. But in terms of any planning that is underway, I’m sure my colleagues at DHS would be happy to speak to you.

Staying with the front, Simon, anything?

QUESTION: First, I’m on Haiti then go – you can go elsewhere.

MR PATEL: Okay. Anything else on Haiti before we —

QUESTION: Before we can switch?

MR PATEL: Nick, you look like you’re about to put your hand up. Haiti? No, you’re good? All right.

QUESTION: Can we go —

MR PATEL: On Haiti? No? Okay, then I’m going to go to Simon. I’ll come to you, Said, I promise.

QUESTION: Yeah. I wanted – on Gaza, if I could get your response to the IPC, the integrated food security phase classification assessment, basically saying it’s already – the situation – the food shortages in the Gaza Strip have already exceeded famine levels. Mass death is now imminent, and basically the UN says a ceasefire immediately is needed to avert this. Is that something that, given the severity that’s laid out in this report, that the U.S. might consider?

MR PATEL: So first, I just want to say we have seen this alarming and heart-wrenching report. It is quite stark. There are children who are starving, that are malnourished as a result of the fact that humanitarian assistance can’t get to them. And that is why we believe so strongly that everything must be done to scale up the delivery of humanitarian assistance. We believe sustained humanitarian assistance is required. Unhindered land convoys, we think, are irreplaceable when it comes to the ability to reach people wherever they are across Gaza in addition to the additive and supplemental efforts of delivery of food via maritime routes and air drops.

I don’t have any new policy to announce, Simon. You’ve heard the Secretary say pretty clearly that we are for a ceasefire, but one that is coupled with the release of the hostages and one that allows some space for continued diplomacy and deliberations for broader peace and security in the region.

QUESTION: You mentioned unhindered land convoys. So is it correct that Israel is hindering the flow of aid across the land borders?

MR PATEL: That’s not at all what I was saying, meaning to imply. The point that I’m making is that there – the amount of aid that has been entering Gaza up to – we continue to need more. And this report is – it is pretty stark in its assessment of how much more is needed. But we continue to see progress in that space; I will say over the weekend the World Food Program’s 96th gate convoy successfully delivered aid into Gaza; 18 trucks were able to enter the north without any incident, were able to offload at their planned destinations without any looting. There was no additional interference.

I will also say that since March 2nd, U.S. C-130s and U.S. C-17s have dropped more than 315,000 meals, more than 140,000 bottles of water, and more than 5 tons of items such as rice, flour, pasta, and canned food. I’m certainly not trying to make the case that any of this is enough or addressing – enough to alleviate any concerns. But it is a step in the right direction, and it’s the kind of metrics we want to see and continue to hopefully see in the days ahead.

QUESTION: Okay. Just to clarify, the 18 trucks, surely there could be more trucks if it wasn’t for the Israelis who are controlling that border.

MR PATEL: Again, this is not a – you’ve heard me say this before. This is not a border that the United States controls, and Israel has legitimate security concerns, and we’re respectful of appropriate steps that need to be taken for assessing security for anything that might be entering Gaza. But we also continue to believe that more can be done expeditiously, more can be done rapidly, and overall more steps can be taken to allow the entrance of aid to help alleviate the dire humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

QUESTION: So that – sorry, I’ll hand over in a second. But this 96th gate, there was this one load of trucks that went through. Is that now like a regular crossing that trucks will be going through every day?

MR PATEL: That’s our hope. That’s our hope. That’s not for me to speak to from up here. I sort of just offer this metric to you as an assessment. But our hope is that the avenues that exist for humanitarian aid to flow into Gaza, all of them – these gates, airdrops, and so, what have you – that all of them be pursued aggressively so as to help alleviate the humanitarian crisis in Gaza right now.

QUESTION: I’m sorry, Vedant. Can I just say —

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: You mentioned that one of the things that you were dropping was pasta. Are those part of MREs, or are you dropping – when you drop the pasta, are you dropping enough clean water so it can be cooked?

MR PATEL: I don’t have a – I don’t have a technical breakdown of the kits, Matt. I just have five tons of food items that include rice, flour, pasta, and canned food; but I’m happy to —

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR PATEL: I’m sure USAID would be happy to check with you.

QUESTION: Yeah.

MR PATEL: It’s likely that they may already be ready-to-eat meals and already cooked so have you.

QUESTION: Thank you, Vedant. A couple questions. Today the Israelis assassinated Faiq Mabhouh who was one of the police commanders, and in fact he was responsible for the distribution of the American flour a couple weeks ago and so on, effectively and efficiently. Now, if I recall, there was a – back in February, I think February 24th, the administration requested that Israel not assassinate the police force because they keep order and so on. Is – has Israel broken this —

MR PATEL: I’m not aware of this —

QUESTION: You’re not aware?

MR PATEL: — specific report saying —

QUESTION: Could you look into it?

MR PATEL: I am not aware of this specific report, but I’m happy to check on it.

QUESTION: Okay. I have a couple more questions —

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: — just to follow up on Simon’s. UNICEF says that 13,000 children in Gaza have been killed. That is really – it’s staggering, but it doesn’t seem to have any end. I mean, this thing keeps going day after day. The Israelis keep going to the hospitals over and over and over again. So we see them now at the Shifa complex. So what is your comment? I mean, could this go on for the next six months?

MR PATEL: Let me say a couple things on this, Said. First, as it relates to any timeline, we have not been – we have not parsed words about the fact that we wanted to see this conflict end as soon as possible. And in fact, Hamas could end this conflict yesterday. Hamas could lay down its arms, all of its arms. Hamas could stop co-locating itself with civilian infrastructure, with civilian institutions like hospitals. Hamas could release all of the hostages that it has been holding since October 7th. All of those things could happen.

And on the impact on children, we are, of course, devasted by the toll that this conflict has taken. It is an unspeakable tragedy, the number of children that have been killed, and it is an unacceptable outcome of the fighting of the past five months. And that is why, at every opportunity, we have reiterated to our Israeli partners that additional steps must be taken to minimize civilian casualties. But, again, Said, I will also remind you that Hamas could end this conflict at any moment by releasing all of its hostages, by laying down its arms.

QUESTION: So nothing short of Hamas laying down its arms will bring this war to an end, right? Is that what you’re saying?

MR PATEL: That’s not at all – that’s not what I was saying, Said.

QUESTION: But that’s what you just said.

MR PATEL: That’s not what I’m saying. When it comes to – when it comes to a ceasefire, we have been very clear – I have, Matt has, the Secretary has – that we believe that progress being made on the release of hostages could allow for the conditions in which broader diplomatic conversations can be had when it comes to the safety, security, and stability of the region; and conditions could be created in which additional humanitarian aid might be able to enter Gaza, which is what we would hope for in such a ceasefire.

QUESTION: I want to ask about UNRWA, but just to follow up on your point now. I mean, are there any indications – has there been any assessment – that Hamas is about to lay down its arms, that it’s reaching the very end where it could say, cry uncle, and say, that’s it, we’re done?

MR PATEL: You have seen the Secretary and others speak pretty clearly that we believe some kind of deal as it relates to the release of hostages and progress in other areas continues to be possible, and it’s something that we’re continuing to work towards.

QUESTION: Yeah. But just to remind you that last Monday the intelligence chiefs, all of them, said that Hamas is not about to lay down its arms. So this war can go on.

MR PATEL: Again, Said, this is something that we’re going to continue to work towards.

QUESTION: Okay. One last question —

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: — on UNRWA. Yesterday Senator Chris Van Hollen called the claims against UNRWA as “flat-out lies,” unquote. Do you – are you – in fact, first of all, with the senator, you looked at what he based his assessment on. You have – are you changing your position on UNRWA and the investigation and so on? Because it seems like all the Europeans, all your allies – Australia, Canada, all of them – are saying there is no evidence that UNRWA was involved in any way, shape, or form. And —

MR PATEL: Said, I will let the —

QUESTION: — on October 7th.

MR PATEL: I will let the senator clarify or expand on any of his comments. I will just say that we found the allegations that were made against certain UNRWA employees to be credible and to be legitimate, and that is why we continue to be focused on this ongoing investigation. And as Secretary Blinken has said, it is important that these allegations are thoroughly investigated, that there’s clear accountability, and that necessary measures are put in place so it doesn’t happen again. We believe that the United Nations recognizes this, which is why we welcomed the fast launch of an investigation and an independent review to look at some of these issues, and we look forward to the result. I will also say though, Said, we agree that UNRWA plays a critical role in providing lifesaving assistance to Palestinians in Gaza across the region, including essential food, essential medicine, shelter, and other vital humanitarian support. And lastly, on our partners and allies in other countries, these are sovereign decisions for those countries to make when it comes to the support that they are in a place to provision or not.

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: Just a follow-up on UNRWA?

MR PATEL: Yeah, sure, go ahead.

QUESTION: The head of UNRWA today – Philippe Lazzarini – said that he was denied entry into Gaza by Israel. Does the United States have a stance on that or has there been any discussion about that?

MR PATEL: I would defer to the – our Israeli partners as well as the United Nations. I don’t have anything to offer on that.

QUESTION: Well, do you think it’s fine if they want to deny him entry?

MR PATEL: I don’t have insight into what Chairman Lazzarini was going for and so I don’t want to – I don’t want to misspeak, but I’m happy to look into more. But again, you’ve heard me say this before – just broadly, not as it relates to this circumstance – this is not a border that the United States has access to.

QUESTION: But in general, shouldn’t the – a senior official from UNRWA, which you say is an important organization, should be allowed to visit Gaza?

MR PATEL: Certainly. I – but again, I don’t know the specifics surrounding this, so I’m – just will refer to our Israeli partners on this.

QUESTION: Also just – sorry, to clarify on your position on UNRWA, I think when the allegations first came out, the Secretary said they were – these allegations are credible in terms of – I think we’re talking about 12 UNRWA staff who took – who may have taken part in October 7th, right. That’s one kind of allegation. I think there’s a broader allegation that Hamas is a proxy for – sorry, UNRWA is a proxy for Hamas. Does the U.S. have – regardless of where the —

MR PATEL: That is not – that’s not an assessment that we share. It’s not an assessment that we – that’s not an assessment that you’ve seen us speak to or share. What we’re talking about when I talk about these ongoing investigations is the specific circumstance around the subset of employees that you’re referring to.

QUESTION: Right.

MR PATEL: Michel.

QUESTION: Yeah, Vedant, have you received any plan from Israel regarding entering Rafah? Especially the prime minister has confirmed during the weekend that they will be entering Rafah soon and they will be moving the people out of the area.

MR PATEL: We have not seen any details to that plan, and we have been clear at the highest levels that Israel cannot and should not proceed with a full-scale military operation in Rafah without a credible and implementable plan for ensuring the safety and support for more than the 1 million people sheltering there. So no, we have not seen the details of that plan. The Government of Israel has said that they will implement a humanitarian assistance plan. They’ve said that publicly, but we have not seen anything yet.

QUESTION: So, sorry, when you say you have been clear that Israel cannot and should not start a Rafah operation, what does that mean, “cannot?” I mean, of course they can, right?

MR PATEL: What do you mean, Matt?

QUESTION: Well, you say that they cannot and should not start an operation in Rafah without this plan, but I don’t understand your use of the word “cannot,” because —

MR PATEL: Certainly, yes. I will just – to take a step back, of course —

QUESTION: If there’s a plan or not, they can do it, right?

MR PATEL: Let me just say that, again, Israel of course is a sovereign country. I say “cannot” as a turn of words to express our dire and immense concern about any kind of impending —

QUESTION: I get that, but, I mean, It’s not an issue of “can” for – it’s an issue of whether they should or not.

MR PATEL: Correct.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR PATEL: I will also just note, though, Matt, though, even in the – if we’re going to parse on the specific of the words, even in the “can” —

QUESTION: Well, you were the one who used it, not me.

MR PATEL: No, no, I mean, I – just to say that even in the – if we’re focusing on the “can” of it all, there continues to be a lot that needs to be dealt with in the context of Rafah. One – you’ve heard us say this before – more than 1 million people are sheltering there. Rafah as a region overall is a conduit for entry of humanitarian aid. It’s also a conduit for departure of foreign nationals. So without a serious, credible plan that addresses all of this stuff, I think it would be very difficult to conduct something like this. So perhaps they cannot even do something like this without a credible plan.

QUESTION: Right. Well, okay.

QUESTION: Vedant, could I just – yeah. Can I just follow up on Matt?

MR PATEL: Said.

QUESTION: Because last week, the top Israeli commander – military commander – talked about something like three islands – he called them human islands and so on – for moving 1.4 million people. Now, could this look anything other than like a concentration camp in your view? Is that plan that you may have looked at?

MR PATEL: So, Said, let me just be very clear about this so there’s no question. When we’re talking about any kind of humanitarian plan as it comes to Rafah or plans that address how to ensure that the 1 million people sheltering there are not impacted by any violence or military activity, there’s no part of that in which we claim to mean that that would involve forcible movement of these people in Gaza, these people who might be sheltering in Rafah. I would just say broadly that anything like that would, one, need to be voluntary; two, I’ve not seen the specifics of that plan, so I unfortunately can’t comment on that. But both in the context of our broader vision for the region, but both in terms of dealing with this immediate issue, there should be no forcible movement or displacement of the Palestinian people.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Vedant.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: I will just – I’ll stay also in Gaza.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: Last evening, our colleague, our correspondent, was arrested by IDF in al-Shifa complex outskirts. He was wearing his vest, his helmet; he had his equipment with him. He was beaten, stripped, and got his equipment destroyed. This is – I mean, the IDF plainly saw that he’s a journalist with his equipment, and this didn’t stop them. And just add him to our – a long list of journalists that have been either killed, injured, or detained by the Israeli forces. Do you have any comment?

MR PATEL: We’re aware of those reports and we’ve asked the Government of Israel for more information. But in general, we have been very clear that journalists play a vital role and that no journalist should be targeted in order to silence their voices in this conflict or any other. And the circumstances are as such in Gaza where we believe the journalism and the voices of journalists is more important than ever. But again, as it relates to this specific situation, we’ve asked for more information but I don’t have any other specific comment on that.

QUESTION: And about al-Shifa hospital.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: The ongoing operation – because the arresting happened right before this operation started, and that led us to believe that it is a way to black out what’s going on in al-Shifa complex. Do you have – do you hear from your Israeli partners why they are targeting this hospital?

MR PATEL: So I’m not going to speak to specific military tactics or assessments or operations from up here. Let me just say two things. First, President Biden, Secretary Blinken, others have made their points quite clear that civilians at hospitals, medical personnel, patients must be protected, and that hospitals must be enabled to be supported, to be run effectively, and to treat patients and to care for people who need help from these hospitals.

I will also just note, though, that there is plenty of open-source information out there that indicate Hamas’s use of many different kinds of civilian institutions, including hospitals, to store weapons, to function as command and control centers, to house its fighters. There also is information that Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad use some hospitals in the Gaza Strip, including al-Shifa, and tunnels underneath to conceal and support their military operations and potentially hold hostages.

So I’d refer you to the IDF to speak more to their specific operations.

Alex, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you, Vedant.

MR PATEL: On this or another topic? We’ve got to —

QUESTION: Moving to Russia if I —

MR PATEL: Well, I’m going to – I think other people have questions on this, so I’ll come back to you.

QUESTION: Please come back.

QUESTION: In the region.

MR PATEL: In the region? Unless anything has – someone still has anything on Gaza specifically?

QUESTION: I have one quick —

MR PATEL: Go ahead, Ryan.

QUESTION: — follow-up on what they were asking about UNRWA.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: When you originally talked about the allegations against the 12 staff, you had said that UNRWA itself was the one that forwarded those allegations along. You said that you found them credible. But since then, UNRWA itself has said that its staff were tortured by Israel in order to get some of those confessions extracted. Does that change your view of the evidence that was presented by Israel? And if UNRWA was credible enough for you to believe the allegations the first time, is UNRWA credible enough when they make an allegation of torture against its staff?

MR PATEL: I’ve not seen that reporting, Ryan, but I will just note that we continue to find the allegations that were laid out a number of months ago to be credible, and we also welcome the swiftness at which UNRWA informed not just the United States but others about this, but also the swiftness in which the United Nations launched its own investigation mechanism and its own independent review, and we look forward to seeing those results. And to echo Secretary Blinken, we want these allegations thoroughly investigated so that there is clear accountability and measures put in place so this doesn’t happen again.

We want all this to happen because we believe very strongly that UNRWA plays a critical role in producing lifesaving assistance in the region – not just in Gaza, but the broader Middle East as well. They are vital, vital players when it comes to food, medicine, shelter, and other humanitarian support.

QUESTION: Your position, which is in opposition, as they said, to so many allies around the world, has encouraged Congress to move forward with a ban. There’s now an agreement between some Democrats and some Republicans to continue the ban – think, what, throughout the rest of the year. Is that something that the State Department would support, tying the State Department’s hands even if the report comes back and finds that —

MR PATEL: You’ve heard me talk about this before broadly when it comes to the supplemental bill that is being negotiated in Congress. These are active and ongoing things that are happening, so I’m not going to go down a rabbit hole too much. But broadly, we support the contours of this supplemental bill. We believe that it is vital for what is required to support our Ukrainian partners, to support our Israeli partners. There is also funding in that supplemental bill for humanitarian aid, including a significant portion for Gaza. So these conversations are going to continue to happen, and I will let those – the bill take more concrete shape.

Anything else on Gaza before we move to —

QUESTION: I have one on Honduras, but anybody’s got other —

MR PATEL: What’s that?

QUESTION: I have one on Honduras but if —

MR PATEL: Yeah, we’ll – I’ll try to come back to you if I can.

Diyar, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you, Vedant.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: One question on the Kurdistan region election.

MR PATEL: Uh-huh.

QUESTION: The Kurdistan region long-delayed election, which was scheduled to be held in June 10th, but today the Kurdistan ruling party – KDP – announced that they will not participate in that election and they said that the Iraqi top court is trying to imposing an illegal and unconstitutional election in the Kurdistan region, which is not acceptable for them, and this may result in further delay in that election. Do you have any comment and reaction to that? And does the United States willing to engage with the parties in the region to bring the solution to that matter?

MR PATEL: We’ve seen the KDP Politburo statement that they will boycott the upcoming Iraqi Kurdistan parliament elections. We’re concerned by the KDP’s announcement. Our consistent position has been to support the conduct of and the full participation in free, fair, transparent, and credible elections. We also understand that many of the concerns raised by Iraqi Kurds with respect to recent decisions made by the federal institutions, but we don’t think that boycotting these elections will serve the interests of the IKR, the Kurdish people, or Iraq in general.

QUESTION: And one more question.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: The tensions between Kurdistan region and Baghdad is getting more intense and tense, especially after the Iraqi top court decisions against the Kurdistan region. So what’s your reaction to that disputes, and how are you going to work with these two partners to bring a solution to that disputes?

MR PATEL: I will say we regularly engage with officials in Baghdad and Erbil about issues of shared interest, including Iraqi stability, rule of law and enduring protections of all of Iraq’s communities. But I’m not going to get into the details of these court decisions. Fundamentally, though, the administration believes that stabilizing Iraq through the protection of Iraqi minorities, preserving the electoral rights of those minorities, consistent with the Iraqi constitution, is going to lead to stability and security of the Iraqi Kurdistan Region broadly.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR PATEL: Go ahead. Yeah.

QUESTION: Thank you, sir. So Pakistan’s airstrikes hit multiple TTP sites, Tehrik-e Taliban Pakistan sites, inside Afghanistan that killed eight. It was in response of a bombing, suicide bombing, that killed seven soldiers in Pakistan. Do you have any comment?

MR PATEL: So we’ve seen reports that Pakistan carried out airstrikes in Afghanistan in response to the attack in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan on Saturday at a military post. We deeply regret the loss of life and injustices sustained during the attack in Pakistan, and the loss of civilian lives during the strike in Afghanistan. We urge the Taliban to ensure that terrorist attacks are not launched from Afghan soil, and we urge Pakistan to exercise restraint and ensure civilians are not harmed in their counterterrorism efforts. And we urge both sides to address any differences. We remain committed to ensuring that Afghanistan never again becomes a safe haven for terrorists who wish to harm the United States or our partners and allies.

QUESTION: But is United States is helping Pakistan in counterterrorism operations and intelligence sharing?

MR PATEL: We are in regular communication with Pakistani leaders to discuss Afghanistan in detail, including through our counterterrorism dialogue and other bilateral consultations.

QUESTION: And U.S. Ambassador to Pakistan Donald Blome met with President Zardari, prime minister, and foreign minister, and discussed bilateral ties. Can you just tell us what will he discuss in those meetings?

MR PATEL: I think you just answered the question for me. He said they discussed bilateral ties. So – look, I’m sure our embassy in Islamabad will have more to share on this. But Ambassador Blome on March 15th did meet with Prime Minister Sharif to discuss a broad range of bilateral issues – as you said, partnering with the Government of Pakistan on regional security; the United States’s support for continued economic reforms with and through the International Monetary Fund; trade and investment, education, climate change, and other private sector led economic growth issues that we continue to engage with our Pakistani partners on. And they discussed a number of, range of other issues as well.

QUESTION: Do you mind if I just briefly hop in on this?

MR PATEL: Yeah, sure.

QUESTION: When you say call on Pakistan to exercise restraint, could you elaborate? Does that mean that they shouldn’t have carried out the airstrikes; they shouldn’t carry out further airstrikes?

MR PATEL: You’re speaking to the previous question, right?

QUESTION: Yeah, on Afghanistan, yeah.

MR PATEL: Yes, yes. Shaun, any loss of civilian life is troubling and heartbreaking to us, and so we want to make sure that when some of these operations are being conducted, that every step possible is being taken, that it’s the perpetrators that are being held to account, and that it’s not civilians who are being impacted.

QUESTION: Do you mind if I switch to a different topic (inaudible) —

MR PATEL: Not at all. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Niger?

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: There has been a lot of uncertainty about that, the junta’s remarks appearing to sever military cooperation with the U.S. Do you have any update where things stand? Does the United States think that that’s where Niger is going?

MR PATEL: So to take a step back, Shaun, a senior U.S. delegation traveled to Niger last week to discuss a number of issues with the CNSP. The U.S. is aware of the March 16th statement by the CNSP announcing the end of the status of force agreements between Niger and the United States. This statement followed from frank conversations from this American delegation on the CNSP’s trajectory, and we are in touch with the transition authorities to seek clarification of their comments and to discuss additional next steps.

QUESTION: To seek clarification – I mean, is it the sense to the United States that military cooperation is a good thing, that United States wants to continue that in Niger?

MR PATEL: I would say broadly that our security partnership with West African partners are mutually beneficial and are intended to achieve what we believe to be shared goals of detecting, deterring, and reducing terrorist violence, and creating an environment conducive to economic and social development.

QUESTION: And when you say seeking clarification, is there something that’s been happening since Friday? Has there – obviously the delegation’s left, but has there been some sort of contact? How is the United States trying to seek that clarification?

MR PATEL: We continue to engage through our embassy. We continue to have our ambassador and our embassy team there, and we’re continuing to discuss with them. I will just note that the delegation meeting included an exchange of views and a number of ideas – Niger’s path to civilian democratic rule; our shared fight against terrorism, including the role of U.S. security support; the importance of Niger conducting its external partnerships in a manner consistent with international law. Those were a number of things that were discussed.

Nick, you’ve had your – patiently – hand up. I’ll come to you, Alex; I promise.

QUESTION: Different topic. There are some rumblings on the Hill and elsewhere about Chilean criminals using the Visa Waiver Program to come to the United States – pardon me – and commit organized crime. Some members on the Hill are threatening to block funding for the Visa Waiver Program. Are you familiar with this issue, and do you have any comment on it?

MR PATEL: So I don’t have any specific comment on this specific issue, Nick. But let me just say broadly in the context of visas and any circumstance as it relates to any country around the world, whether they are party to the Visa Waiver Program or not, a visa allows a foreign national to travel to a U.S. port of entry and request permission to enter the United States. But the visa does not guarantee entry into the United States. U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials at ports of entry have broad statutory authority to conduct inspections and permit or deny admission to the United States in accordance with U.S. immigration law. We take the – I would say the administration broadly takes the safety and security of our ports of entry quite seriously. I am sure my colleagues at DHS would be happy to talk to you about some of this more.

Alex, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you, Vedant. I have my question, but before that, let me go back to Russia briefly. Curious where you are standing on growing calls to the administration to refrain from recognizing Putin as a duly elected president.

MR PATEL: You were late, Alex; we talked about this at the top. We talked about this at the top. So you can read the transcript. So why don’t we go to your next question. Anything else?

QUESTION: Today marks five months since the detention of RFE/RL reporter Alsu Kurmasheva in Russia. I know there was a meeting last week in this building; assistant secretary met with her husband. What is your understanding of why she is in jail?

MR PATEL: Look, Alex. We believe her detention to be just another in a long line of the Russian Federation’s actions of arbitrarily detaining journalists who are just doing their jobs. I will let them speak to any kind of a sham explanation that they are providing. But this is something that we’re going to continue to remain deeply engaged on. As you know, she is not an American citizen, so our options here are somewhat limited.

QUESTION: You meant she is an American citizen?

MR PATEL: Sorry, she’s a dual citizen. She’s – she is a dual citizen, and therefore our ability to engage through appropriate consular channels are limited, because this is something that the Russian Federation often does when it is detaining dual nationals.

QUESTION: Just to be certain, is that the reason to why the administration hasn’t recognized her arrest as – detention as wrongful yet?

MR PATEL: Alex, there is a number of factors that go into these kinds of assessments, and I’m not going to speak to that deliberative process in specificity.

QUESTION: What we don’t hear from you is urgency. Five months in, the Russian authorities have never allowed to talk to her – to daughters, her husband. Why is it taking this long?

MR PATEL: Alex, this is something that we’re continuing to work around the clock. But again, I will remind you we just spoke about this. When someone is detained as a dual national in the Russian Federation, the Russian Federation has a long track record of not giving respectful consular access consistent with the consular convention as it pertains to the other country. There is a clear track record of this. And so it should be no surprise that they are conducting themselves in this way. But we are continuing to be deeply engaged on this and work it around the clock.

QUESTION: Okay. On South Caucasus, if I may.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: I’m just curious if you have anything for me on Special Advisor Bono’s trip to the region. He has been there for a couple of days now, had meetings in Baku. What is he hoping to achieve this time?

MR PATEL: I don’t have any updates on his trip, but I’m happy to check with the team and get back to you.

QUESTION: Okay. Another question, if I may.

MR PATEL: I’m going to work the room, Alex; I’ve got to do it.

QUESTION: Just —

MR PATEL: Go ahead, in the back.

QUESTION: Oh, thank you. Recently, DPRK launched a missile again. So do you have any reaction for yesterday’s event?

MR PATEL: We strongly condemn, again, the March 18th ballistic missile launch. These launches, like all other ballistic missile launches in recent years, are in violation of multiple UN Security Council resolutions. They pose a threat to regional and international peace and security, and we continue to consult closely with the Republic of Korea, Japan, and other allies and partners about the best way to engage the DPRK, deter aggression, and coordinate international responses to the DPRK’s violations of multiple UN Security Council resolutions.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR PATEL: Ryan, go ahead.

QUESTION: On Honduras.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: So earlier this month, the former president, as you know, was convicted of drug trafficking. But one of his major achievements aside from drug trafficking when he was in office was the creation of these kind of libertarian free market zones known as ZEDEs that have been really popular with crypto investors. So just I think last week, President Castro withdrew from the World Bank’s settlement court in order to kind of fend off this $11 billion attack by these crypto investors on Honduras. $11 billion would be about a third of Honduras’s entire budget.

Now, you’ve been pressured by some senators to kind of support these libertarian zones that are used by the crypto utopians, and some senators have asked you to support Honduran sovereignty and democracy instead. Is State – where does the State Department come down on this, on this fight going on between American investors and the Honduran Government?

MR PATEL: Ryan, I’m going to have to check in with the team on that and get back to you, unfortunately.

Michel, go ahead.

QUESTION: Yeah, I have two questions, Vedant.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: One on Assistant Secretary Leaf. She’s been visiting the Middle East since last week. What is she trying to achieve? What is she doing there?

MR PATEL: So as you know, Assistant Secretary Leaf is a senior official of this department who has been engaged around the clock on the many issues currently facing the Middle East. I’m happy to check with the NEA Bureau if there’s specific readouts that we can share as it relates to some of her engagements.

QUESTION: And on Niger.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: Is the U.S. delegation back to Washington and what’s going on with Niger? Is the U.S. planning to leave the country soon?

MR PATEL: So they are back. I think Shaun asked this question not too long ago, but I will just note that we are aware of the March 16th statement from the CNSP. This statement followed from conversations with this American delegation that they visited where we had some frank conversations about the CNSP’s trajectory, and we are continuing to be in touch with transition authorities to seek clarification and discuss next steps.

Simon, go ahead.

QUESTION: Any plans to leave very soon?

MR PATEL: This is one of the things that we continue our – to be discussing with them and discussing next steps. I will just say, as I said to Shaun, we believe our security partnerships in West Africa are mutually beneficial and they achieve – are intended to achieve, I should say, what we think to be shared goals of detecting, deterring, and reducing terrorist violence.

Simon.

QUESTION: Thanks.

QUESTION: If I can squeeze one in on Cuba, the Cuban foreign ministry said it summoned U.S. top diplomat Benjamin Ziff after protests on Sunday and accused the U.S. of interfering in Cuba’s internal affairs. Do you have any response to that?

MR PATEL: Well, let me just be quite, quite unambiguous about this, Simon. The United States is not behind these protests in Cuba, and the accusation of that is absurd. I will note, though, since you asked, we are closely following these reports. Protests across several cities in Cuba yesterday called for electricity, food, and fundamental freedoms. I think what we are seeing is a reflection of the dire situation on the island. We urge the Cuban Government to refrain from violence and unjust detentions and are calling on the authorities to respect the Cuban citizens’ right to peaceful assembly.

QUESTION: Has the – have you responded to that summon? Did Ziff go to meet them?

MR PATEL: I’m not aware – I’m not aware. I would have to check specifically.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR PATEL: Jalil.

QUESTION: Thank you very much, Mr. Patel, and Happy Ramadan to you. Just two questions. When you were commenting about the strikes between Pakistan and Afghanistan, I didn’t feel like you sounded like Pakistan was an ally. It seemed like you were treating both the countries in a very balanced manner, telling Pakistan to restrain. So do you not believe that the Afghanistan land is being used by the TTP terrorists against Pakistan? Does the —

MR PATEL: Well, the – let me just say first, next time you have feedback, you can find me on Yelp if you’d like.

But look, broadly, we believe that it is important that steps be taken to minimize casualties. We’re aware of these reports that were carried out. And we deeply regret the loss of life and the injuries sustained, both the seven Pakistani soldiers who perished in – at the onset of the first suicide bomb as well as the civilians who were impacted and lost their life by this counterstrike. Again, though, Pakistan is an important and key partner and one that we are in regular communication with when it comes to talking through our counterterrorism dialogue and other shared security priorities.

Go ahead, in the back.

QUESTION: Just one more – just one —

MR PATEL: Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: Thank you very much.

MR PATEL: We’ll – then I’ll come to you (inaudible). Sorry.

QUESTION: (Inaudible.) A few weeks ago in Adiala Jail where Imran Khan is kept, two inmates in jail were killed. Has Ambassador Blome shared any concerns about Imran Khan’s assassination or any security concerns with the State Department, or no?

MR PATEL: I don’t have any specifics to offer on that, including as it relates to Ambassador Blome’s meeting with Prime Minister Sharif. I don’t have any other specifics to offer beyond what I laid out.

(Inaudible) go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR PATEL: And then we’ll wrap after you.

QUESTION: Sure.

MR PATEL: Go ahead.

QUESTION: Currently, the third Summit for Democracy is taking place in South Korea. Compared to the past two years, there’s been less media coverage surrounding it and there’s been criticism of the U.S.’s invitee list as well as its message of democracy to the world, particularly from the Global South. Do you think the Biden administration’s approach to promoting democracy around the world is working?

MR PATEL: Well, I will just note (inaudible) that we are putting an immense emphasis on the Secretary’s participation in the Summit of Democracy, so much so that he gave some pretty important set of remarks. First, let me just say we are thankful to our hosts, the Republic of Korea, for hosting the Secretary at the beginning of the summit and continuing to have some great programming throughout the week. We know that this is a shared priority not just between the United States and the Republic of Korea, but also other countries who participated.

But the Secretary, as a part of this, outlined the U.S. strategy to promote information integrity and resilience. We believe information integrity is critically important to addressing shared global challenges, including health, security, the climate crisis, revitalizing our alliances, and we have a positive and holistic vision for a resilient information environment. And let me just say this is something that has been a priority for this Secretary, but it has also been something that our bureau, the Bureau of Global Public Affairs, as well as Under Secretary for Public Affairs and Public Diplomacy Liz Allen and her team have been deeply engaged on since the onset of this administration.

All right. Thanks, everybody.

(The briefing was concluded at 1:28 p.m.)

# # #