Department Press Briefing – November 13, 2018 (Diplomatic Security and Counterterrorism)

MS NAUERT: Good afternoon, everybody. Hope you’re all doing well. Great to see you again. Today we’re going to begin with a special
briefing by some of my colleagues. We will be joined by our Assistant Secretary
of Diplomatic Security, Mike Evanoff, and also our Ambassador-at-Large and Coordinator
for Counterterrorism, Nathan Sales. They will talk about new measures that the
U.S. Government is taking against Lebanese Hizballah
and also Hamas. First up, I’ll invite Assistant Secretary
Evanoff, and then we’ll – and then Nathan Sales, and then we’ll take a few questions. I’ll moderate, and then we’ll go on to
the regular briefing. QUESTION: (Off-mike.) MS NAUERT: (Laughter.) I’ll come back, Nazira. Okay. Go right ahead, Mike. ASSISTANT SECRETARY EVANOFF: Thanks. Good afternoon, everyone. So today the U.S. Department of State’s
Rewards for Justice program is offering rewards of up to 5 million each for information leading
to the identification or location of Hamas leader Salih al-Aruri, and Lebanese Hizballah
leaders Khalil Yusif Mahmoud Harb, and Haytham Ali Tabatabai. Salih al-Aruri is a deputy of the Hamas’s
political bureau and one of the founders of Hamas’s military wing. Al-Aruri is currently living freely in Lebanon,
where he is reportedly is working with the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps
Quds Force. Al-Aruri raised funds for and directed Hamas
military operations in West Bank and has been linked to several terrorist attacks, hijackings,
and kidnappings. In 2014, al-Aruri asserted Hamas’s responsibility
for the June 12th, 2014 terrorist kidnapping and murder of three teenagers in the West
Bank, including dual U.S.-Israeli citizen Naftali Frenkel. The U.S. Department of Treasury designated
al-Aruri a specially designated global terrorist in September 2015. Khalil Yusif Mahmoud Harb is a close advisor
of Hassan Nasrallah, leader of Lebanese Hizballah, and has served as the group’s chief military
liaison and Palestinian terrorist organizations. Harb has commanded and supervised Lebanese
Hizballah military operations in the Palestinian territories and several countries throughout
Middle East. The U.S. Department of Treasury designated
Harb as a specially designated global terrorist in August of 2013. Haytham Ali Tabatabai is a key Lebanese Hizballah
military leader who commanded Hizballah special forces in both Syria and Yemen. The Department of State designated Tabatabai
as a specially designated global terrorist in October of 2016. The Hamas and Hizballah organizations receive
weapons, training, and funding from Iran, which the Secretary of State has designated
as a state sponsor of terrorism. The Department of State designated both Hamas
and Hizballah as foreign terrorist organizations in October 1997, and as specially designated
global terrorist entities in October 2001. We urge anyone with information on the whereabouts
of these individuals to contact the Rewards for Justice Program via the RFJ website at, or via email at [email protected] The individuals outside the United States
may be – also contact the nearest U.S. embassy or consulate. All information submitted to us will be kept
strictly confidential – I repeat, confidential. The Rewards for Justice Program has been an
effective tool in our fight against international terrorism. Since its inception in 1984, the program has
paid in excess of $150 million to more than a hundred individuals who provided credible
information that prevented international terrorist attacks or helped to bring terrorists to justice. Through the efforts of courageous people who
have stepped forward with information about wanted terrorist suspects, the Rewards for
Justice Program has helped law enforcement authorities throughout the world to stop terrorists
and save innocent lives. I’m hopeful that the rewards offers we are
announcing today will play a similar role in bringing Salih al-Aruri, Mahmoud Harb,
and Haytham Tabataba’i to justice. Thank you. And now I would like to turn over the microphone
to Ambassador Nathan Sales, who will then give you a – our government’s view on
Iran going forward. Thank you. AMBASSADOR SALES: Thanks, Mike. I’d like to say a few words to put into
a broader strategic context the RFJ reward offers that Assistant Secretary Evanoff has
just announced. Before I do so however, I’d like to pause
for a moment to acknowledge that today is a very sad anniversary. This is the three-year anniversary of the
ISIS attacks on Paris in November of 2015. Iran is the world’s leading state sponsor
of terrorism. It has held that dubious distinction for many
years now, and it shows no signs of relinquishing the title. Let me give you some numbers. Iran spends $700 million a year on Lebanese
Hizballah. It gives another $100 million to various Palestinian
terrorist groups, including Hamas. Combined with the money that Tehran provides
to other terrorists, the total bill comes close to $1 billion a year. Sadly, it is the Iranian people who are forced
to pay this price. The resources that Iran uses to fund its global
terrorist ambitions are resources that come directly out of the pockets of everyday, average
Iranians. The regime robs its own citizens to pay its
proxies abroad. Inside Lebanon, Hizballah’s destructive
actions have endangered the Lebanese people. Thanks to Iran’s backing, Hizballah has
built a fearsome arsenal. The group has stockpiled more than 100,000
rockets and missiles inside Lebanon, and we see this as a massive and destabilizing buildup. As we all know, Hizballah hides its missile
factories in population centers, effectively using innocent civilians as human shields. Hizballah’s ability to destabilize is not
confined to the Middle East, however. It is able to destabilize inside Lebanon itself. As Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri told
media outlets earlier today, Hizballah continues to block Lebanon from forming a new government. This is all at the expense of the Lebanese
people in an effort to extract more concessions for Hizballah’s own benefit. We are also deeply concerned about Tehran’s
growing ties to Hamas. After a brief split early in the Syria conflict,
Hamas and Iran have rebuilt their relationship. Iran is once again providing Hamas with much-needed
funding. Salih al-Aruri has been a major player in
the Hamas-Iran relationship, serving as one of Hamas’s key liaisons with Iran and playing
an important role in the reconciliation between the two sides. As has been widely reported, Aruri is currently
living freely inside Lebanon, where Hizballah’s leadership has welcomed him with open arms. This is simply unacceptable. It is intolerable for a leader of Hamas to
enjoy safe haven in Lebanon. In addition to the reward offers just unveiled
by Assistant Secretary Evanoff, I announced several new actions to combat Iranian terrorism
earlier today in a speech at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Today, the State Department is designating
Jawad Nasrallah and the al-Mujahidin Brigades as specially designated global terrorists,
or SDGTs. Jawad Nasrallah is the son of the group’s
secretary general, Hassan Nasrallah. AMB is an Iran-backed terrorist group that
has been operating in the Palestinian territories since 2005. In addition, we’re maintaining Hizballah’s
designation as a foreign terrorist organization, which was up for a mandatory five-year review. Likewise, the Treasury Department is designating
a number of Hizballah-related individuals as SDGTs: Shibl al-Zaydi, Yusuf Hashim, Muhammad
Farhat, and Adnan Kawtharani. All told, the Trump administration has already
designated more than 40 Hizballah-related individuals and entities this year alone,
with a total of 160 to date. The actions we’re announcing today are one
more step in our campaign to build the toughest sanctions regime ever imposed on Iran. More sanctions are coming, and they will continue
until Iran and its proxies change their behavior. Iran must follow the same rules that every
other civilized nation follows and renounce terrorism as a basic tool of statecraft. We will continue to ratchet up the pressure
until Iran joins the community of civilized nations and ceases its support for murder
and mayhem around the globe. Thank you very much. MS NAUERT: Have time for a few questions. Nick, we’ll start with you. Nick Wadhams from Bloomberg. QUESTION: Can you tell us – you said I think
it’s Aruri is living freely in Lebanon. So what pressure are you putting on the Government
of Lebanon to detain him, if any, and will they face any punishment or sanction for allowing
them to go free? And then can you also just explain, given
that these men have been on various terrorist lists since 2013, why now with the rewards? AMBASSADOR SALES: Let me take the first piece
and then turn it over to the assistant secretary. What we expect of Lebanon is what we expect
of any government when dealing with a designated SDGT. So a person who is designated as an SDGT is
subject to having all of their assets that are subject to U.S. jurisdiction frozen, and
individuals are prohibited from engaging in any kind of transaction with them. Doing so subjects those individuals to secondary
sanctions. It’s intolerable, as I said, for a senior
Hamas figure to enjoy freedom of movement in any country. And what we expect of Lebanon is what we’d
expect any responsible country to do, and that is crack down on any terrorists in their
Justice Program is an interagency program with the Secretary of State having the final
say in it. This has taken time to get processed, and
once the time has come, we have now unveiling it. So it’s nothing – there is nothing that
shows that we have an issue with it right now. It’s just coming up through the process. MS NAUERT: Next question, Laurie from K24. QUESTION: The Treasury Department – the
Hizballah people that Treasury Department designated today include people from Iraq,
Kata’ib Hizballah. Could you explain the relationship between
Kata’ib Hizballah and Lebanese Hizballah? Is it the same organization? And secondly, the lead figure there in Kata’ib
Hizballah is actually the head of the Popular Mobilization Forces. Are you doing anything against him, al-Muhandis? ASSISTANT SECRETARY EVANOFF: Let me speak
about the relationship between groups. We see a number of similarities in objectives
and tradecraft between these various Iran-backed terrorist groups. They seek to destabilize the regions where
they’re active. They have access to weapons and training provided
by Iran. They receive funding from Iran. And that’s the reason why we are grouping
them together in today’s announcements. Today’s announcements are about increasing
our pressure campaign on Iran proper but also on the various different proxies that Iran
uses throughout the region and around the world. MS NAUERT: Nina from i24, did you have a question? QUESTION: No, (inaudible). MS NAUERT: Okay, got it. Said, go right ahead. QUESTION: Thank you. Is it just Salih al-Aruri or other Hamas leaders? Because the other Hamas leaders are constantly
going and coming back to Cairo, one of your allies, where you can freely take them if
you wanted. AMBASSADOR SALES: Well, we have – QUESTION: They are different because they
are involved in negotiations. AMBASSADOR SALES: We have used a number of
tools to amplify the pressure on Hizballah, so today’s announcement, as assistant secretary
– Hamas, thank you for correcting me. Today’s announcement is limited to Mr. al-Arouri,
but in the past we have taken a number of other steps against Hamas as an organization
and Hamas-related individuals. Hamas was one of the first groups we ever
designated as at FTO back in the late ‘90s after Congress enacted the statute providing
for that authority. In addition, in January of this year, we designated
Haniyeh, Ismail Haniyeh, the leader of Hamas’ political bureau, as an SDGT. So today is just the tip of the iceberg. MS NAUERT: Conor Finnegan from ABC. QUESTION: Good afternoon, thank you for doing
this. Two quick questions for you. The first one: There had been some reporting
that the administration is considering designating the Houthi rebels in Yemen. Can you speak to whether or not that is actively
under consideration? And then secondly, the administration’s
been in office for nearly two years now with this unprecedented sanctions regime on Iran
and their proxies. Have you seen any change in their behavior
to date because of these sanctions? AMBASSADOR SALES: On the Houthis, I’m not
going to comment on speculation in the press. What I can tell you is that we’ve been very
clear. It’s intolerable that the Houthis are launching
Iran-origin munitions into Saudi Arabia. We expect that any country will abide by the
standard rules that apply to the international system, one of the most basic of which is
do not lob missiles at your neighbors. And your second question about the effects
of our sanctions. The President has been clear. We want to squeeze the Iranian regime as tightly
as possible. And the reason to do that is to deprive them
of the resources they need to commit terrorism and acts of violence around the world. Sadly, this is a core component of Iranian
policy, so we’re going to have to keep squeezing them. Seven hundred million dollars a year for Hizballah
can buy a lot of bullets and a lot of bombs, so we’re going to continue to ramp up the
pressure. MS NAUERT: Thank you, everyone. Oh, I’m sorry. Michel from Al-Hurra, final question. QUESTION: Thank you so much. To what extent the Lebanese Government is
coordinating with the U.S. to arrest these people? AMBASSADOR SALES: Well, I can’t comment
on any diplomatic conversations that may or may not be taking place. But what I can tell you is that whether it’s
Lebanon or any other government around the world, if terrorists are present on your territory,
we all have an obligation to prevent them from spreading bloodshed around the world. QUESTION: Did you mean that there is a coordination
or no coordination? ASSISTANT SECRETARY EVANOFF: We believe the
terrorists – these three will move around in the area, so it doesn’t have to be in
Lebanon. It could be any country in the area. It’s – RFJ is a tip line. It’s an informational thing. So if they do move and the government that
they are in spot them, they tell us, then it’s up to the interagency to decide how
they pick them up, and the country. MS NAUERT: Thank you, everyone. AMBASSADOR SALES: Thanks, everyone. MS NAUERT: Well, thank you. I’m a bit shorter than these guys, so I’ll
take advantage of this box here. QUESTION: Well, use the little fancy riser. MS NAUERT: I’m not sure I know how to use
that fancy button, but good afternoon, everyone. A couple quick announcements to bring you
before I take your questions. The first is Secretary Pompeo met earlier
today with His Majesty King Abdullah II of Jordan here in Washington, D.C. During the meeting, Secretary Pompeo conveyed
his condolences to the victims of recent flooding in Jordan and reaffirmed the United States
steadfast support for Jordan. Secretary Pompeo underscored the importance
of the bilateral relationship between our two countries and thanked the king for his
efforts to promote peace and stability in the Middle East, and sought King Abudllah’s
views on regional developments and other matters of mutual interest. Secretary Pompeo also congratulated King Abdullah
on his receipt of the 2018 Templeton Prize. Next and final thing is Secretary – Deputy
Secretary of State John Sullivan is traveling right now to Japan, Singapore, Australia,
and Papua New Guinea through November 18th on behalf of Secretary Pompeo. The deputy secretary will accompany Vice President
Pence as he represents President Trump at the U.S.-ASEAN Summit and the East Asia Summit
in Singapore, as well as the APEC Economic Leaders Meeting in Port Moresby. The U.S. participation in these events demonstrate
our continued commitment to advancing a free and open Indo-Pacific. President Trump outlined our vision for the
Indo-Pacific, a constellation of nations that are sovereign, strong, and satellites to none
in his speech last November at the APEC CEO Summit in Vietnam. One year later, we’ve effectively advanced
our vision by building on our principles that are widely shared throughout the region: ensure
the freedom of the seas and the skies; raising our concerns about sovereignty with other
nations who may be open or – to external coercion; and promoting market-based economics,
open investment environments and fair and reciprocal trade; and supporting good governance,
transparency, and respect for individual rights. In bilateral meetings and in multinational
events throughout this trip, the deputy secretary, the Vice President, and other U.S. officials
will continue to work with our allies and partners to ensure an open, rules-based system,
which has benefitted the entire region and will remain essential for future prosperity
of all countries in the region. And with that, I’d be happy to take your
questions. Hi. QUESTION: Thank you, Heather. MS NAUERT: Hi, Matt. QUESTION: Hello, welcome back to the podium. MS NAUERT: Thank you. And I — QUESTION: A speculatively long absence. MS NAUERT: I should thank – after having
done this job for a year and a half solo briefing all of you, which has been quite a job, it’s
been wonderful to have a deputy in place, as you can imagine. And Robert gave his first on-camera briefing
last week, so he’s done terrific work in getting prepped up for those briefings. And Robert, it’s been a pleasure sitting
in the back of the room and watching you take on this effort as we continue to staff up
here at the State Department. So thank you. QUESTION: All right. That wasn’t a farewell address, was it? MS NAUERT: Absolutely not. Thanking Robert for all his hard work. QUESTION: All right. I wanted to start with something that’s
– what I assume is – will be related to the Secretary’s meeting with King Abdullah,
and that is the issues of – regional issues of mutual concern that you mentioned. Is one of those issues the flareup of – or
intense flareup of violence in Gaza over the course of the last 48 hours? MS NAUERT: Yeah. In my experience, when the Secretary has sat
down with the king, that has been a big topic of conversation, Israeli-Palestinian peace
effort and the situation going on there. I wasn’t at the meeting that took place
just a short while ago today, but I would imagine that was a part of the conversation
too, but I have not confirmed that yet with the Secretary. QUESTION: Okay. Well, as you are – you’re probably aware,
it looks like there is a chance that a ceasefire could be arranged, or maybe even has been
arranged and is in its early stages. I’m just wondering, in the reporting on
this, Egypt has been involved, some European countries have been involved in this, but
there’s been no mention of the United States, of this administration at all. Are you at all engaged in trying to bring
an end to this current round of fighting or are you guys just sitting this one out? MS NAUERT: No, we are hardly sitting this
one out. The United States Government at many levels
remains engaged in talking to our partners, our allies, and others in the region about
our concerns. We certainly want regional peace and stability. What we’re seeing right now take place is
not regional peace and stability. We condemn in the strongest terms those rocket
missile and mortar attacks that are taking place from Gaza into Israel. We call for the sustained halt of those attacks. We stand with Israel as Israel defends itself
against these attacks. It is simply unacceptable to target civilians. As you know, we have an ambassador over there,
Ambassador David Friedman. He has been hard at work in voicing his concerns
about the situation over there. Our presidential advisor Jason Greenblatt
as well has been involved in this, and the United States Government continues to have
conversations with the various governments of the region at different levels. QUESTION: But can you be a little bit more
specific? I mean, who – has anyone from this building
actually picked up a phone or gone to see anyone to help try and organize a ceasefire? MS NAUERT: We have been engaged at the highest
levels in this, but we’re not going to get into our diplomatic conversations. QUESTION: And the reason I ask is it just
seems that previous administrations would – were in similar situations extremely active
at very high and very public levels with secretaries of state flying out to the region, trying
to – and really exerting some pressure, and this administration seems to be content
to do – whatever it is it’s doing, to do it completely behind the scenes. Is that an accurate characterization? MS NAUERT: I would not confuse hopping on
a plane and flying all over the world with positive activity necessarily. Just because you’re hopping on a plane does
not always bring about positive results. We can have conversations, whether it’s
by phone or in person with our representatives on the ground that we think can effectively
advocate our views and concerns. QUESTION: Right. Well, forget about getting on a plane. At least tell us who they’re – who it
is that’s – from the U.S. who’s talking to — MS NAUERT: At this time, I’m not prepared
to get into our private diplomatic conversations. If at some point that changes, I’d be happy
to let you know. Said, go right ahead, certainly. QUESTION: I want to follow up on this. There was quiet and there was agreement – in
fact, the Israelis allowed money to go into Gaza and so on, but then they sent in special
forces into Gaza and killed seven Palestinians. I mean, that’s how this whole round, this
latest round — MS NAUERT: Understood. I can’t — QUESTION: Do you condemn the Israeli action? MS NAUERT: I can’t comment on Israel’s
decision to make its – go with its operation that took place over the weekend. That would not be the United States Government
— QUESTION: But you just condemned the Palestinians
for responding to Israel. So — MS NAUERT: Rocket attacks, certainly without
a doubt. But I cannot comment on — QUESTION: So if they go — MS NAUERT: — the specific details of the
Israeli operation. I’d have to refer you to the Government
of Israel and its military for that. QUESTION: So if, let’s say, the Palestinians
or Hamas were to send in a group of armed men into Israeli territory and do the same
thing, you will not comment on that? MS NAUERT: I think that’s entirely a hypothetical. Okay? All right. Next question. Hi. QUESTION: Yes, hi. The President this morning criticized again
the statement from President Macron on European army. Does that mean that the U.S. are not reassured
about what President Macron told them during this weekend, that this is part of an effort
to step up European defense, precisely to do what President Trump is asking, to share
the burden with NATO? MS NAUERT: Yeah. Well, as you know, I was not there on that
trip. Robert Palladino was kind enough to have gone
on that trip with the Secretary and the President. That was the President’s trip, so he had
those meetings, so I can’t comment too much on that. But what I can tell you, the Secretary met
with the French foreign minister over the weekend. They had good, productive conversations. They discussed U.S.-French cooperation on
resolving global security challenges, including – and I’d like to highlight this – how
to strengthen NATO. That is something that’s important, the
NATO alliance, to the United States Government and to many others, and we feel that whatever
should be done should not take away from NATO’s efforts. That’s been a sustained entity that the
United States Government and many others have supported for many years, and so we would
not want the weakening of NATO. QUESTION: And aren’t those good, productive
meetings undermined by President Trump’s tweets saying the opposite? MS NAUERT: I don’t think so. I don’t think so. Okay. Next question. QUESTION: Hey. MS NAUERT: Hi, Michelle. QUESTION: Hi. On the same subject, so right after this dispute
or a series of tweets or whatever you want to call it happened, the French president
explained through his spokespeople what he was saying. I mean, he was explaining that he – this
would be in tandem with NATO, not taking away from it. And now we’ve heard the German chancellor
saying that no, she sees it being an actual European army. So in Secretary Pompeo’s interactions with
his counterparts from these countries, does he have a problem with a European army or
no? MS NAUERT: Look, our position, I think, on
this is very clear: We have a longstanding relationship with NATO. NATO is America’s most important alliance. It has been and will continue to be central
to the collective defense of North America and also European member-states. NATO will become stronger, in our view, when
all members assume greater responsibility for that. We’ve seen many countries step up to the
plate and contribute more in terms of its – their GDP to NATO’s collective defense. We support the European efforts to increase
defense spending at NATO, and also their military capabilities as a means to achieve a more
equitable burden-sharing in the transatlantic security relationship. QUESTION: So does that he mean he supports
a European army or not? MS NAUERT: Look, I have been clear, and let
me say it once again: We support NATO. We support NATO and think that NATO should
only be strengthened. Okay? QUESTION: You just said that NATO was the
most importance alliance that the United States has, but France is actually the oldest ally
that the United States has, and the President sniping at them via tweet is engendering some
really – some real ill will on the other side of the Atlantic. What’s this building do to try to minimize
the damage that’s caused by this? MS NAUERT: I think I can only say in my experience,
in hearing from my counterparts, from some of these foreign leaders, some of this is
much ado about nothing. There are news reports, people like to make
a big deal out of what they see as a falling out, a rift. And from my experience, and I think from the
experience of many of my colleagues at the State Department, that is not the case. We have a close alliance with France. It’s one of our oldest and most critical
allies, and nothing with regard to that relationship has changed. QUESTION: Okay. So in other words, much ado about – when
you say much ado about nothing, we should just ignore the presidential tweets? MS NAUERT: No. What I would say is, though, many in – and
I’m not criticizing my colleagues here in this briefing room, but often people publicly
make a lot more out of a situation than really is the case. QUESTION: The President of the United States
got on his Twitter account and insulted the president of France. MS NAUERT: I would — QUESTION: That’s not us or anyone else making
a big deal out of it. That’s him doing it. MS NAUERT: I would say, Matt, that – really
not a big deal, okay? QUESTION: Okay. MS NAUERT: I think you’re making a big deal
out of really nothing, okay? QUESTION: North Korea. MS NAUERT: Okay. Go ahead, Rich. QUESTION: Hi, Heather. Has there been any progress towards rescheduling
the meeting that was canceled because of a scheduling conflict between the Secretary
and his North Korean counterpart? MS NAUERT: Yeah. So I think we addressed this issue last week,
where we talked about the scheduling matter between the United States and also North Korean
officials. We look forward to scheduling a meeting when
the time is right. That is something that is important to us. As the President spoke last week, he talked
about a possible upcoming meeting early next year with Chairman Kim. The communications that we have with the North
Korean Government are regular communications and we continue to stay in contact with the
North Koreans. When we have additional information on any
rescheduled meeting, I’ll let you know. QUESTION: Does the State Department believe
that there should be a meeting between the Secretary or officials before they – the
President and the chairman meet again? MS NAUERT: I’m not going to get ahead of
that, but as you well know, our meeting we expect to be rescheduled. Yeah. Yeah. Hi, Janne. Go right ahead. QUESTION: Thank you, Heather. Follow-up, North Korea issues. And do – I think you know already, reading
on New York Times article, and CSIS reported that there are 13 uncleared secret missile
bases in North Korea. So North Korea continues to develop their
nuclear and missiles. What is your comment or what is Secretary
Pompeo’s reaction of this article? MS NAUERT: Sure. Some of these are intelligence matters, so
I’m not going to comment on that. I can refer you to the President’s tweet
from earlier today in which the President said – addressed this very thing, so I’m
not going to go beyond what the President said. However, I will highlight in the UN Security
Council resolutions, those resolutions included ballistic missiles, recognizing – as do
so many other governments – that ballistic missiles continue to be a threat from North
Korea. Now, we have come an awfully long way since
last summer, when ballistic missiles were being launched. Recall when there was a ballistic missile
launched over Japan, how frightening that was for those in that country. Nuclear weapons were being tested. We had three Americans who had been detained
by the North Korean Government. We have still come a long way from where we
were in our relationship and our posture with North Korea in the past year. We see that as progress. A lot of people like to poo-poo that idea. There is still a long way to go, and we go
into this with our eyes wide open, recognizing and acknowledging that there is work that’s
left to be done. QUESTION: But do you still expect CVID or
FFVD from North Korea? MS NAUERT: Our policies have not changed,
okay? Hey, Ben. QUESTION: Hi. Just an update on inspectors going to Punggye-ri
and other sites – it’s been a month since the Secretary said he’d like to get inspectors
in as soon as logistically possible. So are we any closer to sending inspectors
in? Are there any kind of logistic hurdles that
you’re having trouble with? MS NAUERT: Let me look into that and see if
I have anything for you on that one, okay? Okay. QUESTION: Just on North Korea. So the story just said basically that you
have come a long way with North Korea, and that is that North Korea is far more dangerous
now than it was at the beginning of this administration. It has more bombs, it has more missiles, and
probably it now has the technical capability to hit the United States. MS NAUERT: Gardiner, as you can appreciate,
I’m not going to comment on the details of a specific story like that. Some of these would be intelligence matters. I can tell you that we have made significant
progress. We have met more times, had more negotiations
with the North Korean Government in the past six or seven months than the United States
Government has within the past 10 years. We see that — QUESTION: But it hasn’t reduced the threat,
has it? MS NAUERT: We see that as progress, okay? I think some of our officials, from the President
to the Secretary of State to Ambassador Haley, have addressed concerns about the threat of
North Korea, but we are working hard. We are giving diplomacy a chance, and that’s
something that we’ve said from the very beginning of this administration: We’re
giving diplomacy a chance. QUESTION: Afghanistan. MS NAUERT: Okay. Hi, Nazira. How are you? QUESTION: How are you? Welcome back, Heather. MS NAUERT: Thank you. QUESTION: Yeah, two question. One question: Any comment about Moscow conference? And the second question: Any update for Ambassador
Zal Khalilzad? Because this is the second round that he started
to travel to Pakistan, Emirate, Qatar. There are so many different opinion and idea. What’s going on? Do you have any update? MS NAUERT: Yeah, I think it shows the fact
that Ambassador Khalilzad is in – that he’s in the region shows our commitment to a lasting
peace agreement, hoping that we can facilitate the Afghans and the Taliban coming to some
sort of lasting peace agreement. Our officials have long said, including the
DOD, that we don’t see a military solution to this outcome – to this in Afghanistan. Ambassador Khalilzad has been hard at work. I think he’s spent more time on an airplane
or traveling overseas than he has back in Washington in the past month and a half or
so since he’s taken on these duties. In terms of the first part of your question,
with regard to the Moscow meetings, we see Russia, the Russian Government doing this,
where they will hold meetings related to hot topics around the world. That is certainly their right to do so. The United States Government sent a representative
simply at the working level, not to participate but just to observe in those discussions,
and I don’t have anything more for you on that today, okay? QUESTION: Did you see the report that the
administration is trying to push for the Afghanistan election to be delayed? Do you have anything to say about that? MS NAUERT: Yeah. I mean, I’ve seen that report. One of the things that is important to us
is we’re committed to the overall electoral process. If there were to be any changes made to the
scheduling, that would entirely be a decision on the part of Afghanistan, one in which we
would not interfere. QUESTION: But you’re not – so you’re
not suggesting or advising one way or another? MS NAUERT: As you can see, I’m not there
with Ambassador Khalilzad, but I can tell you that our support for an Afghan-led, Afghan-owned
peace process is our policy. In terms of elections and if they were to
make any changes, that would entirely be up to the Government of Afghanistan and not the
United States Government. Laurie, go right ahead. QUESTION: Saudi Arabia. MS NAUERT: Hi, Laurie. QUESTION: Hi, how are you? Welcome back. MS NAUERT: Thank you. QUESTION: Both the Iraqi prime minister and
president have said that they are too dependent on Iran specifically for its gas and oil,
for its electricity, to abide by U.S. sanctions. You’ve given them a 45-day waiver. Are you considering their appeal or do you
consider the matter settled? MS NAUERT: Well, I mean, we watched, right,
over the summer how Iraq suffered from a lack of electricity, especially in the south, and
that was a real problem. That is part of the reason that the United
States Government granted a 45-day waiver to allow Iraq to continue to pay for electricity
that its people desperately need. We also saw some of the rioting and protests
that took place in the southern part of the country. So we recognize that and understand that. We’re confident that this waiver will help
Iraq limit its electricity shortages into the south. I’m not going to get ahead of any of the
decisions or actions that we might take in the near future, but 45 days we think is important. We’ll continue to discuss this with Iraq. QUESTION: And are they reducing their import
of Iranian energy? I mean, that’s one of your conditions for
these waivers. MS NAUERT: Yeah, I don’t have any information
for you on that at this time, but I can take a look and get back to you, okay? Hey, Abbie. QUESTION: Hey. I actually wanted to ask about the announcement
you made today regarding the Humanitarian Assistance Steering Council. Can you explain a little further on what the
intention of this is, that – what it will accomplish that it hadn’t accomplished before? MS NAUERT: Sure. QUESTION: And what role that it will play
in the foreign assistance review. MS NAUERT: Yeah. I think what this is – and we just put out
this statement today, and I can get you more information after discussing this with my
colleagues over at USAID. This is a new approach, a new way to be able
to come together in the U.S. Government and look at some of our assistance
proposals and how money is being spent, but I don’t want to say much more without having
the opportunity to discuss this with USAID first. I’ll gladly get back with you. QUESTION: And on the foreign assistance review,
do you have any update on that? I know you’ve been saying it’s ongoing,
but is there anything further? MS NAUERT: I don’t at this time. Okay, go ahead. QUESTION: Saudi Arabia. MS NAUERT: Yes. QUESTION: A few quick questions: Have the
Saudis been forthcoming in their dealings with the U.S. in this investigation? MS NAUERT: Well, I can tell you the Secretary
spoke with MBS over the weekend and had a conversation with him in which we reiterated
the importance of holding all of those involved in the killing of Jamal Khashoggi accountable. The Secretary has spoken to the fact that
the United States Government is compiling some of its own data and taking a look at
those facts. We’re getting information from a variety
of sources, as any government would. And we’ll — QUESTION: But have the Saudis been forthcoming? MS NAUERT: And we’ll take a look at all
of the information. I’m going to get – I’m not going to
wade into our private diplomatic conversations at this time, but we have been very clear
with the Government of Saudi Arabia that we expect transparency and accountability and
also speed to the ability that those countries are able to make a speedy determination in
terms of what happened to Jamal Khashoggi. QUESTION: And in working with Turkey, can
you say whether the Secretary has now viewed all of the evidence that the Turks have? MS NAUERT: I’m not aware if he has or has
not. The Secretary is not an investigator. I imagine that he will be looking at some
information, but I just don’t have anything for you on that. QUESTION: Well, but there have been reports
that he has heard the audio. MS NAUERT: Okay, let me make this clear one
more time. QUESTION: Okay. MS NAUERT: Okay. The State Department has not heard any audio. There was one report about that, and I think
we attempted to clarify that. I think the Secretary was very clear that
he had not heard any audio. QUESTION: Well — QUESTION: So that still stands today? MS NAUERT: That still stands today. QUESTION: So Ambassador — QUESTION: Why not, though? QUESTION: Ambassador Bolton said this morning
in Singapore that the tape that the Turks turned over does not directly implicate the
crown prince. Is that your understanding? MS NAUERT: I have not seen Ambassador Bolton’s
actual quote from what he had apparently said this morning, so I’d have to refer you to
the NSC for questions about what Ambassador Bolton had said. But I will reiterate that the Secretary has
said that we will hold those accountable – people will be held accountable. The Secretary outlined some visa revocations
a couple weeks ago. We are also blocking some Saudi officials
from coming into the United States. But the Secretary was also clear in saying
that things will not end there. So you know we don’t forecast sanctions,
but our actions that we take did not end and will not end with the visa revocations and
the blocking of certain Saudi officials from coming into the United States, okay. Yeah. QUESTION: Heather, why has the Secretary not
heard the audio? Why? I would think that as the former director
of the CIA he’d be very interested in it. MS NAUERT: I think the Secretary is in the
role of being the nation’s chief diplomat at this time, and it wouldn’t be appropriate
to hear. Okay. QUESTION: Heather, was the — MS NAUERT: Michel, go ahead. Final question. We have to wrap it up. QUESTION: — the last step that the U.S. took
regarding the Arab coalition in Yemen related to Khashoggi’s killing? MS NAUERT: I’m sorry. What is the question? QUESTION: Stopping the refueling of the Arab
coalition in Yemen, was it related to the killing of Jamal Khashoggi? MS NAUERT: Oh, you mean the air refueling? Is that what you’re asking about? QUESTION: Correct. MS NAUERT: Well, that was – that was something
more in the Department of Defense’s lane, but no, those things were not related. QUESTION: Heather, I’m sorry. I didn’t understand your answer to Carol. Why would it be inappropriate for the top
diplomat of the United States to listen to this tape or to look at all of the evidence? I mean — MS NAUERT: The Secretary – and guys, I don’t
want to go down this road another time. The United States Government has said that
people will be held accountable. QUESTION: Well, I — MS NAUERT: We expect accountability. We expect a speedy investigation. We expect a thorough investigation in which
people are held accountable. QUESTION: I get that. I’m not — MS NAUERT: The Secretary has not listened
to a tape, and I’m not going to get into it beyond that, okay. QUESTION: Well, okay. But why? Does he think it would be inappropriate for
him to listen to it? MS NAUERT: I’m not going to get into it
beyond that. QUESTION: Well, I don’t get why it would
be inappropriate. You would think that even that anyone who
is going to be looking into how you respond to this would want to have the entire plate
of evidence to – would want to review the entire docket. MS NAUERT: Matt, we will be taking a look
at a lot of different pieces of information and developing our own data set. Okay. Thanks, everybody. Good to see you all again.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *