1:10 p.m. EDT

MR MILLER:  Good afternoon, everyone.  Start with some opening comments. 

Yesterday, Secretary Blinken traveled to Jamaica to attend the High-Level Meeting on Haiti to address the ongoing security crisis there and expedite a political transition.  The meeting in Jamaica was the culmination of months of intensive engagement with and among more than 39 Haitian stakeholders representing civil society, the private sector, political parties, and interfaith groups, as well as international partners, to bring an end to the violence and political stalemate plaguing Haiti.  

The Secretary thanks CARICOM for the key role played in this process, particularly Jamaica’s Prime Minister Holness for his leadership on Haiti and for hosting the meeting; Guyanese President Ali, current chair of CARICOM; Barbados Prime Minister Mottley; and members of the CARICOM Eminent Persons Group for helping to facilitate consensus.

We welcome yesterday’s announcement of a transitional governance structure in Haiti, which paves the way for a peaceful transition of power, continuity of governance, an action plan for near-term security including the deployment of a Multinational Security Support Mission, and a pathway to free and fair elections.

We commend Prime Minister Henry for his statesmanship in putting his country first and agreeing to step down when the transitional presidential council is established.  His decision comes at a critical point for the Haitian people.  

The Secretary also thanks our international partners— Brazil, Canada, Mexico, France, and the UN—for facilitating and supporting the meeting.

During the meeting, Secretary Blinken announced an additional $33 million in humanitarian assistance for the people of Haiti as well as an additional $100 million for the Multinational Security Support Mission.  These are important first steps to achieving free and fair elections and providing the peace and security the Haitian people deserve.

We recognize there is a great deal of work that remains to be done, and the United States is committed to continuing to support the people of Haiti.  

With that, Matt.

QUESTION:  Okay.  Thank you.  So when exactly is this transitional council going to be formed?

MR MILLER:  So the – under the terms of the agreement that was announced yesterday, we expect that the members of the transitional council will be appointed in the next 24 to 48 hours, and then they will take the step to appoint an interim prime minister in the near future after that. 

QUESTION:  So when will Henry actually resign? 

MR MILLER:  Our expectation is that he would resign upon appointment —

QUESTION:  Upon the formation? 

MR MILLER:  — upon appointment of – no, of an interim prime minister.  So the transitional council will be appointed first; then they will deliver and appoint an interim prime minister.  He would remain the prime minister until such point as there is an interim prime minister who takes the position. 

QUESTION:  Is there any expectation that, one, a transitional council – the membership of a transitional council will be agreed on any time soon?  And two, once it is, if it ever is, that they will be able to agree on a candidate for —

MR MILLER:  So we expect that the members of the presidential transition council will be appointed in the next 24 to 48 hours.  That should happen in very short order. 

QUESTION:  Yeah. 

MR MILLER:  And then I can’t put a timeline on the appointment of an interim prime minister except to say that we expect it to happen in the near future, and this was the subject of conversation among Haitian stakeholders, including representatives of the organizations who will designate members to the presidential council, and —

QUESTION:  Yeah.  But is there – 

MR MILLER:  – and CARICOM.  And it was the broad agreement among everyone, both the Haitian stakeholders and international stakeholders, that they would come to an agreement of an interim prime minister in the very near future.  I don’t know exactly when that will be, but we do expect it to happen without —

QUESTION:  Well, do you guys —

MR MILLER:  – without further delay. 

QUESTION:  Do you guys have a deadline for when he has to step down or when – or, sorry, maybe not in terms of when he steps down, but when the council —

MR MILLER:  So it’s not —

QUESTION:  – has to make its decision? 

MR MILLER:  So it’s not a question of a United States deadline because this is a – this would be a —

QUESTION:  I have not —

MR MILLER:  No, under – this will be a Haitian-led process.  But once this Haitian transition council is appointed, that is up for them to decide, but there is broad consensus among the organizations —

QUESTION:  Well, I mean —

MR MILLER:  Let me just say there are organizations – the organizations that will be presenting members to sit on that council were all part of the meetings yesterday, and there was consensus among them that they should come to an agreement quickly.  So we expect that that is what is going to happen.  I of course can’t predict the future, but that was the agreement of everyone involved in the meetings, that they would move quickly. 

QUESTION:  Well, you don’t expect it to take months.

MR MILLER:  I do not.  I do not. 

QUESTION:  Okay.  And then in terms of what the U.S. is prepared to do to support both the humanitarian situation on the ground, you said the 33 million; then there was another 100 million for the MSSF.  Is that what it’s called? 

MR MILLER:  MSS Mission. 

QUESTION:  MSS Mission. 

MR MILLER:  MSSM, if you want to further abbreviate. 

QUESTION:  Okay.  Is that going to include transport of these Kenyan police? 

MR MILLER:  So it will include logistic support.  That portion of it will come from the Department of Defense, so I would defer to them to speak to whether it includes transportation or not.  There are several different types of money we’re providing.  So $33 million that the Secretary announced yesterday in humanitarian assistance.  There is, on top of that, $300 million that we have announced in support for the Multinational Security Support Mission; $200 million of that comes from the Pentagon, will come in the form of equipment and other logistic support, and they can speak to that; and then there’s $100 million that will come from the State Department that we’ve been in consultation with Congress about. 

QUESTION:  Okay.  The last thing from me on this is have you – there have been concerns, fears, that the situation is so out of control that it could result in a major influx of migrants, of people seeking to leave, including coming to the United States.  This is a situation that we have seen unfold before over the course of the last 30 years or so.  Have you seen any such influx? 

MR MILLER:  I do not have the latest.  I would really defer to DHS to talk about the latest status of influx of migrants.  But certainly we have seen a very unstable security situation, and we know that what often happens when you have an unstable security situation, as you reference in the question, is an increase in people attempting to flee the country and leave to other places.  

That’s not the only reason.  It’s not even the main reason why we want to establish security in Haiti.  The main reason is for, of course, the safety of the Haitian people, and there are American citizens on the ground in Haiti.  But it is another reason why it’s so important that the Multinational Security Support Mission move forward as quickly as possible. 

QUESTION:  Right.  And I’m sorry, I said that was my last, but again there’s just one more, and that is:  How many American citizens are you aware of who are in Haiti who are wanting to leave, who have, like, contacted the embassy or contacted you guys directly here in Washington —  

MR MILLER:  I don’t have —

QUESTION:  — and said they want to leave? 

MR MILLER:  I don’t have a number. 

QUESTION:  Thank you.  

MR MILLER:  Sorry, go ahead.  

QUESTION:  Just to, yeah, follow up on the Multinational Security Support Mission.  The –there’s some reporting out of Kenya that they are pausing moving forward with sending those troops, given the political sort of uncertainty.  Is that – is – are you concerned that that’s going to delay this even further?  This has already taken a long time to get going.  

MR MILLER:  So I would – we would be concerned, of course, about any delay, but we don’t think there – that there will need to be a delay.  If you look at the – what the Kenyan Government said in its statement, it’s that they have to have a government with which to collaborate, which has been an important part of their understanding.  It’s a perfectly natural thing to expect – that they want to know that there’s a government that can host them, that can make a request for them to deploy a mission.  

So right now, as you wait for the appointment of a presidential transition council which would appoint, then, a new government, a new prime minister, I think that’s an appropriate step for the Kenyan Government to take.  But we think those are steps that will happen, as I said, in the very near future, and that would pave the way for this mission to go forward without delay. 

QUESTION:  And in the meantime, are you confident that the Haitian police can maintain control of ports and airports that obviously would be needed for the mission to get in? 

MR MILLER:  I am not going to make any predictions because, obviously, it is a very tense situation on the ground, and we’ve seen a degradation of the security environment not just over the past months, but over the very recent days, just over the past week.  But obviously that will be our aim, is to get that mission deployed as safely and as quickly as possible.  

QUESTION:  And I guess finally, I think, there’s – in terms of that money, the money that you mentioned, how much – has the U.S. actually put any money into – I think there’s a UN sort of fund; the UN is holding money to then go into the – into the mission.  Has the U.S. sort of transferred any money – actually transferred any money yet? 

MR MILLER:  So you’re getting into a level of accounting detail that is probably beyond — 

QUESTION:  Okay. 

MR MILLER:  — what I have at the top of my head.  But I know that of the $100 million that’s coming from the State Department, we have notified 50 million of it to Congress; 10 of it has been approved so far to Congress.  We have begun deploying that money.  I don’t know whether it’s been transferred to the UN or it’s being deployed in some other fashion.  But we have been – begun deploying it, and we have been urgently engaging with Congress.  We’ve held 68 meetings with members of Congress and their staff to urge the release of additional funds to support this mission because we think it’s urgent to the security of Haiti.  It’s urgent to establish stability on the ground and pave the way for a free and fair – for free and fair elections.  

And as we discussed a moment ago, there are American citizens on the ground right now in Haiti whose – along with every other person in Haiti, whose safety is in question.  So we think it’s important that this mission move forward as soon as possible, and that’s why we’re working with Congress to see that these funds are released.  

QUESTION:  Thank you. 

MR MILLER:  Jenny.

QUESTION:  The gang leader Barbeque has already come out and rejected any sort of government that’s formed by this transitional council.  Do you have a comment on his remarks and how do you intend to deal with the fact that they’re already dismissing this? 

MR MILLER:  So I’m not surprised that gang leaders are rejecting this agreement because it is the gang leaders that thrive on the chaos that we have seen unfurl in Haiti over the past few weeks.  But it is ultimately up to the Haitian people to determine the future government of Haiti, not to violent gang members, not to criminals.  

And so we support the agreement that CARICOM reached with Haitian stakeholders yesterday for a transition to democracy, but I think those comments that you referenced just reinforce the urgency of the deployment of this security mission to Haiti to establish law and order on the ground, which of course gang members fear and oppose. 

QUESTION:  But it seems like it’s kind of a catch-22, right, if they’re not going to deploy this until there’s an appointment of a new prime minister, interim prime minister, and the gangs are prepared to completely reject them immediately.  Like, I guess, how do you intend to deal with that? 

MR MILLER:  We — 

QUESTION:  And to Simon’s question, do you think the Haitian National Police can keep the situation stable enough on the ground to deploy? 

MR MILLER:  So I think there are two questions there.  One is a political question and one is a security question.  With respect to the political question, we believe that the agreement that was reached yesterday can move forward.  The members of this transition council can be appointed.  We expect them to be appointed, as I said, in 24 to 48 hours, and then they can appoint a new government.  

With respect to the security question, it is an ongoing concern, and that’s why we’re working to get the MSS Mission off the ground and deployed as quickly as possible.  

Yeah, Leon. 

QUESTION:  Could you give us some insight as to when exactly and why the U.S. decided to drop the Haitian Prime Minister Henry?  Do you think he had lost total legitimacy?  And then related to that, the gang leaders precisely requested his resignation, and so in a way have you conceded to the gang leaders here?  

MR MILLER:  So first of all, I would say it’s not a question of – for the – of the United States making a decision.  It’s not something for us to dictate or in any way prescribe to the Haitian people.  If you look at the background and the context, Prime Minister Henry has always been a transitional figure.  If you look at the way in which he came into office, the tragic circumstances of the assassination of the president, we have always called – along with Haitian civil society and Haitian political leaders – for a transition to free and fair elections and a transition to democracy, which, of course, requires stable security in which you can hold elections.  

But it did become clear, not to the United States but to members of CARICOM, to members of Haitian civil society, to a number of Haitians that the political situation had become untenable over the past few days.  And that’s why you saw this meeting yesterday in Jamaica where members of CARICOM engaged with the United States and with representatives of the Canadian Government and other governments in the region, but most importantly with Haitians themselves.  There were a number of Haitian civil society representatives who joined the meeting via Zoom to participate in these talks about the future of Haiti.  And it was ultimately the – these Haitian civil society representatives that agreed that they would appoint members of a presidential transition council to pave a way forward. 

QUESTION:  Okay.  And what gives you the confidence that – you guys seem – you appear to be fairly confident that they’ll be able to appoint a new prime minister or interim prime minister in, let’s say, about a couple weeks, or maybe a few months, or what have you.  What gives you the confidence that this new council will be able to in fact agree – I mean, this is a little bit following up on the question that was asked – given that – I mean, precisely in all these years and despite all of the – Henry’s efforts there was no consensus at all with either political parties or the opposition or civil society.  What do you think happened that – what gives you the confidence that this time around it’s going to work?  

MR MILLER:  So, again, I can’t speak for the members of Haitian civil society and representatives of the Haitian people who will ultimately appoint the members of the transitional council.  I can’t speak to what the members of the transitional council will do.  Ultimately, these are decisions for Haiti to make and decisions that Haiti needs to make.  But I will say what the Secretary heard in the room yesterday was, one, a recognition of how serious the situation is – a recognition not just from CARICOM leaders but a recognition from those representatives of Haitian civil society of how serious the situation is, and how that required compromise on achieving a path forward.  

And so I think everyone recognizes that the stagnation and failure to compromise that we have seen over the past few months, over the past few years have led to this untenable political situation and untenable security situation, and that’s why they need to make these compromises going forward.  Now, I’m not going to make any predictions about what will happen, but what we heard was a recognition that they did need a way to break through this logjam and move forward.  That’s what we support.  That’s what members of CARICOM support.  That’s what other Western Hemisphere governments who were represented in the room support.  Ultimately, of course, they will have to be the ones that make that decision.  

QUESTION:  Okay.  

MR MILLER:  Let me make sure – this is a Haiti? 

QUESTION:  No.  I —

MR MILLER:  Any more from Haiti?  Yeah, Ryan. 

QUESTION:  Can I follow up – just briefly follow up? 

MR MILLER:  Yeah, finish off Haiti before we go to anything else. 

QUESTION:  Sure.  Yeah, to follow up on his point about the resignation of Ariel Henry, after Moïse’s assassination, Henry was plausibly linked to it via phone calls and others and was not in line to take power, but it was the U.S. and the Core Group that kind of recognized him and pressured Claude Joseph to take power.  He was seen as illegitimate at the time, called a de facto prime minister.  In retrospect, was it a mistake to have pushed Joseph aside or pushed anybody aside for Henry given that Henry now a couple years later is out after a failed non-tenure?

MR MILLER:  So ultimately that wasn’t a decision for the United States, and what happens now is not a decision for the United States. 

QUESTION:  But the – but the U.S. and the Core Group made the decision by recognizing him.  

MR MILLER:  We – yeah – we will – our goal all along has been a transition to democracy, and trying to achieve a stable security situation on the ground so that Haitian political leaders have the room to make the tough choices they need to make so they can transition into democracy and have free and fair elections that aren’t marred by gang violence.  So that was our goal when the president was assassinated.  That continues to be our goal today.  

But ultimately, as I’ve said, these are decisions that Haitians have to make; that the United States and other countries in the region – members of CARICOM and other countries – cannot make for them.  They’re decisions that ultimately they have to make.  We will always make our decisions about when and how we can recognize governments, but when it comes to the disposition of governments in Haiti, it’s – those are questions for Haitians.  

QUESTION:  But then why endorse a foreign intervention of troops from outside of Haiti to come in?  Like, in 2004, 2010, 2021, the State Department and the Core Group got their way when it came to who would form the Haitian Government.  That’s setting aside the occupations and invasions of the past.  What makes you confident that this time it’s going to work when all the other times it didn’t? 

MR MILLER:  So first of all I’d say that the Multinational Security Support Mission will be there at the invitation of the Haitian Government.  That is a key prerequisite for their deployment, and it’s what the —   

QUESTION:  But you guys just made that government in Jamaica. 

MR MILLER:  But it’s what – it’s what the – hold on, let me – it’s what the Kenyan Government said in their statement, that they have to have a government that has invited them with which they can collaborate, and it’s why they’re looking for the appointment of this presidential transition council, and ultimately a new prime minister, and ultimately a new government.  

But when it comes to what just happened in Jamaica, again, this was a collaboration of CARICOM leaders, Haitian civil society, the United States, Canada, France, Mexico, Brazil – all of whom have an interest in seeing stability, and all of whom have the same goal, which is to address the immediate security situation on the ground, restore calm, restore peace, restore law and order for Haitian – for Haitians, and then establish the conditions in which free and fair elections can take place.  That is our only goal.  It’s what we’ve been trying to achieve from the beginning; it’s what we’re continuing to try to achieve.  

QUESTION:  Are there any Haitians that the U.S. would not allow to come to power through that process?

MR MILLER:  It’s not a question of the United States allowing anyone to come into power.  Ultimately, as I said, that is a – that is a question for the Haitian people.

QUESTION:  Okay.

MR MILLER:  All right.  Any more – before we go, any more on Haiti?  Alex.  Okay.

QUESTION: Okay.  And moving to Ukraine, a couple questions, but first things first.  Russian media have started claiming that portions of two Patriot systems have been destroyed in Ukraine.  What do you know on the worst circumstances there?

MR MILLER:  I would defer to the Ukrainian Government, the Ukrainian military to answer that question.

QUESTION:  There are also reports that the administration is poised to announce a new package today, which will include munition – ATACMS munitions as well.  

MR MILLER:  We will have more to say about that in the very near future, today.

QUESTION:  Yeah.  Tomorrow is —  

MR MILLER:  Just checking the clock; very near future.

QUESTION:  Are you in a position to speak to growing narrative in Europe in particular over – following Hungarian prime minister’s trip to Mar-a-Lago, or the notion that cutting off the funding will end the war?  What do you —   

MR MILLER:  That cutting off – I’m sorry, that cutting off the —  

QUESTION:  The funding will end the war.  So obviously, he’s quoting the former president; we don’t have any confirmation from —   

MR MILLER:  Oh, I see, the quote to which you’re referring.  Look, I’m not going to comment on that visit or on those quotes, but I will say that, as you are well aware, it continues to be the position of this administration, the position of the United States, that we need to support Ukraine.  And look, Ukraine has the ability to fight absent U.S. support; of course they do.  But I think we’ve seen – and you saw the director of the CIA testify to this before Congress yesterday – we have seen Ukraine suffer battlefield losses in recent weeks that either they would not have suffered, or would not have been as severe, if they had the U.S. support, the U.S. ammunition that we are – have committed to provide them, and that they will continue to suffer additional losses over the coming year if Congress doesn’t act and support Ukraine.  So we will continue to call on Congress to pass the President’s supplemental request, because we think it is important that we stand up to Russia’s aggression and support Ukraine in its defense of its territory.

QUESTION:  There are some calls on the Hill, some folks entertaining the narrative that converting aid request to loan might address the problem, the issue.  Where are you standing on that?

MR MILLER:  We do not think that saddling Ukraine with billions of dollars of foreign debt when it is trying to revive its economy – which ultimately is the best way for its – to stand on its own feet, own two feet, and defend itself without aid from other countries – is an appropriate step at this time.

QUESTION:  Question about Russia as well.  So have you guys responded to —   

MR MILLER:  One more, and then I’m going to move on.

QUESTION:  Thanks so much.  Have you guys responded to Russia since last week, since they called in the ambassador and they claimed that the U.S. is intending to meddle in the internal affairs?  And they even threatened to expel some U.S. diplomats.  Any – any response to that?

MR MILLER:  No.  Obviously – I don’t have any response to those reports of potential expulsions, other than that they would be completely unfounded, unnecessary, and inappropriate.

Go ahead.

QUESTION:  Thank you, Matt.  I apologize to you and to everyone in this room for walking in late.  I could not help it. 

MR MILLER:  You don’t have to apologize for that.

QUESTION:  I have a question you may have —   

MR MILLER:  If you’re apologizing for that, there are a lot of other people that owe me and the members of this room apologies.

QUESTION:  Well, sure, but I mean —   

MR MILLER:  But don’t think it’s necessary.

QUESTION:  Just barging – barging in, I should be waiting and sitting and ready.  Anyway.

On UNRWA, if I may.

MR MILLER:  Yeah.

QUESTION:  The Haaretz reported that Israel is moving to dismantle UNRWA without replacement body to manage aid for Palestinians in Gaza.  And it says while the Israeli army plans to fully dismantle the UN agency in order to undermine Hamas’s civilian rule in Gaza, including through a slander campaign, it is unclear which organization will assume its responsibility.  Are you aware of this report first of all?

MR MILLER:  I’m aware of the report.  When it comes to UNRWA, our position has not changed.  As you know, we have paused our funding while the investigations are ongoing, and we have been exploring ways to continue to deliver humanitarian assistance through other partners on the ground – UNICEF, the World Food Program.  But right now, UNRWA plays a critical role in delivering humanitarian assistance to Palestinian civilians that no other agency is positioned to assume.

QUESTION:  Okay.  But if in the event – I mean, I know you may say this is hypothetical, but in the event that this comes to light that Israel actually is taking steps to dismantle UNRWA, will the United States have a position – a contrary position, or a position to, say, stop this dismantling?  

MR MILLER:  So first of all, I would say that I don’t think it’s news that Israel has had issues with UNRWA.  Those pre-date October 7th.  They go back many, many years.

QUESTION:  Before, yes; that’s right.

MR MILLER:  As I know you are well aware.  

QUESTION:  Yes, absolutely. 

MR MILLER:  But it doesn’t change our position with respect to UNRWA and the important work that it continues to do to deliver humanitarian assistance to Palestinian civilians who desperately need it.

QUESTION:  Right.  So in your view, UNRWA is the only organization that can – at least for now – can mete out the kind of aid that it has been giving to the Palestinians for the past 70 years or some odd years and so on; and education, health care, and so on.  I mean, there is – is there any other organization that could do this?

MR MILLER:  As we —

QUESTION:  In your view, any alternative organization?

MR MILLER:  As we stand today, no, there is not.  But we do continue to explore alternatives – alternative groups and alternative organizations that can deliver the humanitarian assistance that UNRWA delivers.  

QUESTION:  Yeah.  I have a couple more, if I may.

QUESTION:  (Off-mike.)    

MR MILLER:  I’ll come to you in a second. 

QUESTION:  There’s also reports on – that the Israelis have tortured detainees, Palestinian detainees in Gaza.  Are you aware of such reports and can you comment on it?  

MR MILLER:  I have seen those reports; I have no way to verify them.  But of course we would expect Israel to treat any detainees consistent with the rule of law, consistent with international humanitarian law. 

QUESTION:  Yeah.  But also, I mean, the Israelis themselves, Israeli soldiers themselves, are basically posting videos showing that they are hoarding groups of Palestinian detainees, even in the West Bank, (inaudible) like cattle and so on.  Have you seen any — 

MR MILLER:  I haven’t.  Again, we expect them to treat any detainees consistent with international humanitarian law.  

QUESTION:  Thank you. 

MR MILLER:  Simon, go ahead. 

QUESTION:  Just wanted to drill on that – drill down on – you said you’re exploring alternative options for getting aid into Gaza.  Does that mean the U.S. has decided that UNRWA is not the organization for the future? 

MR MILLER:  No – no.  This is something I spoke to before when I’ve been asked about the fact that the supplemental request that passed the Senate contained a prohibition on funding for UNRWA.  So we have to plan for the fact that Congress may – but – let me back up and say we obviously have a pause in place with funding for UNRWA right now.  We have to plan for the fact that Congress may make that pause permanent.  I don’t know that that’s going to happen and we haven’t made the determinations with respect to the – what the administration will do, because we’re waiting on the UN investigation.  

But just as part of prudent planning, we have to plan for all possible alternatives, and so we have been exploring dealing with other humanitarian agencies that could deliver humanitarian assistance. 

QUESTION:  Right.  But in the event – I know you’re probably going to say this is a hypothetical, but I think that you are raising a pretty stark possibility that the main aid organization delivering aid to Palestinians at this time of extreme need is going to – is losing, perhaps permanently, its main funder.  You’ve said the U.S. has given $300-400 million a year to UNRWA.  I think you’re the biggest – historically the biggest funder of this organization, right? 

MR MILLER:  Correct. 

QUESTION:  So if you’re sort of willing to get – to live in a universe where UNRWA doesn’t get U.S. funding, that seems to be basically an admission that Israel – which obviously wants to – seems to want to delegitimize UNRWA – has succeeded.  

MR MILLER:  So first of all, I think let’s not get ahead of several things that have not yet happened.  One, the investigation that the United Nations is conducting that still is ongoing; two is whatever Congress may do.  I just said, as we have said before, that it’s prudent for us to plan for all possible scenarios.  I don’t think, if we get to a place where Congress has banned funding, you would want to look back and say – you would be asking me asking me questions – why didn’t you do anything to plan for this – when one house of Congress has already passed a ban on funding.  You would have very legitimate questions about why we hadn’t planned for that.

So we plan for all eventual outcomes.  That doesn’t mean that it’s the outcome that we expect will happen.  It may be that we – that there are different paths that unfold before us.  But we just have to plan to be prudent, to make sure there is no suspension of this humanitarian assistance to the Palestinian people, because we know they desperately need it, and we are committed to delivering it.

Jen, and then go back. 

QUESTION:  An Israeli American hostage was declared dead today by the IDF – Itay Chen.  Do you have any comment on his death? 

MR MILLER:  So the President put out a statement on this already, I’m sure you saw.  I will just say, on behalf of the State Department and everyone that works here, including Secretary Blinken, that we pass on our deepest condolences to the family.  Secretary Blinken has met with his family on a number of occasions; he’s heard their story.  He knows how much they were hoping to bring him home.  We were hoping to bring him home too, and so we offer our deepest condolences to his family for this horrific loss.

And it just reinforces, from our perspective, the importance of achieving a deal to bring the remaining hostages home and secure a ceasefire that would alleviate the suffering of those hostages and of Palestinian civilians in Gaza.   

QUESTION:  Has there been any movement in the discussions to secure that ceasefire?  

MR MILLER:  We continue to pursue one, but I don’t have any update to provide.  

QUESTION:  And then on the questions that were raised yesterday about Israel restricting U.S. humanitarian from reaching Gaza and whether that would implicate the Foreign Assistance Act, you said you hadn’t made that judgment.  Is that something that is being reviewed? 

MR MILLER:  We are always looking at everything, including the provision of humanitarian assistance.  But what I meant by that statement is that we have not made a judgment that they’re blocking U.S. humanitarian assistance, because we have seen U.S. humanitarian assistance delivered to Gaza – not as much as we want.  We want it to be – we want more humanitarian assistance to go in.  And that’s why we’re constantly engaging with Israel, but we have seen them allow humanitarian assistance going back to the time period two weeks shortly after October 7th, and it’s been ongoing, but not enough.  And that’s why we’re engaged with them on an ongoing basis at the most senior levels on the need to do more. 

QUESTION:  Do you assess they’ve blocked other humanitarian aid, though, that isn’t U.S.-provided – UN, WFP?  

MR MILLER:  I just don’t have – I don’t have an assessment.  Obviously there are times that there is humanitarian assistance that they don’t allow to go in.  That may be for logistical reasons.  It may be for a dispute over whether something is a dual-use good, and there are some times that they have a position that we disagree with, and we try to resolve that to the best of our ability. 

QUESTION:  And has any aid gone in from this new northern crossing that was floated last week by an administration official?  Is that open?  

MR MILLER:  I will let Israel speak to that.  They have committed to us that they will open additional crossings to allow aid to go in, and I’ll let them speak to the specifics.

QUESTION:  To stay on that subject, the EU top diplomat, Borrell, in a speech at the UN today, the Security Council, basically accused Israel of using food as a weapon of war, saying that that’s what Russia was accused of in Ukraine – weaponizing food – and Israel, basically by blocking aid and forcing everyone to find alternate routes, like you are with the air drops, the maritime, and all that – by blocking the entrance of enough aid, is basically using food as a weapon of war.  Would you agree with that statement?  

MR MILLER:  I would say we want them to allow more food in; we want them to allow more water in; we want them to allow more humanitarian assistance in.  Look, they have allowed humanitarian assistance in, they have allowed food in, but in our judgment it hasn’t been enough.  And we saw that, the whole world saw that incredibly starkly almost two weeks ago, when we saw that horrible scene in northern Gaza, which is why you’ve seen us not just weigh in with the Government of Israel, as we have been doing, but to begin delivering humanitarian assistance ourself through air drops, and begin work on a maritime option to deliver a large amount of humanitarian assistance in over the sea.  

But none of that changes our fundamental baseline position, which is that the majority of aid needs to go in through the land crossings into Gaza, and there needs to be much more of it than has been going in now.  Now, that said, over the past week, 10 days, we have seen a fairly significant increase in the amount of aid that is going in.  Now, that’s partly because aid was at such low levels in February.  It had gotten to the point where an incredibly low amount, not nearly enough, was getting in for a variety of reasons.  And now we’ve seen an increase that is substantial, but it’s still not enough, and we want to see much more.  

QUESTION:  So precisely – you said there’s this increase, so basically the – unfortunately, it’s not a game – sorry – it’s not the right word, but they’re playing around with aid – opening, closing.  So again, to my question, would you agree with the comment that Israel is using food as a weapon of war?  

MR MILLER:  So we have seen a number of barriers erected, and sometimes those are logistical barriers; sometimes there are hurdles that are imposed not by the Government of Israel but, for example, you’ve seen protesters that have showed up and the Government of Israel has intervened to prevent protesters from blocking the delivery of aid, but then those protesters have moved to other locations.  Instead of blocking the gate, they move to a screening location, or they move to a road that trucks are delivering in.  

So there are a number of hurdles that have popped up that had slowed down the delivery assistance of aid, including especially in February, that we have had to work through and that we have been urging the Government of Israel to work through.  But ultimately, it doesn’t change the bottom-line conclusion, which is not enough aid has gone in, and the Government of Israel needs to do more.  

QUESTION:  I may just follow on this very quickly — 

MR MILLER:  Said, and then Michel, I’ll come to you.  

QUESTION:  Yeah – very quickly.  Eyewitnesses who are leaving Gaza – some people leave Gaza – are saying that upon departure they see 45-minute drive of trucks that are stopped not going anywhere before Rafah.  Couldn’t there, anything that can be done – could there, anything that the United States, let’s say, could influence either Egypt or Israel to allow these trucks — 

MR MILLER:  There are a number of things that can be done.  There are improvements to the screening process that need to happen.  There are improvements to the distribution process inside Gaza, which at times has been partly responsible for the backlog outside Gaza, because trucks that enter Gaza obviously need to have somewhere to go, and if the warehouses are full, they don’t have anywhere to offload their cargo.  And the warehouses were full for some time because they couldn’t distribute it inside Gaza.  So there are a number of different issues that have to be worked through, and that’s what we’ve been attempting to do.  

Michel.

QUESTION:  Thank you.  

QUESTION:  Israeli Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir asked Israel defense minister to immediately attack Lebanon.  He reportedly said: we have to start responding, attacking, war now.  Do you have any reaction to that?  

MR MILLER:  So we have consistently urged everyone in that conflict not to escalate.  We have consistently pursued a diplomatic resolution to the concerns that Israel has and to the concerns that Lebanese civilians have.  Both Israeli civilians and Lebanese civilians don’t feel safe returning to their respective homes.  We have seen the Government of Israel say over and over again that they want to pursue a diplomatic resolution to this conflict, and that’s our goal, and that’s what we’re going to continue to try to pursue.  

QUESTION:  And one on the U.S. and Saudi Arabia.  Is the U.S. still discussing with the Saudi Arabia the day after Gaza war and the normalization with the Israel?  And did you make any progress, especially regarding providing Saudi Arabia with a nuclear – civil nuclear program and the defense act – or pact?  

MR MILLER:  We are continuing to discuss with Saudi Arabia and a number of partners in the region post-conflict governance in Gaza, and post-conflict reconstruction, and all the issues that are related to that, including Palestinian – including reform of the Palestinian Authority.  And we continue to discuss bilateral issues related – with Saudi Arabia related to potential normalization of relations with Israel.  

QUESTION:  Reports said that the Saudis are insisting on a defense pact and a nuclear program.  Do you have an answer to that?  

MR MILLER:  I’m – as has been consistent, I’m not going to get into the underlying conversations.  

QUESTION:  Matt?  

QUESTION:  Did you say in response to the first question that you’ve heard over and over and over again from Israel that they want a diplomatic solution to the Gaza war?  

MR MILLER:  Yeah, they – no, no, no, I was talking with respect to the conflict in northern Israel —  

QUESTION:  Hizballah.  

MR MILLER:  — with Hizballah.  

QUESTION:  Oh, with Hizballah.  

MR MILLER:  With Hizballah. 

Guita.

QUESTION:  Going back to the delivery of aid to the Gaza Strip, be it now or in the future, in a structured forum like UNRWA, you said you’re considering all options.  Now, irrespective of whether the U.S. will or will not be able to contribute, have you considered Arab countries taking on this responsibility – a group of them, maybe?  Have you heard any appetite for such a thing?

MR MILLER:  So I think there – sort of mixes a couple different things.  There are a number of Arab countries that not only have been willing but have been providing humanitarian assistance in the same way that the United States provides humanitarian assistance.  So sometimes that is funding the delivery of food or medicine, and of course Jordan and Egypt have been doing their own air drops of food into Gaza.  There have been Arab countries that have set up field hospitals inside Gaza.  So there are a number of things that Arab countries can do and have been doing with respect to the delivery of humanitarian assistance to Gaza.

But the role that UNRWA plays – it really is critical – is the distribution of that aid inside Gaza, and that’s a piece that right now – there are other organizations that are now providing some distribution of aid inside Gaza, but that is primarily the role that UNRWA is equipped to play that no one else is due to their longstanding work and their networks of distribution and their history inside Gaza.

QUESTION:  Well, UNRWA started from zero.  A group of other countries can do the same.  That’s what I meant.

MR MILLER:  Yeah.

QUESTION:  Maybe a new group replacing UNRWA.

MR MILLER:  And I just wouldn’t want to speak for other countries and what they might be considering doing.

Go ahead.  Yeah, go ahead.

QUESTION:  I have two questions.  First one:  Mr. Biden in the – in his speech, for union speech, he mentioned that this temporary pier or, like, harbor is going to receive ships carrying food, medicine, and temporary shelters.  Could you explain what that mean of temporary shelters, it’s like what it is purposed for?  Is like – it’s going to be like shelters for people in Rafah?  Is this going to be for evacuating, like, Palestinian to service?  Like, he mentioned temporary shelter.  It’s like in – still in vague area.  Could you explain what is —

MR MILLER:  I don’t have any additional information to offer at this time.  This is an – a delivery system that we are still standing up.  As you know, the Pentagon is in the lead on just —

QUESTION:  Yes, he said that, but shelter.  The shelter.  What does that mean?

MR MILLER:  Hold on.  Hold on, hold on.  Just let me finish.  Hold on – still standing up the delivery mechanism, and we will have more to say about what types of humanitarian assistance specifically.  We will be able to offer that in the coming weeks, but it’s not something I can do today.

QUESTION:  Okay.  The second question:  You have been saying that Hamas or anyone else should recognize Israel, but Israel doesn’t have borders.  What is the position of the U.S. for, like, Israel’s border?  Israel doesn’t have a constitution, they don’t have a border, they don’t recognize 4 June 1967, like, resolution for the United State – United Nation.  What is the U.S.A. position in terms of Israeli borders?  If I want to —

MR MILLER:  So we —

QUESTION:  If someone want to recognize Israel tomorrow, in which land should recognize Israel?  And what is the capital of Israel should Hamas or any other Palestinian recognize Israel based on?

MR MILLER:  So I will say that there are a number of countries all over the world, including Arab countries, that have recognized Israel and recognized Israel despite the border issues that you raise, but as long – been the longstanding position of the United States that the border issues with respect to the West Bank and other areas will be – should be established as part of final status negotiations.

QUESTION:  And the capital of Israel is going to be Tel Aviv or Jerusalem?

MR MILLER:  Jerusalem.  It’s Jerusalem.

QUESTION:  For Israel?

MR MILLER:  Yes.

Go ahead.

QUESTION:  Thank you, Matt.  This January, U.S. and Iraqi Government started talks for the future of the U.S. forces in Iraq.  Do you have anything for me about where are you in these talks?  And are you getting an understanding with the Iraqi Government that you’re going to stay in Iraq or you’re going to set a deadline for withdrawing in Iraq?

MR MILLER:  I don’t have any update on the status of those talks.

QUESTION:  And there are some reports telling that the U.S. putting pressure on the Iraqi Government to resolve the disputes with Erbil, the KRG, before prime minister’s visit to Washington, and in one of the reports says that this is a matter of pride for the Washington.  Have you put any pressure on the Iraqi Government to resolve disputes with Erbil.  Especially currently, there are more disputes between these two governments; today, one of the two Kurds member of the Iraqi top court resigned from the Iraqi top court because of these disputes.  What engagements do you have?  Are you putting pressure on Iraqi Government to resolve these disputes before prime minister’s visit?

MR MILLER:  So we have long wanted to see those disputes resolved amicably, but I don’t have any engagements to read out in specific.

Go ahead.

QUESTION:  Thank you, Matt.  I just wanted to ask you about – regarding the Pretoria Agreement between the TPLF and Ethiopian Government.  Are you aware of any allegation between – TPLF is accusing the Addis government for taking kind of slow step for (inaudible) agreements, and I know your ambassador’s also just arrived in Ethiopia.  What’s your assessments on agreements?  And what is the overall – what the African Union is – initiative is taking place, which is they’re going to have a meeting – they have not set the date, but what’s your statement on that and what’s your concern?  The TPLF is accusing the Addis government for taking slow steps on agreement.

MR MILLER:  Let me take that back and get you a specific comment.

Go ahead.

QUESTION:  Thank you.

QUESTION:  Thank you, Matt.  There was a prisoner swap recently between the U.S. and the Taliban government.  How many more U.S. citizen are in Taliban’s custody?  And what’s the update on Mahmood Shah Habibi, who is citizen?  He is in Taliban’s custody since 20 months.  And second question —

MR MILLER:  So what’s the – what’s the prisoner swap to which you’re referring? 

QUESTION:  It was about one, two months ago. 

MR MILLER:  Are you —

QUESTION:  Al Arabiya said that the Taliban released a U.S. citizen in exchange of senior member of the Taliban.  So it was – I think —

MR MILLER:  I think you’re – I think you’re referencing some – there were two Afghan nationals who were in Oman who were released that were sent from Guantanamo Bay that were released.  It was – they – were security guarantees given to – that were going to expire at a certain time, and upon the expiration of those security guarantees —

QUESTION:  But wasn’t there other —

MR MILLER:  — they were going to be released.  But that did not relate to a prisoner exchange.  With respect to your overall question, of course we continue to press, including in meetings with Taliban representatives, for the immediate and unconditional release of Americans detained in Afghanistan.  Those detentions have been and continue to be a significant obstacle to positive engagement with the country. 

QUESTION:  And the second question:  A senior Taliban leader once again asked for the Afghan military planes that were taken to Uzbekistan and Tajikistan in the collapse of Kabul in 2001.  They ask, and they say that this is – belongs to the people of Afghanistan.  But U.S. not letting the planes to be brought back to Afghanistan.  What’s the U.S. stance on this? 

MR MILLER:  I’ll have to take that back and get you an answer. 

Simon, go ahead. 

QUESTION:  Going back to Gaza.

MR MILLER:  Yeah.

QUESTION:  The BBC reported yesterday regarding some medical staff from the Nasser Hospital in Khan Yunis – they’ve interviewed three doctors or three members of the staff of that hospital who’ve given, like, detailed accounts of their detention by Israeli authorities.  They told the BBC they were humiliated, beaten, doused with cold water, forced to kneel in uncomfortable positions for hours.  One was set upon by a dog.  I’m wondering, is that a specific – one of the specific cases that you would raise with the Israeli Government? 

MR MILLER:  I have only seen the report.  I don’t know if we have raised it, but I would expect that we would.  It is the type of cases that we often raise with them to seek more information and to make clear, as we always have, that any detainees should be treated in strict compliance with international humanitarian law. 

QUESTION:  And more broadly, there was also last week a report out of UNRWA about the treatment of UNRWA staff who had been detained by Israeli authorities.  So they’re sort of piling up allegations, and there’s – a lot of these accounts are quite similar, right.  The treatment of – I guess these tend to be men who are detained, presumably on suspicion of being part of Hamas.  But given – there are numerous of these allegations coming from different places with similar accounts.  Are you concerned?  Have you sort of – are you able to establish from that that there might be a pattern here, and is that something that’s – you’re able to raise?

MR MILLER:  Well, I’d say first of all that any detainee ought to be treated in compliance with international humanitarian law.  That’s what we have impressed upon the Israeli Government.  And we have seen the IDF come out and make statements to the same effect, say that they – they are a professional military; they expect all of their soldiers to behave consistent with their rules of engagement, consistent with the laws of war.  And if they – if people make mistakes, they will be disciplined.  And we will continue to impress upon them that that’s our expectation. 

QUESTION:  Are you aware of any cases where Israeli troops have been disciplined for mistreating prisoners? 

MR MILLER:  I am aware of cases.  I don’t know with – specifically with respect to prisoners.  But I know that we recently raised with them an incident where Israeli soldiers were filming themselves inside a mosque inappropriately, and the IDF told us that they were investigating and, if appropriate, there would be accountability and discipline. 

QUESTION:  But that’s a case where there’s video evidence.  They showed their faces in the video as well.  But —

MR MILLER:  Yeah, correct.  Correct.  But it doesn’t change what we think the standard ought to be, which is if there are allegations that are substantiated, there ought to be accountability.  That’s true for the Israeli military, as it should be for the United States military, and any military anywhere in the world. 

Go there, and we’ll wrap up for the day. 

QUESTION:  President Biden a couple of days ago, as you know, has stated that any attack on the city of Rafah is a red line for himself.  But just one day after President Biden’s statement on Rafah, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu said that he has intentions to go for Rafah.  So what is your reaction to Netanyahu’s statement? 

MR MILLER:  I’m not going to expand on what the President said or respond specifically to what the prime minister said, other than it has been our clear expectation that before any assault on Rafah proceeds, that the Government of Israel needs to develop a plan to deal with the well more than a million Palestinians who are there, many of them displaced, and that they have a credible and implementable humanitarian assistance plan.  And, as of today, we have not yet seen such a plan. 

With that, we’ll wrap for the day.  Thanks, everyone.

(The briefing was concluded at 1:57 p.m.)