MR PRICE: Hello. happy monday Welcome back. Welcome back to the tundra. It has been a very long time. It is very good to see everyone from this perch. I hope I remember how to do this. We’ll go ahead and get started. A few things at the top and then I’ll take your questions.
First, the United States continues to demonstrate its commitments to the thousands of brave Afghans who stood by our side over the past two decades. We have already taken significant steps to improve the Afghanistan Special Immigrant Visa Program, and today we announced a change that will simplify and streamline the application process for Afghan applicants. Starting this week, as you heard earlier this morning, applicants to the new Afghanistan SIV Program will only need to fill out one form, an amended Form DS-157, as their SIV petition. New applicants will no longer need to file Form I-360, a petition for special immigrant status, with DHS’s US Citizenship and Immigration Services. This new streamlined process will help remove barriers for applicants and reduce application times. This change does not reduce or eliminate any of the robust security vetting processes required before the benefit is granted.
This is one of the many steps we have taken to improve the SIV process while protecting national security. Since the start of the administration, we have poured resources into this vital program and reviewed every step of the statutorily required application process to simplify wherever possible, and you heard about the latest steps today.
Next, last Friday, the administration released the 2022 Elie Wiesel Act Report to Congress, alongside the new US Strategy to Anticipate, Prevent and Respond to Atrocities. These products reaffirm that preventing atrocities, including genocide, is a core US national security interest and a core moral responsibility. The report describes countries experiencing atrocities and recovering from atrocities in the past year. It includes our continued alarm and condemnation of President Putin’s brutal, premeditated and unprovoked war against Ukraine.
Of course, Russia’s ongoing slaughter in Ukraine is not the only place we have seen atrocities committed or seen warning signs of atrocities. The report also documents appalling conditions in countries ranging from Afghanistan to Burma to the People’s Republic of China. The report draws attention to joint efforts to strengthen the ability of countries to protect their populations and also to account for crimes and abuses of human rights in the past, including in Colombia and Guatemala. The new strategy institutionalizes whole-of-government processes by numbering the roles and coordination mechanisms of our interagency Disaster Prevention Task Force. Many atrocities are the result of deliberate planning over time and can be prevented. If we can detect early the early warning signs of atrocities, we can also act early to disrupt the path of deadly escalation.
The strategy recognizes that a key aspect of response and recovery is justice for survivors and victims and the prosecution of those responsible for atrocities. This approach informs our work within the United Kingdom – with the United Kingdom and the European Union through the Astrocity Crime Advisory Group to assist the office of the general prosecutor of Ukraine. In addition, the United States supports a range of efforts to detect and document human rights abuses or violations of international humanitarian law that can be used by national and international accountability mechanisms. This includes the Conflict Observatory Program, which captures, analyzes, and provides open source information to the public documenting evidence of atrocities committed by Russian forces in Ukraine.
Together, the report and strategy reinforce our ongoing commitment to call out, condemn, and bring justice to those who commit humanity’s most heinous crimes and prevent those crimes from being committed in the first place.
And finally, tomorrow and Wednesday, Secretary of State Blinken and Commerce Secretary Raimondo will co-host a supply chain ministerial forum to work with partners to reduce short-term bottlenecks and long-term supply chain challenges that hurt all Americans, in especially working families. Supply chain disruptions hamper economic growth and fuel inflationary pressures. The ministerial forum builds on the Global Supply Chain Resilience Summit that President Biden held in October last year with the European Union and over a dozen countries that also recognize the importance of strong and resilient supply chains. It will include partners from all over the world and will include sessions with domestic and foreign partners, stakeholders, and sub-national officials from 17 economies on July 19th and a ministerial Plenary on July 20th. The participants from labor, industry, civil society, and sub-national governments include members of historically underrepresented communities whose presence at the table is necessary to solve these problems.
The administration is committed to inclusive economic growth. We can improve our global supply chains through international diplomacy and make them safe and resilient, and we will seek political commitments to cooperate with allies and partners to minimize supply chain disruption in the near term. We will also seek to work together to build long-term supply chain resilience to prevent future disruptions by increasing transparency, creating and hardening diverse supply chains through joint investment, improving security through sharing best practices, and maintaining resilient supply chains through following high standards. labor and environmental standards. This is part of the department’s ongoing work to provide solutions to the American people by addressing supply chain challenges.
With that, we will turn to your questions.
QUESTION: Okay. Thank you, Ned. I have a couple, but neither is earth-shaking, groundbreaking. So I’ll pass to –
MR PRICE: Okay. Humeyra, please.
QUESTION: May I ask about this American citizen who is being detained in the United Arab Emirates over the weekend? I mean, basically right groups say he was kept for political reasons. He has links to Khashoggi. Does the US share that assessment, and what exactly are you doing with the Emiratis to try to bring him home or seek a fair trial?
MR PRICE: Well, Humeyra, we have been actively and closely involved in this case ever since we learned about it shortly after it was detained late last week. We have raised his detention with higher levels of the Emirati Government. We have requested additional information from our Emirati partners. And we are watching this case closely, and we are providing appropriate consular support. Indeed, the consular officers of our embassy visited Mr. Ghafoor on July 15th. They visited him again on July 17th. Embassy officers observed his virtual hearing today on July 18th. We have communicated our expectations to our Emirati partners that Mr. Ghafoor has continued consular access, that he receives a fair and transparent legal process, and that he is treated humanely.
You asked about the basis for his detention and the charges against him. Of course, we would refer you to the Emirati authorities to talk about that, but what I can say is that we have not seen any indication at this point that his imprisonment has anything to do with his association with Jamal Khashoggi , but we still gather. information. Again, as I said, we have raised this case at higher levels, and we are doing everything we can to ensure that Mr Ghafoor is treated fairly and humanely.
QUESTION: Doesn’t it strike you, though, that it came — it comes on the heels of President Biden’s visit to Saudi Arabia, it’s too much of a coincidence?
MR PRICE: Humeyra, once again, we have seen nothing –
QUESTION: Were you beheaded by the Emiratis, by the way, in custody?
MR PRICE: Again, what I can say is that we certainly did not apply – we did not seek to arrest Mr. Ghafoor. The Emiratis have spoken to their rationale for the detention. We’re going to continue to engage with them. We have been engaging at very high levels in this case, and that will continue.
QUESTION: Just one thing – one last thing on that. I understand that the detention did not come at the request of the United States but the investigation into it by the Emiratis precedes this, it goes back to a few years, I understand. Did the United States ask for that investigation?
MR PRICE: If any such investigative assistance was requested, it would have been done by the Department of Justice. It is not my place to speak to the Department of Justice. I would need to direct you there.
QUESTION: Did he also refuse to comment.
QUESTION: Did he refuse to comment on this.
MR PRICE : Which is their prerogative. Jane.
QUESTION: Thank you, Ned. Welcome back.
QUESTION: I have two questions on Korea and China. First question in Korea. Regarding the case where the former South Korean government Moon Jae-in forcibly returned fishermen who escaped from North Korea, can you comment on how this will affect human rights issues? And I followed up after this.
MR PRICE: Well, Janne, we have a number of concerns with the DPRK, with its behavior on the international stage. Of course, we have spoken on a number of recent occasions about the unprecedented number of ballistic missile tests that the DPRK regime has carried out in recent weeks. But our concerns with the DPRK regime do not end with its WMD programs. Of course, we have deep concerns about the human rights record of the regime in the DPRK. These are concerns we share with our allies and partners around the world. These are concerns we share with our ally, the Republic of Korea. These are concerns that we talk about with our allies and partners as well, and we have some tools, including tools that we have used, to precisely measure accountability for the atrocities and mis- human rights abuses that have occurred within the DPRK. .
In terms of moving individuals from the ROK, I would have to defer to the ROK Government to talk about that process.
QUESTION: On China, it is reported that China has exported military goods to Russia. Can you confirm what kind of material it is?
MR PRICE: I can – sorry. What was the last part of your question?
QUESTION: Can you confirm what kind of material it is?
MR PRICE: Ah, we have spoken since February 24th and regularly thereafter about the steps we have taken to limit the types of sensitive technologies that can be exported to the Russian Federation. Not only have we enacted a series of punitive sanctions and financial measures against the Russian economy, but our export controls have taken a significant toll.
Since the invasion, there has been a decrease of 74 percent by value of global exports of semiconductors, to name just one example, to Russia compared to the same period last year. This is the period between March and May in 2022 this year compared to 2021 last year. We are watching very closely as countries pursue and in some cases maintain a relationship with the Russian Federation.
We have not seen, as we said, the PRC engaging in the kind of systemic avoidance or providing military equipment to Russia, but we will be watching very closely. This is a message that we have made clear publicly that the provision of arms or any assistance on behalf of the PRC to systematically help Russia avoid the unprecedented sanctions, export controls, other financial measures imposed on Moscow, which would come with very steep cost.
It would bring a very steep cost not only from the United States but the United States acting with the dozens of countries around the world with whom we have enacted this sanctions and export control regime. We have made this clear to the PRC from the earliest days of Russia’s war against Ukraine. Secretary Blinken reiterated this message when he met State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi in Bali a few days ago.
QUESTION: With this streamlining of the SIV application process, is the US still helping to facilitate flights from outside of Afghanistan with any SIV applicants? Is that something that is starting again or has it been happening for the last few weeks?
MR PRICE: This has been something that has been happening constantly since the end of last year. And what I can say is, as well as – well, let me start – back up just a little.
You remember, of course, that during the evacuation period approximately 124,000 individuals were airlifted from Afghanistan. Of those, around 75,000 were Afghans. We expect the majority of those individuals to be eligible for SIV. Many of them are somewhere – somewhere in that SIV application process.
Regarding relocation since August 31st of last year, you’ve heard us talk constantly about the progress we’ve made in terms of US citizens and lawful permanent residents. To date, the United States has facilitated the departure of 803 US citizens and 594 lawful permanent residents from Afghanistan. When we said at the time that our commitment to those seeking to leave Afghanistan, including US citizens and LPRs, would be ongoing, we meant it.
But we also said, when it came to our partners, the many thousands of Afghans who assisted the United States Government in various ways during our 20-year military engagement in Afghanistan – I can’t give you a firm figure, but I can tell you the there have been thousands of Afghans, Afghans in danger, who – those we have been in a position – I should say, we have been in a position to help facilitate their travel.
QUESTION: But you can’t say how many flights? How regularly?
MR PRICE: I can tell you that flights leave regularly. Flights depart regularly with those groups we are determined and committed to helping. That includes US citizens, LPRs, and Afghans who have worked with us over that 20-year period.
QUESTION: Can I ask you about the upcoming meeting, the three-way meeting between Turkey, Russia and Iran, which is coming up in Tehran this week? Perhaps in general, what does the United States hope for from this? Do you think there is any possibility of progress in terms of whether it is Syria or whether it is the grain shipments out of Ukraine? And specifically on Putin traveling, is there any concern for him to have diplomatic commitments like this?
MR PRICE: I will leave it to these three countries to talk about the agenda. We have seen various statements emanating from these countries regarding the topics of discussion, but I will let these three countries speak to him.
QUESTION: Just specifically – sure, just one thing on that. Today, President Erdoğan again made a comment that seemed to suggest that it is not a done deal on NATO accession for Finland and Sweden. How confident is the United States that this is actually a done deal, that this — that the Turks have given their approval to it, or is this still a work in progress?
MR PRICE: We were in Madrid, Spain late last month. Some of you were there with us. The President and the Secretary of State, others, and all of you who were watching heard from the 30 NATO Allies in the room at that NATO summit in Madrid support for the bid and the eventual accession of Finland and Sweden. There is consensus and strong support within the NATO Alliance to be accepted, knowing that the ascension of these two long-standing partners, these two great democracies, will make the Alliance stronger, make it more effective, and contribute to the mission the foundation of the NATO Alliance.
Since then, a number of national assemblies and legislatures around the world have taken the necessary ratification steps. I know that our Congress is working eagerly to put its stamp on the request to accept these two countries together. Turkey, Finland, Sweden – they signed a tripartite memorandum in Madrid to implement this process. The United States will continue to work with those three countries to ensure that the acceptance and confirmation process here and around the world is as fast and efficient as it can be.
QUESTION: On the same subject, Putin said today that his country cannot be cut off from the rest of the world. Is that a wishful thinking, in your opinion, or does it reflect the truth considering the previous question on his next trip?
MR PRICE: Well, no matter what we might hear from the Kremlin, the fact is that Russia is economically, politically, diplomatically, financially isolated from the rest of the world. And it is isolated from the rest of the world precisely because of the decisions that President Putin has made in, of course, the decision to wage this illegal, brutal, unjust war against the people of Ukraine.
It is always a surprise to us to hear any degree of surprise from senior Russian officials that they could find themselves in these dire economic, financial, political, diplomatic constraints because we were very clear and consistent in our warnings before February 24th. Vladimir Putin went ahead with his plans for an invasion at exactly the kinds of costs that he would incur, and those are the costs that the Russian Federation has incurred.
These costs have increased as we have imposed new measures, as we have been coordinated with our allies and partners, and they have increased – as they have gotten worse and will get worse over time as they become to power and gain steam.
Many of you – some of you, I should say – were with us in Bali the other week, and among those who took part in the G20 was Foreign Minister Lavrov, who I think may well have been surprised by the reception which he received from his peers. from around the world. A very clear message was sent to the Russian Federation that it is not business as usual, it cannot be business as usual. The same message was repeated at the G20 finance ministers’ meeting a couple of years ago, and that same meeting – the same message will be constantly conveyed to Russia again and again until and unless it gives the best to their brutal war in Ukraine, withdrawing its forces, and stopping the violence.
QUESTION: I have one more question on Ukraine, if you don’t mind. The Secretary met the Ukrainian first lady here at the State Department this morning, and she is expected to address Congress on Wednesday. Any specific message the Secretary wants to convey and so on?
MR PRICE: I expect we will have a read out of the Secretary’s meeting with the First Lady of Ukraine, Olena Zelenska, later today, but this was really an opportunity for the Secretary to underline the comprehensive and continuing commitment of the United States to the people of Ukraine. He had the opportunity to praise the work of the first lady to support the many civilians, Ukrainian civilians, who have been affected in different ways by this brutal war against Ukraine. He noted that our embassy in Kyiv looks forward to continuing to work with the first lady to support some of her programs. It has a tremendous mental health initiative for citizens affected by the war. USAID has supported this as well. And he ultimately reiterated that we remain committed to helping the Ukrainian people to heal, to help them rebuild, and that we will continue to stand by them moving forward.
QUESTION: Thank you. I want to ask about the visa waiver for Israelis and the Jerusalem consulate, but I would be remiss if I did not raise the issue of the President’s visit and winners and losers. Analysts like to talk about winners and losers and so on, and perhaps missed opportunities. Do you think the President missed the opportunity to emphasize that you cannot, at this time, move Palestinians by force, as in Masafer Yatta while he was there, while this is really ongoing as he was there?
MR PRICE: He said, the President, in Israel and the West Bank, took the opportunity to reaffirm our commitment to the people of Israel and to the people of Palestine. He made that point in both locations. He made the point very clear, next to President Abbas, that the United States continues to firmly believe in a two-state solution to the conflict between Israel and Palestine based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed exchanges. It was an important indication of where the United States stands.
It was also an important signal that we continue to redouble our financial commitments to the Palestinian people. Since the beginning of this administration – and I would like to remind you that we have inherited a relationship with the Palestinian people and the Palestinian Authority that was essentially broken. Since the beginning of this administration, we have repaired and reinvigorated that partnership. And you heard from President Biden about the commitment to the East Jerusalem Hospital Network, you heard from President Biden about an additional commitment to UNRWA, bringing our total support to the Palestinian people since the beginning of this administration to more than half a billion dollars.
As for the challenges that Palestinians face, those were topics of discussion in the West Bank and in Jerusalem.
QUESTION: Yes, yes, the two-state solution with a caveat is perhaps in the light – I don’t know when it will happen. But I mean, there are some things that the United States should be able to say very clearly and bluntly about the forced movement of people like in Masafer Yatta.
MR PRICE: He said, we say those things very clearly and bluntly – constantly. If you’re talking about eviction, he said, I don’t have to remind you that you’ve heard me say on any number of occasions, you’ve heard Secretary Blinken say on any number of occasions—
MR PRICE: – you have heard senior officials say on several occasions that we believe it is crucial for Israel and the Palestinian Authority to refrain from unilateral actions that exacerbate tensions, that undermine efforts to move forward –
QUESTION: You keep saying the Palestinians and the Israelis, but really – but forgive me.
MR PRICE : — the two-state solution which the President once again approved. That certainly includes, He said, as you have heard us say, evicting families from their homes.
QUESTION: OK, but the Palestinians are not evicting anyone. I mean, you keep saying both sides. But never thought. Let me ask you about the visa waiver. What is the status of the visa waiver for Israelis?
MR PRICE: This is something that I know we continue to discuss with our partners in Israel. There are a number of steps that must be completed before any country can be accepted into the Visa Waiver Program. This is a decision, this is a process, which is closely coordinated between the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security.
QUESTION: And finally, I want to ask you about the consulate. Is the consulate still operational? I mean, do you think the US is as determined as when you started 18 months ago about reopening the consulate? You were determined then. Are you still as determined as you were then?
MR PRICE: Well, if you want to talk about seizing the opportunity, you heard and saw President Biden seizing the opportunity, once again, sitting next to President Abbas, to confirm once again that we remain committed to opening our consulate – to reopen our consulate in Jerusalem. We continue to believe that it is an important way for our country to engage with the Palestinian people. In the meantime, as you know, we have a team on the ground in Jerusalem as part of our Palestinian Affairs office that is doing that in the meantime. But yes, we remain committed to reopening our consulate in Jerusalem.
QUESTION: Despite whatever opposition you might get from Capitol Hill? There is a group of Republicans who are introducing a bill to never reopen it.
MR PRICE: We continue to consult closely with Congress, but we remain committed to reopening the consulate in Jerusalem.
QUESTION: On a related matter, last year the Israelis accused and shut down six Palestinian NGOs, accusing them of terrorism. Last week – I believe it was last week, at least – the Europeans, who had been given the same evidence as the Israelis gave you, said they saw nothing in what the Israelis presented to them prove or make a statement. case against any of these NGOs. What is the status of your view on this?
MR PRICE: That look continues. The last time we talked about this, I made the point that our partners in Israel presented us with the prediction for their decision. That information was shared with the State Department. We in turn have shared it with partners through all the agencies. We have discussed this with other partners around the world as well, including some of those who have come out with their own decision, but I don’t have an update for you as to where that stands.
QUESTION: Well, I mean, do you expect that you will have a decision one way or the other, whether you agree or – do you agree with the Israelis or do you take a similar tack as the Europeans?
MR PRICE: Well, what I would say at this stage is that it is never a matter of closing the book. And we are going to do, and we are doing, an assessment of the information that our partners in Israel have provided us. But these types of assessments are continually updated based on any new information we may receive. So I can’t talk to –
QUESTION: Well, it’s been like a year, and the Europeans have – they’ve managed to find their own – whether you agree with it or not, I don’t know, but i mean, they’ve managed to come. up with their own assessment, and they do not agree with the Israelis. So if you do or don’t agree with the Israelis, will you put something out to that effect?
MR PRICE: I – we always strive to be as transparent as possible, but we do not have an update today to provide in terms of the status of that analysis.
QUESTION: I have a quick question on China. When President Biden was in Saudi, he said that the United States will not leave any vacuum to Russia and China. As for China, what specific areas does he refer to?
MR PRICE: What he was referring to was the fact that the United States has a positive vision, a positive vision for our partnerships around the world. The – we have made the point in the lead up to this trip to the Middle East that over the last few months, the United States – including at higher levels, to include at the highest levels, with President Biden in his own head. travel – we have had the opportunity to engage with our European partners. We did it with the G7, we did it in NATO. We have had the opportunity to engage with our partners in Latin America, with the LA summit at the end of May. We have had the opportunity, including at the highest levels, to engage with our partners in the Indo-Pacific. President Biden traveled to Japan, he traveled to South Korea at the end of May, and Secretary Blinken, of course, has had the opportunity as recently as just a couple of weeks ago to travel to the Indo-Pacific as well.
In all of those engagements, we’ve talked about the ability of the United States to be a partner of choice, to be a partner of choice that brings these countries and helps them achieve our mutual interests. And the fact is that we often share a large number of common interests. Our relationships are ones that – that add value to the United States, to our partners. They are different from some of the relationships that we have seen other countries around the world, including China, pursue in that they are not extractive, they are not based on a race to the bottom. They maintain high labor standards, they maintain the highest standards when it comes to climate change, when it comes to human rights.
And so in all of our conversations, we emphasize primarily what we can bring to the table. The contrast between the United States and other countries is often implicit; sometimes we underline it so that it is clear. I will not speak to what the PRC is seeking from the Middle East, what the PRC is seeking from Africa or elsewhere, but what I will say is that the United States is seeking a series of relationships – bilateral and regional – that are predicted. on partnership, and that is what we are describing.
QUESTION: So when those countries choose to do business with China, do you respect their independent decision?
MR PRICE: Of course. And our point, as you’ve heard from us on a number of occasions, is not to force countries to choose between the United States and China. Our goal is to give choices to countries around the world, to give them high quality choices where the United States – we can present ourselves and give ourselves – present ourselves in the most favorable terms and to explain exactly the a type of partnership that we are trying to make clear how we can work together to achieve our mutual interests, and offer very clearly the high standards we bring to the table, the highest standards in terms of labour, when it comes to human rights, in terms of chains deliver, when it comes to all the things that matter – that matter to our partners around the world.
QUESTION: And finally, during the last meeting in Bali between Secretary Blinken and Chinese State Councilor Wang Yi, China emphasized that the Three Joint Assemblies are the most reliable guardrails for the two countries. What is your response to that? And are the recent arms sales to Taiwan inconsistent with your words to China regarding the establishment of the guard rails?
MR PRICE: We believe that our “one China” policy provides an appropriate framework for continued engagement with our PRC counterparts. One of the main objectives of the meeting with the State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi was to continue and in some ways even deepen the dialogue paths, because we know that the relationship between the United States and between the PRC is the most consequential bilateral. relationship on the face of the Earth. We know that it is a relationship based on competition, and we want to see to her that that competition cannot turn into conflict.
And that is why we continue to believe that engaging with our counterparts in the PRC is in our interest, but it is also in the broader interest of countries around the world. We came away from the meeting with Wang Yi with a better understanding of our counterparts’ perspective. I think we saw from their reading that they appreciate the dialogue too. We will continue that dialogue to do everything we can to see that those avenues for conversation, that those avenues for diplomacy remain readily available.
QUESTION: But actions speak louder than words. On Taiwan, how do you explain that these arms sales to Taiwan are going to affect the relationship immediately after the meeting?
MR PRICE: Well, we have always said that we have obligations under the Taiwan Relations Act, and under the Taiwan Relations Act we make available to Taiwan defense articles and services to enable Taiwan to maintain an adequate self-defense capability. This is something that successive administrations – have done. It is in – it is fully consistent with our “one China” policy.
QUESTION: About two – two answers ago I think you said something about how you want to be able to present yourself in the most favorable terms possible. Is the administration’s view that China is somehow preventing you from presenting yourself in the most favorable terms possible when you go to countries in the South Pacific or Africa or somewhere else to –
MR PRICE: No, I didn’t mean to point that out at all.
MR PRICE: My intention was to say—
QUESTION: Well, I mean, so you can do that now, right?
MR PRICE: That’s right. That’s okay.
QUESTION: So what’s the issue, then?
MR PRICE: Well, the question was about the relationship that the PRC is seeking with other countries around the world, and so I was distinguishing between —
QUESTION: Well, okay, no, I understand that. But I – but you said you don’t have a problem with them looking for connections around the world –
QUESTION: — and this is not that you are forcing other countries to make a choice.
MR PRICE: It is about us describing what we can offer.
QUESTION: Well, then – right, right. But you don’t say the Chinese are stopping you from presenting your best case.
MR PRICE: No, I didn’t mean to point that out at all, no.
QUESTION: In your response to (inaudible), you mentioned human rights and so on. But on the other hand, we saw that the President just met with the leaders of OPEC and so on, who are not known for their human rights and so on. Isn’t that a compromise on this issue? Is the United States compromising on the issue of human rights?
MR PRICE: He said, if we want to have human rights at the center of our foreign policy – which we do – it is important that we meet with counterparts from all over the world and that we talk about human rights. So if the contention is that we should only talk to our closest allies with whom we see eye to eye on almost everything, that would limit our ability to conduct diplomacy, but more to the point, it would limit on our ability to deliver results for Americans around the world. We can do both. We can be honest, we can have honest discussions about human rights, at the systemic level and in terms of specific cases with ours – with other countries around the world, just as we have conversations about what interests us.
And the fact is that the President in his trip to the Middle East was able to participate in those two conversations. You heard from him in response to the bilateral engagement he had with our partners in Saudi which put human rights prominently on the agenda, but we have many interests with Saudi Arabia, and we were able to make good progress in the those areas too. .
QUESTION: I’m sure you and I – most everyone in this room, so experts in this part of the world and in their part of the world, say that basically the President has given up on the issue of human rights for nothing in return. He has nothing in return. How do you assess that?
MR PRICE: He said, I think if you watched closely over the last few days, you would have seen some of the very historic announcements to come out of the President’s trip to the Middle East. I will name just a few from his time in Jeddah. Of course, we saw the announcement from Saudi Arabia that it will open Saudi airspace for flights to and from Israel. It is a decision that will – has the potential to pave the way for a more integrated, stable and secure Middle East. This is the latest step in our constant efforts and our constant efforts over a period of multiple administrations to build bridges between countries in the region and something we committed to – we commit to progressing even further.
The GCC+3 – the President was there for the GCC+3 summit – promised – billions of dollars of aid to tackle food security – in response to President Putin’s war against Ukraine. Saudi Arabia committed to support the balancing of the global oil market for continued economic growth. This followed on the heels of OPEC+’s decision to increase production by 50 percent above what was planned for July and August. We had an opportunity – the President, the Secretary had an opportunity to discuss the ongoing ceasefire in Yemen for the first time in more than seven years. We have had months of a humanitarian pause in the fighting. During this time we have been able – the United Nations in particular has been able to arrange to supply tons of humanitarian aid to parts of Yemen that have been absent from it for far too long. And we discussed with the GCC+3, including our Saudi partners who were so instrumental in giving – and in getting the ceasefire in place to begin with – our deep desire to see it extended once again.
And then running through all these discussions – and this includes our time in Israel – was a discussion of Iran and the challenge that Iran poses to the region and possibly beyond, and some strategies and ways in which we can continue to coordinate our efforts. to push back on Iran’s malign activities and influence throughout the region.
MR PRICE: Let me move around a bit. Yes.
QUESTION: During the President’s visit to Saudi Arabia, did the administration secure any commitments regarding US citizens and residents deemed to be unjustly imprisoned or under a travel ban in Saudi Arabia?
MR PRICE: These types of issues are always on the agenda. The President has no higher priority than the safety and security of American citizens around the world. But I would need to refer you to the White House for the specifics of that.
QUESTION: Are President Zelenskyy’s allegations of treason and collaboration with Russia against many members of his own government, are they — are they cause for concern, especially in terms of US intelligence sharing and prosecution war crimes?
MR PRICE: Well, let me make some broad points. First, regarding the news we have heard from Kyiv, we are aware of the reports and will continue to monitor the situation carefully. We are in daily contact with our Ukrainian partners. We – we – I think the fact is, over – in all of our relationships and including in this relationship, we don’t invest in personalities; we invest in institutions. And of course, President Zelenskyy has spoken with his rationale for making these personnel shifts. We would, of course, refer you to him and his office for more information on that.
The wider point, however, is that we all know – and it has been clear since long before February 24th and in fact for the better part of a decade – that Moscow has long sought to subvert and destabilize the Ukrainian Government. Ever since Ukraine chose the path of democracy in a Western orientation, this has been something that Moscow has tried to subvert. Now, I’m not talking about the personnel changes announced today; I’m talking to the broader strategic intent on Moscow’s part. It looked a certain way, between 2014 and February 2022 with the start of the invasion, but what we are seeing and what we saw in the earliest days of Russia’s war against Ukraine was very clearly an effort to not only overthrow but we think overthrow the Ukrainian Government, of course an effort where – where the Russian Government has been unsuccessful.
QUESTION: Can I track that?
QUESTION: But you didn’t say whether or not you’re concerned about sharing US information with the attorney general’s office. So is that a concern? Have you delayed any of that sharing? Because this was not about personality, according to Zelenskyy; it was related to a wider problem within that office.
MR PRICE: Well, again, we’ve invested in the organisation. Of course, there was a relationship between the general prosecutor and individuals in this building and through all the agencies. But I am confident that that personal relationship between people like Beth Van Schaack and others can be built with the incoming attorney general. We are pressing forward with the information we are sharing with our partners in Ukraine to help them build the case for accountability against those who may have committed war crimes and other atrocities.
The fact is that liability and what is useful in constructing these cases is often not particularly sensitive. And you may remember that we established the Conflict Observatory a few months ago, whose role is to collect, assimilate and make accessible open source information that points to possible atrocity crimes. And so much of the information, much of what we do transfer to the attorney general’s office on a regular basis, is open source information. We have an information sharing relationship with our counterparts in Ukraine. I mean, we’re continuing to push forward with that. It is an important element of the support we provide to our partners in Ukraine in an effort to help them protect themselves.
QUESTION: So two questions on Mexico. Two weeks ago, The New York Times published a report stating that several officials within the administration were very critical of the cozy relationship that Ambassador Ken Salazar has with President AMLO in Mexico. Has the Secretary called Ambassador Salazar to give assurance that there is full confidence in him?
And secondly, last Friday in the custody of Mexico, the arrest of one of the best drug lords in the country, namely – who is also part of the Narcotics Rewards Program by the State Department. What kind of cooperation did the United States provide, information sharing or any other details, to the Government of Mexico to carry out this operation?
MR PRICE: So on your second question, there is not much I can provide beyond noting that counternarcotics is an area of cooperation between our two governments. It is an area that was discussed when President Biden met with AMLO, President López Obrador, in the Oval Office a little less than a week ago. But in terms of specific investigations and the specific operations as such, it is not something that we will be able to speak to in detail.
As for Ambassador Salazar, he often talks to the most senior individuals in this building. He is an outstanding ambassador who represents the interests of the American people in his role as the US ambassador to Mexico. We have a broad and deep relationship with Mexico, with agencies across the US Government working very closely with their partners in Mexico to advance our many shared interests. I just spoke to one of them, but there are many more. Since the beginning of this administration, we have relaunched the US-Mexico High-Level Economic Dialogue, the bilateral high-level security dialogue, and the North American Leaders’ Summit. And Ambassador Salazar has been a leading voice and a leading force in all of these efforts.
Now, of course, there is much to be done bilaterally with our counterparts in Mexico. A lot was on the table when AMLO met with President Biden at the White House last week, and we will continue to have those conversations. And Ambassador Salazar will continue to lead our engagement with the Government of Mexico when it comes to those conversations.
QUESTION: Hello. I was wondering if you could talk a little bit about what former Japanese Prime Minister Abe meant to the relationship between the United States and Japan. And while the relationship between the United States and Japan is of course much stronger than any one individual, how might Abe’s death affect the relationship between the United States and Japan moving forward?
MR PRICE: You heard from the Secretary, that it was an honor to have the opportunity and the invitation to visit Japan a week ago today following the tragic assassination of former Prime Minister Abe. The Secretary attended a private gathering with the prime minister. He presented a letter to the prime minister from President Biden addressed to Prime Minister Abe’s family. But Secretary Blinken also spoke on behalf of not only the American Government, but on behalf of the American people when he spoke of the legacy that the Prime Minister is leaving behind.
Secretary Blinken made the point that Prime Minister Abe was one of the few figures in history who had a vision, who had a vision of a free and open Indo-Pacific, who developed that idea, and someone who was on the once able to implement that vision. Prime Minister Abe worked closely with successive American administrations on that vision. I believe it is only appropriate to his legacy that today we have an Indo-Pacific that we together – with our Japanese allies and our other allies and partners around the world – seek made even more free, even more open, very much. Prime Minister Abe predicted and expressed.
QUESTION: Can you think of any ways that the death of the former prime minister could affect the relationship between the United States and Japan going forward?
MR PRICE: I believe that, as Secretary Blinken said, it only redoubles our conviction that we need to continue to do everything we can to promote the vision that he presented. We have a tremendous relationship with Prime Minister Kishida and his government but – and I have already said this in a different context during this briefing – in terms of partners, when it comes to the closest allies like Japan, there’ these are relationships that go beyond any one prime minister, any one individual, any one leader. And the relationship between the prime – between the United States and Japan means that it is an ongoing relationship between two allies, between two countries, and a relationship that will continue for decades to come.
MR PRICE: Let me – yes, please. Yes.
QUESTION: Regarding the ministerial meeting on COVID-19, which will be held tomorrow morning, what deliverables can we expect from the meeting?
Second, the Taiwanese have not received an invitation. So why will Taiwan be out of this meeting this time?
MR PRICE: We will have more to say on the minister tomorrow. This is a minister we are co-hosting with our Japanese allies. Again, this speaks, I think, to the breadth of our relationship with Japan, the many shared values and the many shared interests that we have with our allies in Japan.
This is an opportunity for the convening countries to discuss the urgent need to continue to tackle the acute phase of this pandemic and continue to act against the different lines of effort that are part of what we refer to as the GAP, or the Global Action Plan, which we unveiled earlier this year, in February this year, I believe. And the GAP is – it’s an approach that looks holistically at the challenge not only posed by COVID-19, but also the global health infrastructure demands that go far beyond the current pandemic , to see that the world is in a better position to respond. to the next case or epidemic before it can become a pandemic.
There are a number of countries that we have partnered with over the last 16 months in this administration on COVID-19. The ministry tomorrow will bring some of them together, but certainly not all of them. Other partners have also played an important role. As for Taiwan, the world, as we said before, has a lot to learn from Taiwan in terms of public health, in terms of global health. We will continue to engage with — we will continue to engage with the Taiwanese authorities, consistent with our unofficial relationship with Taiwan, on public health and global health moving forward.
QUESTION: President Biden and Secretary Blinken always affirm that they will never, ever allow Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon of any kind. Now, if we believe what is coming out of Iran – and not from anyone in Iran, from the supreme adviser of the Iranian leader, which is a very credible source – that Iran is indeed a threshold state. So do you have any new assessment, do you have any new policy toward Iran, specifically after Biden’s trip to the region?
MR PRICE: Well, we’ve made it clear – and I think you’ve heard me make this point – ever since the last administration left the JCPOA, it’s no secret that Iran’s fissile material and its breakout time – increased its fissile material. and his breakout time, that is the amount of time he would need to acquire enough fissile material to create a nuclear weapon if he chose weapons, that time has been significantly reduced. It has gone from about a year at its peak to a few weeks or less.
The reason why we are so — we remain focused on determining whether we can achieve a mutual return to compliance with the JCPOA is precisely the reason that a mutual return to compliance would put Iran’s nuclear program back in a box. It would extend that cut-out time, now too short for comfort, now reduced far beyond where anyone would like to see it. And it would also ensure that Iran’s nuclear program is once again subject to the most stringent verification and monitoring regime ever negotiated and subject to IAEA monitoring.
But you said this in your question. The President is committed that Iran will never get a nuclear weapon. We continue to believe that diplomacy is the most effective way to deliver on that promise. We continue to believe that under that framework a return to compliance with the JCPOA is the most advantageous course that remains viable, and we will continue to pursue that for as long as it is in our interests .
QUESTION: So you don’t believe in Iranian claims? You don’t buy that? You think they are bragging?
MR PRICE: We know that they acquired additional fissile material. We know that their break time has decreased significantly. But this President has made a commitment that Iran will not acquire a nuclear weapon.
A couple of final questions. Yes, Nick.
QUESTION: Can I go back to follow up on Shaun’s earlier question on President Putin’s trip to Tehran tomorrow? Are there any concerns that he could use this, at least in part, to promote his country’s acquisition of weapon-capable drones from Iran?
MR PRICE: Well, we’ve talked about our concerns about a potential Russian provision – excuse me, a potential Iranian provision of UAV technology to Russia. We will continue to watch very carefully. All our sanctions remain in force. Any transaction of this type would mean a number of sanctions that we have on the books and probably a number of sanctions that countries around the world have on the books. So this is something we will continue to monitor.
QUESTION: Ned, just to follow up on Shaun’s question also about NATO – the NATO membership of Finland and Sweden, you made some comments but I didn’t hear an answer. Just wondering – Germany ratified the treaty, and I think maybe a dozen of them also ratified it. Obviously, Turkey has made it clear that they are going to take more time. So what is the US expectation on how, when this ends? Do you have, like, a timetable that you want to do this? It was as soon as possible. It turned out that it was – that’s not going to be true. So, like the end of a year?
MR PRICE: We have a timetable. And as you just said, it is as soon as possible. The fact – the –
QUESTION: But that’s not realistic at the moment, is it?
MR PRICE: Well, of course. There is – we note that the process for ratification involves legislative or parliamentary action on behalf of some 30 countries. Different countries will have to move at different speeds based on their laws, based on their procedures. As you have pointed out, several countries have already been in a position to move forward. But because this is the amendment to an agreement, it is not something that can be done overnight, but we want to see it completed as soon as possible.
QUESTION: Sure. Totally different topic, Sudan.
QUESTION: There has been an increase in violence in the Blue Nile region, and there have also been some street protests I think over the weekend in Khartoum. On July 4th, General Burhan made his speech where he refused to – or I’m sorry, to say he – wanted to pave the way for the civilians – for civilian leadership. At the time, your response was fairly cautious, saying let’s wait and see what happens. Do you have any new assessment of what is happening in Sudan? Are you confident that there could be some progress in Sudan, or are you concerned about the way things are going there?
MR PRICE: I do not have an updated assessment to offer. As you correctly pointed out, we noted at the time we saw General Burhan’s address to the country and his commitment to dissolve the Sovereign Council once a civilian government has been formed. We urged, at the time, all sides to re-engage, to find a solution that will keep Sudan moving towards a civilian-led government, democracy, and free and fair elections. And we also urge that violence against protesters be investigated and that perpetrators be held accountable. We have continued to engage with relevant stakeholders, but I do not have an updated assessment of next steps.
QUESTION: Thank you, Ned. Two questions on the South Caucasus. Can you elaborate on the Secretary’s Saturday tweet on — about the foreign ministers of Azerbaijan and Armenia meeting in Georgia, which he called a positive step? I understand that all this was discussed by Assistant Secretary Donfried’s call, I think, during her call to Baku and Yerevan yesterday. Has the United States been seeking some active role in this process? What is your current role?
MR PRICE: Well, we have been actively involved. We have consistently said that we are ready and willing to engage bilaterally and with like-minded partners, including through our role as co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group, to help the countries find peace comprehensive, long term.
Secretary Blinken had the opportunity in recent weeks to engage with his foreign ministry – his foreign minister counterparts. Assistant Secretary Donfried, others in this building, have also had the opportunity to engage at high levels with their Armenian and Azerbaijani counterparts as well.
The meeting between the representatives was welcomed. We continue to believe that dialogue is the best way to ensure a peaceful, democratic and prosperous future for the South Caucasus region, and we will continue to support that in any way we can.
QUESTION: Thank you very much. And the last question on the EU gas deal on – with Azerbaijan this morning. How reliable do you think it is, given Azerbaijan’s questionable relationship with Russia and also the lack of human rights records?
MR PRICE: Sorry, say that again? How –
QUESTION: The country’s lack of human rights records and also the country’s questionable relationship with Russia. They had a partnership ally agreement just days before Russia invaded in Ukraine.
MR PRICE: If we have anything on that, we will let you know. We are obviously working very closely with our allies in the EU as well as other partners in the region, including Azerbaijan, on the issue of energy security. We want to see a stable global supply of energy during this period. It is something that our US-EU task force is working very closely on. It is something we are working very closely on bilaterally with a number of countries around the world, including Azerbaijan.
(The briefing ended at 3:11 p.m.)
