Press Releases: Remarks to Families of Americans Held Captive Abroad


Remarks

Michael R. Pompeo

Secretary of State

U.S. Diplomacy Center
Washington, DC
April 2, 2019


MR O’BRIEN: Good afternoon, congressmen, senator, ambassadors, my colleagues at the State Department, and other officials in the United States Government – most importantly, the families of Americans who are held captive abroad. Welcome to the State Department.

My name is Robert O’Brien. I am the Special Presidential Envoy for Hostage Affairs. We here at the State Department are all deeply humbled that you made the effort to gather here today from all four corners of our great land. For those of you whose loved ones are held captive abroad, we asked you to make this journey because we want you to know and to feel the deep commitment we have to bringing them home. We want you to meet the people in our government and some of our foreign partners who are working to make that happen.

For those of you here today who’ve lost loved ones at the hands of evil men, evil terrorist organizations, and evil regimes, we asked you here because we want you to know that your loss will never be forgotten. We want you to know that you have a community here at the State Department; we support you and we love you.

My team and I at the State Department, the Hostage Recovery Fusion Cell, headquartered at the FBI, are available to you at every hour. Bringing our fellow citizens home is the single-most important mission we have, and it is also the key mission of this Secretary of State, of this President, and of this nation.

It is now my honor to introduce the Secretary of State, Michael Pompeo. Mike hails from my hometown of – pardon me, the home state of California, but he lived his life, most of his life, in the heart of our country, in Kansas. His career started when he entered West Point as an 18-year-old cadet, and he spent his entire life serving his country.

I am proud to call him a friend. You won’t meet a finer, more humble, more decent, more sincere American than Michael Pompeo. Mr. Secretary. (Applause.)

SECRETARY POMPEO: Thank you, Robert. And I want to start – and this is the way that Robert did – by thanking all the families of the hostages for making this journey to be with us today. And for those of you who could not make the trip, thank you to you as well.

I must say that when Robert and I first discussed this, the idea of inviting all these families back to the State Department, it was months ago, and we were too slow. I regret that we didn’t get this done more quickly. It very much seems like something that has been worthy and special, and I hope you all feel that way as well.

I want you all to have a personal relationship with us and get to know our hearts and our mission, the mission that we carry forward on behalf of your loved ones each and every day.

I want to welcome – I see in the audience ambassadors from partner nations who have joined us here today. Thank you all for being here. I want to thank everyone who made this day possible as well – Robert; his colleagues; his principal deputy, Hugh Dugan; his deputy, Julia Nesheiwat; and Meredith Stock as well. You all did the legwork to bring this all together. I just show up and there’s a microphone where it’s supposed to be. So thank you for making this happen.

I want too to make sure that I’m not remiss by not acknowledging all the others – the Bureau of Consular Affairs; Mike Burnett, Georgiana Cavendish, and their team; the White House National Security Council, who deals in hostage affairs as well – I see some of you with us today – our Ambassador Laura Dogu, Diane Ryan, and other team members of the interagency HRFC, who work hand in hand alongside Robert to coordinate diplomatic engagements on behalf of your loved ones.

I’m glad too – I know I have former colleagues from Capitol Hill, members of the House and the Senate, each of whom is personally invested in helping us make sure we bring Americans home. I see Congressman Hill and Waltz are here, to name a few – raise your hands, please. Thank you for being here. We grateful for your support.

And we’ve got folks from all across the government – from the Federal Bureau of Investigation, from the Department of Defense and Justice and Treasury, all the intelligence agencies, everyone who remains nameless who works on this critical mission as well. We thank them, and please thank your colleagues who could not be with us today as well.

For those of you’ve had a chance to come visit my office – a handful of you did it today – you would have seen on the edge of my desk a Bible that I keep open every day to remind me of what matters most in our life – God and family, doing what’s right, protecting the weakest.

Every day, you should know that Susan and I pray for you and your loved ones and that I am constantly reminded when I work on this mission set, the mission set of bringing wrongfully detained Americans home, of Acts, Chapter 12, Verse 6. In it there’s an extraordinary encounter.

It’s where Peter is sleeping in a cell. He is shackled next to two soldiers. There are sentries stationed outside. It’s the night before Herod put him on trial.

And suddenly, an angel appears. The angel shakes Peter awake. His shackles fall off. The angel tells Peter to follow him to freedom.

Peter is bewildered and probably scared, but he follows the angel. They pass by the two soldiers who were standing sentry outside, and then they reach the city’s iron gates, which open to them of their own accord.

Those of you who know this verse know it’s an incredible moment. Peter was rescued the night before he was to face judgment and likely execution. But his hope and faith allowed him to walk free.

I know too sometimes our rescued hostages feel like Peter must have felt, like they’ve received an act of God, but I know too that not every American held abroad is saved as Peter was. Sometimes, tragically, our efforts fail, or they don’t produce results as quickly as they deserve. And I want you all to know I am not here today to instill in you any false hope. Sometimes our best simply is not enough.

And we mourn all the men and women that have been wrongly detained and who have been lost to us. I met with some of their families today as well.

We mourn for them, folks like Jim Foley, Kayla Mueller, Steven Sotloff, Peter Kassig, and Otto Warmbier. Their families were all with us today. I want to personally thank them for being here.

What I can do today for each of you is to make my personal commitment known, to talk to you about what it is we’re doing and will continue to do every day – our very best every day to deliver every wrongfully detained American home.

I want to talk to you in practical matters about what this commitment means, what this pledge means.

You should know I’ve been at this now for over two years, first as the director of the Central Intelligence Agency and now in my role as Secretary of State, and the President asks every week for an update. He wants to know the status; he wants to know what we’re doing and why we haven’t been more successful. He is personally invested in the safe return of each and every one of them.

I talk to my counterparts in foreign capitals regularly, seeking their assistance, trying to get our hostages home. I do it by phone, I do it from my office, I do it from my home office, I do it when I travel on the road. I talk to Robert, too, and our team to make sure that they’re on track, that they’re on mission. He and I have an incredibly close relationship working on this important mission set.

He and his team spend every minute of their time at work, liaising with the White House, with the Hostage Rescue Fusion Cell, with foreign governments, to craft creative diplomatic strategies to pressure our enemies to release our people.

He meets too with congressmen on both sides of the aisle. He works to keep families as well informed as we can. And he and his team too think about this 24/7 – how is it that we can get just one more good result and then another.

I saw this too when I was in the intelligence community. It was a priority for collection. We try to collect as much data as we can about loved ones, sometimes in very difficult places, hard places to get information, and they work with their counterparts too to see what they know. I wish I could talk about some of those more than we sometimes can, but know that they are extensive and real and ongoing.

Our military too stands ready, some of our bravest and most skilled warriors, ready to rescue when possible.

In my personal experience, I must say that of all the places that all the government agencies work together, it is on this mission set where I find the most capability and people really focused on their mission, intelligence professionals working to help us rescue Americans alongside all of our diplomatic efforts. It is unparalleled in any other corner of our government.

I think the reason you see this, whether it’s folks in the Legislative Branch, folks in the Executive Branch working together, it’s because this mission is deeply held in the American spirit. It is nonpartisan. It’s a mission that is just. It’s a mission that’s right. And you should all know that we will never abandon our people, and I am confident that the entire country is with us and with you in this endeavor.

As I close today, I want you all to know that sometimes it doesn’t seem that way. Indeed, many of you shared experiences today where you were frustrated that not enough was being done. I understand how it can seem that way. I can’t put myself in your place, but I understand that you want more. I understand the days sometimes turn into weeks and weeks into months and months into years. I implore you, don’t give up, don’t despair. We will not.

Don’t be discouraged when you hear folks in the media say things that make no sense to you and to this mission.

And please, too, don’t despair if a particular member of Congress isn’t doing everything you think that they need to do, that they’re giving – they have a lack of attention to the plight of your family member. There are so many others working so diligently, acting as advocates for them from both houses and from both parties.

Please, too, don’t be discouraged by propaganda from our enemies. They want to divide us. They want to distract us from our mission to rescue your loved ones. Know that we are not distracted. I’d urge you to help us, be with us, and stay the course.

I know too that there are those who have talked about this idea that the United States ought to return to the practice of paying ransom for exchanging – exchanging the return of individuals back to the United States. I understand this plea from the bottom of my heart; indeed, I am confident that if I stood in your shoes, I too would be willing to do anything. I can understand that the suffering is unspeakable.

But please do remember: As we move in that direction, we create risk. Indeed, we know that there are nations that take Americans less because there is less money coming from America. I’ve seen it; I’ve seen the information. It’s what’s happened after we paid the mullahs in Iran. I’ve seen this kind of activity. Please remember that any payment to a terrorist or a terrorist regime gives money so that they can seize more of our people. We cannot accept that risk. You wouldn’t ask that of us. Even a small payment to a group in, say, Africa can facilitate the killing or seizure of tens or even hundreds of others, including Americans or foreign nationals in that region.

We also know for a fact that some terror groups don’t seize Americans because we won’t pay. It’s a trend I want to continue.

Look, this administration has had failures, but we’ve had many successes. We’ve rescued many people without concessions, some of whom you’ve heard about and others that we have kept from the public eye. And indeed, I’m proud of the record that we’ve achieved.

We were thrilled to welcome home Danny Burch just a few weeks back; Pastor Brunson, Kim Hak-song, and many others. Please know that my team – Robert and his team – will not rest until everyone is home.

And for those of you who today have a loved one held wrongfully or held hostage, I’m under no illusion that today’s events will provide relief from your suffering. No words can do that, nor will we be successful every day.

But perhaps, perhaps with this gathering, with my prayers, and with the actions of our team here at the State Department and our partners all across the government, you will wake up tomorrow knowing you are not alone in this mission to achieve freedom for every American hostage.

Know that we are treating every hostage situation with the urgency that it demands, that it deserves. Know that we’re treating your family in the way we would want ours treated, because as Americans, we are indeed all family.

Thank you. I look forward to getting the chance to talk to some of you here in just a few minutes. I hope that the Lord blesses each of you, blesses your loved ones who are wrongfully detained, and blesses our great country. Thank you. (Applause.)






Press Releases: Department Press Briefing – April 2, 2019

Robert Palladino
Deputy Spokesperson

Department Press Briefing
Washington, DC
April 2, 2019


Index for Today’s Briefing

  • IRAN/REGION
    • BURUNDI
      • DEPARTMENT
        • EL SALVADOR/GUATEMALA/HONDURAS/REGION/DEPARTMENT
          • VENEZUELA/TURKEY
            • MIDDLE EAST PEACE
              • IRAN/REGION
                • NATO/DEPARTMENT
                  • TURKEY/REGION/DEPARTMENT
                    • DPRK/ROK/REGION
                      • CHINA/REGION/DEPARTMENT
                        • ALGERIA
                          • INDIA
                            • DEPARTMENT

                              TRANSCRIPT:


                              2:51 p.m. EDT

                              MR PALLADINO: Good afternoon. Sorry for the slightly later than expected start. Today we have a special guest with us, Special Representative for Iran and Senior Advisor to the Secretary of State Brian Hook. Brian has some remarks at the top that he’d like to make, and then will be able to take a few of your questions. Please.

                              MR HOOK: Thanks. Good afternoon. Today we are providing an update on the President’s Iran strategy. I will highlight the effects we are seeing on the Iranian regime and its allies and proxies in the Middle East. This briefing comes at a time when Iran is facing severe flooding. At least 45 people have died in the past two weeks after heavy rains, with flooding affecting at least 23 of Iran’s 31 provinces. The Secretary issued a statement earlier today extending his condolences and offering assistance, and I extend my condolences as well.

                              Since taking office, the administration has designated over 970 Iranian entities and individuals. The sanctions announced last week against front companies supporting the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and Iran’s ministry of defense were the 26th round of American sanctions. Our sanctions have targeted a range of threats, especially Iran’s support of terrorism, missile proliferation, its nuclear program, human rights abuses, and others.

                              As part of this pressure, we have sanctioned more than 70 Iran-linked financial institutions and their foreign and domestic subsidiaries. The SWIFT financial messaging system matched many of these designations and disconnected every sanctioned bank in Iran. In November, SWIFT even disconnected the Central Bank of Iran from its system. We have targeted Iran’s illicit oil shipping networks, which enrich the brutal Assad regime and terrorist partners like Hizballah. We are taking unprecedented steps to deepen our cooperation with allies and partners to confront Iranian-backed terrorism and aggression. Joint teams from the departments of State and Treasury have now visited more than 50 countries around the world to brief on our new policy and warn of the dangers and reputational risks of doing business with Iran. Almost one year after the United States ended its participation in the Iran nuclear deal, and five months after the full reimposition of our sanctions, it is clear that our actions are restricting Iran’s cash flow. They are constraining its ability to operate freely in the region.

                              Our oil sanctions have taken approximately 1.5 million barrels of Iranian oil exports off the market since May of 2018. This has denied the regime access to well over $10 billion in revenue. That is a loss of at least $30 million a day, and this is only with respect to the oil. Iran would otherwise use this money to support its destructive and destabilizing activities. Because of our efforts, the regime now has less money to spend on its support of terrorism, missile proliferation, and on its long list of proxies. In November, we granted eight waivers, oil waivers to avoid a spike in the price of oil. I can confirm today that three of those importers are now at zero. That brings us to a total of 23 importers that once were purchasers of Iranian crude that are now at zero. With oil prices actually lower than they were when we announced our sanctions, and global oil – and global production stable, we are on the fast track to zeroing out all purchases of Iranian crude.

                              More than 100 major corporations withdrew from business in Iran. Companies like Total and Siemens have exited the Iranian market, taking with them billions of dollars in investment. Since the IRGC controls up to half of Iran’s economy, this lack of investment means less money for the Quds Force and Iran’s network of proxies. Our sanctions are draining Iran’s support to its proxies, and for the first time in a very long time, they have less access to revenue to spread terror and militancy. In March, Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Lebanese Hizballah, publicly appealed for donations for the first time ever. He has been forced to undertake unprecedented austerity measures. There are reports that some Hizballah fighters are receiving half of their pay, and that others are only being paid $200 a month. Other Hizballah employees report receiving 60 percent of their normal monthly salaries.

                              A new analysis released last month by the Washington Institute corroborates these findings. Hizballah has closed almost a thousand offices and paused hiring of new personnel. The report further concludes that Hizballah itself attributes this belt-tightening to U.S. sanctions on Iran, which has historically provided the group with $700 million annually. That is 70 percent of Hizballah’s entire budget.

                              Hizballah is not alone in feeling the strain of American sanctions. Iranian proxies in Syria and elsewhere are experiencing a lack of funding from Tehran. Fighters are going unpaid, and the services they once relied upon are drying up. Last week The New York Times quoted a Shia fighter in Syria who said that, quote, “The golden days are gone and will never return. Iran doesn’t have enough money to give us.”

                              We are working with our allies and partners to make this the new norm. We have acted with them to disrupt Iran’s illicit oil shipping operations. When we identified ships smuggling illicit Iranian oil for the Quds Force to support Hizballah and the Assad regime, Secretary Pompeo dispatched diplomatic teams to work with our allies and partners to help prevent it. We have been working with countries on almost every continent to identify vessels of concern and disrupt their operations. More than 75 vessels involved in illicit activity have been denied the flags that they need to sail.

                              Panama issued a presidential decree to pull registration and de-flag Iranian vessels. Countries like Singapore, Sri Lanka, and Sierra Leone have exercised great diligence to disrupt these schemes and deny criminal Iranian entities access to flag registries, insurance, and classification. We thank each of these nations for their work.

                              America has not acted alone to counter Iran’s malign behavior. Our European partners pushed back against Iran after a foiled bomb plot in Paris, and thwarted an assassination attempt in Denmark. In January, the European Union sanctioned Iran’s ministry of intelligence and security and two of its agents for their roles in these activities. The EU’s recent Foreign Affairs Council passed conclusions in February that called out its ballistic – Iran’s ballistic missile program. It also opposed Iran’s malign activity in Europe, as well as its ongoing role in regional conflicts. Many European countries, including the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Denmark, the Netherlands, Albania, and Serbia have acted to address the threat of Iranian terrorism on their own soil, whether by recalling ambassadors, expelling Iranian diplomats, eliminating visa-free travel, or denying landing rights to Mahan Air, as Germany recently did. All of these activities were undertaken after the U.S. exited the Iran nuclear deal, undercutting the narrative that the U.S. is alone in countering Iran’s threats to international peace and security.

                              We are also working with our allies and partners to oppose Iran’s ballistic missile program. The United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany have repeatedly highlighted Iran’s defiance of UN Security Council Resolution 2231, which calls upon Iran not to undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons. We relayed our strong concerns to the UN secretary-general following Iran’s launch of a medium range ballistic missile in December, and its attempted satellite launches in January and February.

                              Just last week, the UK, France, and Germany wrote to the secretary-general again, underscoring their concerns with Iran’s recent missile launches. We are confident that our shared assessment of the threat from Iran will continue to translate into even more shared action.

                              Our sanctions are laying bare this regime’s mismanagement and lack of transparency. Shortly after the President exited the Iran nuclear deal, Foreign Minister Zarif bragged that Iran would, quote, “thrive” under U.S. sanctions. His optimism was misplaced. A few months later, the supreme leader said that the regime is under, quote, “unprecedented pressure,” end quote. President Rouhani has since said Iran faces its, quote, “most severe economic crisis in 40 years.”

                              This economic crisis is largely of the regime’s own making, because it has prioritized expanding the revolution abroad over sound economics at home. Living conditions have barely rebounded to pre-revolution levels. For most Iranians, the promises of the revolution never materialized. This is why the hashtag #40yearsoffailure was a popular hashtag inside Iran during the regime’s 40th anniversary. Today there are reports that indicate Iran’s economy is in recession. The rial has lost two-thirds of its value, the IMF predicts Iran’s economy will contract by as much as 3.6 percent in 2019, and inflation hit a record 40 percent in November, with inflation for goods at 60 percent. It is likely to be much higher than that today, but it is difficult to know because the Central Bank of Iran stopped publicly reporting inflation back in December. What is the CBI hiding?

                              More than 70 percent of the Iranian public see the economy as bad or very bad, and 60 percent say it is getting worse. The Iranian people know whom to blame for reduced wages, lost savings, and a reduction in their purchasing power. A 2018 poll conducted by IranPoll found that nearly two-thirds of Iranians blamed the regime for mismanagement and corruption and for the country’s economic woes. Less than a third blamed sanctions or international pressure for the current state of affairs.

                              This has not stopped Iran’s leaders from deflecting blame for their own corruption and mismanagement, but the Iranian people know that their government’s policies are the root cause of Iran’s worsening economy. There are already whispers throughout the Iranian medical community that the regime is hoarding drugs and other medical products that they can then sell at marked-up prices for profit. The Iranian people view their government with such skepticism because the regime has lost all credibility.

                              I’ve discussed at length how our pressure is depriving the Iranian regime of the resources it needs to sustain its tactical operations. I want to close briefly by discussing the broader strategic implications this has for the region. As we increase pressure, we are creating new opportunities for peace and stability in the Middle East.

                              First, our pressure is aimed at reversing Iran’s strategic gains. From roughly 2007 through 2016, Iran was able for a variety of reasons to deepen its support of proxies and entrench itself in regional conflicts without facing negative consequences. Iran does this by letting its proxies do the dying for them in regional wars. The proxies also give the regime plausible deniability, a 40-year fiction this administration refuses to honor. Since taking office, but especially in the last 11 months, this administration has countered Iran’s grand strategy. We are imposing costs on the regime for behaving as an outlaw expansionist regime. The regime is weaker today than when we took office two years ago. Its proxies are also weaker. Unless the regime demonstrates a change in policy and behavior, the financial challenges facing Tehran will mount.

                              Second, as we expose the regime’s corruption, economic mismanagement, human rights abuses, arbitrary detention of dual nationals, environmental destruction, and more, we are making the case to countries in the region that Iran is neither a model to emulate nor a partner to follow. Wherever it goes, conflict, misery, and suffering follow. Here are a few examples.

                              President Rouhani recently visited Iraq, where he seeks to bring – which he seeks to bring under Iranian control. We ask the Iraqi people to consider this: Given how Rouhani treats his own people, just imagine how he will treat you.

                              The effects of Iran’s meddling had been felt most sharply by the region’s innocent civilians. Men, women, and children are casualties of Iran’s dangerous expansionism almost every day. In Yemen, Iran has helped fuel a humanitarian catastrophe by backing the Houthis. Its support has prolonged the conflict well beyond what makes any sense at all.

                              In Syria, Iran has (inaudible) and abetted Assad’s brutal war machine as that machine has killed hundreds of thousands and displaced millions of civilians. Under the cover of the Syrian war, the IRGC is now trying to plant military roots in Syria and establish a new strategic base to threaten Syria’s neighbors such as Israel.

                              In Lebanon, the Iranian regime’s obsession with using Hizballah to provoke conflict with Lebanon’s neighbors threatens the safety of the Lebanese people. IRGC backing enables Hizballah to use murder, terrorism, and corruption to intimidate other Lebanese parties and communities.

                              In Iraq, I can announce today, based on declassified U.S. military reports, that Iran is responsible for the deaths of at least 608 American service members. This accounts for 17 percent of all deaths of U.S. personnel in Iraq from 2003 to 2011. This death toll is in addition to the many thousands of Iraqis killed by the IRGC’s proxies.

                              Third, rolling back Iran’s power projection will make it easier to address other regional challenges. Many intellectuals and diplomats over the years have argued that without progress on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, there can be no progress on other conflicts. This has been referred to by some as linkage – the idea that resolving peace between Israel and the Palestinians was necessary to resolve other flash points.

                              However, the Middle East of today challenges this theory of linkage. In fact, what we are seeing more and more is a kind of reverse linkage; addressing the threats posed by Iran is a precursor to helping resolve other conflicts.

                              When we look at the challenges in the region, from the peace process to conflicts in Syria and Yemen, to violence in Bahrain and Iraq, Iran’s operations lie at or very near the heart of the problem. It supports Palestinian terror groups like Hamas that undermine the aspirations of the Palestinian people. It exports missiles and terrorist know-how to the Houthis in Yemen, who in turn threaten neighboring countries. It threatens the war – it perpetuates the war in Syria by propping up the Assad regime. Nowhere in the region are peace and prosperity compatible with Iranian influence and support.

                              The Islamic Republic is linked to these crises in a way that compounds suffering and prevents peace and stability from getting a better footing. Iran can no longer be allowed to play the role of chief spoiler. Our pressure is making it harder than ever before for them to do that.

                              Secretary Pompeo will continue to use all the tools at our disposal to press the regime to change its destructive policies for the benefit of peace in the region and for the sake of its own people, who are the longest-suffering victims of this regime.

                              As we have done from the start, we will continue to call on all nations to join us in restoring the basic demands on Iran to behave like a peaceful nation. This include – this includes ending its pursuit of nuclear weapons, stop testing and proliferating ballistic missiles, stop sponsoring terrorist proxies, and halt the arbitrary detention of dual citizens.

                              As Secretary Pompeo has said, we are prepared to end the principal components of every one of our sanctions against the regime. We are happy to re-establish full diplomatic and commercial ties with Iran. If Iran makes a fundamental shift, as outlined in the Secretary’s 12 demands, a lot of good things can happen between the people of Iran and the people of the United States. That includes supporting the modernization and reintegration of the Iranian economy into the international economic system.

                              Glad to take a few questions. Matt.

                              QUESTION: Thank you. Are you going to be making an abridged version of this available?

                              MR HOOK: There will be a fact sheet released after this.

                              QUESTION: Okay. Thanks. Two things real quick. One, on the money, the 10 billion denied for destructive activities, is it not also the case that no matter how small the amount that Iran might spend, that 10 billion that you’ve taken away from them could also have been used for things like infrastructure or for disaster relief if –

                              MR HOOK: Iran had that opportunity back in 2013.

                              QUESTION: Well, right. But it’s 2019 now –

                              MR HOOK: Right. But —

                              QUESTION: — and they’re suffering from floods. So that –

                              MR HOOK: They are suffering from floods because Iran has prioritized its expansionist foreign policy over things like emergency preparedness and water management. I released a video a few weeks ago, before the flooding occurred, talking about how Iran has destroyed its environment. The regime has destroyed its environment, and it has mismanaged its water resources, and it goes through these cycles of drought and flooding.

                              When this regime came to power, there were about seven ancient dams and 12 modern dams. Over the course of the last 40 years, this regime has built 600 dams. That is just water malpractice, water management malpractice.

                              QUESTION: Okay. But, I mean, natural disasters happen everywhere. They happen here too. It’s not —

                              MR HOOK: And so they have prioritized all of this – they have prioritized this consistently. People are still recovering from the earthquake in 2017.

                              QUESTION: Can I – then just the last one briefly. You said on the oil waivers – so you said three of the eight that were – three of the eight are no longer necessary, the ones – the original ones?

                              MR HOOK: No, I said that three of the eight have gone to zero.

                              QUESTION: Right. Well, so they don’t need waivers then, right? So there’s five left?

                              MR HOOK: That’s correct.

                              QUESTION: There is – there are some people, quite a few actually, who make the argument that you should not give any more waivers, that everything should go to zero, zero means zero, maximum pressure.

                              MR HOOK: Right.

                              QUESTION: That concerns about the market and the supply are compensated for or made up for by the Saudis willingness to expand production to cover any – so do you intend to not give any more – to extend – to not extend any of the waivers? Or is that still an open possibility?

                              MR HOOK: Well, we’re still currently under the existing waivers that expire on May 2nd. There will be an announcement on that in due course. We are not looking to grant any exceptions to our campaign of maximum economic pressure. As I’ve said in my remarks and I’ve said in other forum, fora, that in 2018 we had a very tight and fragile oil market and the President did not want to lift the price of oil. We very, I think, carefully and correctly calibrated balancing our national security and economic objectives. 2019 is a much better picture in global oil markets. We forecast more supply than demand. And that creates much better conditions for us to accelerate our path to zero.

                              QUESTION: Thank you.

                              MR HOOK: Rich.

                              QUESTION: Thanks, Brian. So if you’ve taken off a million and a half a day, you’re somewhere south of a million barrels a day? That’s where —

                              MR HOOK: Yeah, approximately. Yeah.

                              QUESTION: Is there a point – and I know the intent is to get to zero, but is there a point that the administration sees as a real tipping point that – is it half a million barrels or somewhere in between that really begins to drive the economic ramifications?

                              MR HOOK: Well, we already are – we’re doing that now at our current levels. So we have reached that goal of affecting Iran’s – disrupting and making it harder for Iran to sustain its foreign policy. So we’re – this briefing was to talk about the impact. I often get this question – what kind of impact are you seeing? – so I thought it’d be useful to provide a comprehensive briefing on what we’re seeing and what others are seeing. And we’re just getting started.

                              Michele.

                              QUESTION: Thank you. Since Secretary Pompeo is hosting this event on captive Americans this afternoon, I wonder if you can tell us if there’s been any new effort by the administration to open up a humanitarian dialogue with Iran on the cases of Americans held there in Iran or if you’re considering anything punitive, specific sanctions to pressure Iran to release these people.

                              MR HOOK: Well, I’d refer you to – I don’t want to get in Robert O’Brien’s lane. I can tell you that when I did – this was back when the United States was in the Iran nuclear deal and I attended the last meeting of the joint commission that the United States participated in. I requested a meeting with Iran’s deputy foreign minister Abbas Araghchi, and I presented him the names of all the Americans who are being arbitrarily detained. I asked for their release, asked for an update on their condition, and suggested that we do some sort of – that we start opening the channel. Robert O’Brien has picked that up, and so we are – he’s going to be having some events this afternoon. I’m happy to put Robert in touch with you to give you a more detailed answer.

                              Nick.

                              QUESTION: Brian, just two quick ones, one on the oil waivers. So if conditions on May 2nd are what they are today, would you say that conditions are right to bring that to zero? And then second, on the 608 American service members you identified as Iran having been responsible for their deaths, is that – could you us give more detail on that? What was that classified information that was declassified? And you mentioned 2003 to 2011, so is that – that’s the date frame, time frame for those Americans?

                              MR HOOK: Yes. That’s a Department of Defense statistic. I’m happy to give you more details on it but wanted to release that number.

                              QUESTION: And on the waivers?

                              MR HOOK: I already answered the waiver question.

                              QUESTION: But not – I mean, if today, given the – what you mentioned about the oil market and the fact that it seems to be well supplied and oil prices are relatively low, would you feel comfortable bringing waivers to zero?

                              MR HOOK: We – because 2019 we forecast more supply than demand, there are better market conditions for us to accelerate our path to zero. We are not looking to grant any waivers or exceptions to our sanctions regime.

                              Last question for Abbie.

                              QUESTION: Thank you. You went through a lot of the economic impact of what you’re seeing one year after from the sanctions. But what changes in behavior have you seen from Iran as far as their malign activities throughout the world that you have been pointing out for the last year?

                              MR HOOK: Well, that’s what we wanted to highlight today. To some extent I feel like don’t take my word for it; the Iranian regime is admitting it at the supreme leader level, the presidential – the level of the president. You’ve seen the leader of Hizballah make a public appeal for donations. You’re seeing reporting in the New York Times front page on Friday last week chronicling how the combination of Iran’s financial mismanagement plus American sanctions are impeding Iran’s ability to fund its proxies and allies at the levels that they are accustomed to. And since Iran does supply Hizballah with 70 percent of its revenue, it is quite significant when you have the leader of Hizballah making a public appeal for money. He’s obviously not getting as much as he needs to execute his objectives because, as he’s attributed to, American sanctions.

                              So we think it’s very much interest – in the interest of the Iranian people to join this effort of pressure, because we are seeing the results. And there were a lot of people who, when we got out of the deal, who were saying, “Oh, America alone, can you do this? This is going to be very hard without everybody joining you.” And I think that that has now been proven wrong. We’re only five months into the re-imposition of our sanctions, and we are now already seeing these effects that are being reported by others, not by us.

                              And so we think, as I said, we share the same threat assessment with so many – with our – with countries in the Middle East, with our European partners. When we were in Warsaw, we saw there – one nice consequence of Iran’s foreign policy is that it has brought together Arabs and Israelis in a way that we had not thought possible. And so you saw they have this common threat of Iran’s foreign policy, its revolutionary foreign policy, and it is a very urgent matter. And so I remember Prime Minister Netanyahu saying in Warsaw when you see the Arabs and the Israelis agreeing as strongly as they do, you need to pay attention to that. Something very important is happening, and we’re seeing it. We’ve been seeing it for a while, and I just wanted to give you an update on what we’re seeing on the ground. Thank you.

                              MR PALLADINO: All right. Thanks, Brian.

                              MR HOOK: Thanks.

                              MR PALLADINO: All right. Hi, everyone.

                              Something for the top: The United States is deeply concerned by the Government of Burundi’s decision to extend indefinitely the suspension of broadcasts by the Voice of America and to revoke the operating license of the British Broadcasting Corporation. This decision raises serious concerns for the freedom of expression enshrined in article 31 of Burundi’s constitution as well as for Burundi’s international human rights obligations. We call on the government to rescind its decision, and we urge the Government of Burundi to allow all journalists to operate in an environment free from intimidation. A free and independent media is indispensable to a vibrant, functioning democracy and to free and fair elections in 2020.

                              With that, I’d be happy to take some questions.

                              QUESTION: You sound subdued for some reason.

                              MR PALLADINO: Ah, do you want me to sing more, maybe, perhaps?

                              QUESTION: No. No, you just seemed a little subdued. Can I ask you —

                              MR PALLADINO: No, Idon’t read into my – okay, I’ll be more casual. Go ahead, Matt, please. (Laughter.)

                              QUESTION: Can I ask you a – one logistical question before getting into – and that is – the logistical question is: Why is the Secretary not going to the G7 Foreign Ministers Meeting?

                              MR PALLADINO: The Secretary has full faith in Deputy Secretary of State John Sullivan and his ability to advance America’s national security interests at the G7 Foreign Ministers Meeting. In fact, the deputy secretary has previously represented the United States at the G7 Foreign Ministers Meeting, and as you know, beginning today, the Secretary will host all NATO allies for a two-day NATO ministerial. Transatlantic alliances are stronger than ever, and in that same spirit, he’ll be sending the deputy secretary.

                              QUESTION: Right. Well, except that the time that Deputy Secretary Sullivan attended the G7, he was actually the acting secretary of state; he wasn’t the – I mean he was the deputy but was also acting secretary of state. I’m just – I mean, was there some reason that – does he have some kind of a conflict? Why – what’s the —

                              MR PALLADINO: I have nothing to announce on the Secretary’s future schedule at this time.

                              QUESTION: Okay. Can I ask you about the decision – the President’s decision on aid to the Northern Triangle countries, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras? I’m curious to know what kind of decision-making process or planning went into this, and how much money is actually going to be affected. It seems to me – the President went on at length about this in his meeting with the NATO secretary general, and he said that he understood what the money was for. But this administration has made a big play – a big push for countries that receive U.S. assistance to agree with or vote with it at the United Nations, et cetera. Both Honduras and Guatemala have signed on to the Lima Group consensus on Interim President Guaido in Venezuela. Guatemala has moved its embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, following the U.S. lead. So what kind of message does this send if they do what you ask them to and then you go ahead and take away money that was supposed to be going to alieve the very problem that you say they’re being punished for?

                              MR PALLADINO: Right. To answer your question on money, at the Secretary’s instruction, we are carrying out the President’s direction to end foreign assistance programs for the Northern Triangle. The President’s direction to end foreign assistance programs impacts approximately $450 million in Fiscal Year 2018 allocations. And the State Department along with the United States Agency for International Development currently are evaluating the impact on Fiscal Year 2017 funds. When we have further details to provide on that process moving forward, we’ll be sure to let you know.

                              Regarding the decision itself, the President has made clear that the decision is aimed at securing United States borders and protecting American citizens, and that’s something that the Secretary of State is now pursuing. The President has determined that these programs have not effectively prevented illegal immigration from coming to the United States, and they’ve not achieved the desired results. We – political will and strong partnership are critical to ensuring the success of any foreign assistance program, and that’s something that is true in this regard as well.

                              QUESTION: How much of this money actually goes to the governments and how much is actually distributed by USAID to NGOs and other groups, civil society groups?

                              MR PALLADINO: Yeah, I don’t have a line item breakdown on distribution. I have the top line Fiscal Year 2018 method. But —

                              QUESTION: I mean, I think the overwhelming majority of this goes to nongovernmental organizations that are involved in – that run programs designed to reduce the threat. So exactly how is not spending this money or not sending this money securing the U.S. border and protecting Americans?

                              MR PALLADINO: Well it’s clearly – it’s not succeeded in stemming this flow.

                              QUESTION: Okay, so we —

                              MR PALLADINO: And we have a crisis situation.

                              QUESTION: Right.

                              MR PALLADINO: As the Secretary said, the numbers don’t lie.

                              QUESTION: Okay. But —

                              MR PALLADINO: That must be addressed.

                              QUESTION: Okay —

                              MR PALLADINO: And the President has been clear repeatedly that this was something that he was considering, and he’s made it clear that foreign assistance should be in support of America’s national interests. And our national interests here are quite prioritized, and that is the crisis that we are facing along our border is a national security issue, and that’s what we’re addressing.

                              QUESTION: So obviously the – there is some alternative plan in place, other than just taking this money away, right?

                              MR PALLADINO: I have nothing further to announce today on future United States Government actions.

                              QUESTION: So you’re just telling us that there’s no – there’s no – you – no one has an idea about how it can be better done or what would work?

                              MR PALLADINO: I didn’t say that. What I said is I have nothing to announce today on future actions. Please.

                              QUESTION: Follow-up on that?

                              MR PALLADINO: Go ahead, Lesley.

                              QUESTION: Robert, as far as I understand, the State Department has to notify Congress of its decision to suspend this aid. Have you done that? And then what happens? Is there a period of time in which you then move forward? Can you just run us through the process, please?

                              MR PALLADINO: Right. The State Department and U.S. Agency for International Development intend to consult with and notify the Congress regarding the planned reprogramming of funds, and that will be consistent with all applicable requirements.

                              QUESTION: When will that happen?

                              MR PALLADINO: We are engaging Congress.

                              QUESTION: You are engaging?

                              MR PALLADINO: We are engaging Congress.

                              QUESTION: So currently the State Department is talking about this plan with Congress?

                              MR PALLADINO: We are engaging the Congress, and we intend to pursue additional consultations with, and eventually the notification too.

                              QUESTION: And on the amount, you mentioned you have at least one number, because there have been a number of different amounts reported out there, because some of it might be Fiscal Year ’17 money that could have been spent or wasn’t spent. Can you break it down as much as you can?

                              MR PALLADINO: I can’t at this point. The process is complicated. And that said, when we have those numbers and further details, we will be able to provide them at that point.

                              QUESTION: But the number that you have is what? You said you have a —

                              MR PALLADINO: Fiscal Year 2018, we’re able to provide a specific number and that’s $450 million.

                              QUESTION: Robert?

                              QUESTION: Iran?

                              QUESTION: More on aid?

                              QUESTION: More on aid?

                              QUESTION: Aid?

                              MR PALLADINO: Let’s go to CBS, please.

                              QUESTION: Thank you. Can you – more of explaining, but can you say – I understand it’s reprogramming – but what the authority is that you’re using to do this? Is it just reprogramming, or does it have to do with the clause in the appropriations bill that gives the Secretary oversight for foreign aid to these three countries specifically?

                              My other question is, obviously, most foreign aid goes through State and USAID but not all of it. There’s over 20 government agencies that deal with foreign aid in some form. Will this apply to all that aid, and will this apply to programs for the Millennium Challenge Corporation, which have hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of programs in those three countries?

                              MR PALLADINO: I don’t have any specifics on the second part of your question. Regarding the first part, the funds will be reprogrammed consistent with all applicable requirements regarding congressional consultation and notification. Beyond that, I don’t have anything further.

                              QUESTION: Taiwan?

                              QUESTION: Turkey?

                              QUESTION: I have one more on —

                              MR PALLADINO: One more? Go ahead, Abbie, please.

                              QUESTION: As I understand it, the law works as such that Congress has to approve that reprogramming. Given the congressional reaction so far, it seems they’re not supportive of withdrawing that foreign assistance generally. If Congress insists that the reprogramming that is suggested is not something they support, is the State Department willing to see that money go back to Congress and not be spent?

                              MR PALLADINO: I don’t want to engage in a hypothetical, but what I would say is that the President’s decision is clear, and the Secretary of State has ordered us to march forward. We’re going to continue to do that, and we intend to consult with and notify Congress as is appropriate.

                              QUESTION: On the breakdown?

                              MR PALLADINO: Last one. This is the last one on this subject. I don’t have much more. Go ahead.

                              QUESTION: Can you please talk a little bit about what the President sees as the motivation for those three countries? Does he believe that those Northern Triangle countries are insufficiently committed to the idea of stopping these migrant flows, that they want to stop them, that they have – but have not been able to? And what do they say in their conversations when the U.S. Government asks why they’ve been unable to stop these migrant flows?

                              MR PALLADINO: I don’t have anything to report on what they’re saying to the White House, if I understand your question correctly here.

                              QUESTION: Well, I mean, I would assume that some of those conversations would happen through the State Department as well or through the embassies. Were you – when the President made that threat some time ago to stop aid, there would have then been some sort of conversation where they would say, listen – I mean, do you have a sense of their intent? Do you believe that they have shown insufficient commitment to the work of stopping these migrant flows?

                              MR PALLADINO: What I would say is we need these countries to continue making the tough reforms that are necessary. I’ll stop there. Let’s move on.

                              Go ahead, Laurie. Please.

                              QUESTION: Venezuela’s foreign minister visited Ankara yesterday, and he was – and he reiterated Turkey’s support, quote, “in all fields for Venezuela,” to quote the Turkish foreign minister. What is your comment on that?

                              MR PALLADINO: I don’t actually have anything on that, Laurie, and I am going to have to get back to you. Go ahead.

                              QUESTION: Okay. I’ve got another – I have another one.

                              QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

                              MR PALLADINO: Go ahead, please.

                              QUESTION: Turkey’s ruling party is contesting the elections that it —

                              MR PALLADINO: Yeah.

                              QUESTION: — lost, apparently, in Istanbul and Ankara. And do you have any concerns that that contest by the AKP, that challenge by the AKP to the election results, could undermine their integrity?

                              MR PALLADINO: We’re aware of those reports. I would say that free and fair elections are essential for any democracy, and this means acceptance of legitimate election results are essential. And we expect nothing less from Turkey, which has a long, proud tradition in this respect.

                              QUESTION: Robert —

                              MR PALLADINO: And to go back to your first question, sometimes our organization is lacking, Laurie. I do have a response to your question, and I apologize.

                              Regarding the visit itself, I would say that we call on all other governments to recognize Interim President Juan Guaido and to take steps to prevent Maduro from further stealing Venezuela’s wealth. Additionally, we urge the international community to hold Maduro and other corrupt actors accountable and to take appropriate actions to end the theft of Venezuela’s assets and prevent the travel of Maduro’s cronies. Thanks.

                              QUESTION: And that would include the roughly $2 billion that Turkey imported from – of gold that Turkey imported from Venezuela last year?

                              MR PALLADINO: I don’t have anything specific on that specific transaction, but the general principle remains.

                              Go ahead, Said, please.

                              QUESTION: Yes, thank you, Robert. Ambassador Dennis Ross, a former official in many administrations, Republican and Democrat, along with his colleague, David Makovsky, wrote a lengthy article in The Washington Post, where they’re saying that your Golan policy basically invites the Israeli right wing to annex the West Bank and that you ought to do – make a declaration. Will you make a declaration that the West Bank is occupied territory and is not to be tampered with by whoever – any group that may annex it?

                              MR PALLADINO: I —

                              QUESTION: Do you have any comment on his article?

                              MR PALLADINO: I haven’t read his article, but I can say I’m not going to speak about hypotheticals, and our policy on the West Bank has not changed.

                              QUESTION: But Ambassador Ross was probably – was more involved with this process than probably any other official in town, has a long history. He knows what he’s talking about. He’s saying that next it will be the right-wing groups annexing part of the West Bank. Would you perhaps preemptively – I don’t know, maybe you can say that you should not do this?

                              MR PALLADINO: Yeah, not going to speak about hypotheticals. I would just say this administration is firmly committed to pursuing a comprehensive peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians, and I have nothing further on this topic.

                              Go ahead, Shaun, please.

                              QUESTION: Can we move on to Iran for a bit?

                              MR PALLADINO: To Iran?

                              QUESTION: To Iran.

                              MR PALLADINO: Oh, there wasn’t enough at the beginning.

                              QUESTION: There wasn’t enough. (Inaudible.)

                              MR PALLADINO: Okay, please. (Inaudible.)

                              QUESTION: Well, one question —

                              QUESTION: (Inaudible.) (Laughter.) I didn’t quite get what Brian was saying.

                              QUESTION: Well, one part specifically, regarding the Secretary’s —

                              MR PALLADINO: Really? Okay. Okay. (Laughter.)

                              QUESTION: Regarding the Secretary’s —

                              QUESTION: You don’t like Iran, right? That’s the —

                              MR PALLADINO: Please, go ahead, Shaun. Okay.

                              QUESTION: Regarding the Secretary’s statement this morning about the aid – or about the floods —

                              MR PALLADINO: Right.

                              QUESTION: — he mentioned that the United States was willing to contribute via the Red Crescent. The head of the Iranian Red Crescent is saying that because of the U.S. sanctions, because of the regulations on SWIFT, that the Iranian Red Crescent side actually can’t reach funding from the umbrella organization. Iran has also said that helicopters, spare parts in particular, that they don’t have access to those. Is the U.S. willing to address those specific concerns in terms of aid? Does the U.S. have a concern that its sanctions overall could be hurting the relief effort?

                              MR PALLADINO: I guess I would echo what Special Representative Hook said earlier, that the floods demonstrate the level of Iranian regime’s mismanagement in urban planning and in emergency preparedness. Furthermore, I would say the United States stands ready to assist and to contribute to the International Federation of the Red Cross and the Red Crescent Societies, which would then direct the money through the Iranian Red Crescent for relief. We stand ready to do that. And I’d point out that we remain the largest donor of humanitarian assistance in the world, and every sanctions regime that we have made makes exceptions for food, for medicine, and for medical devices. I would also point out that the – this Iranian regime has a history of creating front companies to divert the distribution of humanitarian goods. And financial institutions around the world know of this track record, they know this history of deceiving banks when it comes – when it comes – regards to the sale of humanitarian goods.

                              So the burden is on Iran here to open up its dark economy so that banks around the world have more confidence that when they facilitate a humanitarian transaction, that the humanitarian goods will actually reach the people. And the regime makes it very difficult to facilitate humanitarian goods and services. I’ll stop there.

                              QUESTION: NATO?

                              QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

                              QUESTION: Robert, is it the administration’s position that all natural disasters everywhere are caused by that government’s mismanagement of natural – of emergency preparedness and water management?

                              MR PALLADINO: Absolutely not. Brian Hook spoke earlier —

                              QUESTION: Only Iran.

                              MR PALLADINO: No, please. Brian Hook spoke specifically earlier about the environmental degradation that has been wreaked across the Iranian regime.

                              QUESTION: Right. No doubt, but natural disasters happen everywhere, including in this country.

                              MR PALLADINO: And of course. And our —

                              QUESTION: And it’s not always the fault of mismanagement.

                              MR PALLADINO: And we would never insist that they are. And we have offered our condolences, because at the end of the day here we are extremely sympathetic for the victims of this recent flood. And I’ll stop there. Please.

                              QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

                              MR PALLADINO: Let’s – I’m going to go to CNN. Go ahead.

                              QUESTION: Okay. So since burden-sharing is on the agenda again, can we expect to hear the same kinds of statements from the administration strongly urging or hounding NATO allies to contribute more, or would you say that given the progress that has been made, the administration is now satisfied with who’s on track and who’s not?

                              MR PALLADINO: I don’t want to get ahead of the ministerials that are coming, but burden-sharing is definitely a priority for this administration. And where we’re on track, we’re on track; where we’re not on track, you can expect there to be further discussion encouraging more progress on this regard.

                              QUESTION: How many countries – in the State Department’s view, how many countries meet the 2 percent GDP contribution to their defense?

                              MR PALLADINO: I don’t have all the facts in front of me on the statistics in that regard, so I don’t want to misspeak at this point.

                              QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

                              MR PALLADINO: Let me go to Cindy, please.

                              QUESTION: Thank you. With the summit about to get underway, how big an issue – the tensions with Turkey over their purchase of the missile defense system from Russia, and what are you hearing from other – do other countries, NATO allies, support the U.S. position on this?

                              MR PALLADINO: I guess I’d say at the top, if we’re talking about NATO in general, this is an old organization that certainly has had challenges previously, things that we’ve had to work through. It’s a pretty resilient organization, and we are – it’s the most successful alliance probably in the history of the world, for that matter, and it’s something that we continue to take – that remains at the core of our national security and it’s something that’s being prioritized – will continue to be a priority for the United States.

                              Regarding the specific sales that you’re referencing in regards to Turkey, we’ve been – no surprise here – we’ve been pretty clear on these issues for some time right now, and specifically the procurement of the S-400 would put Turkey’s continued participation in the 14-nation F-35 program at risk. So what you saw yesterday was the Department of Defense announcement that, as discussions on this matter continue, it would be taking prudent steps to protect the shared investments made by the United States and our allies, including Turkey, in these critical defense technologies. And DOD announced that pending an unequivocal Turkish decision to forgo delivery of the S-400, deliveries and activities with the stand-up of the Turkey F-35 operational capability have been suspended and secondary sources of supply for Turkish produced parts are in development. That was the announcement that they made yesterday.

                              So again, this is not new. This is something we’ve spoken about a lot from this – from the State Department, and here we are.

                              QUESTION: Are you hearing from other NATO allies about what – how they see this – these – this dispute or —

                              MR PALLADINO: Nothing to disclose from the podium. We’ll be taking a look at all kinds of issues that impact NATO’s readiness this week.

                              QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

                              QUESTION: Robert, it’s the same topic.

                              MR PALLADINO: Okay, let’s stay on topic. Go ahead.

                              QUESTION: Thank you. So Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu is arriving in Washington for the summit, and he’s expected to meet his American counterpart, Secretary Pompeo. Are they going to talk about this issue, F-35s, and do you know – can you say anything —

                              MR PALLADINO: I don’t have any bilateral meetings to announce today to talk about, but – I’ll leave it at that. Please, go ahead.

                              QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

                              CHINA” name=”CHINA”>Go ahead. Let’s go to NHK. Ben, go ahead.

                              QUESTION: Thank you, Robert. I have two quick questions. The first one is: Could I get a reaction to these two Chinese jets that flew into Taiwan airspace? Taiwan characterized it as reckless and provocative. Do you agree with that characterization?

                              And then my second question is on Hong Kong. The Hong Kong Government is currently considering revising legislation to allow extradition of criminals to Chinese authorities. Do you have any comment or concern about that?

                              MR PALLADINO: I haven’t seen that specific – or I’ll say we’re aware of that legislation, and we’re going to follow related developments to it closely. I don’t have anything further at this point.

                              Regarding Taiwan, we note Ambassador Bolton’s tweet yesterday. And I would add to that that the United States opposes unilateral actions by any party that are aimed at altering the status quo, including anything related to force or coercion. And such unilateral efforts are harmful and do not contribute to regional stability, and they undermine the framework that has enabled peace and stability and development for decades. Beijing should stop its coercive efforts and resume dialogue with the democratically elected administration on Taiwan.

                              And I’ll stop there. Please.

                              QUESTION: Wouldn’t that – wouldn’t you say that that policy extends beyond the Taiwan Strait to other places?

                              MR PALLADINO: I need more specifics. I don’t understand the question.

                              QUESTION: Well, you said the U.S. opposes unilateral actions that affect the status quo. And I’m just wondering, that applies there in the – to the Taiwan Strait, but does it apply elsewhere, say, perhaps the Middle East, where this administration has taken numerous unilateral steps that affect the status quo. And if you apply the same principle, you would, in fact, oppose the steps the administration has taken. Is that not correct?

                              MR PALLADINO: We – yeah, we’ve got different fact scenarios and we’ve got – that we’re dealing with, different actors in the region, and we take – we take the world as we find it. We’re not looking for – go ahead, Michel, please.

                              QUESTION: Do you have a comment on the resignation of the Algerian president after 20 years in power?

                              MR PALLADINO: Yeah, I saw that that was just – just broke. I mean, I’m aware of that. I don’t have any specific reaction other than we continue – the United States – questions about how to navigate this transition in Algeria, that is for the Algerian people to decide. And beyond that I don’t have anything further at this point.

                              QUESTION: Robert, India?

                              MR PALLADINO: Okay, let’s go to India, please. Tejinder.

                              QUESTION: Yes. Do you have any official reaction to India’s anti-satellite missile test? As the NASA chief has said, it has called it a terrible, terrible thing to create.

                              MR PALLADINO: Yeah, we – I think we spoke a little bit about this last week. But as we’ve said previously, we have a strong strategic partnership with India, and we will continue to pursue shared interests in space, in scientific and technical cooperation with India, and that includes collaboration on safety and security in space.

                              Now, the issue of space debris, that is an important concern for the United States, and I would say that we took note of the Indian Government’s statements that the test was designed to address space debris issues. And I’ll stop there. And —

                              QUESTION: Are you —

                              MR PALLADINO: Okay, go ahead, Tejinder, please. We need to wrap this up. Go ahead.

                              QUESTION: Are you sending any kind of any election monitors to the – this general elections in India from (inaudible)?

                              MR PALLADINO: I’m not aware of anything in that regard. Guys, I’m sorry, but we have to go. I gotta go, gotta go.

                              QUESTION: (Inaudible). Has Heather Nauert officially – has she ended her role in the State Department officially now?

                              MR PALLADINO: Heather no longer works for the State Department. She’s been a great colleague. Thanks.

                              (The briefing was concluded at 3:50 p.m.)






                            Press Releases: Implementation of Phases Two and Three of Brunei’s Sharia Penal Code


                            Press Statement

                            Robert Palladino

                            Deputy Spokesperson

                            Washington, DC
                            April 2, 2019


                            Brunei’s decision to implement Phases Two and Three of the Sharia Penal Code and associated penalties runs counter to its international human rights obligations, including with respect to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

                            All governments have an obligation to ensure that all people can freely enjoy the universal human rights and fundamental freedoms to which they are entitled. The United States strongly opposes violence, criminalization and discrimination targeting vulnerable groups, including women at risk of violence, religious and ethnic minorities, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) persons.

                            We continue to encourage Brunei to ratify and implement the United Nations Convention Against Torture, which it signed in 2015, and to sign, ratify, and implement the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.






                            Press Releases: U.S. Department of State and Smithsonian Institution Expand Partnership


                            Media Note

                            Office of the Spokesperson

                            Washington, DC
                            April 2, 2019


                            The U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, the J. William Fulbright Foreign Scholarship Board, and the Smithsonian Institution are pleased to announce the signing of a new agreement to deepen and expand the organizations’ collaboration to advance U.S. leadership in international scholarship and research through the Fulbright program.

                            The agreement aims to increase the number of Fulbright participants to and from the Smithsonian Institution, to enhance the U.S. Department of State’s ongoing efforts to diversify the pool of Fulbright applicants and participants, to increase the number of Fulbright-producing and Fulbright-hosting institutions, to deepen engagement with Fulbright Program alumni, and to increase institutional partnerships for the Fulbright program.

                            The agreement is in furtherance of the 2012 Memorandum of Understanding between the Department of State and the Smithsonian, and builds on many years of cooperation during which the Smithsonian and State Department have worked together to develop programs that advance shared goals, including hosting visiting Fulbright research scholars at the Smithsonian. In recent years, the Fulbright Commissions in Ireland and the United Kingdom have established joint research programs in partnership with the Smithsonian. The new agreement represents the further development of ongoing collaboration to build capacity among international museum professionals, to protect cultural heritage, and to promote mutual goals to expand cultural and scientific exchange.

                            Established by the U.S. Congress in 1946, the U.S. Department of State’s Fulbright Program is the U.S. government’s flagship international academic exchange program, designed to increase mutual understanding between people of the United States and people of other countries. The Fulbright Program annually supports more than 8,000 students, scholars, artists, and professionals from the United States and more than 160 countries to study, teach, conduct research, exchange ideas, and find solutions to shared international challenges.

                            Established through a bequest from British scientist James Smithson, the U.S. Senate passed the act organizing the Smithsonian Institution in 1846. The Smithsonian advances its core mission of “the increase and diffusion of knowledge” through its 19 museums, 12 research centers, seven education and outreach centers and the National Zoo that collectively work in more than 140 countries around the world. This new agreement supports the ongoing efforts of the Smithsonian to employ its unique strengths to engage and inspire people, wherever they are, while catalyzing critical conversations on issues affecting our nation and the world. The Smithsonian’s goals include driving visionary interdisciplinary research, creating new forums to proffer solutions to problems of national and global import, and magnifying its national and global reach through new collaborative approaches and strategic partnerships.

                            For more information, please contact ECA-Press@state.gov.






                            Press Releases: Counterterrorism Coordinator Ambassador Nathan A. Sales’ Travel to Brasilia and Sao Paolo


                            Media Note

                            Office of the Spokesperson

                            Washington, DC
                            April 2, 2019


                            Ambassador Nathan A. Sales, the Coordinator for Counterterrorism, traveled to Brasilia and Sao Paulo April 1-2 to bolster our bilateral counterterrorism cooperation with Brazil against threats from transnational terrorist groups in the Western Hemisphere, including ISIS, al-Qa’ida, and Hizballah. Ambassador Sales raised the importance of strengthening border security and implementing UN Security Council Resolution 2396 to deter terrorist travel. He also discussed the need to counter terrorist financing through robust sanctions regimes and strong investigative, prosecutorial, and judicial capabilities.