On Monday, State Department Spokesperson Matthew Miller answered reporter questions during a press briefing.
Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:
https://account.forbes.com/membership/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=display&utm_campaign=growth_non-sub_paid_subscribe_ytdescript
Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: http://fb.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: http://instagram.com/forbes
More From Forbes: http://forbes.com
Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:
https://account.forbes.com/membership/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=display&utm_campaign=growth_non-sub_paid_subscribe_ytdescript
Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: http://fb.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: http://instagram.com/forbes
More From Forbes: http://forbes.com
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00 Hello, everyone.
00:05 Welcome back to those of you who were traveling with us last week.
00:08 Let's start with some opening comments.
00:12 Since the President's remarks on Friday, Secretary Blinken has been engaging in intense diplomacy
00:17 with foreign counterparts to urge the completion of an agreement for a ceasefire in Gaza that
00:22 would secure the release of hostages and set the stage for lasting peace.
00:26 Over that time, the Secretary has spoken to the foreign ministers of Turkey, Egypt, Qatar,
00:32 Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and the United Arab Emirates, as well as Israeli Defense Minister
00:37 Galant and War Cabinet member Benny Gantz.
00:40 In all of his calls, the Secretary has underscored the benefits of this proposal to both Israelis
00:46 and Palestinians.
00:48 For Palestinians, a ceasefire would see an end to the daily death toll in Gaza, an end
00:53 to the destruction that has torn so many families apart and robbed children, women, men of their
01:00 lives and their futures.
01:03 It would allow hundreds of thousands of Palestinians to begin returning to their neighborhoods
01:07 as the international community surges humanitarian assistance into Gaza and launches a major
01:12 reconstruction effort.
01:14 For Israelis, too, this proposal offers a path to a better future.
01:18 It would bring home the hostages who have now been separated from their loved ones for
01:22 240 days.
01:23 It would unlock the possibility of calm along Israel's border with Lebanon, where we saw
01:28 continued terrorist attacks by Hezbollah just today, so the tens of thousands of Israelis
01:33 who have been displaced from their homes for the past eight months could finally return
01:37 home.
01:39 And it would set the conditions to finally realize the strategic realignment which Israel
01:44 has long sought – improved relations with its Arab neighbors and the isolation of Iran
01:49 and the terrorist groups it funds.
01:52 This is the possibility that exists for Israelis and Palestinians today.
01:57 As the United States said in a joint statement on Saturday with Egypt and Qatar, this proposal
02:02 will bring immediate relief to both the long-suffering people of Gaza and the long-suffering hostages
02:08 and their families.
02:09 It offers a roadmap for a permanent ceasefire and an end to the crisis.
02:15 The world should know – the Palestinian people should know – that the only thing
02:19 standing in the way of an immediate ceasefire today is Hamas.
02:24 The proposal on the table is nearly identical to what Hamas said it would accept just a
02:28 few weeks ago, and it is now time for them to act.
02:32 It is time for them to accept the deal.
02:35 It is time to finalize this agreement and put an end to the suffering of Israelis and
02:40 Palestinians alike.
02:41 And with that, Matt.
02:42 QUESTION: Great.
02:43 Thank you.
02:44 And welcome back.
02:45 Just logistically, all of these calls – all of – well, if you did say calls, I guess
02:53 they were all on the phone.
02:54 MR.
02:55 RATHKE: They were all calls, yeah.
02:56 QUESTION: Okay.
02:57 Because he did see Faddan in Prague.
02:58 MR.
02:59 RATHKE: He saw Faddan on Thursday.
03:00 He then talked to --
03:01 QUESTION: Before.
03:02 MR.
03:03 RATHKE: He talked to Faddan and the foreign ministers of Saudi Arabia and Jordan on the
03:07 plane on the way back on Friday.
03:09 He talked to the foreign ministers – the prime minister of Qatar and the foreign minister
03:15 of Egypt and – foreign ministers of Egypt and UAE on Saturday.
03:19 And then he talked to Ben Gantz and Yoav Galant last night.
03:22 QUESTION: Okay.
03:23 So nothing today yet.
03:24 MR.
03:25 RATHKE: Nothing today yet.
03:26 QUESTION: Okay.
03:27 So where do things stand?
03:29 I mean, I think you tried to make it very clear right now that everything rests with
03:33 Hamas.
03:35 But there seems to be a lot of friction, to say the least, inside the Israeli Government
03:41 about this.
03:45 Are you confident that the Israelis have, in fact, signed off and are willing to go
03:50 along with this?
03:51 MR.
03:52 RATHKE: We are completely confident.
03:53 It was an Israeli proposal.
03:54 Obviously, it was a proposal that they developed in consultation with the United States and
03:57 Qatar and Egypt, the three countries that have played the mediating role throughout
04:00 this process.
04:01 But this was ultimately an Israeli proposal.
04:03 In terms of where it stands, it was submitted to Hamas on Thursday night.
04:07 We have yet to hear a response.
04:08 We obviously saw the statement that they put out – I think it was on Friday – but we
04:12 haven't gotten a response back from them.
04:14 In terms of the – inside the Israeli Government, the President spoke to this in his remarks
04:19 on Friday, where he said that – fully anticipated that this would be controversial with some
04:24 members of the Israeli Government.
04:26 And of course, we've seen some members of the Israeli Government already come out and
04:30 oppose it – in fact, opposed it over the weekend.
04:33 But the case that he made and that we will continue to make is that this is a proposal
04:38 that is in the long-term security interests of Israel.
04:41 It's obviously in the long-term interests of the Palestinian people as well.
04:44 But this is a chance to not just come to an end in the – to the conflict in Gaza and
04:51 return the hostages home to their families, but help solve the conflict in the north of
04:57 Israel, which is displacing tens of thousands of Israelis, and finally bring further integration
05:04 with the region, which is in Israel's long-term security interests.
05:06 Okay.
05:07 And then – but then on the other side, you make the case how it's great for Israel.
05:14 What does Hamas get out of it?
05:16 And I'm not asking because I think or that they should necessarily get something out
05:22 of it, but it's a negotiation and there's always give and take and concession.
05:26 So what's – what are the selling points for Hamas, do you think?
05:29 So let me talk about the – what the Palestinian people get out of it.
05:33 I know that's not the exact question that you asked, but I –
05:35 No, it's not, because it's actually – I think it's a different question.
05:38 It is a different question, but I'll –
05:39 So can you answer the one that I asked?
05:41 I'm going to answer both of them.
05:42 All right.
05:43 So the Palestinian – because they ought to be the same.
05:45 They ought to be the same answer, but it might not be.
05:47 You're right.
05:49 Palestinian people get an end to the conflict in Gaza, an immediate ceasefire.
05:54 They get a surge of humanitarian assistance, 600 trucks a day.
05:57 We are ready with international partners to begin the reconstruction of Gaza.
06:03 Incredible that they get to return to their homes and their neighborhoods, and those who
06:08 have lost their homes get the ability to start to rebuild those homes.
06:12 Now, as it pertains to Hamas, look, if Sinwar decides that he's safe in a tunnel and this
06:21 proposal isn't in his interest because he feels safe, that's an assessment he can make.
06:25 But I think it is very clearly in the interest of the Palestinian people, and we would hope
06:29 that given that this proposal is nearly identical to the one that Hamas submitted just several
06:33 weeks ago, that they would not move the goalposts now and try to walk away from it.
06:37 Right.
06:38 Well, but – all right, I'll let that be.
06:42 Last one.
06:43 No, I get where you're going.
06:44 But look, I mean, I can't answer for Hamas, but Hamas –
06:46 I know, but –
06:47 I would just say Hamas claims they represent the Palestinian people.
06:50 This is manifestly in their interest.
06:52 And given the fact that Hamas just a few weeks ago signed off on a virtually identical proposal
06:58 –
06:59 But you just spoke to the points of why this would be wonderful for Israel.
07:02 And there's – the way you've approached this so far is that – the way a lot of people
07:08 have approached this is that Hamas doesn't care about the Palestinian people; they only
07:12 care about themselves.
07:14 And so there are in a sense three parties to this – Israel, the Palestinian people,
07:20 non-Hamas, and Hamas.
07:22 But I think the answer to my question, which is what's in it for Hamas, is essentially
07:27 nothing for them.
07:28 So again –
07:29 Right?
07:30 So they claim to represent – I'm not trying to be cute.
07:35 I get it.
07:36 They claim to represent the interests of the Palestinian people.
07:37 But you don't believe that, and you've made it clear many, many times that you don't
07:40 think that they do care about the Palestinian people, and they don't.
07:41 Well, I suppose this proposal puts – I suppose that – this proposal puts that question
07:45 very squarely to Hamas.
07:46 Well, didn't the last one and the one before that and the one before that?
07:48 And given that this one is nearly identical to the one that Hamas presented, I think it
07:53 puts it more squarely to Hamas.
07:54 My last one, I want to focus on this "nearly identical."
07:58 What does that mean?
07:59 Because a lot of small changes – I've seen negotiations break down over the placement
08:02 of punctuation marks, commas, dashes.
08:09 What do you mean "nearly identical"?
08:11 And that I can't get into in detail from here at the podium, but I will say if you
08:14 look at the major elements of this proposal, they are nearly identical to the major elements
08:19 of the proposal that Hamas submitted several weeks ago.
08:21 There are some minor differences.
08:22 There are differences that we think that can be bridged, and it's not just the United
08:26 States thinks they can be bridged.
08:28 There are differences that the other mediators, Egypt and Qatar, think that can be – that
08:33 think can be bridged.
08:34 I think actually Hamas – this is a serious enough proposal that Hamas should just accept
08:38 it, but if there need to be further negotiations, we think those are all eminently bridgeable
08:42 if – and this is the if – if Hamas wants a deal.
08:46 And if – are they nearly identical, does that apply to the – what the Israelis submitted?
08:52 Or is this word for word what the Israelis submitted?
08:55 The proposal that went to Hamas?
08:56 Yeah, it is what the Israelis submitted.
08:58 Word for word?
08:59 Yeah, it is – so in other words, the "nearly identical" does not apply to the Israelis?
09:04 That is a comparison between the Israeli proposal, which is what went to Hamas on Thursday, and
09:10 the proposal that Hamas submitted several weeks ago.
09:12 All right.
09:13 Thank you.
09:14 Maybe just following up on that, you know, it's – this is basically what Israel has
09:20 proposed or accepted.
09:21 Of course, there's criticism within Israel as well.
09:23 It's not a monolithic country.
09:25 Are you sure that Israel can follow through on this, that if Hamas says yes, that considering
09:31 the coalition politics and the policies within Netanyahu's cabinet, that Israel would definitely
09:36 go ahead with this?
09:37 So I certainly can't speak to internal Israeli politics complicated enough for Israelis to
09:42 speak to without the United States trying to weigh into them.
09:45 I would say two things.
09:47 Number one, this is a proposal from the Israeli government.
09:50 So that's the first thing that's important.
09:54 But number two, I think it is important to speak to the benefits of this proposal to
09:58 all Israelis.
09:59 That's why you saw the President do it on Friday.
10:02 That's why you've seen the Secretary speak to some of these same themes and issues a
10:05 number of times, including in Israel.
10:08 And I will say the point that the President made in his remarks on Friday that you've
10:14 seen the Secretary say a few times is that endless conflict in Gaza in pursuit of some
10:23 idea of total victory is not going to make Israel safer.
10:28 We agree with Israel that Hamas cannot run Gaza.
10:31 We agree with Israel on Israel's right and Israel's obligation to pursue Hamas for the
10:36 terrorist attacks of October 7th.
10:40 But an endless conflict without a political plan forward is just going to leave Israel
10:47 bogged down in Gaza, and it's going to exacerbate the security challenges that they face in
10:51 the north of Israel.
10:52 It's going to exacerbate the security challenges they face in the West Bank.
10:56 It's going to exacerbate the security challenges they face against Iran and the proxies that
11:01 it funds, because it makes it more difficult for Israel to work with its allies and its
11:05 partners in the neighborhood.
11:07 So in addition to the long-term security interests that we think this proposal would help address,
11:14 in addition to bringing the hostages home, which is obviously in the national interest
11:21 of Israel, it addresses the very real short-medium security challenges that they face, and that's
11:27 why we think it's in their interest and that's the case that we will continue to make.
11:30 But the president was pretty clear about this, that we recognize there are people in Israel,
11:34 including the Israeli government, that oppose it, and we're going to continue to make that
11:38 case and we expect that the government of Israel will too.
11:40 Can I just follow up on two things with that?
11:44 First of all, in the proposal itself, I mean, in the president's remarks, he was saying
11:49 that Hamas basically can't do another October 7 attack.
11:53 In terms of what's the assessment for that, what's the basis for that?
11:56 Is there anything else that needs to be done to ensure that outcome?
12:00 Basically would--under this, would Hamas need to more formally lay down some arms?
12:04 Is there some sort of settlement that would be involved to make sure that that's the case?
12:07 So let me separate two parts of that question, because I think they're slightly different.
12:11 One is just a question of capability.
12:13 Hamas clearly does not have the capabilities it had on October 7 when it launched that
12:20 horrific terrorist attack.
12:21 It has seen its leadership degraded--not all, but significantly degraded.
12:26 It has seen a great deal of its personnel killed or captured.
12:31 It has seen a great deal of its military materiel destroyed.
12:36 And not just the weapons themselves, but the underground factories that they were using
12:41 to produce more weapons that they used on October 7.
12:44 Those have been in many cases destroyed by Israel.
12:46 So it is in many ways an incredibly diminished organization from the one that it was on October
12:56 7, and we do not believe could conduct an attack anything like the scale and scope that
13:00 did on October 7.
13:01 Now, it still poses a threat, absolutely.
13:03 Hamas launched rockets against Israel just last week, and Israel needs to continue to
13:08 have the ability to defend itself against that threat.
13:11 But this goes to the point that we ultimately think you cannot address this threat with
13:18 just a military solution.
13:19 This is what I was getting to the other day when I said this idea of pursuing a total
13:23 victory, which the president spoke to, that just a military campaign in itself, while
13:28 it will without a doubt continue to kill and capture members of Hamas, is also going to
13:36 serve as a recruitment device for other potential Hamas members that will come and join and
13:39 replenish the ranks.
13:40 And so you have to have not just a military campaign, but a political path forward as
13:45 well.
13:46 And that is, to get around to the second part, or what I deemed is the second part of your
13:48 question, what the secretary and other members of the administration have been working on
13:54 with other partners in the region intensively since early January.
14:00 And that is a political path that provides for the reconstruction of Gaza, a political
14:05 path forward, the security of Gaza.
14:07 And so when you look at this proposal, obviously the first phase is for the immediate release
14:11 of some hostages and a ceasefire.
14:15 And then during phase one, you would negotiate phase two.
14:19 And in phase two and in phase three, we would pursue what we've termed the day after.
14:25 And it's how you ultimately come up with a different governing authority for Gaza that
14:31 is not Hamas.
14:32 And I'll just make clear, in case there's any question, when the secretary gave a speech
14:37 in November in Tokyo, he made quite clear that one of the principles that we see for
14:43 the end of this conflict is that Hamas cannot continue to govern Gaza, period, full stop.
14:49 Sorry for the incredibly long answer.
14:51 That's okay.
14:52 Do you want to just--okay, just proceed to--just actually just one thing that's slightly different.
14:55 But just in the proposal, just the language "major population centers" that the Israelis
15:00 would have dropped on, is there actually a list of what the major population centers
15:03 are, or is there some wiggle room?
15:04 Could this be something that could become a point of contention in the future?
15:07 So it just means what it means, which is major population centers.
15:10 And partly that is because the population of Gaza has been fluid, or where the population
15:15 of Gaza is has been fluid over the past months, because you've seen people move from one place
15:19 to another.
15:20 So it means major areas in Gaza where you have people gathered together.
15:26 And so that's the point of it.
15:28 I don't want to get into it any more from here, but we think the term is fairly obvious.
15:31 Yeah.
15:32 Thank you, Matt.
15:33 I just wanted to follow specifically on this assessment of Hamas's military capability,
15:37 because some Israeli officials seem to have taken objection to that line in the President's
15:41 speech about what they are capable of doing.
15:45 John Kirby has since said that this stems from U.S. intelligence and military assessments
15:49 as to what they're capable of.
15:50 Are those assessments something that the Israelis share in terms of what Hamas is capable of?
15:56 And then secondly, is that the same bar for the Israelis?
15:58 Because it seems to be that that's at the crux of whether they're willing to agree to
16:02 a permanent ceasefire or not.
16:04 So I'm not going to speak to what the Israeli military or intelligence assessment might
16:08 be.
16:09 As I just said, our assessment is that Hamas in no way could conduct a terrorist attack
16:14 the size, the scale, the scope of what it launched on October 7th.
16:17 It has been diminished as a terrorist organization.
16:20 But that, again, does not mean that the threat has disappeared.
16:23 It has not.
16:24 It continues to fight Israeli soldiers in Gaza.
16:26 It continues to launch rocket attacks in Gaza.
16:28 And those need to be dealt with.
16:32 But in terms of where this roadmap would go forward, there are a number of issues that
16:39 would need to be negotiated as we transition from phase one to phase two.
16:44 And that's what I was getting at in my comments a moment ago, that we don't think this idea
16:49 of total victory, where you pursue a military campaign in perpetuity with really no end
16:56 in sight, is something that's in the security interests of Israel.
16:58 It's obviously not in the interests of the Palestinian people.
17:00 And so that is the point that we'll continue to make to them.
17:02 Without getting into specifically what the Israelis assess, is there a difference between
17:06 the U.S. assessment and the Israelis' assessment?
17:08 Again, I can't really get in – I can't answer that question without getting to what
17:11 their assessment is.
17:12 I can only speak for the United States.
17:13 Okay.
17:14 So speaking only for the United States, is this a recent assessment?
17:16 Because presumably Hamas's capabilities would have been steadily degraded up until this
17:20 point.
17:21 Has something changed where they've reached a sort of benchmark, in our view?
17:25 I cannot give you a date where we made that assessment, but we have seen their capabilities
17:29 steadily degraded over the past eight months of this campaign.
17:34 Obviously, you saw it first in the north and then in Khan Yunis, and then significantly
17:38 with the destruction of tunnels that housed Hamas's major weapons manufacturing programs
17:42 – its IDF made those quite public when they did it.
17:45 And so when you look at Hamas's capabilities, I think it's quite clear that while they
17:50 clear – still pose a terrorist threat and we will back Israel's right to deal with
17:56 that threat, we do not believe they can, again, launch attack the size and scale of October
18:00 7th.
18:01 Okay.
18:02 And sorry, so they're – so the U.S. is unilaterally assessing this.
18:03 There may still be a difference as to what the Israelis think Hamas is capable of.
18:08 I just can't speak – it is a U.S. assessment.
18:10 I can't speak to that.
18:11 Got it.
18:12 Yeah.
18:13 Okay.
18:14 And then one last one.
18:15 The U.S. has put it is the best possible deal that negotiators to this point have been able
18:19 to present Hamas.
18:20 What is the plan if they say no?
18:23 So I'm not going to deal with hypotheticals.
18:24 As we've made quite clear, there's no reason they should say no.
18:27 This is essentially the proposal that they made.
18:29 Now, if they want to move the goalposts and back away from what is essentially a proposal
18:34 they put forward several weeks ago, at some point Hamas ought to have to explain to the
18:38 world why it has rejected this proposal.
18:41 And that's what the President was making clear on Friday, when – we all get why people
18:45 criticize Israel.
18:46 We all get why people criticize the United States for our support for Israel.
18:51 But this is a proposal to actually reach an immediate ceasefire, to surge humanitarian
18:56 assistance in, and ultimately set the conditions for an end to the war.
19:01 Why wouldn't Hamas accept it?
19:02 And so we have welcomed the statements that have come out in the Arab world calling on
19:06 this deal to be finalized.
19:08 We have welcomed the statements that we have seen from the G7 and from other leaders calling
19:11 for this deal to be finalized.
19:14 Only Hamas can speak to what it will do, but it ought to have – it ought to have to explain
19:20 that answer if they do reject this proposal that is, as I said, manifestly in the interest
19:24 of the Palestinian people.
19:26 If they do reject it, though, you would expect the Israeli campaign to continue and for the
19:29 U.S. continue supporting Israel as it pursues that campaign?
19:32 I'm not going to deal with hypotheticals, but I think the Israelis have made quite clear
19:35 that the campaign would continue absent a ceasefire.
19:38 Okay.
19:39 I'll yield to Josh.
19:40 Yeah, thank you.
19:41 I wanted just to try and understand what the space for – we're talking about going from
19:47 phase one to phase two in this deal.
19:52 If you're saying you still have this strong line that Hamas can't run Gaza in the future,
19:59 but you're also saying that there's no path to total victory, to total sort of eradication
20:05 of Hamas --
20:06 By military means alone.
20:07 That's what I mean by that.
20:09 Right.
20:10 So you're – so what you're asking is for Hamas to peacefully – the leaders and the
20:14 members of Hamas to peacefully disarm and sort of just disappear.
20:19 What is the actual sort of proposal here for someone like Yair Sinwar, who's there, he's
20:26 a leader?
20:27 You're saying him and his cadre of leaders of Hamas have no role in the future of Gaza.
20:35 So what are they – where are they going to be in the future?
20:37 So because that is quite clearly an issue that will still need to be negotiated – we
20:43 haven't even gotten the acceptance of this proposal yet, but should it be accepted, phase
20:47 two and all of these related questions are things that will have to be negotiated as
20:50 part of the process.
20:51 I am not going to do that negotiation here in public.
20:56 That said, we have long made clear that we think Hamas should lay down its arms, and
21:01 that continues to be our position.
21:03 But you have kind of moved from earlier in the war – I think the – you were strongly
21:08 supporting Israel's goal of completely eradicating Hamas.
21:12 Now there seems to be this little space for they can exist in some form.
21:16 No, that is not at all what our position is.
21:19 What our position is is that you cannot eliminate Hamas just through military means, just through
21:24 a military campaign.
21:25 And this has been the experience of the United States in counterterrorism activities all
21:30 around the world, that a military means by itself, without some kind of political path
21:35 for the population, will ultimately prove ineffective.
21:41 And you can take out terrorists and see those terrorists replaced, and ultimately find
21:46 yourself in the same strategic position you did at the start of the campaign.
21:49 And so that's why you have to pair a military campaign, which Israel has executed, with
21:55 a political plan for the people in Gaza.
21:57 And that is ultimately what we are trying to pursue.
21:59 Yeah, go ahead.
22:00 Yeah.
22:01 Thank you, Matt.
22:02 If the President said that this was an Israeli proposal in essence, why would there be the
22:10 need to implore the Israelis to accept it?
22:13 Could you explain that to us?
22:14 We are not – we are imploring others in the Israeli Government to accept this proposal.
22:19 But this is a proposal that was put forward by the Government of Israel.
22:24 I think we were – went into this with eyes wide open that there are certain people in
22:28 the Israeli Cabinet, in the Israeli Government, who would probably not look too kindly on
22:32 this.
22:33 And of course we've seen their statements in the days since.
22:35 But ultimately this is an Israeli Government proposal.
22:37 But Said, to the point, it's a proposal the Government of Israel made, and we expected
22:43 that there would be intense debate about it in Israel.
22:45 There has been.
22:46 We saw demonstrators out on Saturday night urging that the proposal move forward.
22:50 And of course you saw several members of the Cabinet urging its rejection.
22:54 And so what the President's message was is that Israel should reject those voices
23:00 at the ends of the spectrum who have said, "Don't take a deal to bring the hostages
23:04 home.
23:05 Don't take a deal to advance Israel's long-term security interests."
23:08 So knowing that there is the War Cabinet and there is a larger cabinet and so on, where
23:13 there is a great deal of veto power among certain people in the larger cabinet and so
23:17 on, so conceivably they could turn it down.
23:20 What would be your second plan in this case?
23:22 Because we heard the President, we heard the President say, "This war must come to an
23:29 end," and using the most authoritative podium on earth, which is the White House, to say
23:34 this.
23:35 I mean, there seems to be some sort of commitment that this war has to end.
23:39 So the reason I was smiling at the question is I'm interested that the question is about
23:46 what Israel might do about a proposal that they put forward that is pending with Hamas.
23:51 And the real question right now is to Hamas.
23:52 It is Hamas that has this proposal in front of them, and Hamas that is the decision-maker
23:58 right now about whether it can go forward or not.
24:00 Now, that said, we have been quite clear that we will continue to speak to the Israeli public,
24:08 speak to the Israeli government about why this deal is in their interest and why, should
24:13 we get a deal, moving from phase one to phase two is in their interest and why further integration
24:18 with their neighbors is in their interest.
24:20 But let me be clear, the roadblock right now to a ceasefire is not Israel.
24:24 The roadblock to a ceasefire is Hamas.
24:27 Fair point.
24:30 But you know, we know that communication with Hamas, especially in Gaza, is very tenuous.
24:34 It's very difficult.
24:35 It's not that easy.
24:37 So that may take time.
24:38 So it could be just an issue of time.
24:41 They may agree and so on.
24:43 So if they do, that's it.
24:45 There's no backing down.
24:46 Israel will have to sort of abide by this agreement.
24:49 If Hamas agrees to this proposal, we fully expect it to be implemented.
24:52 One – a couple of last points, if you'll allow me, on the West Bank, I really want
24:55 to ask, because we have seen a situation that is really deteriorating in the West Bank.
25:02 We see towns like Taqqua, for instance, were being – it's being almost besieged.
25:08 The land is taken.
25:10 They erect steel doors and so on and all these things.
25:13 And I wonder, what is your position on all this?
25:16 Can – is this reversible?
25:17 Is this something that you could sort of pressure the Israelis to sort of pull back from?
25:22 So the violence that we have seen in the West Bank is unacceptable.
25:26 It must stop.
25:27 Civilians are never legitimate targets of violence.
25:30 They must be protected.
25:32 We urge Israel to do everything in its power to prevent these attacks in the first place.
25:37 And when they're not prevented, to hold those responsible accountable.
25:39 We urge them to work with the Palestinian Authority to that end.
25:43 And we have also made clear that we are willing to take our own actions to hold people accountable.
25:48 You've seen us impose visa restrictions and economic sanctions on individuals and
25:53 entities who perpetrate or support violence in the West Bank, and we will not hesitate
25:57 to continue to do so.
25:58 And finally, Samantha Power, the Israeli – I mean – I'm sorry – Samantha Power said
26:04 that Israel is the chief impediment to Gaza aid.
26:08 How do you assess what she said?
26:10 So I won't speak to her comments.
26:12 My USAID colleagues speak to them.
26:15 I think if you look at her – the full substance, she was speaking to the conflict ongoing being
26:19 the chief impediment to getting aid in, and that is manifestly the case.
26:23 You can get aid – even when you can get aid to Kerem Shalom, it's often difficult
26:27 to get it distributed inside Gaza because people are moving to new places and there's
26:31 an ongoing conflict.
26:32 That's been a challenge throughout that we will continue to work through.
26:36 But two things with – in that regard.
26:39 Number one, so there were just officials from the U.S.
26:42 Government who met in Cairo yesterday with officials from Egypt and from Israel to try
26:50 and work on a solution to reopen Rafa Gate.
26:53 There were constructive discussions, professional, and we'll continue to pursue them in the
26:58 coming days because we want to see Rafa open because that would be another gate to allow
27:01 humanitarian assistance in.
27:03 And then second, back to the bigger point, if we could get a ceasefire, if Hamas would
27:08 agree to this ceasefire proposal, we could get 600 trucks a day coming in, and not just
27:13 coming in, but it would be much, much easier for them to move safely around Gaza and get
27:18 humanitarian aid in the hands of the people that we need – who need it.
27:21 Nadia.
27:22 QUESTION: Thank you, Matt.
27:23 Prime Minister Netanyahu has said neither Hamas nor the Palestinian Authority will play
27:28 a role in the day after in Gaza.
27:31 Do you agree that the Palestinian Authority should be excluded from playing any role?
27:37 MR.
27:38 RATHKE: No, we do not.
27:39 We've made quite clear we see a role for the Palestinian Authority in the governance
27:41 of Gaza after this conflict.
27:42 QUESTION: So do you see this as a point of – that might be not acceptable for Israel
27:48 in terms of this proposal that the President put forward?
27:50 MR.
27:51 RATHKE: So when it comes to all of those issues about who would govern Gaza at the end of
27:55 this conflict, I'll say two things.
27:57 One, it is something that we have been, as you know well, discussing with Arab partners
28:03 in the region.
28:04 It's been a good subject of the work that we have done and as well as the work that
28:09 we have done to encourage the Palestinian Authority to take steps to reform itself so
28:14 not just Israelis could have faith in the Palestinian Authority, but so the Palestinian
28:17 people could have faith in the Palestinian Authority governing as a non-corrupt, faithful
28:23 actor in the interests of the Palestinian people.
28:25 So that's the first thing I would say.
28:27 The second thing I would say is that we are going to continue to engage with the Israeli
28:30 Government about this.
28:32 And there are a diversity of views inside the Israeli Government about the Palestinian
28:36 Authority and the role that they ought to play and the future that they ought to play
28:39 in governance in Gaza, and we're going to continue to make clear to them that we think
28:44 a revitalized, reformed, fully functional Palestinian Authority is in the best interest
28:51 of the Palestinian people, it's in the best interest of Israel, and it's especially
28:55 in the best interest of Israel's security.
28:57 Okay.
28:58 I want to have another go at the previous questions on Hamas.
29:04 The President said that Hamas capabilities have been degraded to the degree that they
29:08 don't pose a threat equivalent to the October 7th.
29:12 Would you entertain or accept some kind of political presence for Hamas, or do you think
29:17 that is going to be a situation analogous to the de-Baathification that we have seen
29:22 in Iraq after the war, which is de-Hamas-ization if – I don't know if the term applies,
29:27 but basically that nobody will be allowed to take part in any kind of shape or form
29:33 of civil authority, of local authority, whatever?
29:37 We're not talking about a definition of a brigade.
29:40 So I'm not going to get into any level of detail because we're just not at that point
29:45 in the process, but I will say at a high level it is the strongly held view of the United
29:50 States that we will continue to push that Hamas can play no role in the governance of
29:56 Gaza.
29:57 It has lost any legitimate claim it ever had – and we didn't think it had one to begin
30:01 with – but it's lost any legitimate claim to participate in the governance of Gaza by
30:04 virtue of launching a brutal massacre of 1,200 Israelis on October 7th.
30:11 And finally, Saudis and Qataris has condemned an Israeli knesset attempt – or a rebel,
30:19 actually – to label UNRWA as a terrorist organization.
30:23 Do you condemn this attempt by the Israeli knesset to do that?
30:26 So I am not – I was not aware of that vote.
30:29 Obviously, we do not believe UNRWA is a terrorist organization.
30:32 There were members of UNRWA who – UNRWA provided evidence, had participated in some
30:40 way in the attacks of October 7th, but that is not the --
30:43 I want --
30:44 But that is not actions by UNRWA, the body itself.
30:48 So that's our general position, but I can't speak to the specific vote because I'm not
30:51 familiar with the specifics.
30:52 I just want to – I want you to clarify this.
30:54 UNRWA has provided evidence that some members were part – were part in the --
30:59 Yeah.
31:00 Well, so I should say "provided."
31:01 They briefed us on evidence that they found.
31:03 Yeah, at the beginning of this – I've gone through this a few times.
31:06 At the beginning of this entire issue with regard to UNRWA, a lot of people think it
31:11 was – we took the action that we took to suspend UNRWA's funding because of something
31:14 the Israeli Government told us, and that's not the case.
31:17 It was UNRWA that came to us and said they were aware of these allegations.
31:21 They had looked into them, found evidence that certain members of UNRWA had participated
31:25 in the attacks of October 7th and so had suspended and fired for 13, 14 – I don't remember
31:29 the exact number now – and that's why we took the action we did.
31:31 And you can update us on the investigation because it's been, what, a few months now?
31:36 I can't because it's not a U.S.
31:37 Government investigation; it's a United Nations investigation.
31:39 I would refer you to them to speak to that.
31:41 Matt, could I have clarification on your engagement with the PA?
31:46 Are you engaged with the Palestinian Authority right now?
31:48 Yeah, yeah.
31:49 We have conversations with the – Where are the whereabouts of Mr. Hadi Amr, for instance?
31:54 Is he engaged?
31:55 He has been – he travels back and forth between here and the region quite regularly.
31:58 I don't know if he's here or in the region today, but yeah, he engages regularly with
32:02 the Palestinian Authority, as do officials in our embassy in Jerusalem.
32:06 Okay.
32:07 Stay in the region.
32:08 Any more?
32:09 Yeah, yeah, go ahead.
32:10 Matt, did you hear back from the Israeli regarding the investigation on the strike in – last
32:18 weekend?
32:19 Because -- We have not been – we have not – number
32:22 one, I don't know if the investigation has concluded, but in any event, we haven't been
32:25 briefed at this point.
32:26 And on this proposed deal, the President, also the Secretary yesterday in his call with
32:32 the Ghants, he mentioned that this proposed deal will unlock a calm on the northern borders.
32:40 Do you have something substantial?
32:41 Did you – is there a progress made here with Hezbollah?
32:47 So we have had ongoing conversations for some time to try to reach a political solution
32:53 to the cross-border strikes between Israel and Hezbollah, and we have made progress in
32:58 those conversations.
33:00 But ultimately, it is our assessment that it's very difficult to reach a solution to
33:04 that problem without calm in Gaza.
33:06 Ultimately, all of these problems are interconnected, and as long as there is intense fighting in
33:12 Gaza, it's very difficult to reach a solution in the north.
33:16 And that intense fighting also poses other security challenges for Israel.
33:20 And so we do believe that should we get a ceasefire in Gaza, especially if we can make
33:25 that a durable ceasefire that ends the war, that that is a challenge that we can resolve.
33:30 Thank you.
33:31 On this -- Yeah, go ahead.
33:32 Did you discuss such a deal or diplomatic resolution for the conflict between Israel
33:39 and Hezbollah with Hezbollah and Iran?
33:43 So I'm not going to get into any conversations.
33:45 We don't have direct communications with Hezbollah, obviously.
33:47 But we have been pursuing diplomatic – a diplomatic resolution to this issue for some
33:53 time.
33:54 And one more on Iran.
33:56 Iran's acting foreign minister said today that the process of negotiations between U.S.
34:04 and Iran are currently underway and exchange of messages and consultations continue.
34:10 Can you confirm that?
34:11 I cannot.
34:12 I will just say that we have always made clear we have the ability to get messages to Iran
34:17 when it is in our interest to do so, but I'm not going to confirm or read out any specific
34:20 conversations.
34:21 Did you mean that his statement is not accurate?
34:23 No, I mean exactly what I said.
34:26 Go ahead.
34:27 Thank you.
34:28 Just a question on the framework that's currently on the table.
34:29 Yeah.
34:30 Can you say if it's the U.S. expectation that during phase two and three of the deal,
34:34 if it's implemented, if Israel would still be able to carry out specific targeted military
34:39 strikes should a threat emanate from within Gaza?
34:42 So I don't want to speak to – I don't want to speak to that in terms of tying it
34:44 to phase two and phase three, because those are things that are going to have to be negotiated
34:48 and the exact – the exact parameters of that negotiation.
34:51 We're not – we don't even have a deal for phase one yet, so I think I should refrain
34:55 from commenting on that.
34:56 But the President made clear we will always back Israel's right to defend itself, and
34:59 that remains true.
35:00 All right.
35:01 Go ahead, Janne.
35:02 Thank you, Matt.
35:03 Two questions.
35:04 I will follow up again on the last North Korean garbage balloon question.
35:12 Last time China sent spy balloons to the United States, but North Korea sent over thousands
35:20 garbage balloons to South Korea over the past few days.
35:25 These garbage balloons contain all kinds of unsanitary germs.
35:32 There could also be damage to U.S. troops stationed in South Korea.
35:40 What measures do you think the U.S. and South Korea to take in this regard?
35:46 So I will just say that it's obviously quite a disgusting tactic, irresponsible, childish,
35:53 and it should come to an end.
35:54 I'll leave it at that.
35:55 So you're not condemning?
35:56 Of course I condemn it.
35:57 Absolutely.
35:58 Okay.
35:59 Do you – yeah.
36:00 Condemn any country that sends trash to its – floats trash over in a balloon to its
36:02 neighbors.
36:03 Yeah.
36:04 Right.
36:05 Yeah.
36:06 You guys do a lot of that.
36:07 If it is an agreement between two countries, that is a very different thing.
36:11 Yeah.
36:12 Do you think that it – yeah, one more.
36:14 Do you think that this is a violation of the UN Security Council?
36:19 I would have to consult with people here whether trash-carrying balloons – I'm not trying
36:25 to be flippant.
36:26 I just have to consult with some people here about whether that's the case.
36:28 Also, do you think this action has anything to do with China, China involvement?
36:35 The trash balloons do?
36:36 Yes.
36:37 I have not seen any assessment that it does, no.
36:38 All right.
36:39 Thank you.
36:40 Yeah.
36:41 Go ahead, Alex.
36:42 Thank you, Matt.
36:43 Very quickly on Ukraine, then I'll move to Georgia.
36:44 Yeah.
36:45 Do you have any plans to attend to accompany the Vice President in Switzerland at the summit?
36:50 I don't have any scheduling announcements to make with that peace summit.
36:52 You heard the Secretary say a number of times over the past few weeks, you heard us say
36:55 that we would be well represented at that summit, and that's – clearly saw that today
37:01 with the announcement that the Vice President would be attending.
37:03 Right.
37:04 President Zelensky called out China for sabotaging that event.
37:08 Do you share his concerns?
37:10 So I will just say that when it comes to the peace summit – I'm going to speak for the
37:14 United States – that we support the peace summit.
37:16 We want it to be successful, and that's why you see the Vice President of the United
37:20 States attending that summit.
37:21 We support Ukraine's diplomatic efforts.
37:24 That said, we have always been clear that China could play a useful diplomatic role
37:29 in helping resolve this conflict if it wanted to.
37:33 But that said, right now it's hard to see how they could play that role, given the actions
37:37 that we've seen China take over recent months to rebuild, reconstitute Russia's defense
37:44 industrial base.
37:45 So we are going to continue to make clear to China that we object to those actions,
37:48 that we will hold entities responsible for those actions, and we've heard our Russian
37:53 – I'm sorry, our European counterparts say the same thing.
37:56 Thank you.
37:57 Let's head to Georgia, if I may, where the Kremlin-inspired draft already became law
38:02 of the land.
38:03 The speaker who signed it today was quoted as saying that the Western foundations are
38:07 quoting him, are financing organizations that are financing terror, violence, et cetera.
38:14 There are other officials that are talking about clearly shutting down these civil society
38:18 organizations, clear departure from what they told us intention – the original intention
38:23 was.
38:24 Moving forward, how do you expect them to apply the law?
38:27 So I'm not going to speak to that.
38:29 I will say we have been quite concerned about exactly the point you raised, which is that
38:32 this law moves Georgia away from its democratic trajectory and could stigmatize civil society
38:38 and stifle the freedoms of association and expression, and that the actions fundamentally
38:44 alter the U.S. relationship with Georgia.
38:46 And so that's why we have launched a review of our relationship and will consider our
38:52 response to the actions that the Government of Georgia has taken.
38:55 On that point, the mayor of Tbilisi is quoted as saying that we have, quote/unquote, "done
38:59 nothing to be sanctioned."
39:00 Is he mistaken?
39:01 We have announced a new sanctions policy.
39:05 We have not yet announced individual sanctions, and I'll leave it at that.
39:09 But we have made clear that we would not hesitate to impose them.
39:13 Fair enough.
39:14 Given what's at stake here, why did the Secretary make no mention of Georgia during
39:17 his Eastern European trip?
39:20 The Secretary just put out a statement announcing an entire comprehensive review of our policy
39:24 with respect to Georgia that could jeopardize hundreds of millions of dollars of assistance
39:29 that we provide to Georgia, and as well announced a new visa restriction policy that you should
39:37 fully expect to see the United States take action on.
39:39 I think I'll leave it at that.
39:40 His commitment to this has been quite clear.
39:41 Let me go ahead.
39:42 That was like three or four.
39:43 Sean, go ahead.
39:44 I'm sorry.
39:45 I thought you had your hand up.
39:46 Getting back slightly to the Middle East, but staying in Europe, I don't know how many
39:54 times you get asked about Slovenia.
39:58 So the parliament is debating recognition of a Palestinian state, of the state of Palestine.
40:03 It's been put on hold by the opposition.
40:05 I know in the previous three cases, the European countries, the reaction, you had a reaction
40:09 coming up.
40:10 But as it's actually in process, does the U.S. want to tip the scales one way or another?
40:13 Do you have a position on whether Slovenia should go ahead and recognize a Palestinian
40:16 state?
40:17 So, look, ultimately, we see those steps as not helpful or productive at this time.
40:21 We have been quite clear that we support the establishment of an independent Palestinian
40:25 state.
40:26 We have been working on actual paths to get us there through diplomacy in the region.
40:31 But that ultimately, that is a step that needs to come not through unilateral recognition,
40:36 but through direct negotiations between the two parties.
40:38 And Slovenia in particular, is it?
40:41 That comment applies to everyone.
40:43 Can I just ask you briefly about two elections?
40:45 I know you issued statements on them already, but two major countries, Mexico and South
40:49 Africa.
40:50 I know that those have been statements issued in both, but particularly in the case of South
40:53 Africa, it seems the ANC for the first time since the end of apartheid is going to lose
40:57 a majority.
40:58 The U.S. has a relationship with South Africa, but obviously there have been some ups and
41:03 downs recently with regard to Russia, with regard to the issues in The Hague.
41:10 Does the United States anticipate any changes to the relationship with South Africa coming
41:15 out of this?
41:16 Anything more to the U.S.'s liking, potentially?
41:17 So, I'd say that we remain committed to deepening our cooperation with South Africa.
41:21 We cooperate with South Africa on a number of areas, even places where we have differences.
41:26 There are other areas, such as expanding economic prosperity, fighting the climate crisis, ensuring
41:32 that democracy delivers.
41:33 We work quite closely with South Africa, and we would fully expect to do that with the
41:37 new government.
41:38 And I do also want to take a note to congratulate the South African people on successful national
41:43 and political elections.
41:45 And this maybe won't have resonance for everyone in the room, for the younger crowd in the
41:51 room, but for some of us older folks, this is now three decades of South Africans having
41:55 the opportunity to exercise the fundamental right to vote, something that seemed difficult
42:01 and far beyond reach when I was a kid has been achieved, and now we have seen entrenched
42:07 for three decades, and it's, I think, important to highlight that positive development.
42:11 Sure.
42:12 Continued positive development.
42:13 And on Mexico, again, I know there's the same issue, but with AMLO, there are quite a few
42:17 arrangements on migration that have taken place.
42:20 Is it the understanding that these will continue on with the new administration?
42:23 Do you think, do you anticipate any type of shakeup in terms of the immigration protocols
42:26 with --
42:27 So I think we'll let the new president, the president-elect, take office before we start
42:30 talking about specific policies, but we do expect to continue our close working relationship
42:36 with the government of Mexico.
42:38 We value the special relationship we have with them, and we're committed to working
42:42 together to advance our mutual economic and security interests.
42:45 Brian.
42:46 Back in February, the White House announced sanctions on people, undermining peace, security,
42:51 and stability in the West Bank.
42:52 I'm not sure if you saw, but Senator Chris Van Hollen just suggested that those sanctions
42:58 ought to apply to Smotrich, who you mentioned earlier today as an obstacle to the peace
43:03 deal.
43:04 Is that something that the State Department would consider?
43:07 So I'm never going -- I make this a rule never to make sanctions announcements or talk about
43:12 what we're considering before we impose any -- in a sanction.
43:16 And before anyone reads anything into that comment, you shouldn't read that one way or
43:22 the other.
43:23 It's just our blanket rule in not talking about possible sanctions.
43:25 Quick Pakistan question.
43:26 I'm not sure if you saw Imran Khan was acquitted of his previous conviction on the Cypher case.
43:34 So the only case that he's currently jailed for is what's known as this un-Islamic marriage
43:40 charge.
43:41 So the most popular politician in Pakistan is currently in jail because the Pakistani
43:48 court says that there were not enough menstrual cycles between his wife's divorce and his
43:55 marriage.
43:57 So you talked earlier about the Georgia law and that that was undermining Georgian democracy.
44:04 Why does the -- why is the State Department willing to weigh in on a law passed through
44:07 the Georgian legislature, but something insane like this, that's a matter for the Pakistani
44:13 courts?
44:14 So I just don't have any further comment on the case.
44:15 We look at -- when we look at different countries, we take into account appropriate context,
44:20 circumstances in making our judgments.
44:22 We've addressed the question of Imran Khan many times.
44:25 The legal proceedings against him are something for the Pakistani courts to decide.
44:29 Could that really be -- In accordance with their laws and constitution.
44:32 But could that really be a matter for the Pakistani courts?
44:35 Could that possibly be the State Department's position?
44:37 It is our position that when you come to these laws in Pakistan and this court case, it is
44:44 something for the Pakistani courts to decide.
44:46 And you just saw to this question charges against him thrown out by the courts.
44:51 Go ahead.
44:52 Thank you so much.
44:53 Regarding the bilateral deal between United States, Saudi Arabia, and Israel that included
45:00 a defense deal between United States and Saudi Arabia and Saudi Arabia and Israel normalization,
45:05 we have seen that Secretary Blinken in a Senate hearing mentioned that United States and Saudi
45:12 Arabia are very near to a defense deal.
45:15 It seems like U.S. is prioritizing its defense deal with Saudi Arabia, but not the ties with
45:22 Israel, the basic effort that U.S. led from for the mediation between Saudi Arabia and
45:28 Israel.
45:29 So with this testimony in the Senate hearing, is it understood that it will be a bilateral
45:39 deal only with the defense deal between Saudi Arabia and United States and the normalization
45:45 between Israel and Saudi Arabia as a sideline?
45:47 The arrangement that we have contemplated, that we have been working on, is an agreement
45:53 that encompasses three parties, the United States, Saudi Arabia, and Israel.
45:57 There are bilateral pieces between the United States and Saudi Arabia that would be part
46:00 of that deal, and that's what we have been working on.
46:02 And then there are other components that are – that ultimately involve a path towards
46:07 a Palestinian state.
46:09 But I will just say, as all of – as part of all of this, you've heard the Secretary
46:12 say this before, there are two – there is one thing that has to happen – two things.
46:16 One, I just referred to, the path to a Palestinian state.
46:18 But the other thing that has to happen before any such arrangement can go forward is Kalman,
46:22 Gaza.
46:23 We don't have Kalman, Gaza today.
46:24 We're trying to get to Kalman, Gaza through this ceasefire proposal.
46:26 And you heard the President speak to normalization of Saudi Arabia being one of the benefits
46:30 that it ultimately could unlock.
46:32 Then secondly, from the second time in 21 years, United States allowed a jailed Pakistani
46:41 lady who is facing 86 years of, like, sentence in a Texas jail with the allegations of alleged
46:48 attacks on U.S. troops in Afghanistan, that is Dr. Afia Siddiqui.
46:52 So former Pakistani caretaker, government official, in a private conversation told – he
46:58 revealed that U.S. and Pakistan were very close for a deal, a possible deal between
47:03 United States and Pakistan that might be a swap deal, basically.
47:08 So you have any information on that, or is there something behind U.S. and Pakistan are
47:14 considering that?
47:15 MR PRICE: So let me take the question.
47:16 I'm just not familiar with the full details of the case that you mentioned.
47:20 Go ahead.
47:21 QUESTION: A question on Turkey.
47:23 Today, Turkey interior ministry, they removed a recently elected pro-Kurdish party mayor
47:29 of Hakkari and replaced him with a trustee.
47:31 Do you have any reaction or comment on that?
47:33 MR PRICE: So the – our position on the Kurdistan Workers' Party is well known.
47:38 It hasn't changed.
47:39 The PKK was designated as a foreign terrorist organization by the Department of State in
47:43 1997.
47:44 And regarding the specific case you mentioned, I would refer you to the Government of Turkey
47:48 for comment.
47:49 QUESTION: And did you say that he was naked with the PKK?
47:50 MR PRICE: I'm sorry, what was that?
47:51 QUESTION: Did you say that he was naked with the PKK?
47:53 MR PRICE: I'm just speaking to our assessment of the PKK, Robert.
47:56 QUESTION: And what's your assessment on that case?
47:57 MR PRICE: As I said, I don't have any specific comment on it.
48:00 QUESTION: And what's your approach to the Kurdish issue in Turkey?
48:02 It's been a long time.
48:03 MR PRICE: The approach --
48:04 QUESTION: Kurdish issue in Turkey.
48:05 What's the U.S. approach on --
48:06 MR PRICE: We have made clear our longstanding position on that.
48:09 Many times, I don't have anything to add today.
48:10 Go ahead here, and then we're going to have to wrap for today.
48:14 QUESTION: You said that you would hope that the Israeli law enforcement would follow through
48:21 in curtailing violence from settlers in the West Bank.
48:25 However, on Thursday, last Thursday, the Israeli military raided a vegetable market in Ramallah,
48:34 in Elvira to be specific, but one of the largest vegetable markets in the West Bank, and – which
48:40 lit on fire, and – who is going to hold Israel accountable, and the Israeli military
48:49 in this sense?
48:50 Which law enforcement authority should --
48:51 MR PRICE: So a few things.
48:52 First, I can't speak to that specific raid.
48:55 Obviously, Israel has the right to conduct legitimate anti-terrorism activities in the
49:00 West Bank.
49:01 We have seen them do so, but those need to be legitimate.
49:03 They need to comply with their national humanitarian law.
49:07 But as regards to this particular incident, I can't speak to it at all.
49:11 But that said, when it comes to holding people accountable, we have seen the Israeli Government
49:16 take some actions to police settler violence in the West Bank.
49:19 We've seen them make arrests.
49:20 We've seen them hold people accountable.
49:22 But in our assessment, it hasn't been enough.
49:23 And so that's why --
49:24 QUESTION: But this wasn't settlers.
49:25 MR PRICE: But I know.
49:26 That's why I'm separating out the two.
49:28 I can't – because I can't speak to this one without knowing the details.
49:30 But when it comes to what I was speaking to, settler violence, they need to do more, and
49:35 if they don't, we will.
49:36 Is that clear?
49:37 And with that, we're out for today.
49:38 Thanks, everyone.
49:39 QUESTION: Thank you.
49:39 [BLANK_AUDIO]