A Bunch of Questions with No Answers, Transcribed 

 

 

If a question falls and nobody answers, will you read it?

 

A love letter for journalists to you.

 

 

 Today there is a report since now in Israel that Netanyahu ordered Gallant not to travel to Washington, D.C., and this also comes with reports inside Israel that the ongoing cabinet meetings finalizing the Israeli respond to Iran.

 

 Do you see that the cancellation of Gallant's visit as a sign of imminent Israeli respond or not?

 

 In Lebanon as well, the deputy general secretary of Hezbollah, Naim Qassem, today announced that he supports the efforts by the speaker of the parliament, Nabih Berri, and other political leaders to reach a diplomatic solution to this conflict based on the proposal by the United States and others of 21-day ceasefire.

 

 Do you see that this proposal and these diplomatic efforts in Lebanon has any feasibility to succeed or considering what's going on on the ground?

 

 I mean, 105 missiles today have been fired onto Israel, fighting still going on in the Gaza.

 

 Delinked from Gaza.

 

 So I mean, correct me if I understand you wrong.

 

 What you're saying is, yes, we are ultimately want a diplomatic solution to stop this war.

 

 But it's not yet now.

 

 We need to give a window for Israel to attack Hezbollah more.

 

 And you also today spoke directly to the Lebanese people as leading with them to take this opportunity to take their country back.

 

 I mean, I'm quoting here.

 

 And someone inside Lebanon are afraid of this conflict to spill into another civil war in Lebanon.

 

 Do you see that maybe this kind of rhetoric from Israel is pushing Lebanon toward more inner fighting rather than fighting the South?

 

 My last question, a simple one.

 

 I asked it before, but I have to repeat it now.

 

 Oil industries in Iran and nuclear facilities in Iran, are they still legitimate targets for Israel?

 

 Just to come back to that question, I know you said you won't comment on Netanyahu's statement, but this idea of this being an opportunity for Lebanon, for Lebanese people.

 

 And it's been a longstanding position that you wanted to, you would like to see a new, the hold over the new president lifted.

 

 But does the US see this as an opportunity to, the current state of Hezbollah as an opportunity to get something you've wanted for a while, which is a change of the, a new regime in Lebanon?

 

 There seems to be a contradiction between two weeks ago you were proposing a three week ceasefire, you know, a lot of calls for the Israelis, for all sides not to escalate.

 

 The Israelis have escalated and now you're saying it's an opportunity for the Lebanese people.

 

 So I guess people might see that as disingenuous that you're kind of happy with this outcome.

 

 And I think you've been saying, you know, you support the idea of a limited incursion by the Israelis in Southern Lebanon.

 

 But I guess as we've seen, as the facts on the ground change, your position basically seems to be, okay, we're okay with the new normal.

 

 So if this limited incursion starts to last for longer, at what point will you basically not be okay with the continued operation, which becomes an invasion or an occupation?

 

 Matt, sorry, just given that Hezbollah, someone in Hezbollah is now saying they, you know, they're open to a ceasefire, are the Israelis calling for a ceasefire?

 

 And so we know that you've said repeatedly, it takes two to tango when it comes to a ceasefire.

 

 Is this not a good starting point?

 

 That, as you say, Hezbollah is being degraded.

 

 At one point – at what point is it significantly degraded enough for the U.S. to say, okay, enough is enough, we've got something to start off with here?

 

 Like, are you talking about supporting Israel to the point of removing Hezbollah entirely?

 

 Or like, there's got to be some endpoint in which you guys are working with, and if that's something you can't talk to us about now, then okay, but like, this is – we're going to keep asking you.

 

 But if you don't – but my – because this is why I ask about the Israelis, that Hezbollah, they're not going to – it seems to me like they're not going to offer to do all of that if they don't see that there's – like you've been talking about with the other conflict in Gaza, that there's a political will.

 

 There is no will on the Israeli side to stop right now.

 

 And it appears that they have the support of the U.S. to keep going until they degrade Hezbollah to a point of – like to what point?

 

 That's why that question is important.

 

 So for – We've been asking about a red line at a – Sure, and – Even been asking about bombing of Beirut.

 

 Circling back to the cancelled Golang trip, there are reports that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ordered that he not come to the U.S. until Netanyahu has a chance to speak with President Biden.

 

 Is there any indication or announcement the lack of communication between the heads of state is trickling down to other levels of government and preventing communication there?

 

 Actually, in your response to Shannon, or the substance of what she said about the relationship with Netanyahu and so on, I mean, there was – today there was – not a leak, but there was a report on the new book by Bob Woodward and the kind of, you know, relations between the President and Prime Minister Netanyahu.

 

 Yesterday, the Vice President was on 60 Minutes and so on, and the forensics of both suggest that you don't really have a great deal of sway over Netanyahu, despite the fact that we've given them – or taxpayers paid for – almost $23 billion in the last year alone.

 

 That's almost $3,000 for each and every Israeli.

 

 So we have – you have absolutely no leverage on – no pressure.

 

 You cannot tell them, do this or not do this.

 

 Yes, but I understand.

 

 But a sovereign country that received from American taxpayers – that received $22 billion in one year.

 

 I mean, this is the number that came out of – Yeah, which it – so – I mean, I believe there was – So what's the U.S. government – What does the U.S. government think that it has given Israel?

 

 And look, there are five different organizations, educational organizations that have come up with estimates – that have come up with estimates.

 

 This building, at least, which is in charge of arms transfers, at least many of them, hasn't seen fit to come up with an update since July of last year.

 

 It's very difficult to separate what has been given to them post-October 7th in terms of – in terms of things that were not approved before then under the MOU, stuff that went to them specifically for the Gaza – and now Lebanon.

 

 Matt, the numbers were Brown University's numbers, not mine, and so on.

 

 But it doesn't matter what the actual figure is.

 

 But we give them a lot of money.

 

 We give them a great deal of leverage.

 

 We give them, obviously, a great deal of political coverage in the UN and many other places and so on.

 

 And to suggest that this huge and lengthy partnership really does not exact any kind of leverage with the Israelis, don't you question that?

 

 Let me just ask you a couple of other questions.

 

 Pope Francis slammed the world as being a shameful inability to bring about a ceasefire in Gaza.

 

 Do you agree with the pope or do you think that the US has done everything possible to bring about a ceasefire in Gaza?

 

 All right.

 

 Let me just—a couple more, bear with me.

 

 Hamas military spokesman said that Israel could have basically had the hostages released way back, you know, last October or last November and so on.

 

 Do you think there was a missed opportunity to do that?

 

 First, I want to follow up on the questions.

 

 It takes two to tango.

 

 Yesterday when I was asking you about the ceasefire and what—if you are engaging with the Lebanese, you told me it's up to the Lebanese to step up or not.

 

 But you are the one who are conveying the messages and supporting Israel.

 

 So the question now, you are asking them to implement the 1701, to send the left to the south.

 

 They express will to do so.

 

 So at what step you are going to step up?

 

 And I don't know, mediation, convey the messages to the Israeli that it's time to stop that.

 

 Are you waiting for some breakthrough on the ground more?

 

 So can I get it from here that you want Hezbollah to stop its attacks first?

 

 One final question on the limited intrusion.

 

 Because yesterday, today, I don't know if you saw the video of the Israeli raising their flag in Maroun al-Ras.

 

 Do you think that this fall under the limited operation?

 

 Do you support that?

 

 Thanks for mentioning that you're evacuating Americans through commercial airlines.

 

 But also, the Israelis has been attacking the highway that leads to the airport, and it's the only way that you can arrive to the airport.

 

 And also, you have thousands of Americans that live there and other nationalities as well.

 

 They might need to use this kind of transportation.

 

 Did you talk to the Israelis that the airport is a red line?

 

 Are you having conversation with the Speaker of the House, Nabi Barak, as he is the one can call for a session to elect a president?

 

 So he's the one that's controlling this kind of doctrine.

 

 Are you speaking with him seriously?

 

 Because we had a visit from a foreign minister of Iran that wanted Lebanon to stay at the same position, relate the matter to Gaza, and keep fighting to the end.

 

 And they're trying to block this.

 

 Thank you, Matt.

 

 Since Israel's killing of Hezbollah's leader Nasrallah in Lebanon, who also was the head of the UN agency UNRWA Teachers Association of Lebanon, when did the United States know this and what did the United States do about it?

 

 And have a follow up.

 

 Okay, Nasrallah.

 

 Since Israel's killing of Hezbollah leader Nasrallah in Lebanon, who also was the head of the UN agency UNRWA Teachers Association of Lebanon, when did the United States know this and what did the United States do about it?

 

 So Israel is still poised to strike Iran.

 

 And in July, Blinken said that Iran was one to two weeks away from developing a nuclear weapon.

 

 So I guess for all we know, they might have one by now.

 

 And meanwhile, in Ukraine, they've struck deep within Russian territory several times, as deep as 300 miles from the border.

 

 And in that case, we don't have to guess.

 

 We know that Russia has the largest nuclear arsenal on the planet, as many as 6,000 warheads.

 

 And so one of the risks of arming militaries that are striking in the territories of nuclear powers is that one of those gets deployed and then it could escalate very quickly from there.

 

 So it's rarely discussed, but it's important to address that the nuclear risk is real.

 

 And it could very abruptly mean the end of what humans have worked for thousands of years to collectively achieve.

 

 And us today are very lucky to live with the fruits of that achievement.

 

 And I feel like we're treating the risks kind of brazenly.

 

 So my question for you is, we often hear in response to these concerns that, well, Putin, Khomeini, they're war criminals, they're terrorists, as if they're too inherently evil or immoral for us to negotiate with.

 

 But meanwhile, this administration has financed a genocide in Gaza for the last year.

 

 And every day you're up there denying accountability for it.

 

 So, I mean, what gives you the right to lecture other countries on their moral?

 

 Yeah, but people are sick of the bullshit in here.

 

 I mean, it is a genocide.

 

 Just a follow up on just some media is reporting now that Israel has set conditions for accepting discussions on a ceasefire in Lebanon.

 

 This is French diplomatic sources to some media.

 

 So do you have anything to comment?

 

 Okay, before we get back into Gaza, which I'm sure we will, can I just get you, do you have an update on the flights out of Lebanon for Americans?

 

 No, it is indeed a somber day.

 

 I wanted to ask you something that you said in your opening statement.

 

 This call, and you've said it many times in administration, this call saying it is far time to end this conflict today.

 

 Obviously, this conflict is not only ongoing, but it's escalating in every direction you look at.

 

 There are new operations in Gaza, of course, bombing in Lebanon, and we're waiting for the response against Iran's attacks.

 

 So when you say it's far time to end this conflict, and obviously you have to be two sides to agree to end the conflict, are you saying specifically to Israel, stop the bombing, stop its operations in Gaza, or do you still support those?

 

 Just a broad question to perhaps reflect a year on.

 

 It's the anniversary of October 7 Hamas attacks.

 

 It's also the anniversary of the start of Gaza War, which is, according to Palestinian house authorities, killed nearly 42,000 people.

 

 And everything we've lived through.

 

 I'm wondering, does the United States believe Israel is safer today than before the start of this?

 

 And given the United States has supported Israel throughout this, I'm just wondering if there is any reflection within the administration going back to the early days and sort of looking at the steps that you've taken, is there anything that the administration would have done differently since then?

 

 Right.

 

 So let me take that to Lebanon then.

 

 Are those questions at all answered or being answered or are the answers being thought about right now because Israel is conducting an operation in Lebanon?

 

 And given that over the weekend, for example, it has targeted some densely populated Beirut suburbs, I'm wondering if the United States still sees this as a limited incursion.

 

 Just on the limited incursion though, what is the parameter for U.S. for this to be considered anything beyond limited incursion?

 

 But are there any active conversations about this?

 

 Because, I mean, at the moment, it does appear that the United States is green lighting what Israel is doing in Lebanon so far.

 

 But do you have, and you just talked about how there was no post-war Gaza plan, there was no political pathway, and that left us where we are a year on in Gaza.

 

 But you don't seem to have anything concrete for what comes after Israel's Lebanon operation either.

 

 So isn't that a point of concern for the United States?

 

 This risks being an open-ended issue as well.

 

 For me, the President has said he doesn't want Israel to hit Iran in the near sides and also like the oil facilities.

 

 But I'm just wondering if Israelis actually have given you any assurances that they won't do that.

 

 Just to follow up on one bit of what you said to Humeyra, you said the ground incursions continue to be limited, I believe.

 

 So does the United States believe that the bombings in the Beirut area are included in that limited character trait that you guys are wishing to see?

 

 And so long as the Israelis are going after Hezbollah targets in those Beirut strikes, the US is supportive of them doing that?

 

 And have they done that so far?

 

 And we know that this department is carrying out that assessment when it comes to Israeli operations in Gaza.

 

 Are you also carrying out that assessment when it comes to Israeli operations in Lebanon targeting Hezbollah?

 

 But I mean, okay, you're doing these evaluations and come out whenever they come out.

 

 I mean, the president, you know, in Gaza said the Israeli operations were over the top, for example.

 

 So specifically, the ones that are happening now in Lebanon, are they over the top?

 

 You said in your opening remarks that the Biden administration continues to work towards a ceasefire.

 

 You gave readouts – or actually, you didn't give full readouts, but you noted the phone calls that the Secretary has had in recent days that are driving towards that outcome.

 

 But from the perspective of us, it does seem like that effort is a little bit stalled right now as you guys are waiting to watch what Israel does militarily.

 

 And is there any latest ceasefire proposal that you're waiting for Hamas to respond to right now?

 

 Thank you, Matt.

 

 In your response to Humeirah, I believe, on if Israel was safer today, you said that Israel had degraded Hamas apparently a great deal and so on.

 

 So I want to ask you, why the need to continue to bomb ten places and places where Palestinians are advised to go to for safe havens and so on with F-35s and bombs that are 2,000 pound bombs?

 

 So – Why is there a need to continue to do this kind of bombing?

 

 But Israel continues to use these bombs, these huge bombs.

 

 In fact, bombing a coffee shop in the West Bank, which is an area they control.

 

 They should not be bombing by, you know, area of bombardment, coffee shops and so on.

 

 But you mentioned a point that takes me to my other point.

 

 Israel seems to be cutting off the north of Gaza from the south.

 

 They're basically, you know, what is underway is nothing short of ethnic cleansing.

 

 Now, you all along have said, and the president, I think the secretary said that, I'm not so sure whether the president said that or not, but you don't want to see Gaza reoccupied.

 

 You don't want to see any part of Gaza reoccupied.

 

 Are you aware of these reports and do you have a response to that?

 

 That will give Israel a cause for continuing this war.

 

 I mean, nobody expected a year ago that this war would be going on at this time, but it is.

 

 And it can conceivably go on for many more months, maybe even years and so on.

 

 What is the end game?

 

 What do you, in your view, what is the end game of Israel?

 

 That means that when you answered, say, you don't want to see Gaza reoccupied by Israel, you also don't want the West Bank occupied by Israel, right?

 

 So you don't want the Israelis to be occupying the West Bank?

 

 And then just secondly, and I've asked this and I know others have asked this before, but when you talk about how you want a ceasefire in Gaza so that people can return to their neighborhoods and their homes, how many neighborhoods and homes do you think are left for them to return to?

 

 Can I get to the very specific point here?

 

 Do you think Israel should contribute to this?

 

 I'm not asking who should pay if someone should pay for everything, but who should contribute?

 

 Would the U.S. be willing to contribute?

 

 Let me just continue with a couple of questions.

 

 Although it was Israel that dropped close to 50,000 tons of bombs on Gaza, rendering where it is now, so maybe they ought to pay for it.

 

 Let me ask you about a report in Dropside.

 

 And it says that Secretary Blinken approved a policy to bomb eight trucks.

 

 That's what an Israeli cabinet member said.

 

 Are you aware of this report and do you have any comment?

 

 My final one, the president today issued a statement, and he talks about the anniversary, he talks about 1,200 Jews were killed, which is the highest number since the Holocaust and so on.

 

 But he did not mention the genocide that the Palestinians are subject to.

 

 He did not mention the fact that 42,000 people were killed.

 

 In fact, a group of American doctors are saying 119,000 have been killed.

 

 Is that negligence on his part?

 

 Is he not showing the kind of sensitivity that he ought to show to the Palestinians?

 

 You have confirmed several times that you are in contact with the Lebanese and you are working behind the scene.

 

 But the prime minister yesterday, he had an interview and he said not the U.S. officials reached out to them since he saw Amos Hochstein in New York before the assassination of Hezbollah Secretary General.

 

 Today, even, there was a statement by a block of opposition saying, asking for the implementation of the Resolution 1701, even 1559.

 

 And also some of them went far, not from the opposition.

 

 One of the Druze leader, Walid Jumblatt, he asked to go back to the 1949 Druze with Israel.

 

 But there is no U.S. engagement.

 

 It's like you are giving the Israeli time to finish the military operation.

 

 Why you are not engaging?

 

 And if you are engaging, who is engaging with them from this department or from the White House?

 

 So what are you doing?

 

 But the Iranian foreign minister visited there two days ago.

 

 You know, in Lebanon, the situation, it is not a domestic situation.

 

 It's a regional situation.

 

 Second, are you planning to keep asking the Israelis to keep the airport open?

 

 And in your readout regarding the call between the Secretary and the Saudi foreign minister, you said that they discussed ongoing efforts to fund and support the Lebanese armed forces and the importance of international support for UNIFIL.

 

 Are there any specific steps that you are considering?

 

 To sum up your line of question with Humayra Saeed and others, going back to last year, both the President and Secretary advised Israel not to make a mistake on 9-11, so our response to 9-11.

 

 Is it your assessment that this is, in fact, what Israel has been doing last year?

 

 Yeah, a lot of them.

 

 And then in response to Michelle's question, you said you want the airport in Beirut to stay open and you want access to the airport.

 

 So does that mean that you have complained to the Israelis about this apparent bombing of the road, one of the roads to the airport?

 

 So you don't see UNIFIL as having any role in terms of Israelis going into Lebanon?

 

 This isn't an anti-Israel question.

 

 I'm not suggesting that UNIFIL should be taking action against Israel, but they haven't been able to do it.

 

 So why do you think they're going to be effective now?

 

 I mean, in terms of Hezbollah.

 

 So in his statement on the anniversary of October 7 today, Secretary Blinken specifically mentioned the names of Americans killed by Hamas.

 

 But he did not mention Americans who were killed by Israel since October 7, like Tawfiq Ajaq, Ayşenur Ezgi Eygi.

 

 Why were these Americans not mentioned in the statement?

 

 And is that, you know, does that indicate a different standard for Americans based on who killed them?

 

 Thank you, Merit.

 

 Last week, Iranian-backed groups in Iraq attacked Golan Heights.

 

 They killed two IDF members and injured two dozens.

 

 These attacks and other attacks have brought Iraq to the brink of this conflict.

 

 Have you ever talked to the Iraqi government about these militia groups to stop attacking Israel and making these destabilized actionists?

 

 And why the Iraqi government so far couldn't bring these groups?

 

 So far, Israel has not responded to these groups inside Iraq, but it may one day.

 

 So have you ever requested Israel or advised Israel to not attack these groups inside Iraq in order to prevent the war not spill over to Iraq and shield the Iraqi territory from that?

 

 I'm going to go back to your conversation about U.S. talking to Israel about its retaliation against Iran's attack.

 

 Have you tried, does the administration, has it even tried to dissuade Israel from retaliating?

 

 Matt, just something that you said at the beginning, I think, of the briefing to Kylie.

 

 She was asking specifically about potential IHL violations in terms of Israel's strikes in Lebanon.

 

 And you said, with respect to Gaza, I mean, she asked about that later, but before you said, a limited number of people available to perform those assessments, especially when you look at the number of incidents that's been reported in Gaza.

 

 So, are you – we'll ask you about these potential IHL violations of Israeli offensive since the beginning of Gaza war.

 

 Are you suggesting that US hasn't been able to conclude these assessments because you're short of personnel?

 

 Right.

 

Just to take a step back, American officials, including from this building, had in previous months expressed doubts and concerns that Israel could sustain military engagements on two fronts, in Gaza and in the north.

 

 Has that assessment changed?

 

 Without betraying the confidence of diplomatic conversations, does the U.S. have a clear picture of Israel's goals in the north in terms of how long they might stretch in time or geography?

 

 And vis-a-vis Iran, similarly, without getting into what they might be targeting or what kinds of operations may be considered, does the U.S. have clarity on what Israel is considering doing, especially because steps that they've taken in the past have come with little advanced notice and nonetheless require the U.S. to engage on the deterrence or defensive front thereafter?

 

 Does the U.S. believe that Israel striking nuclear sites would lead to a broader war?

 

 I mean, it's not much – it's not really a hypothetical.

 

 But if there is a chance for Israel to lessen Iran's breakout time from a matter of weeks to a matter of months or years, does that not make them a less potent foe and lessen the likelihood of a regional war?

 

 And last one.

 

 Is there today any sort of messaging from the U.S. that it will condition future arms deliveries to Israel on a circumscribed incursion into the north and a minimizing of civilian casualties there?

 

 Just to follow up on how Israel could potentially respond to the attack that we saw on Tuesday, the President today did leave the door open to Iran going – sorry, excuse me, Israel going after Iran's oil reserves.

 

 Is it the assessment of Biden administration officials that going after those oil reserves would keep this conflict at the simmer that it's at right now?

 

 But certainly there must be a reason that the President feels that one action would be okay and another action would not be.

 

 So can you just help us understand the thinking of that?

 

 I wanted to come back to the sort of – the situation on the ground in Lebanon.

 

 So obviously, these American citizens seeking the flights out, they're being caused to flee by these Israeli actions.

 

 You've talked about what the Israelis have said to the U.S. about limited incursions into southern Lebanon.

 

 But we've sort of seen there's a ground – there is a ground operation and there's also an aerial operation with a lot of bombing going on in Beirut.

 

 How do you kind of characterize what Israel is doing?

 

 Is this a full-scale war against Lebanon as a state broader than – it seems to be broader than just these limited incursions and targeted bombings to take out Hezbollah leaders?

 

 So everything that the Israeli – all the elements of the Israeli operation within what you just said is – those are sort of – those have the green light from the U.S. like, we're okay with this.

 

 This doesn't go beyond – again, red lines is not a word we like to use.

 

 But you talk about a diplomatic solution, but what's going on at the moment is a war, right?

 

 How long does Israel need to continue those operations, or how long is it okay for them to keep this kind of level of attacks up?

 

 Do they have an endgame?

 

 Do the Israelis have an endgame?

 

 But in the case of Gaza, which was not that long ago, Matt, you were pressing the Israelis to plan a revision for governance for what comes next.

 

 Are you doing that the same in the north?

 

 You said the Israelis don't know what's going to happen.

 

 Is it okay for a country using U.S. weapons to go into a conflict with no way out?

 

 You said that the Secretary is in contact with the Israeli, and you've been in contact with the Lebanese officials.

 

 According to many Lebanese officials, that there has no communication with them since the assassination of the Secretary General of Hezbollah.

 

 You specifically spoke about the role of the state, the army, and other factors.

 

 Can we now conclude that you are waiting to see what unfolds on the ground before making any decisions?

 

 I mean, who you are in contact with.

 

 And my question is also on what you said.

 

 You know, you say that you support Israel's limited encouraging and so on.

 

 You support this operation, but — and you are, in a way, reconciled to the fact that this war could blow way out of proportions, citing what happened in 1982 and encouraging that it went on to be an 18-year occupation and so on.

 

 So which is it?

 

 I mean, are you reconciled to this fact or do you want to push for a diplomatic solution right now, I mean, before things get out of hand?

 

 Now, on the issue of the war in Gaza, I mean, you always say Israel's right to defend itself, and that's fine.

 

 A sovereign state can defend itself.

 

 But also, Israel uses the euphemism or the pretext, whatever you want to call it, of saying that there are human shields and so on.

 

 So conceivably, these are not — MR.

 

 As you said in the run-up to your question, the Palestinian nation is facing an ongoing terrorist threat.

 

 Hopefully it will change.

 

 Yesterday I asked you about the six first responders who were killed.

 

 Today the total number is 97 of people who are trying to help others have been killed.

 

 So do you believe that Israel is taking every precaution to avoid people like first responders, doctors, people on the front line who are trying to help people who are wounded or evacuated?

 

 A Lebanese health minister said today that Israel accusing Lebanon of hiding rockets in hospital is pure propaganda.

 

 Does the U.S. assess that actually there are rockets or no rockets in hospitals in Lebanon, which we heard in Gaza?

 

 Sure, because they give us assessment of other things.

 

 One following question, so I give others a question – the chance to answer.

 

 There was a clip that has been circulating on the social media that your former colleague Ben Rhodes has retweeted, and that's of Prime Minister Netanyahu testifying in Congress 22 years ago, saying basically – and I'm sure you saw it or maybe you will see it – if we get rid of Saddam Hussein, everything, the whole Middle East will be great.

 

 And we know how the Middle East turned out to be.

 

 So do you see a scenario now where Netanyahu saying, if we just get rid of Hezbollah and Hamas, the whole Middle East will be great?

 

 Do you see similarities between the two historical variables?

 

 Can I just press you a bit more on this – the reports of this strike on – in Bashura in Beirut overnight, which is a very residential area, reportedly has the Islamic Health Organization, in which local reports say nine people were killed.

 

 I mean, have you got any assessment on that or any more information?

 

 Because it feels like the phenomenon we saw in Gaza of health care facilities being targeted may now be happening in Lebanon.

 

 And so the bar under international humanitarian law is extremely high.

 

 So I wondered if – how closely you're looking at this and what conversations you're having with the Israelis about it.

 

 Well, I think it's important to ask the accountability question.

 

 I mean, Article 9 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, you talk about protection ceasing if it's used for hostile intent.

 

 But that is only after due warning has been given, naming in all appropriate cases a reasonable time limit, and after such warning has remained unheeded, the fact that sick or wounded members of the armed forces and nurses in these hospitals shall not be considered to be acts harmful to the enemy.

 

 So even if it is a Hezbollah-linked organization, the medics are there treating potential militants, whatever, that's still not high enough bar to attack it.

 

 And once it is attacked, there has to be a huge amount of warning given and enough time for people to leave.

 

 So I ask the question because are you getting a sense from the Israelis that they're doing that?

 

 And we've seen this one here.

 

 But I'm not asking about the Israeli – I – yeah, no, no, but it is a question about where it's going to go.

 

 I'm not going to publicly — I'll rephrase.

 

 Today, an Iranian official told Al Jazeera that the Iranian Government passed messages to you, to U.S. Government, via Qatar, that they don't want a regional war, but they want you to contain – and I'm quoting here – the Israeli insanity in the region, and that their self-restraint is no longer required only of them.

 

 It should be mutual.

 

 Did you receive such messages, and do you have any comments?

 

 My last question is today the President said that he doesn't – nothing will happen today, on Thursday, about the Israeli retaliation.

 

 Is that something based on assurances from Israel, or it's just a guess?

 

 So has the U.S. Government received any messages directly or indirectly from Iran about what they might do next if Israel retaliates?

 

 On this map, how would you view the Iranian President's visit to Qatar a day after they launched the 200 missiles to Israel?

 

 A Yezidi woman was freed after being trafficked to Gaza.

 

 What role did the U.S. play in her rescue?

 

 And the circumstances of her captivity seem undoubtedly horrific, but can you explain why the U.S. chose to intervene in this particular case?

 

 Is that the only case that you're aware of that the Yazidi girls are in Gaza and in that area?

 

 Because there are about 2,600 Yazidis that are missing, and I'm sure that the U.S. government is helping the Iraqi government to rescue them.

 

 Another question on the Iranian attack.

 

 After President Biden said today they are discussing a possible Israeli strike on Iranian oil facilities, the Iranian UN mission said anyone who is helping Israel attack Iran would be an illegitimate target for Iran.

 

 So on yesterday, the Iranian president said that we are not seeking a war, but if Israel is spawning gas and attacking us, we will attack them harder.

 

 So how do you see these comments?

 

 Is that something that you are taking or looking at when you are calculating a response to Iran?

 

 So have you seen this report from the Times of Israel this morning and a few other outlets that the Lebanese military for the first time has been involved in a direct shooting conflict with Israeli forces?

 

 And in general, you've spoken, I think earlier this week, a few times about the rights of sovereign nations to defend themselves.

 

 Where does that play into Lebanon?

 

 And at what point does Lebanon have a right to say, you're on our territory, you need to leave?

 

So I think this probably goes on silence just to make sure we're getting it.

 

 So in terms of what happened, is there any damage to U.S. facilities?

 

 And then, both you and the National Security Advisor, you were talking about the unacceptable escalation.

 

 But does the administration see anything that Israel has done over the course of the last three weeks in the hospital?

 

 Given that the Secretary and the National Security Advisor just said that this attack by Iran is sort of definitively escalatory in nature, I know that State, you've been telling us, the Secretary even told us that for months you've been encouraging the Israelis not to respond to attack and provocation in such a way that escalates anything further.

 

 Is the Secretary going to continue to offer that same advice to the Israelis now in the wake of the ceasefire?

 

 The Iranian foreign ministry people have said that they gave the U.S. a heads up in advance of these missile strikes today through diplomatic channels.

 

 Given, you're not going to detail what the consequences are going to look like yet, understandably by their own conversations with the Israelis about that.

 

 Can you give us a sense for how U.S. officials are thinking about this right now in terms of magnitude of a response?

 

 Will it be more severe than the U.S. response to the Iranian attack on Israel in April?

 

 How much more worried are you about a regional war today than you were in previous days before this attack occurred?

 

 Just a few more questions.

 

 Is Iran's nuclear program a legitimate target for an Israeli response?

 

 Any other countries involved in defending Israel alongside the United States?

 

 There have been a lot of parallels drawn between Iran's attacks on Israel we saw in April and what happened today.

 

 The big difference is that back in the spring, Iran did message for weeks the kind of attack it was going to carry out against Israel, as opposed to this time around it seemed to be very sudden by comparison.

 

 That lack of warning, public messaging, do you read into that?

 

 Is there any diplomatic significance?

 

 I know you're going to have conversations with your Israeli counterparts about what their response will be, but can you say anything about – are the discussions happening now?

 

 Have Israeli officials laid out any potential options for retaliation?

 

 And just to clarify, I understand consultations are ongoing with the Israelis.

 

 What does the U.S. believe is the right course of action now, a response or diplomacy?

 

 And in previous instances, it had become known that part of the way, as you mentioned, the U.S. deterred Iran from taking action was through diplomacy, including the pushing of the potential of ceasefire talks, a potential breakthrough in Gaza.

 

 That seems remote now.

 

 What is the status of ceasefire talks either in Gaza or in Lebanon that the U.S. had been pushing in the weeks prior to these developments?

 

 Is it your understanding that that was one of the reasons that they decided to do that?

 

 Sorry, that's Gaza.

 

 But given the fact that you've been informing the world and the Israelis of this information, was there any effort to – other than the public statements – to reach out to the Iranians to say, don't do this?

 

 And the – I think the Iranian mission to the UN has talked about – they did send some message.

 

 I'm not sure whether it's before – minutes before or after the missiles were launched or – is there anything you can tell us about when that was received and sort of the nature of that message?

 

 Matt – I mean, in your answer to Matt and also during this 12 months, you've been always saying that your main goal in this conflict is not to – for it to spread to a regional war.

 

 And I believe now we are maybe one step further from a regional war.

 

 But do you think that your way of trying to contain it through your diplomatic means, by drawing boundaries and lines to Israel, that if you cross this, this will escalate into this war or that war, and the Israeli prime ministers keep crossing those lines, keeps escalating in the region, whether it is in Gaza with the Philadelphi Corridor or in Lebanon?

 

 First, the – you advised against major operation in Lebanon.

 

 You advised against ground incursions in Lebanon.

 

 It happened.

 

 But don't you see that maybe you are enabling the Israelis to seek, when you say their own interests and their own way of thinking, by risking or going against your interests as the United States of going toward a regional war?

 

 My last question is just – there's some statements coming from Tehran that they waited so long after Haniyeh was assassinated in Tehran because they received messages from the United States that something will happen regarding the ceasefire in Gaza, and this maybe will give them a way of not responding to Israel, and this did not happen.

 

 Did you give them those messages?

 

 You're saying that Hamas has rejected – or Hamas is obstinate about the ceasefire talks.

 

 I just want to understand what you're saying.

 

 Has Israel engaged in a meaningful way?

 

 We're talking about the proposal in Gaza.

 

 Just to follow up, although Hamas did accept the proposal as was suggested by the President on May 31.

 

 They accepted.

 

 They keep saying we accepted wholly.

 

 Yeah, but, you know, a couple of things on this point.

 

 I mean, you mentioned that Israel has a right to go after terrorist leaders and kill them and so on.

 

 Israel has been doing this for decades.

 

 They've killed scores of Palestinian leaders, scores of Lebanese leaders and so on.

 

 Has that in any way really listened to the conflict, resolved the issue, brought peace to the region, arrived at resolutions of the conflict?

 

 Do you believe that what Israel is doing now is basically – makes it safer?

 

 Okay, let me ask you – just shift gears on the aid issue.

 

 ProPublica published a report saying that Israel deliberately blocked humanitarian aid to Gaza and there were two U.S. government bodies that told that to the Secretary of State, but he basically rejected it.

 

 And in fact, he told Congress that he – that in fact Israel was allowing aid to go in.

 

 On the Israeli raids into Lebanon, just first of all, do you have any updates on your assessment of what's happening in the ground if these remain limited as has been described?

 

 I think the Israelis have spoken about these going back some way in time as well, actually.

 

 And you talked about this combination of deterrence and diplomacy, and you're going to be consulting with the Israelis in terms of the response to Iran.

 

 Are both of those things that you're talking about important in your discussions with the Israelis now, both deterrence and diplomacy?

 

 And on the point about... I just want to sort of get you to reflect on where you were at last week at the United Nations, a joint call with a number of countries urging restraint, de-escalation, a 21-day truce.

 

 Where we are now and what we've just seen happening in the region, when you reflect on sort of what has changed or what went wrong, if I can put it like that, for your own strategic position, what is the reason behind the complete difference in what you were aspiring to last week and where we're at now?

 

 And when you said just finally that, I think, which I don't think I've heard you say before, but you described Israel as expanding the conflict in these actions, and you also then said that doesn't – you talked about the death of Nasrallah, and perhaps we're also alluding to Haniyeh, I don't know, but when you said that terrorists are killed, it doesn't mean we always agree with the way they do it.

 

 Is that something you'd apply to either of these cases?

 

 Is he going to be speaking with any Israeli officials?

 

 So he has had – is it accurate to say that he has had conversations today with Israeli officials?

 

 All right.

 

 And then I'm going to ask you to tell me what you're going to do or not to do.

 

 Matt, on – so on those conversations, and you said they told us those are limited operations, has – does the U.S. have some sort of a red line or an ideal description of success for Israel's operations that it's sort of talking with Israel?

 

 Like, this comes across as, like, pretty open-ended.

 

 I'm trying to understand whether U.S. is trying to limit it to – I mean, how will you know that these are limited incursions?

 

 How will you ensure it doesn't sort of escalate further?

 

 So it's interesting that now you're saying we want to ultimately see a diplomatic resolution to this as opposed to last week when United States and France called for a ceasefire in Lebanon.

 

 So the United States at this point is no longer calling for a ceasefire in Lebanon?

 

 So is that 21-day ceasefire proposal still on the table with the Israelis?

 

 Can you clarify or can you help us understand what exactly U.S. is doing right now if that 21-day ceasefire proposal is still on the table?

 

 Like what are you exactly doing to sort of diplomatically end this?

 

 What is the Secretary doing or what is the White House doing?

 

 Because from what it sounds like, from what you're saying, is last week, for example, a U.S. official and I believe senior other U.S. officials have said they disagreed with Israel's argument to escalate, to de-escalate.

 

 Now it – you don't sound like you're disagreeing with that anymore.

 

 You're talking about how military pressure could yield to some sort of a diplomatic resolution.

 

 So I just want to understand what are you doing diplomatically?

 

 On the – on what comes after a diplomatic resolution for the current conflict, are you able to just give us a little bit more about the long-term strategy on what happens with Lebanon now, given that there is a bit of a power vacuum in the country?

 

 Is this something that you – that the U.S. has longer-term planning for?

 

 Is this something that has caught the U.S. off guard in terms of having to work with allies to plan now for the future of Lebanon?

 

 Is there something you can give us in terms of, like, understanding the U.S.'s role in this next step for Lebanon?

 

 On the talks last week on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York, was there any – would you describe it as a miscommunication between the Israelis and the U.S. about a ceasefire being something that they would also want to work towards, or is that – So I don't think I want to characterize it.

 

 Can I just ask a last one on Gaza?

 

 There was reporting in the Israeli press a few days ago about Yair Sinwar, that there wasn't any communication with him in the last couple of weeks.

 

 The Secretary also spoke about this last week, saying that Hamas is not engaging right now.

 

 Can you give us any update on the efforts there, talks?

 

 Is that the – is it – is that the focus of U.S. diplomatic efforts right now, or are you also pursuing other diplomatic solutions to what we're seeing between Hezbollah and It is the focus of our efforts, linked, of course, as we made clear when we made the proposal in the first place, to a broader diplomatic resolution.

 

 And to be clear, you've still not received a direct Israeli response to that proposal because Netanyahu first threw cold water on it, then his office put out a statement with some openness to a U.S. role in bringing down tensions there but not responding to the proposal.

 

 So we don't know what Israel's response still is to that.

 

 And then when we watch what Israel's doing here, they're saying they're open to a diplomatic solution but they continue to forge ahead with these incursions into Lebanon.

 

 Is it the U.S. view that it is productive for them to be continuing to carry out their military campaign against Hezbollah while you're trying to find a diplomatic solution?

 

 Mattias Naim Qassem went out and said today that they will not stop attacks.

 

 They will continue.

 

 But the Lebanese prime minister, he said we are ready.

 

 After meeting the speaker, we are ready to implement the 1701.

 

 We are ready to send the army to the borders and elect a new president.

 

 I know there's a lot of things changing in Lebanon at this moment, but is there a room to avoid a military operation in Lebanon?

 

 I mean, what are you asking for?

 

 Are you asking now for Hezbollah to go and say we withdraw from the border, we will implement the 1701 so you can put pressure on the Israeli?

 

 Do you think there's a room with the Israeli government, this government, to stop, to avoid a ground operation?

 

 Israeli – So anyway, why have you then been providing the Lebanese armed forces with hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars, if they haven't been doing what you want them to Look, we continue to work to try to increase stability inside Lebanon.

 

 But you also haven't given up on the LAF either, right?

 

 So just to follow up on that question, if you're not giving up on the LAF and the Israelis are targeting Hezbollah, but then how they are targeting them also is questionable.

 

 But the thing is, regarding the infrastructure and the institutions in Lebanon, is there a kind of warning from the U.S. Government that they should not target, for example, the airport, the port, the LAF?

 

 And one more question.

 

 The Israeli prime minister also said that he wants to change the face of the Middle East, and he was addressing the Iranian people.

 

 So what do you read in this speech?

 

 Because he made this speech before also his operations in Lebanon.

 

 Just wanted to follow up on what you were saying a moment ago, because you've spoken a lot about the security issues for both Israel and Lebanon and sort of, you know, across the border in a state on state sense.

 

 But what about how concerned are you about stability within Lebanon, both politically and socially?

 

 You know, we know that this is a country with a very fragile sectarian makeup.

 

 We've now had a huge shock to that, given what the Israelis have done over the last week or two, you know, which compounds a series of very significant shocks for that country over the last years, from a financial crisis to the Bay Report explosion and so on.

 

 So what's your assessment on what all this does to Lebanon internally?

 

 And to follow up on the points about, I mean, you were asked a lot about your demands or your calls rather for a ceasefire last week.

 

 But you did more than that because you were calling for restraint repeatedly.

 

 And the US was leading the diplomatic charge at the United Nations on this.

 

 What we have definitely not seen is restraint.

 

 And you talked about a ceasefire involving two sides.

 

 But on this, we have seen a very sharp escalation by the Israelis.

 

 So your call for restraint has failed.

 

 But it's just all those things were true.

 

 You know, we've seen the Hezbollah rocket fight for many, many months.

 

 What we've had in the last week or two is the killing of more than a thousand people, according to Lebanese officials, in these Israeli strikes.

 

 More than a million people displaced, according to the United Nations.

 

 I mean, that's a huge game-changing escalation.

 

 And last week you were calling for restraint.

 

 So I'm just sort of asking the question about whether or not you think you got restraint or your calls were heeded.

 

 And just on that point about displacement, I mean, I mentioned the UN saying more than a million people in Lebanon.

 

 I mean, many have had to flee across the border into Syria.

 

 Are you happy, I'll rephrase the question, given the way in which much of this was done involving warnings delivered by mobile phone from the Israelis for people to leave their homes in the middle of the night, for example, is this process in compliance with international humanitarian law and the way it's been done?

 

 And are you worried about pulling resources from those who have been displaced in Gaza as a result of this mounting humanitarian problem?

 

 You said that Israel has indicated that the ground operations are limited at this time, that it doesn't preclude a ground invasion, and there are experts inside and outside the U.S. Government that say Israel appears poised for a ground invasion.

 

 Is that not what you see?

 

 And if I could follow up on what you were talking about earlier.

 

 Netanyahu is actually expanding the war.

 

 So despite U.S. calls for diplomacy, as you mentioned earlier, ceasefire, he's expanding it not just into Lebanon but also into Yemen.

 

 Is it safe to say that he's simply ignoring U.S. concerns?

 

 Can I have one follow-up on Lebanon, and I will have one more question on the region?

 

 You said Israelis told you that this is a limited operation.

 

 Can you elaborate more on that?

 

 Like what is – how do you define a limited operation and how do you define a major operation?

 

 And today marks the fourth week since the killing of Turkish-American activist Ayşenur Ezgi Eygi by Israeli forces in the West Bank.

 

 Do you have any updates on the investigation?

 

 And have they given you any timeline?

 

 I want to follow up on the limited ground operation.

 

 You don't want to define it, but what you are against – I mean, are you against the Israelis staying in south Lebanon?

 

 Are you against another occupation?

 

 I know you don't want to define the limited operation.

 

 What we're seeing in Lebanon, we saw a similar pattern with regards to Rafah.

 

 First, the U.S. is saying that they wouldn't want to see Israel conducting major operations, then Israel going ahead with what they called limited operations, and then this continued tolerance of sort of day-to-day attacks.

 

 That has led to over 44 percent of all buildings in Rafah being either destroyed or damaged, according to satellite photos, which is to say that there might not have been a major operation in Rafah, but there was cumulative attacks that led to a good deal of destruction.

 

 So how does this precedent of Rafah portend for Lebanon?

 

 But was that the case with Rafah?

 

 For instance, not just in Rafah, but in – We've never wanted – hold on.

 

 Well, okay.

 

 Well, what about the ceasefire?

 

 But so, for instance, other UN satellite image shows that 66 percent of Gaza structures have been damaged.

 

 And you earlier today said that the U.S. supports the targeting of terrorist infrastructure, not civilian infrastructure.

 

 Does the U.S. believe 66 percent of Gaza's buildings are terrorist infrastructure?

 

 And then finally, a few weeks ago the U.S. ambassador to the UN said, quote, I do not believe that Palestinians as they exist right now have all the elements to give it statehood.

 

 What do you think – which elements are Palestinians missing?

 

 And do you think the U.S. continual and unconditional support to bomb Gaza and Palestine supports reaching those elements?

 

 So guys, when you just done that, you said the Palestinian Authority – one of the defects or shortcomings is the PA doesn't have control over Gaza.

 

 Do you think that the PA has effective governing control over the West Bank?

 

 Some of it?

 

 I want to follow up regarding the civilian casualties in Lebanon.

 

 During the past week, Israel targeted many residential buildings in heavy airstrikes, and one of them, 33 people were killed in Bekaa.

 

 Israel always is claiming that there are Hezbollah members there.

 

 How is the U.S. not condemning or finding it normal that a whole building can be targeted only for one person, even if kids are being torn to pieces?

 

 We do not – And sometimes we don't see a Hezbollah member after – in that building after it was, like, hit by an airstrike.

 

 Yeah, but they are not doing a better job.

 

 We saw it in Gaza, and we're seeing it again in Lebanon.

 

 There's always a lot of civilian casualties.

 

 There are always kids that are being targeted, aid workers being targeted.

 

 So they're not doing their best job.

 

 Over the last few hours, Israel has been striking not only in Dahi, the suburbs, but also in Kola, which is inside Beirut for the first time.

 

 It's an area, Kola, that it's a connection point to the airport where there is many foreigners, not just Lebanese people, people from many sects.

 

 So it's not just Hezbollah.

 

 Are you concerned about this more recent strike?

 

 And is it time to ask – are you in coordination with Israel about whether – what is a red line, what is not a red line, where to strike and bomb?

 

 Because there is U.S. citizens in Lebanon, and that's an area frequently.

 

 Can we switch to Lebanon?

 

 We're seeing increasing escalations there.

 

 The Israeli Defense Forces say they are launching strikes there.

 

 Gallant has mentioned a new front.

 

 And what is your response to the fact that it seems the Israelis are trying to escalate this to another front in the war?

 

 And then I'm curious, is the U.S. still prepared to back Israel if they are to escalate this on a northern front?

 

 You don't want any party to escalate it?

 

 I mean, for example, today when Nasrallah was speaking, there were Israeli jets breaking the sound barrier over Beirut.

 

 Are those escalatory actions?

 

 Just to get a step back, perhaps, when you're saying you want de-escalation, how dangerous is it right now in Lebanon?

 

 I mean, what have you seen in recent days?

 

 So just to follow up on Jenny's questions, if Israel invades Lebanon, will the U.S. continue to stand by Israel?

 

 It's well within the realm of possibility.

 

 Will the U.S. get involved and continue to back Israel?

 

 Yeah, I mean, it's also factual that it's the Israeli Prime Minister who keeps putting in new terms.

 

 Let me ask you just a couple of things, and then you respond to Daphne on.

 

 Now U.S. officials don't believe that Israel is preparing to invade Lebanon.

 

 You don't believe that Israel will invade Lebanon?

 

 Okay, some are saying that they don't believe it.

 

 Let me deal with this from a different angle.

 

 Do you believe that Israel is preparing to invade Lebanon?

 

 Let me just have a couple more questions with indulgence from my colleagues.

 

 Israel is blocking about over 40% of food assistance into Gaza, according to the HuffPost.

 

 Are you aware of these statistics?

 

 And can you update us on the latest level of USA to Gaza?

 

 But you are keeping tabs on the level of aid that goes out?

 

 Is it at the same level as it was when the peer was there, or less or more?

 

 I wanted to ask you about normalization.

 

 Yesterday or the day before, the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, MBS, said there will be no, they will not recognize Israel without a Palestinian state.

 

 So do you feel that now, you know, we're getting so close to the election?

 

 This effort to normalize, it will be dropped by this administration?

 

 Can you put any meat on the bones to the sort of urgency to try to calm tensions between Lebanon and Israel?

 

 Are there any sort of calls or U.S. government travel you can read out at all?

 

 There are some reports that the Pentagon secretary is no longer going to visit this weekend.

 

 And calling for calm has been sort of a routine recital by the administration.

 

 Do you have any response to criticism that the U.S. calling for calm while continuing to arm Israel is not a successful strategy for reducing tensions?

 

 It just seems like when the U.S. is visiting in the region, there are escalations that happen sometimes by Israel's enemies, oftentimes by Israel, that seem to catch U.S. officials by surprise.

 

 And it would seem to raise questions about the competency of U.S. policy.

 

 Because, I mean, there has been some reporting that there was a call from the Israelis to say that something was going to happen in Lebanon on Tuesday.

 

 Do you have any comment on that report?

 

 Okay.

 

 Why is it too soon to tell whether or how these incidents may have affected ceasefire talks in Gaza?

 

 Have you not heard from other parties, whether Hamas, the Egyptians, or the Qataris, that it was at least counterproductive to the facilitation of these talks?

 

 So, you've heard no objections or complaints or reluctance from other parties to continue those conversations so long as what's happening in northern Israel and Lebanon is happening?

 

 And the expectation that a bridging proposal may come, I mean, US officials have been saying it could come sort of any day for the past several weeks.

 

 Is there any update to that timing?

 

 Does the Israeli government agree with the US that the only way to settle or to arrive at sort of a calmer situation in the north is by arriving at a ceasefire related to Gaza first?

 

 But, I mean, based on your conversations, diplomatic engagements with the Israelis, is it the US's view that that is how they are proceeding?

 

 A diplomatic resolution writ large.

 

 Since you brought up what Nasrallah said today- Since I- You brought up what Nasrallah said today- About the- Yeah.

 

 He said that Western countries reached out to them after the attack and they said, stop the attacks against Israel and everything goes back to normal.

 

 Now, we know where the talks, the ceasefire talks with Hamas and we know that the talks you have with the corridor and the prisoners.

 

 When it comes to Lebanon, he said that the Western countries offered them that stop the attacks and everything goes back to normal.

 

 Now, for- they said no, not before ceasefire in Gaza.

 

 But for the Israeli, it is not the same.

 

 I mean, they said they want to change the status quo.

 

 They want to change the situation.

 

 So where things stand here, there's a misunderstanding.

 

 What Hezbollah wants and what the Israeli want.

 

 And what are you offering for what?

 

 Nasrallah also said in case of a ground military operation by the Israelis, Hezbollah will operate inside Israel.

 

 He said he threatened that there will be operations inside the settlement.

 

 You've been saying that a military operation also won't bring the Israeli citizens back to the north.

 

 So do you assess that Hezbollah is able to execute what Nasrallah said today?

 

 Because my question goes to that.

 

 You're still assessing and you're still calling diplomatically that everybody should de-escalate, but things on the ground are moving in the opposite direction.

 

 Israel is moving troops to the north.

 

 Hezbollah today said that what Israel did on Tuesday is a declaration of war.

 

 And am I fair to you if I assess from all the answers that you give to my colleagues here that you're kind of helpless?

 

 Like, we're going to call upon them?

 

 Whether they want to listen to us or not is up to them.

 

 But I mean, you just answered Heba's question about that if Hezbollah ceased attacking Israel, you will press Israel to cease attacking them.

 

 And what information have you gathered so far?

 

 Obviously, it doesn't take much guesswork who the most likely culprit would be in terms of doing this, in terms of who the enemy of Hezbollah is.

 

 Do you have any indications that – to doubt that it would be Israel that was behind the – I don't have any assessment to offer one way or other at this point.

 

 And I know you're saying that, but in terms of what this means, I mean, there's been for a number of weeks the talk of dialing down or at least not having a retaliation from Iran over sort of a tit-for-tat, if you will.

 

 How does this play into it?

 

 Is there any message that you're sending to Israel in terms of what to do next, or perhaps to Iran, to Hezbollah, in terms of how to respond to this?

 

 Just a couple of follow-ups on that, Matt.

 

 So how concerned are you about escalation now after this attack?

 

 So how do you see this incident impact the Gaza ceasefire talks, then?

 

 A couple of other – a couple of things more.

 

 Hezbollah has accused Israel of sort of launching this attack.

 

 You said you were gathering information.

 

 Is there anything in that information that would lead you to sort of reject that accusation?

 

 Are you trying to make an assessment, though?

 

 Like, in your gathering of information, are you going to be able to offer an assessment tomorrow or the next day?

 

 One final thing.

 

 Regardless of this incident, although it's a little bit hard to sort of leave that aside right now, but over the past couple of days we have heard Prime Minister Netanyahu especially talk about how unsustainable it is in the north, in the border, and last night the cabinet basically said military action would be needed to allow thousands of residents to go back to their homes.

 

 They've effectively expanded the objectives of the war.

 

 So is the – does the United States see military action from Israel more likely in light of that?

 

 How are you gathering that information?

 

 Do you expect to have an independent U.S. assessment to follow on Humera's question?

 

 And have you been in touch with any Lebanese or Israeli officials?

 

 Because I understand the Secretary is in Cairo specifically speaking on discrete topics with the Egyptians, but are the Qataris and Israelis going to be looped in as part of these discussions?

 

 I have one more on Ukraine for later.

 

 I know that you don't want to comment on what's happening, but till now the figures – we don't know the accurate figures of what happened in Lebanon.

 

 Some are talking about three thousands, four thousands.

 

 We have civilians and there also the Iranian ambassador, also sons of members of parliament from Hezbollah blocs.

 

 Do you – I mean, the question, do you think that this is a legitimate target for any party to do that, whether it's Israel or someone else?

 

 Because there are Hezbollah targets in this, if it's attack or incident or whatever you want to call it.

 

 Okay, Matt.

 

 And you were also saying that it's hard to achieve a diplomatic solution on the northern front with – between Hezbollah and Israel unless we have a ceasefire in Gaza.

 

 This would be more helpful.

 

 Also Hezbollah is saying the same, but the Israeli wants to change their situation, the current – they don't want to go to October 6th.

 

 They want to change the current situation, not the same way it was before October 7th.

 

 They don't want Hezbollah fighters on the borders.

 

 They want like a buffer zone.

 

 I mean, are you able to achieve that?

 

 One more question on this, but the Israeli argument is that we cannot – I mean, if we keep the situation as it was on October 6th, we are just – we cannot prevent another October 7th from the northern borders.

 

 Do you believe this is an accurate assessment by them?

 

 Again, as Heba said, you don't want to talk about it because you don't have any assessment yet, U.S. assessment, but things on the ground are moving.

 

 Hezbollah already is accusing Israel of doing – of considering this incident as an attack.

 

 The Israelis are putting their relative forces in high alert.

 

 There are some reports that Israel will declare soon that the northern front is the main front in this war.

 

 Do you still believe that your influence is capable of holding this conflict from not exploding into a regional war?

 

 Because it seems that it's slipping from your hands.

 

 But I mean, you say it's not a question for the United States.

 

 But don't you see that you are putting your both hands on this conflict and not allowing somebody else to take any actions to pressure Israel?

 

 You're not allowing the UN Security Council to put any pressure, any other countries or international agency in the world who will criticize Israel with an action.

 

 You will go against them.

 

 So you are actually holding this conflict with two hands and not allowing others to act.

 

 But just to make the point, to play devil's advocate here, when those countries tell you that maybe you should do something by toning down your support for Israel, you say, no, that's not just going to – that's just not going to happen.

 

 I want to ask you, what kind of message is Israel sending by doing this attack today, while a high level American envoy doing this to do precisely the opposite of what they did?

 

 What kind of message are they sending?

 

 I want to understand further.

 

 I know.

 

 I mean, I'm just following up on that point.

 

 So, because Israel has like a tradition of doing that.

 

 I mean, every time there's a high level American visitor, they either increase settlement or they attack or they increase their attacks and do things like this.

 

 So obviously, they're not really interested in what you're calling for diplomacy.

 

 Isn't that true?

 

 I mean, I just want to, I'm talking about not the incident itself, but the pattern in which Israel has been, you know, basically well known for, for over many, many years.

 

 I mean, we all remember when President Biden was vice president, he went there for the first time, and they had this, you know, announcement of settlements and so on.

 

 There is, you know, sort of a tradition.

 

 Okay, so let me go take you back to the legitimacy of targets and so on.

 

 Yesterday, a group of settlers attacked a school in Jericho.

 

 They beat up the students, they broke their bones, they beat up the teachers and so on.

 

 Are they a legitimate target?

 

 Should they be a legitimate target by the same kind of definition that in which you have defined the other targets?

 

 I know that you can, you know, in years past, you designated the group as a terrorist organization.

 

 Should, you know, armed settlers like this, you know, that you keep sanctioning and so on, be also named as terrorist organizations?

 

 A couple more questions.

 

 Now, yesterday, there were a group of UN experts that basically called Israel to be a pariah state.

 

 And, you know, they're calling for, of course, a ceasefire and so on.

 

 And, you know, because over what they termed as genocide.

 

 And my question to you is, you know, back on June 10, there was a UN resolution, which you pushed for, which, you know, you, you know, basically made a good case for 14 people voted for it, or 14 members voted for it in the Security Council, you know, Russia abstained and so on, but the resolution passed.

 

 So why not go back and try to implement this resolution?

 

 Will the President or will the United States take advantage of this UNGA meeting to basically enforce such resolutions?

 

 But although, you know, it seems that the Israeli Prime Minister keep moving the goalposts, he keeps moving the goalposts now, including Lebanon, including this and so on, as to the thing, they're the ones that keep changing the terms of the resolution that Hamas has agreed to, you know, the mediators have agreed to and so on.

 

 And finally, I know you said you don't want to talk about a timetable as far as the new proposal is concerned and so on.

 

 Is it likely to occur between now and, you know, the gathering in New York next week?

 

 Can we go back to the Secretary's travels?

 

 Can you help us understand why he's not going to Israel on this trip, given every other trip to the region since October 7th he has?

 

 And you didn't see it as important to then go to Israel and continue to try to build political pressure around this deal?

 

 And then one more on the American killed in the West Bank.

 

 Has the Israeli government identified which unit in the IDF was responsible for her killing?

 

 Just wanted to follow up on Said's question on the school in the West Bank.

 

 So earlier this year, you announced a policy of sanctioning Israeli settlers who commit violence against Palestinians.

 

 And since then you've sanctioned several settlers.

 

 But you have also said that the establishment of settlements themselves in the West Bank is inconsistent with international law.

 

 And since these settlements that house extremist settlers are considered to be illegal, why aren't any of these sanctions placed on the illegal settlements themselves?

 

 Why isn't there a policy of sanctioning illegal settlements?

 

 But if you consider them to be illegal, and they are establishing more settlements as we speak, why not sanction the—since they are illegal?

 

 And also Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant reportedly during his meeting with Amos Hochstein, he said the only way left to return the Israeli residents to the north to their homes is by military action.

 

 Do you have any comment on that?

 

 That sounds like things are not going well with diplomacy.

 

 Is it that the risk is higher?

 

 What's your assessment, the U.S. assessment to that?

 

 Not only Gallant, also Netanyahu said that today he told the U.S. envoy that Israel will do what's necessary to ensure its security and safely return the northern residents to their homes.

 

 In case Israel decides to enter into war with Hezbollah, what would be your position?

 

 Thank you, Matt.

 

 You know, but to follow up on this question, basically Hezbollah said that, you know, the best way to have the people return is basically to achieve a ceasefire in Gaza.

 

 I think they stated that time and time again.

 

 So that's a caveat there.

 

 So going back to what you said to Humayra on the talks and where they are, now it is said that this week you're going to submit a new proposal.

 

 Can you update us on that?

 

 But we are looking at a new proposal sometime.

 

 A couple more questions.

 

 You know, reports say that the medicines in Gaza are just totally empty.

 

 I mean, you know, the stocks of medicines in Gaza are totally empty and the situation is very dire.

 

 Can you update us on your effort, you know, in terms of whether it's a humanitarian aid or medicines and so on?

 

 I mean, especially since the dismantlement or the removal of the pier.

 

 And you think that Israel is doing all it can do to allow supplies in?

 

 Matt, I mean, in the last couple of days or three days, the Israelis killed 88 Palestinians in Gaza.

 

 I mean, it seems that they have exhausted all targets to achieve their goals.

 

 What are their goals at this stage?

 

 Is it just a killing enterprise, just going after the tents and killing people in tents and so on?

 

 And they always have, say, well, they always say there's a Hamas operative and so on.

 

 We never really know the fact.

 

 But is it worth it to keep killing these innocent people to go after maybe one Hamas fighter?

 

 And a couple more on the settlements.

 

 Israel is building a settlement on a historic site as designated by UNESCO.

 

 Are you doing anything to dissuade Israel from building on this very site?

 

 In the Tiyyid next to Bethlehem?

 

 And finally, last week when the Israelis raided the Jenin camp, right outside the camp there's a Hamdan family in a small apartment.

 

 They always take their apartment to be a sniping post and so on.

 

 They ruined the apartment and so on.

 

 They destroyed everything.

 

 But they also stole Ashraf Hamdan, who was 13 years old.

 

 They stole his PlayStation.

 

 You believe that the Israeli army should either give him back his PlayStation or compensate him for that?

 

 The last I looked at was like $207.

 

 So they should either give it back to him or compensate him?

 

 Can I just ask about the West Bank?

 

 Just go back to the killing of American Turkish citizen Ayşenur Ezgi Eygi from last week because the secretary commented on it while he was traveling.

 

 I just want to clarify a couple of things.

 

 So the IDF said effectively that it was an accident, but then we had reporting, namely Washington Post, saying the shots were taken after the peak of the protest.

 

 So there are discrepancies suggesting that perhaps it may not be an accident.

 

 What is the U.S. assessment on how she was killed?

 

 A couple of things there.

 

 When do you anticipate this criminal investigation to conclude?

 

 And is the U.S. considering to launch its own investigation, given she's a U.S. citizen?

 

 And has there been any communication with your Israeli counterparts or IDF since the secretary called for a change in their rules of engagement?

 

 Have they assured you that they will take it seriously and they will make changes?

 

 And just why isn't the U.S. committing to an independent investigation, given that she was a U.S. citizen?

 

 Okay, one final thing.

 

 When you say you guys want this criminal investigation to be conducted promptly, this is the case of a U.S. citizen for sure, but we have had similar back and forths about a number of other incidents where there was civilian harm, and then they disappear from the headlines.

 

 And we don't know what kind of action, if any, or accountability measures have been taken.

 

 So I'm wondering, has the United States set a timetable for when it expects Israel to conclude that?

 

 Like, what do you mean by prompt?

 

 Do you need an answer from them in a couple of weeks, or is it going to be two months?

 

 You said you expect Israel to make changes in their rules of engagement, but actually I remember, actually there was an interview with Rachel Corrie's family last week, and they said, this has been said by Secretary Blinken to Rachel Corrie's family before that, that Israel already promised to make changes to their rules of engagement.

 

 They cited a meeting with Secretary Blinken in 2011.

 

 So considering that, you know, there haven't been any change in their rules of engagement, because I mean, another UN worker was also killed by an Israeli sniper after the killing of Aishah Nusra.

 

 So there's no, it seems like there's no change in Israel's rules of engagement.

 

 Like what steps, what further steps is the U.S. going to take?

 

 Is it, I mean, is just, you know, rule change in their rules of engagement, is that it all the U.S. expects from Israel regarding the killing of their citizen?

 

 And also there have been, you know, criticisms from a lot of people, including Ayşenur's family, that you has, the U.S.'s response to Ayşenur's killing has been very slow.

 

 If I may, just to follow up on this.

 

 You know, when Rachel Corrie was killed, you know, in March 2003, the Israelis came back in 2012.

 

 Then, you know, when Shireen Abu Akleh was killed, you know, in May, and then they came back on July 4th and they said it was unintentional.

 

 And this time around, the Israelis are saying that, you know, it was a bullet that ricocheted and so on, which seems to be accepted in the president.

 

 So is the case closed as far as the U.S. government is concerned?

 

 The White House has not contacted Ayşenur Ezgi's family 10 days out from her killing.

 

 Eyewitnesses themselves tell us that they actually haven't been reached out to for any Israeli-led investigation.

 

 Our colleague is The Washington Post, of course, as you might have seen reported footage and testimony that seem to reveal that the Israeli military misled the U.S. and the world in its initial findings of how and when Aishanour was shot.

 

 When is the president and vice president going to reach out to Ayşenur's family, and how can the U.S. continue deferring to Israel to investigate itself for killing an American if it has already at best misled and at worst lied in its preliminary findings, and how also given it hasn't reached out to eyewitnesses?

 

 But is it not a red flag that the initial findings are already being discredited by testimony and footage?

 

 And then finally, just on what you've said, that the U.S. is urging the Israeli forces to modify, change its rules of engagement after Aishner was killing.

 

 Of course, there's also World Central Kitchen worker Jacob Fliginger, the teenagers, Mohamed Khadour, Tawfiq Abdel-Jabbar, our journalist colleague, Shireen Abu Akleh, peace activist Rachel Corrie, 40,000 Palestinians, which of course you've condemned as well, the killing of them.

 

 The logic would follow that the U.S. has unconditionally funded a military with, evidently, insufficient rules of engagement up to this point.

 

 So is there any U.S. reflection on that idea?

 

 Just to follow up quickly on that, you said that deconfunction isn't perfect.

 

 Is it the U.S. assessment at this point that the Israelis are doing the best that they can, and they've implemented some changes when it comes to deconfliction with NGOs?

 

 And it remains the U.S. assessment at this time that Israel is genuinely working to perfect those deconfliction channels?

 

 The Iraqi government says that the draft deal for the end of the coalition missions in Iraq, is there any deal drafted between you and Iraq to this matter?

 

 I have two more questions on Iraq, if I may.

 

 There are reports that are telling that Iraqi government officials allowed both Hamas and Houthis to open their offices in Baghdad.

 

 While you are requesting Iraq to rein the Iranian-backed groups in Iraq, we see that they are allowing other groups like Houthis to open their offices in Baghdad and establishing their permanent presence in Baghdad.

 

 What is the U.S. position in Israel's insistence to remain in control of the Philadelphi Corridor, which is a fundamental point in the negotiations?

 

 What's happening for the port, the temporary port?

 

 It was built exclusively to provide humanitarian aid and food for the people in Gaza.

 

 We don't hear anything about it.

 

 Is food and humanitarian aid used as a tool to pressure on Hamas?

 

 One question on the killing of Turkish-American activist Ayşenur Ezgi Eygi.

 

 Recent reports dispute Israeli account that she was shot accidentally.

 

 Given what happened with the Shirin Abu Aghles case, is the U.S. reconsidering its stance on the Israeli narrative on this?

 

 And is it still the U.S. position that you are waiting for the results of the Israeli investigation instead of launching a U.S.-led independent investigation as demanded by Ayşenur Ezgi's family?

 

 Just a quick follow-up.

 

 What changes do you expect from Israel and what consequences, will there be any consequences for Israel for killing a U.S. citizen?

 

 Can we go to the West Bank and the killing of an American citizen?

 

 Could you tell us a bit more, after the statement was put out on Friday?

 

 is there any more you can tell us about this incident and what you've been able to find out about it?

 

 You said you're urgently working to get more information.

 

 What does that involve?

 

 Why wouldn't there be an American investigation into the killing of an American?

 

 A lot of people looking at this incident have pointed out what seems to be a double standard or a different treatment of this death, death of an American citizen at the hands of Israeli forces, to other incidents where Americans have been killed in the conflicts in the Middle East or injured.

 

 Obviously, there are different circumstances, but the President, in relation to an attack by Iranian proxies earlier this year, said, if you harm an American, we will respond.

 

 Does that apply in this case, or are we talking about a different standard?

 

 Can I just add a follow-up?

 

 Just the way that you're describing that sounds like you haven't sort of.

 

 obviously you don't know exactly what transpired, but do you have doubt that it was an Israeli bullet?

 

 thank you, Vedan.

 

 So you say you're still seeking more information regarding killing of Ayşenur Ezgi after her killing in the West Bank?

 

 Actually, all the information available indicate that she was killed by an Israeli sniper.

 

 Eyewitnesses say that she was killed by an Israeli sniper.

 

 Autopsy report say that she was shot in the head by an Israeli sniper.

 

 Your NATO ally, Turkey, says that she was murdered by Israel.

 

 So what sort of information you are looking for?

 

 Do you have any doubt that she was killed by Israel?

 

 But you were very quick to determine that Israeli-American Hersh Goldberg was killed by Hamas in Gaza.

 

 And have you ever sought further information regarding his killing?

 

 And why haven't you shown the same quick response and reaction to the killing of Ayşenur?

 

 Vedant.

 

 Do you actually condemn the actual act of killing an American citizen protesting the aggression of, let's say, the Israeli occupation army?

 

 there are protests in Beita every day.

 

 And in fact, 14 have been killed in the last maybe 12 months or so in Beita.

 

 It's a very peaceful protest.

 

 There is never any stones thrown out and so on.

 

 There are actual eyewitnesses that saw exactly what happened.

 

 So do you suspect that maybe there's some entity or some other person that have fired the shot other than an Israeli soldier?

 

 So would you rely on the eyewitness accounts or you just rely on the Israelis?

 

 That's fine, I just wanna take you back.

 

 Because the record, Vedant, is really quite abysmal when it comes to Israel investigating itself on the killing of Americans.

 

 I mean, I can take you back to March 16, 2003, when Rachel Corrie, a Jewish American, was killed by a bulldozer in plain sight of everybody.

 

 And the Israelis only came back with an answer in 2012.

 

 And it was just like, nothing there answer kind of a thing.

 

 And we saw this happen with Omar Assad.

 

 we saw this happen with Shireen Abu Akleh when it was killed, and you guys came out on July 4, 2022 on a holiday, and you said that the intention was not there.

 

 So what is there?

 

 what guarantee do we have that this investigation, this particular investigation, that saw the murder of a 26-year-old American, Ayşenur Ezgi, so we saw her murder, everybody.

 

 there are a lot of accounts and so on.

 

 What guarantee do you have that this will be carried out?

 

 the investigation will be carried out thoroughly, fairly, transparently, and would lead to the proper results as far as you're concerned.

 

 Do we have, I mean, I'm sorry, but let me just, do we have any evidence from the past that Israel actually comes through on these investigations?

 

 My last thing on this.

 

 I mean, when it comes to the Israeli killing of Americans, Americans that are being killed by Israel and their families.

 

 they feel that these Americans are the children of a lesser God.

 

 because Israel is committing the crime, Israel is committing the murder.

 

 is that true?

 

 There are less Americans than, let's say, when Israel commits, it is really the identity of the killer, rather than the identity of the killed, so to speak.

 

 So Israel, no exceptionalism.

 

 You said you look for more information from an independent Israeli investigation.

 

 That's been the same U.S. posture for Hind Rajab, who was killed 224 days ago.

 

 So Ravi's question, how can people, how can Ayşenur's family take an investigation seriously if it's conducted by the perpetrator, and moreover, if they've continued, delayed, and reportedly lied to the U.S. about their investigation into Hind Rajab?

 

 But we've seen now, that's been 224 days since Hind Rajab was killed, and in the same instance, for example, we've seen open source reporting, eyewitness accounts that evidently show a potential human rights violation.

 

 You say, you know, you're pushing for a swift investigation.

 

 Is that through conditioning weapons to Israel?

 

 Sorry, thank you very much.

 

 thank you, colleagues.

 

 To Said's question, the US says it demands respect for press colleagues.

 

 then Israeli forces kill our colleague, Shireen Abu Akleh, and scores of Palestinian journalists.

 

 says it supports aid workers, then Israeli forces kill American Jacob Flickinger and plenty of other aid workers, including Palestinians.

 

 says it condemns illegal settlement activity, and then Israeli forces kill Ayşenur Ezgi, Rachel Corrie, and scores of Palestinians subject to settler violence.

 

 Another New Jersey teacher last month was shot by Israeli forces as he did the same thing Ayşenur Ezgi was doing.

 

 How many more Palestinians and how many more Americans killed, violated, will it take before this administration actually does announce a policy change?

 

 I wanna stay in the West Bank, but I will go to the current escalation there.

 

 And today, the Israeli finance minister put a tweet on X, if that expression is correct now, but he said literally that it's the mission of his life is to create reality on the ground to block any future Palestinian state.

 

 So, I mean, what he means about two-state solution.

 

 he wanna kill it, and during the latest security operations, Israeli security operations in Yemen and then in Nablus, it was accompanied and in parallel by settlers' violence, using of land, et cetera.

 

 I looked through my emails this morning to see if there was any response from the State Department regarding small-states, and I didn't find any.

 

 Are you okay with his statement?

 

 First, do you expect any changes on the Israeli-Hezbollah front, especially that Prime Minister Netanyahu urged his government yesterday to prepare for changing the situation on that front?

 

 On Iraq, should we expect any announcement soon regarding the future of U.S. military presence there?

 

 The Washington Post reported, I believe Friday or Saturday, that the U.S. now, at its assessment, that there will be no ceasefire during this presidency and they are putting on hold whatever new proposals you are working on to both parties and the belief now within the administration that neither Hamas nor Israel are seeking this.

 

 Can you confirm that?

 

 Thank you.

 

 The Israeli foreign minister declared that the force displacement of the people in Gaza should also happen in the West Bank.

 

 Despite of this seriousness statements, we didn't hear any condemnation from US.

 

 Netanyahu again doubled down today saying they would not leave the Philadelphi Corridor.

 

 How do you expect to bridge the gap on this, given his continued insistence that Israeli forces would be there?

 

 What makes you think they'll show any flexibility though, given that Netanyahu again and again insists that there will be a presence in the Philadelphi Corridor?

 

 And when do you expect higher level negotiations or in-person negotiations?

 

 Netanyahu also said he would not change his policies to minimize civilian casualties.

 

 This flies directly in the face of your continued calls for him to stem those civilian casualties.

 

 So how do you intend to hold him accountable to actually stop the civilian casualties?

 

 The U.S. keeps saying that the Israeli government accepted the U.S. proposal, I mean, the President's proposal on May 31st and whatever version comes after that.

 

 But what we hear from Netanyahu today or what is reported by Israeli sources that Netanyahu keeps adding more conditions, keep changing his position all the time.

 

 What is the version here?

 

 Is he accepting it or he is changing his mind all the time?

 

 And I want to go back to the Philadelphi Corridor.

 

 I mean, Netanyahu today, as you noticed, he doubled down that Israel needs to control this area, and this is complicating the negotiation process and also the Egyptian role as a mediator, because Egypt is rejecting that.

 

 Are you trying to give proposals, for example, from the U.S. as solutions for this impasse?

 

 One last question.

 

 Just I want to go to the West Bank.

 

 There's an ongoing Israeli security operation there.

 

 I mean, faded down, but it was for the last four days in Jenin and Tul Karem and other areas.

 

 But at the same time, there was also a settler's movement that seized thousands of donums – I don't know how much is that in square meters or kilometers – in the area.

 

 And as we know from previous attempts, once they seize it, they don't leave it.

 

 They don't get away with it.

 

 I know that the U.S. policy is against it.

 

 You always raise this here on this podium or somewhere else.

 

 But you don't do anything about it.

 

 So what are you going to do to stop this settler's movement inside the West Bank?

 

 Just to follow up on some of the corridor talk that we've had.

 

 You talked about this yesterday a little bit, but in the bridging proposal, the first phase, the language is that the IDF would be removed from densely populated areas.

 

 And you said that includes the Philadelphia Corridor.

 

 In your view, is it possible to evacuate soldiers from all densely populated areas, but still have a military presence all along the border between Gaza and Egypt?

 

 But it's a factual question.

 

 I'm just going to push on that again.

 

 I'm just wondering, again, but have the Egyptians expressed a willingness to go along with a solution that leaves Israeli troops along that crossing?

 

 Just a follow-up on the Philadelphi Corridor.

 

 So Netanyahu has been saying publicly and privately in cabinet meetings that he – the reason he doesn't want to back down on the corridor is that the U.S. supports him on that position.

 

 So can you speak to whether or not what he's saying is correct?

 

 Like does he have U.S. support to not back down on the Philadelphi Corridor?

 

 Is – you talked about a settlement being in everybody's interests.

 

 What you often hear from commentators is that it might not necessarily be in Netanyahu's interest because of his own personal political situation.

 

 What – do you have any assessment from the State Department about whether the prosecutions that he may face or other political repercussions, how that is playing into his intransigence on this question?

 

 I don't know if you saw Thomas Friedman's latest article about the – you know, Netanyahu's playing a U.S. game, and he's pushing back to help Trump.

 

 Do you have any comment on that?

 

 Moving back to the West Bank, there was a footage two days ago showing Israeli bulldozers targeting a group of journalists, including journalists working for TRT and Anadolu, while they were covering Israel raid in Jenin.

 

 Do you have any comment on that?

 

 And generally, you know – and do you have anything to say on the Israeli offensive in the West Bank recently, which is the largest assault over almost two decades?

 

 I have just one follow-up.

 

 So you said Israel has the right to conduct counterterrorism operations, but some human rights groups accuse Israel, actually, of collective punishment in the West Bank, and according to the UN today, thousands of people in the North Shams refugee camp have experienced water cut-offs, and they attributed to damage caused to the water networks, and we have seen many homes and roads have been destroyed by Israeli forces.

 

 So there are footage showing that.

 

 So do you believe that Israel is engaging in collective punishment in the West Bank?

 

 Thank you, Matt.

 

 In light of Hamas recently murdering Israel's six hostages, and the pressure being put on Israel to give up control of the Philadelphi Corridor, I wanted to ask you, why is Israel being expected to make concessions if that will only encourage Hamas to perpetuate further atrocities by rewarding them for bad behavior?

 

 And I have a follow-up.

 

 Additionally, what pressure has the U.S. applied to Qatar to get Hamas to release hostages?

 

 On the fact that you referenced the indictment against Hamas, clearly the State Department, the White House must have been aware that the DOJ was going to unseal this indictment.

 

 Weren't you worried that it may affect the negotiations, the ceasefire negotiations?

 

 I mean, Sinwar is the main remaining person in the indictment and he's also the other side of the negotiation table.

 

 Matt, can you just clarify something technically on the timing of it, though?

 

 Because obviously this came after the news about the hostages on the weekend, but also the DOJ had said on background that it was no longer necessary to seal the indictment and that three of the Hamas leaders are deceased and given, quote, various things that have happened in the region.

 

 Can you just clarify why now, why this happened now?

 

 You've had over 40 Americans who were killed.

 

 But not the Palestinian people?

 

 Last one.

 

 And when do you expect this new proposal, which I presume is not that much different than the last bridging proposal – but correct me if I'm wrong – when do you expect that to be presented to the Israelis and to Hamas?

 

 It's something – Well, like this week and next week, because you keep saying now, now, now.

 

 In light of what the President said over the weekend, does the U.S. Government believe that Prime Minister Netanyahu also share the same level of urgency that you guys have?

 

 One final thing.

 

 Netanyahu last night reiterated again that Israel won't withdraw from the Philadelphi Corridor, which is now the biggest sticking point in this.

 

 And it's also 100 percent at odds with what the Secretary has been saying for months about no reoccupation of Gaza.

 

 I'm particularly interested in how you guys are planning to reconcile that.

 

 On the hangups, it's been well reported that virtually the entire Israeli national security establishment disagrees with the prime minister that maintaining a presence in the Philadelphia corner corridor is a violation of the UN Security Council's recommendations.

 

 So let me say a few things, which I think you'll probably find unsatisfying.

 

 I don't mean it as a political question.

 

 I just mean it empirically.

 

 Like, do you believe the job can be done in the way that the national security establishment in Israel does?

 

 To follow up on Matt's line of questioning about Hamas leaders being brought to justice, I mean, the President said that Hamas leaders will pay for their crimes.

 

 You've walked through what that might look like, but when might that happen considering you need Hamas' leadership's sign-off on a potential hostage and ceasefire deal in the near term?

 

 So when do you expect this justice and payment for crimes to be delivered?

 

 Has the U.S. entertained in any serious way a unilateral agreement with Hamas in order to secure the release of American hostages to the U.S.? Our entire focus has been on securing an agreement to get home all the hostages.

 

 So there's no consideration being given to a sort of unilateral agreement?

 

 I have one more question on the UK's decision to suspend some arms shipments to Israel.

 

 I'm sorry.

 

 Fair.

 

 Has that informed, changed the U.S.'s position on whether international humanitarian rights have been violated in Israel?

 

 Is the U.S. rethinking any of its arms exports?

 

 I mean, obviously, in Israel, they've criticized this.

 

 I mean, how do you – do you see this as part of the international pressure and some sort of message to the Israelis?

 

 Let me just go back to one other thing that you mentioned.

 

 You said a couple of times flexibility is necessary in reaching this.

 

 Prime Minister Netanyahu, his remarks – I mean, beyond just the issue of the Philadelphi Corridor, but he repeatedly said we're not going to – it's not the time for concessions after what happened, after what had lasted.

 

 I mean, do you think there's flexibility, that there's a willingness to flexibility on both sides?

 

 I mean, how did you interpret the Prime Minister's remarks?

 

 Just as a final point, but you say not – of course, the U.S. doesn't believe it's compromising Israel's security, but could there be an issue that they might need to compromise sometimes in the logistics of this, whether it's the Philadelphi Corridor and other things?

 

 Can you put out a list at some point of what the compromises Israel has made, specifically what those compromises are?

 

 Can I just expand off of Olivia's question for one second?

 

 With regard to wanting Hamas to pay for the death of the hostages, can you just help us understand without getting into specific plans, the sequencing that the US envisions happening here?

 

 Do you hope for Hamas to pay first, or do you hope for a deal to come to fruition first?

 

 So essentially, you're pursuing both of those goals, and whichever one comes to fruition first is the one you'll go with?

 

 Sure, but the U.S. hasn't put boots on the ground in Gaza to go after any of those leaders.

 

 So after this weekend, though, it is striking that you guys have repeatedly talked about bringing Hamas to justice and making Hamas pay in recent days.

 

 Is there any change in the way that you pursue that goal?

 

 Would the U.S. consider giving any more resources to Israel to accomplish that goal or putting any boots on the ground, anything like that?

 

 And then to the Philadelphi Corridor, just for a second, it's obviously a central sticking point.

 

 Does it have to be part of the next proposal?

 

 Has Hamas been very clear that without an agreement on the presence in the Philadelphi Corridor, nothing can go ahead?

 

 Or could you guys consider leaving that out of something?

 

 Final question for me.

 

 U.S. elections coming up, have you seen any indication that either side, Israel or Hamas, are looking to those elections and factoring into the way that they approach these talks?

 

 Can I follow up on this?

 

 I have a couple of quick questions.

 

 When Israel called for justice against Hamas leaders, they actually assassinated Ismail Haniyeh.

 

 So when you're calling for justice against Hamas leaders, you're not calling for assassination of the leaders, because that's against U.S. policy.

 

 Just want to clarify that.

 

 Hamas spokesman said that they've been given instruction that if an Israeli military operation is conducted to release hostages, they've been given instruction.

 

 So I assume it's to kill them.

 

 So this is as a result of the operation that the Israeli did in June that resulted in the release of three hostages and the killing of 200 Palestinians.

 

 Do you believe, the administration believe, that hostages can be released in any other way but negotiation?

 

 Yesterday, Netanyahu showed a map when he talked about the Philadelphi Corridor.

 

 It has no West Bank.

 

 It has nothing on it.

 

 Is this kind of normal that he shows a map with just Israel on it?

 

 There's no Palestinian existence?

 

 Just to go back to the UK's decision to limit arms sales to Israel, Prime Minister Netanyahu says that it will embolden Hamas.

 

 I wondered what the US's position on that was.

 

 And also, if you could just give a little bit more insight into why the US disagrees with the UK's position.

 

 Let's go to Gaza then.

 

 I'll talk to my colleagues as well.

 

 But I know that Admiral Kirby over at the White House spoke in length on this today.

 

 But I wanted to ask you, one of the things that he kept saying was that this is the negotiations and the discussions in Doha right now are very much about implementation at this point.

 

 That the broader framework has been agreed.

 

 Could you explain that a little bit?

 

 If I'm not mistaken, Hamas has actually said that we need to implement what the president proposed on May 31.

 

 I know you wouldn't say you're taking the Hamas position on this, but is there a sense that it needs to be implemented, that there isn't room for more negotiations?

 

 And then on Gaza, the health officials there say that this death toll has surpassed 40,000 people.

 

 I was wondering if the State Department has any comment on that.

 

 Thanks.

 

 I know that you've spoken about this yesterday.

 

 I guess I'm just following up to just check that this is still the case that Qatar has said that they will make sure that Hamas participates in this round of talks.

 

 Obviously, we've seen a lot of statements coming from Hamas saying that they won't participate.

 

 We know that they're not meant to be in the room with US and Israeli negotiators to begin with.

 

 So it doesn't seem like there's a whole lot of difference this time around anyway.

 

 But just wanted to ask, is that assurance still there from the Qataris about today's?

 

 Well, the point, I mean, I know what you said yesterday about whatever is attributed to Mr. Netanyahu is basically allegation, alleged.

 

 You know, you said alleged, in fact, it was a title of my article about what you said.

 

 But the Israelis, you know, different Israeli sources, different Israeli media and so on, they insist that Mr. Netanyahu want to renegotiate the Philadelphia crossing.

 

 Mr. Netanyahu want to negotiate the Netzerim crossing.

 

 He want to insist on a system that it's almost impossible to vet, you know, whoever goes to the North and so on.

 

 He's saying basically, you know, it's like an impossible situation to arrive at.

 

 So I know you said that it was alleged, but it seems that Mr. Netanyahu insists on these restrictions.

 

 A couple more questions on the West Bank.

 

 You know, there's been a settlement in a UNESCO site and so on.

 

 I wonder if you're aware of the report and if you have any comment on that.

 

 If you indulge me one more, Vedant, just to follow up on what Jennifer mentioned about crossing the 40,000 mark.

 

 I mean, this is more than 10 to one as far as how many, and all lost life is precious and so on.

 

 But now we have at least 10 to one Palestinians that have died.

 

 When will enough be enough?

 

 Because I know you say, you know, one more, we don't want to see it, but the fact of the matter is that you've been saying this since last December, you know, and we have killing every single day, every single day, no 24 hour goes by without killing at least 36, 40, 50 Palestinians, most of them children.

 

 So, I mean, when will enough be enough?

 

 Well, you wanna see a two-state solution, but I mean, Smotrich himself said in announcing the settlement, we'll continue to fight the dangerous idea of a Palestinian state and establish facts on the ground.

 

 This is my life's mission, and I will continue it as much as I can.

 

 So that's what you're up against when you're saying you oppose the building of these settlements.

 

 Clearly, this will go ahead, and it will not just go ahead, but it will go ahead in occupied territory where you are arming the military force which will facilitate its establishment.

 

 So you're saying you oppose it, but you're arming the military force that facilitates its establishment.

 

 How is building a settlement about self-defense of Green Line sovereign Israel?

 

 I asked about Ben-Gvir and what he's done on the Temple Mount, and to Tom's question, you mentioned tools and the U.S. toolkit.

 

 The U.S. hasn't used any tools in that toolkit.

 

 And I just want to understand, is that because these are U.S. government officials?

 

 These are also U.S. government officials that Netanyahu's- You mean Israeli officials?

 

 Sorry, Israeli government officials that you wouldn't use.

 

 Is that because you can't use U.S. sanctions?

 

 Okay, but it's fair to say that there haven't been any actions taken, other than condemning it verbally.

 

 I mean, I will just remark that the reason that these actions are being taken by settlers in the West Bank is because they do get a green light from said government officials to be able to behave like that.

 

 But again, to me, that seems linked, and that's why these questions are being asked, but I'll leave it.

 

 Canadian doctor Ben Thompson, who volunteered in Gaza earlier this year, posted a video on Axe in which he tells a story of a doctor in Gaza who was forced to strip naked and stand for two days by Israeli force, urinating and defecating where he stood.

 

 He was only allowed to treat his patients while naked.

 

 Do you have any comment on that?

 

 Two days ago, Israel killed pharmacist Dr. Juma and her mother and her three days old twin in a strike.

 

 No other units were struck in that strike, which makes it a very precise and targeted strike.

 

 Since you are in direct contact with the Israelis, can you ask them, or do you have any opinion, why would they target and kill a grandmother, a mom, and a three-day-old twin?

 

 Negotiations are being held without Hamas, and Geneva negotiations are being held without an important party from the, without the army.

 

 Has the United States lost its role or being an effective mediator in the crisis of the Middle East?

 

 It seems based on different reports and what the President has laid out, there is a connection between the Iranian attack on Israel and the talks in Doha.

 

 President says that Iran could hold off on Israel attack if Gaza deal reached.

 

 How these connections have been built up, based on what, based on common sense, intelligence, or let's say the indirect talks that you are having with Islamic Republic?

 

 Yeah, thank you.

 

 On Gaza, Hamas has said it would not take part in a new round of Gaza ceasefire talks slated for tomorrow.

 

 Are your partners in Qatar still working to have Hamas represented?

 

 And if so, are you confident that they will end up being represented at the talks?

 

 How can they move forward and make progress if Hamas is not there?

 

 And what are the remaining sticking points or points on these ceasefire talks?

 

 I'll try to follow up on Daphne's question.

 

 Hamas said they'd be willing to negotiate afterwards if there's a serious response from Israel.

 

 How does the US take these comments?

 

 Does the US consider the proposals from the Israeli government to be keeping in the spirit of what the president outlined at the end of May?

 

 A couple of things.

 

 Yesterday, of course, the State Department notified Congress about $20 billion in new weapons for Israel.

 

 I realize these won't be delivered for a number of years, 2027 and onward.

 

 But nonetheless, the timing of this right – just two days before the ceasefire talks, can we see any linkage to that?

 

 This comes, of course, after criticism of some of the far-right members.

 

 There was a very strong statement by the Secretary on Minister Ben-Gvir's visit to the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound slash Temple Mount.

 

 Can we see any message in this, particularly in the arms sales?

 

 Medan, just to let you know, actually, where Sean left off on the weapons.

 

 I mean, you're saying that Israel's right to defend itself.

 

 We're talking about $20 billion on top of $3.5 billion last week or the week before.

 

 It's paid for by American taxpayers.

 

 And that's larger than many, many countries, maybe 70% of all countries in the world.

 

 I don't know.

 

 To be used against defenseless people.

 

 Can't you tell the Israelis that they should not, not lower down the amount of damage, but they should not be bombing the places like Tabain School or Amra Schools or hospitals and so on.

 

 Can you tell them that you must not use weapons?

 

 Does Israel have a right to use Palestinians as human sheet as was reported?

 

 And Haaretz, are you aware of that report?

 

 Well, you know, many of these weapons used were actually designed for as bunker busters in Afghanistan.

 

 But that's another issue.

 

 Let me ask you something.

 

 The president said that he expects Iran to hold off on an Israeli attack if Gaza ceasefire is reached.

 

 How did the president arrive at this?

 

 Or how did the government arrive at this?

 

 Has there been like a promise by the Iranians?

 

 If you guys go effectuate a ceasefire, then we are not going to attack.

 

 Yeah, on the talks, my final topic, where Jennifer left off on the talks.

 

 Now, Hamas is saying, look, we're not going, and we already agreed to what was proposed to us back in 31, and so, May 31.

 

 Now, the Israelis are changing their terms.

 

 Are you sure they are not?

 

 I mean, the New York Times reports and authenticated that, in fact, the prime minister, Netanyahu, has already changed and has added more demands.

 

 Is the proposal still, does it still maintain the same integrity as it was submitted back on May 31?

 

 But you would agree that if the proposal was changed, then that's not gonna, right?

 

 In an interview with AP, a spokesman for Hamas said that he does not believe that the U.S. is an honest broker.

 

 So basically, if he says that and he said that he — they accepted the president proposal, but you guys are not willing to publicly criticize the Israelis, especially Netanyahu, who obstructed these deals many times.

 

 Why do you believe that Hamas now is the onus on them to show up in this negotiation?

 

 What makes you confident that they have to come?

 

 Considering that you have seen so many U.S. diplomats in the region, including Rick McCurdy in Cairo and Hochstein in Beirut and William Burns in Doha, and there was talk about the Secretary adding into this trip.

 

 How do you see success and failure, considering the intensive efforts that the U.S. Government is putting on this negotiation?

 

 Okay, and just finally, I don't know if you answered this question or not, but you often condemn Hamas for using Palestinians as human shields, and there is this big investigation now by an Israeli newspaper saying that the Israeli army has systematically using Palestinians as a human shield because they believe their lives is superior to the Palestinians.

 

 So do you condemn the Israelis for using Palestinians for the same purpose that you condemn Hamas?

 

 So what's make these reports and Hamas using Palestinians as human shields as fact on the ground?

 

 Because you're not there and you don't really verify.

 

 On this, you know, Hamas using civilians as human shields.

 

 Two weeks ago, I asked you about a photo of Israeli soldiers posing in front of the Turkish-Palestinian Friendship Hospital, and there were also reports that the IDF was using this hospital as their military base.

 

 I asked you about this, and you responded by saying that, you know, you asked Israel for further information.

 

 Did they get back to you?

 

 Do you have any updates on this?

 

 Can I just follow up on some of that?

 

 In the absence of this ceasefire forced Israeli agreement, can you give us an update on what you think the achievements of Israel's military campaign in Gaza are?

 

 Do you have an update on what you believe the achievements of Israel's military campaign in Gaza are?

 

 I mean, I asked the question because it was the 29th of May that the secretary said it was appropriate to ask how incremental gains against Hamas stacked up against what he described as the unintended but horrific consequences of military action when you're going against people that are embedded with civilians.

 

 That was after the deaths of at least 45 people in a tented encampment after an Israeli airstrike.

 

 I mean, we've now had reportedly more than 100 people killed in a school in Al-Tabin on – over the weekend.

 

 So are the Israelis making anything more than incremental gains?

 

 I mean, it's two and a half months since that.

 

 Is it the only lever, a ceasefire?

 

 It's not – I mean, you have leverage in terms of stopping arms to Israel.

 

 Okay, but I mean, when you say it's the only lever, I'm just asking a question, and the point is that the Secretary two and a half months ago said – described incremental gains against Hamas.

 

 So that's why I'm asking the question two and a half months later, when you've continued a military assistance relationship that funds Israel's campaign in Gaza.

 

 I'm just asking the question, are the gains anything more than incremental against Hamas?

 

 Several U.S. officials have said that it's actually not possible to achieve total victory in defeating Hamas.

 

 Given that, does the U.S. really share Israel's goal of defeating Hamas?

 

 And do you have any updates on your diplomatic engagement with Iran about their attacks on Israel?

 

 Said asked you about the President's comments.

 

 What makes you expect Iran is not attacking Israel if you get a ceasefire deal?

 

 And do you feel that your deterrence efforts have worked, given that there hasn't been a retaliatory act?

 

 And then to follow up on one thing you said in response to that Haaretz report, you called on the Israeli government to transparently look into these – the State Department has called a number of times for the Israeli government to look into reports of abuses.

 

 Have they ever gotten back to you with any sort of answers on these reported abuses that are taking place in Gaza?

 

 Are you confident that talks can take place?

 

 What is the US trying to do to get to that goal?

 

 Well, not to get too much into the specifics, but for example, there is a, I'm sure you saw the New York Times report today about the Israeli negotiating position, saying that some demands made in recent weeks, for example, the Philadelphi Corridor, the border with Egypt that Israel has demanded to have control of that.

 

 Do you think that both sides actually want a truce and are ready to make some compromises to get there?

 

 And do you expect them to hold off from any retaliation until after Thursday's talk?

 

 And you expect Hamas to be there?

 

 So Qatar has assured that they will work to have Hamas there.

 

 But it's still not guaranteed that Hamas will participate.

 

 A lot of members of the group have been saying that's because of reluctance that they perceive from Israel to commit to a deal, to implement a deal.

 

 Do you think that's the message the world should get from Hamas' lack of participation if things go forward as they stand?

 

 Or is Hamas unwilling to commit to a deal?

 

 And on the anticipated Iranian attack on Israel, do you still see a broad level of support among the coalition of particularly Middle Eastern countries that helped defend Israel in April, or do you think that has waned?

 

 A couple of questions about other figureheads that could create potential obstacles.

 

 Wall Street Journal reported that Sinwar had said through Arab mediators that if Israel's serious about negotiations and wants Hamas to participate in this week's talks, then they need to stop all military operations in Gaza.

 

 As you know, Hamas have made Sinwar their head of their political bureau, whatever that means.

 

 Are you guys taking what he says seriously?

 

 Do you see what he says as just bluster, or is it potential to, does he have any kind of potential to stop Hamas's participation?

 

 How should we read this?

 

 thank you.

 

 And then on Israel, you guys have a lot at stake all the time in the region, particularly this week with these talks that you guys are really helping push into place.

 

 But you also have figures like the National Security Minister in Israel, Ben-Gvir, going up on the most explosive piece of real estate in the region, again, the Temple Mount, to what can only be perceived as something that he thinks is his right to impose his policy on something, but that is not the status quo policy that Netanyahu has come out and said, this is not our government policy.

 

 Netanyahu can only say so much, so can you guys, this is all rhetoric when you condemn actions like that.

 

 But these actions have real potential to escalate things in the region.

 

 What is your response to what he's doing, like that he's doing this again?

 

 And also, is this something the US can do?

 

 Can you sanction a figure like Ben-Gvir?

 

 You are able to sanction other figures in the region.

 

 It doesn't matter that he's an Israeli government official.

 

 Is there anything that you guys can do to stop this continuing to happen?

 

 So do you have any evidence that actually militants were there at Tabe'in school?

 

 But you're saying that they have a track record, but that is dependent on what the Israeli army says, correct?

 

 Now, a couple more questions on the New York Times is reporting that Israel is less flexible now on the negotiations.

 

 It seems that, in fact, by statements by the prime minister himself and statements by the defense minister, you have glance saying that the Israeli prime minister has really backtracked from the position on the proposal that you mentioned on May 31 by the president.

 

 So do you think that the Israelis have backed down, or at least the prime minister has backed down from what he's agreed to earlier?

 

 That's fair.

 

 Now, Hamas is saying that they have agreed to the proposal as it was proposed, and there is nothing else to negotiate.

 

 Is there anything else to negotiate?

 

 And on Hezbollah and Israel, should a retaliation happen now?

 

 If, I know you are trying very hard to avoid an escalation, but if there is a response from Hezbollah, do you have a sense that Hezbollah or Israel understand their deadlines at least to not go on a wide scale war?

 

 One more question on Sudan.

 

 What outcome are you aiming to achieve if the Sudanese army aren't on the table?

 

 I have a question on South Asia.

 

 Before that, I have one on the deadliest Israeli strike on Gaza.

 

 You talk about this in detail and express your concerns, but at the same time, it look like you're also supporting the slaughter of innocents in the name of self-defense.

 

 New polls show that majority of Americans, especially the young Americans, disapprove Israeli actions in Gaza.

 

 How do you explain this to Americans?

 

 Because they're taxpayers' money.

 

 U.S. government's providing bombs, small arms, and other forms of aid to Israel.

 

 So I- And secondly, sir, how would you define the current policy of this administration, which is like keep expressing concerns and keep providing bombs?

 

 Sir, former Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina accused the United States of orchestrating mass protests that led to her ouster after weeks of violence.

 

 Do you have any comment on that?

 

 Yesterday, the department commemorated the 75th anniversary of the Geneva Conventions.

 

 It said, quote, the anniversary is a fitting occasion to reaffirm our commitment to respecting international humanitarian law.

 

 The prosecutor of the International Criminal Court for violations of the Geneva Conventions are often addressed, seeks arrest warrants against Benjamin Netanyahu as well as Hamas leadership.

 

 Netanyahu was just welcomed by Washington.

 

 Just in recent days, the department said it wouldn't sanction a unit accused of war crimes, including binding, gagging and killing a 78-year-old Palestinian American.

 

 Israeli forces, as has been discussed, killed over 90 people as they prayed at a school and mosque.

 

 The Israeli forces shot an American citizen as he protested illegal settlements in the West Bank.

 

 Nevertheless, the US released 3.5 billion to Israel to buy more US weapons.

 

 So how does the Biden-Harris administration expect Americans and the rest of the world to take such commitments towards the Geneva Conventions seriously, given just the past few days?

 

 So I know that the Department and the U.S. issued certain statements mourning the loss of life from some of these killings.

 

 And you talk about deterrence.

 

 Just hours ago, two twins who were newborn were killed in Gaza with their mother and grandmother as their father went to collect their birth certificates.

 

 They're four days old, born into war, experienced only war, killed by war.

 

 How is the U.S. responding to this instance, given, again, this comes a day after the U.S. celebrated its human rights?

 

 No, it's fine.

 

 Thanks, Vedant.

 

 So can I ask you what the latest on US expectation on Iran's response on Israel following Haneen's killing?

 

 Do you have any indications recently that your efforts are actually working and there might be a more subdued response from Iran?

 

 Are the ceasefire talks that you called for August 15, are they still going to go ahead after what Hamas said last night?

 

 Could we continue in the Middle East?

 

 The strike on a school in Gaza.

 

 I think the latest toll I saw from officials in Gaza, the health minister, is 93 dead.

 

 Israel has said that it identified 31 militants in this war.

 

 I mean, how much do you – how much credence do you put in this?

 

 I mean, do you think that – I mean, even if 31 militants were killed, that means another 60-plus non-militants died in this.

 

 What's the nature of the assessment that the U.S. has, both on the facts on the ground and whether there's any level of concern on this?

 

 Sure, on the more information, is there any indication that US weapons were involved in this?

 

 I mean, are you satisfied with the credibility of what the Israelis are saying about, I mean, because you quoted their claim about a number of militants being in the building and they published pictures and names of people they've said have been, in their words, eliminated.

 

 Are you happy with the credibility of that information?

 

 To verify independently.

 

 I mean, it's fairly strong evidence that at least three of the people they've published pictures of since Saturday and named were not killed in that incident, were killed in incidents before.

 

 That's according to Euromed Human Rights Monitor, who's been going through the list.

 

 I mean, one of them, Muntar or Montasar Daher, who Israel describes as an Islamic jihad operative.

 

 I mean, you can go on Facebook and see the picture of him being mourned as being dead was from the day before with a relative or a friend saying that was in an airstrike on an apartment west of Gaza City.

 

 So a completely different incident.

 

 I mean, do you verify these things?

 

 But there's also a moral and strategic imperative for the information to be accurate and credible after the fact, because it may or may not justify an international humanitarian law.

 

 So I think what Sean was talking about effectively was the issue of proportionality.

 

 If you have many, many dozens of civilians killed, there has to be very strong and clear and overwhelming evidence that those killed created a risk that Israel attacking them gave them a clear military advantage.

 

 That's what international humanitarian law says.

 

 So if it is emerging that some of these people were actually killed in previous incidents, there's not even an accurate account of people that were killed.

 

 So Sean has asked you whether, if you know U.S. made weapons were used.

 

 There is reporting, actually CNN reports that U.S. made small diameter bombs were indeed used in the school attack.

 

 So I just want to understand, is the State Department trying to verify that information or not?

 

 These are U.S. made weapons and you regularly send these weapons to Israel.

 

 So while I understand it's an IDF operation, there is reporting that the weapons used are U.S. supplied.

 

 So I'm wondering if there is a systematic effort at this building to monitor how U.S. made weapons are being used.

 

 In accordance with law?

 

 Right, so since we're at it, can I ask about Netzah Yehuda, the Israeli battalion that you guys needed extra information, and in the end, U.S. decided to clear that battalion and they're going to be able to receive U.S. security assistance.

 

 Can you tell us what accountability measures they've taken that basically made you take this decision, that you're satisfied?

 

 Will these individuals be prosecuted in Israel?

 

 Have you thought that from them?

 

 Yes, but for Israeli settlers, for example, in the West Bank, you have taken action when they haven't prosecuted them.

 

 So are you applying the same criteria to this one or not?

 

 Is the Biden administration still anticipating the potential for some kind of Iranian kinetic attack on Israel in the coming days?

 

 On Saudi Arabia, the U.S. government lifted its ban on certain weapons to Saudi.

 

 Granted that, you know, that ban was also to help wind down things in the war in Yemen.

 

 The language that was used was that the department is lifting its suspension.

 

 So just understanding that this is not an expiration, this is something that was decided to be lifted now, and if lifted, does that mean we see that as also playing into the strengthening of security, the security relationship between the U.S. and Saudi, and also the day after planned strike?

 

 And if that's the case for Gaza, how should we look at the timing?

 

 So it is fair to just assume that this has happened now, that there's been active lifting of this given the tensions in the region with Iran and the Houthis.

 

 Lots to discuss, but could I actually start with Norway, Israel and Norway.

 

 The Israelis have revoked the diplomatic status of a number of Norwegian diplomats accredited for the Palestinian Authority.

 

 This obviously after Norway, along with Ireland and Spain, recognized a state of Palestine.

 

 The U.S. has good relations with Israel and Norway.

 

 Do you have any comment on this?

 

 Has the United States engaged specifically with Israel in this?

 

 To put it a bit more directly, would the United States hope that Israel takes back this step?

 

 Is that – are you worried that that's going to – that this is going to lead to a dissolution of this agreement that you have about the Palestinian tax payments?

 

 1 You spoke yesterday about the need for an in-person negotiator to be designated by Hamas before ceasefire talks could be taken over the finish line.

 

 Until that person is designated or steps forward or is named, is the U.S. trying to sort of get the Israel's side of the deal to a final place so that once there is a designation, all it takes is a signature?

 

 I have one more on Vienna, but we'll – Wait, Said.

 

 Actually, in response to Olivia on the deal, the Israeli press, Yediot Avonot and the Times of Israel both reported that the United States is willing to let Israel start whatever military operations after phase one of the ceasefire.

 

 Can you confirm that?

 

 Now, these reports claim that Prime Minister Netanyahu insists on having something in writing from you that he said that he can attack a twin, basically, that this is a condition that he will not budge from.

 

 By all accounts, the negotiations right now are not moving or frozen or whatever on hold.

 

 But Hamas said that – or Sinoir said that they – they want to go ahead with the ceasefire talks.

 

 Does that change in any way the pace of what's going on?

 

 And finally, I wanted to ask you about the – the administration is being sued by Israeli settlers whom you have imposed sanctions on.

 

 I mean, how do you handle a situation like this?

 

 And especially, I mean, this morning, Mr. Netanyahu told the settlers that he is going to do everything possible to reverse those sanctions.

 

 In fact, he promised them that he would do that.

 

 But that is not going to, let's say, to sway the decision one way or the other, the fact that there may be some legal ramifications for this?

 

 Can I just come back to the – actually, just to follow up on Said's question.

 

 So if the State Department is sued, you wouldn't comment?

 

 And just to follow up on the hostage talks, ceasefire talks, there's some reporting from the National in the region that Yahya Sinwar, after being appointed as the new head of Hamas, has sent a message through the Egyptian mediators of his kind of position on the talks, saying he's got a – his firm position is that there should be a full Israeli withdrawal from Gaza.

 

 He wants the release of high-profile detainees.

 

 He's against the deployment of the Mossad.

 

 He's against the deployment of the international force.

 

 So these are things that I think the U.S. – some of those things the U.S. has been in support of.

 

 It seems to suggest that he's going to have a stronger – or potentially there could be an even more difficult approach by Hamas to the negotiations.

 

 Have you been sort of informed by the Egyptians of a message coming from Sinwar to the negotiating team there about any new position or new approach?

 

 I'm going to the Middle East, Matt.

 

 The Wall Street Journal is just reporting that the U.S. has warned Iran that its government and economy would suffer a devastating blow in case it retaliates against Israel.

 

 I was wondering if this is necessary – if it's necessary to go that far to hurt the economy, which typically and naturally affects the people, to deter Iran?

 

 So it wasn't in the nature of the communication.

 

 I'm not asking for specifics, but was it in terms of the path forward in Bangladesh, or was it about U.S. interests?

 

 Unless somebody wants to follow up on that, should I – a couple other – Yeah, go ahead.

 

 Japan – this is back on the Middle East, but Nagasaki, of course today is the – it's the anniversary tomorrow of the atomic bombing in Nagasaki.

 

 Ambassador Emanuel, as well as the British ambassador, and I think the European ambassadors are not going to attend because the Israeli ambassador wasn't invited.

 

 The Nagasaki mayor says this is logistical or at least not.

 

 Why is it so important that the Israeli ambassador be present?

 

 I'll start in the Middle East, I suppose.

 

 I know Admiral Kirby spoke a little bit about the current state of play, but I'm wondering in particular with the situation between Iran and Israel, where things stand now, has there been any further communication from the Secretary or others with players in the region?

 

 How worried are you right now about the chance of escalation?

 

 A couple things on that.

 

 Could you talk about the OIC meeting and how significant or not it would be?

 

 Obviously, Iran and the Palestinians called this.

 

 What message do you – I know the U.S. isn't a member, but what message do you hope this sends particularly to Iran?

 

 Just one more for you.

 

 I know the Secretary was asked this yesterday, but about the leadership of Hamas, the Secretary said yesterday that Sinwar has always been the primary decider.

 

 Nonetheless, somebody who purportedly masterminded the October 7th attacks, and today the Israelis have – it's not a surprise, but very clear that they want to kill him.

 

 How does that complicate the – just the process of diplomacy in getting a ceasefire?

 

 And is there at least – if not a contradiction, at least a tension between trying to kill someone and trying to negotiate a ceasefire?

 

 Can I follow up on that in particular?

 

 Have the Qataris given any indication that they're any more reluctant to deal with Hamas now that Sinwar is back to the head of the organization?

 

 Absent the designation by Hamas, presumably by Sinwar, of somebody who can physically be present at these negotiations because presumably Sinwar himself will not be traveling to Cairo or anywhere else.

 

 Is there not at least a logistical obstacle to furthering ceasefire talks at this time?

 

 I do not mean this to sound flippant, but does it not— and I take your latter point, but does it not require a commitment from Israel and, I guess, all of the negotiating parties not to kill the people who are taking part in these talks, if only to, again, sort of finalize a deal that I assume would have to happen in person?

 

 I guess I'm wondering who would want this job, given it probably places an immediate target on this person's back.

 

 Just to follow up on the negotiations, just to understand, so one of the things that you are kind of saying to the Iranians is don't escalate because we are really close to getting a ceasefire deal.

 

 This is the deal, the same deal that you were calling an Israeli deal, right?

 

 This came from the Israelis in the first place.

 

 The President communicated it.

 

 Do the Israelis – have they signed up to all parts of the deal?

 

 Like, is there a deal ready for whoever the new Hamas negotiator is to come in and immediately say yes to?

 

 So to put a finer point on it there, you're still – as well as hoping that a new negotiator comes forward from the Hamas side, you're still – this is still kind of optimism and hope that the Israelis will close that final gap.

 

 And just finally, the Secretary mentioned these direct contacts with the Iranians.

 

 Can you tell us, has there been any – has the U.S. sort of had any response directly – no, not through intermediaries, but directly, have the Iranians said anything in response to these messages you've been sending?

 

 All right.

 

 I also wanted to ask you about Sinwar.

 

 In retrospect, do you believe the Israelis made a mistake by assassinating someone like Haniyeh who is more moderate, knows, goes around and so on, and now you have someone who is probably a lot less moderate, more militant, probably more isolated, not exposed in terms of leading negotiations?

 

 So that brings me to this question.

 

 It's been more than two months since the president on May 31 announced a proposal, and he said that it was an Israeli proposal, yet we really are not going anywhere.

 

 I mean, more Palestinians are being killed every day, less humanitarian aid and so on is going in and so on.

 

 The situation is very, very dire.

 

 It seems no end in sight.

 

 So what steps can the United States take to make sure that this actually is, that the field goal is reached?

 

 I wonder if you would comment on the situation in the West Bank.

 

 Yesterday, the Israeli occupation forces killed 10,000 and basically executed them.

 

 And of course, they were holding money, they were seizing the money and so on.

 

 The situation is really deteriorating in the West Bank.

 

 It's in many places not much better than what's going on in Gaza.

 

 So Israel has a right to use fighter planes, fighter jets supplied by the United States against unoccupied people?

 

 Going back to Israel, Israeli media today released a video showing Israeli soldiers raping a Palestinian detainee at Saddam's detention camp.

 

 The footage was very disturbing.

 

 I know you have commented on the reports about this detention center before, but we have now – we now have a new evidence, which is video.

 

 Have you seen that video, and do you have anything to say on that, and also the reports of rape in Israeli prisons?

 

 And actually, this is not the first rape incident we have been hearing about Israeli prisons.

 

 An Israeli human rights group, B'Tselem, on Monday released a report saying that Sede Taman is only the tip of the iceberg and that Israeli detention centers turned into a network of torture camps for Palestinians.

 

 It report cited testimonies from 55 Palestinian detainees.

 

 So I know Israelis are investigating this, but would you support an independent investigation into those allegations?

 

 Just a final one on that.

 

 What is your reaction to that Israelis, including politicians and lawmakers, protested actually the arrest of Israeli soldiers who are suspected of abuse and rape?

 

 We have also seen comments from Israeli lawmakers trying to justify the rape of Palestinians.

 

 Have you seen those remarks?

 

 This is not your – So according to the European Union representative office in the Palestinian territories, Israel advanced last year the highest number of settlements in the occupied West Bank since Oslo occurred.

 

 The total number is 30,682.

 

 Do Palestinians who lose their lands for settlements have the right of self-defense?

 

 So last one, you keep saying – or you're saying that a wider war is not inevitable and you don't think it should be inevitable.

 

 But do you think that an Iranian response or an Iranian attack on Israel is inevitable, whether or not that leads to a broader war?

 

 And from your perspective, is any kind of Iranian response an escalation?

 

 Thank you, Matt.

 

 Given some of the tough rhetoric that we've seen reported between the U.S. and Israel specifically about whether the U.S. would bail out Israel should it escalate another time after this one, are there any limitations being placed on U.S. involvement in what's expected to develop in the coming days?

 

 By limitations, I mean there's a difference between intercepting and defensive actions versus engaging in counterstrikes or even preemptive strikes, which have been floated by the Israelis as a possibility.

 

 Is there anything that the U.S. is drawing lines in front of in terms of those actions?

 

 Given the Secretary's call as the President's personal outreach to King Abdullah in Jordan, can you say whether the Jordanians are as willing as they were in April to engage again in the coming day's development?

 

 And then just lastly, have you heard indications from Hamas after Haniyeh's funeral now that they are going to come back to the table?

 

 Have they told the Qataris, the Egyptians, that they do plan to continue engaging?

 

 And just on the question of an Iranian response, so in April, there was an attack on a – an Israeli attack on an Iranian diplomatic facility or consulate facility.

 

 I think at the time, there was never a conclusion from the U.S. whether it was – whether it did count as a consulate facility or not.

 

 Now we've got an attack on Iranian territory.

 

 Do they have – do the Iranians have the right to self-defense in this case?

 

 In the interest of consistency, though, wouldn't – your message to the Israelis is this is not helpful, or that's the President's words.

 

 I guess people would expect you to maybe go a bit further than to say this is not helpful when you're making these kind of requests of the Iranians not to respond.

 

 We'll deal with something real.

 

 Last week, a week ago, yesterday, Sunday, an Iran rocket hit or maybe intentional hit a small town of Majd al-Shams, a Syrian town, Syrian citizens, and so on.

 

 And you said that Israel has a right to defend itself.

 

 I'm not you personally, but I'm saying.

 

 So, what's different?

 

 I mean, you know, everybody was – everyone was saying Israel has a right to defend itself.

 

 Why doesn't Iran have a right to defend itself when the guest house, you know, I don't want to make comparisons, but it's like the guest house in London or maybe Blair House or anything.

 

 I mean, something that really touched the sovereignty of Iran.

 

 Let me ask you on the negotiation.

 

 Why do you continue to have the notion that Israel is negotiating in good faith when, in fact, it killed the chief negotiator of the other party?

 

 I mean, if you go and shoot the chief negotiator, you kill him, you know.

 

 People must think that you are not very serious about negotiations.

 

 But, you know, Israel is not even allowing the food to go in.

 

 I mean, things are – aid is rotting, and they're not allowing anything to go in, and the situation is very, very dire in Gaza.

 

 So, if they're not even showing that kind of gesture, why should they be taking it?

 

 And finally, I have one last question.

 

 An Israeli-American soldier with a U.S. citizen posted videos showing a detonation of Gaza homes and mosques and so on.

 

 Is that – in fact, something that Amnesty called a war crime.

 

 If this U.S. citizen comes to the United States, should he be arrested?

 

 I think it was the third-to-last question that Said asked.

 

 The premise of it was that Israel had killed, had assassinated, the top Hamas negotiator.

 

 Is that something that you're willing to accept and put on – say on the record that it was, in fact, Israel that did it?

 

 Or have I missed something over the course of the last couple days?

 

 I'm asking if you accept the premise of the question that Israel did, in fact, do it if, in fact, the Israelis have told you that they were responsible.

 

 It's been reported that Iran has sent a message to Israel, to a third party, obviously, that it will be attacking Israel.

 

 Do you think this is a good sign that at least it's – if it's giving a warning that it will definitely be attacking, that it could be a little maybe more limited and things stop there?

 

 I know you didn't want to answer a question about the limitations – on whether there are limitations on U.S. support to Israel.

 

 But my question, when you say that no one – and your message is no one should say no to de-escalation, is it applicable to everyone?

 

 Is it applicable to all parties?

 

 Is this your message to Israel?

 

 Thank you, Matt.

 

 The Iranian Security Council members spoke to Kuwait's Al Jazeera newspaper, and they said that a delegation – a U.S. delegation has visited Iran through Turkey with the mediation of Oman.

 

 What's your comment on that?

 

 And has anyone from the State Department or the U.S. Government spoke directly with the Iranians on this issue?

 

 And last time when Iran attacked Israel on April 13th, they said – they claimed that they sent wide notes to everyone, including the U.S. They said the U.S. that they are going to attack Israel.

 

 Have you received any notification from Iran on this?

 

 Not sure if you saw, there was a report in Semaphore that The Wall Street Journal tried valiantly to try to confirm its reporting on the UNRWA allegations made by Israel.

 

 Talked to American intelligence sources, Israeli intelligence sources, were completely unable to substantiate them.

 

 Does the State Department have anything new about those UNRWA allegations?

 

 And in the future, will the State Department consider allegations coming from Israel differently given that these have not yet been backed up by such drastic measures?

 

 The IDF also announced that they assassinated the Gaza minister of the economy.

 

 I'm curious, does the State Department consider somebody like that to be a combatant?

 

 They said he counts because he had a role over the economy and the economy has a role over manufacturing and within manufacturing, there are weapons that are manufactured.

 

 Just a follow-up on the ceasefire negotiations.

 

 Do you – what are you basing this answer on?

 

 Are you getting any signs from any government in the region that they are pressing either the Palestinians or the Israelis to actually agree to the ceasefire?

 

 And do you think it's possible to press Israel, given that there – it doesn't seem to be in Netanyahu's interest at this point to reach a ceasefire.

 

 At least that's what the Israeli media is saying.

 

 That's what a lot of Israeli officials are saying.

 

 Sorry, just to drill down a little bit, because I mean, what's new about the media reports out of Israel is that now you have the head of the IDF, Shin Bet, and Mossad being quoted as confronting the prime minister and basically saying, either give us something to go on or there's going to be no deal.

 

 That's a paraphrase.

 

 Yeah.

 

 Does the U.S. not view those reports as credible?

 

 I, like everyone in this room and around the country, feel grateful that they have been released and reunited with their families.

 

 It's a good day.

 

 So in the same thing, journalists should not be punished for what they do anywhere in the world.

 

 We have seen yesterday, there's a premeditated crime to kill a journalist for doing their job.

 

 They were right there in the front of Ismail Haniyeh's home, just to show the destroyed home from our colleague from Al Jazeera, Ismail al-Ghoul and his cameraman, Rami.

 

 And they were told by the Israelis to leave the scene.

 

 Now, there are also dozens of Palestinian journalists who are currently detained by Israel.

 

 Overwhelmingly, they're not charged with anything.

 

 They're held under administrative detention and so on.

 

 Do you call on the Israeli government to either charge those journalists that are being held under administrative detention, or let go?

 

 But certainly, you urge the Israelis to release those who are not charged with anything if they don't charge them.

 

 A couple more quick ones.

 

 Was there any communication with the Palestinian Authority, from U.S. officials to the Palestinian officials, in the aftermath of the assassination of Ismail Haniyeh?

 

 And lastly, I want to just bring to your attention that an Israeli lawmaker was asked about the alleged rape of the Palestinian detainee.

 

 And he basically said, yes, it is legitimate.

 

 And as we look at the story, it is really appalling.

 

 I mean, it seems, pardon me for the graphic description that I'm about to describe, but they took a cell phone and they shoved it up his gluteus maximus, all the way to the intestine, and they were calling the phone, the Israeli soldiers.

 

 This is documented.

 

 Don't you find this appalling?

 

 Can I just follow up on some of the comments Lincoln made in Mongolia?

 

 He said that getting to a ceasefire requires all parties to stop taking escalatory actions.

 

 The administration has repeatedly said that Israel has a right to defend itself.

 

 Is it the administration's view in the past few days that Israel's gone beyond that right at all and that the actions have been escalatory?

 

 And then you said yesterday that it was still your assessment that Israel was engaging constructively in ceasefire talks.

 

 What makes you confident that that is the case?

 

 And are there any plans for him to speak with Israeli counterparts in the next coming days?

 

 Following on the calls that the Secretary's been making over the last 24 hours, 48 hours to Middle East partners, have – has the department reached out to Saudi counterparts at all to get any kind of reaction on the deaths of Ishmael Haniyeh and also Israel's confirmed death of Mohammed Deif?

 

 Is there any concern that the Saudis might have the same sentiment that the Qataris initially had?

 

 And has the U.S. received a letter from Israeli Foreign Minister Katz stating Israel is not interested in an all-out war, but the only way to prevent it is the immediate implementation of Resolution 1701?

 

 What does this say about the risk of escalation along the Israeli-Lebanese border?

 

 Go ahead.

 

 I want to ask about how many times the USA asked Israel to investigate itself, and what is the result?

 

 Will the USA will ask a Palestinian civilian to investigate themselves?

 

 Will the USA will ask a civilian Palestinian to investigate themselves?

 

 So on the attacks in Beirut and Tehran, are you concerned that this complicates the ceasefire talks?

 

 I mean, both Qatar and Egypt, which have acted as mediators in talks, suggested that the killing of the Hamas leader in Tehran could further jeopardize efforts to secure a truce in Gaza.

 

 Do you share that concern?

 

 How can you move the talks forward at this point, given everything that's gone on in the past 24 hours?

 

 And then we reported that the US was seeking to deter Israel from striking Beirut in retaliation for the attack over the weekend.

 

 Do you feel Israel has ignored your warnings?

 

 And what conversations have you had with Israel today?

 

 Has he spoken with or will he speak with Israeli counterparts?

 

 We understand that the Israelis provided a heads-up ahead of the Beirut strike.

 

 Was a heads-up provided to the United States ahead of the targeting of Hania?

 

 And I know that you're not speculating about the fallout from here, but does the U.S. view this as a step as conducive to finalizing a ceasefire deal?

 

 So without looking ahead, looking backwards, how essential had Hania been in these discussions?

 

 I mean, we know that ultimately, Yaya Sinwar was signing off on decisions that Hamas was making, but how essential was Hania in the discussions to this point?

 

 So the Qataris have not signaled that they are no longer going to take part in these talks?

 

 Sorry, the Supreme Leader of Iran put out a tweet essentially saying it is our duty to take revenge.

 

 What does the United States know about possible retaliatory steps taken by Iran or its press?

 

 What about those of the Israelis?

 

 Is there a commitment to come to Israel's defense for Iran?

 

 Just to follow up on Olivia's question.

 

 Now, you said you need to understand clearly.

 

 You're saying that if Iran responds, the US will be there to defend Israel, correct?

 

 So you often speak of the right of every nation to defend itself.

 

 Do you acknowledge that this was an Israeli aggression against Iran?

 

 I mean, it seems that the whole world acknowledges that this was an Israeli aggression on the capital of Iran.

 

 But suppose, when you develop the proper information to say that Israel was behind this aggression on the Iranian capital, it is within Iran's right to defend itself.

 

 Okay, in principle, as a sovereign nation, does Iran have the right to defend itself?

 

 Let me ask you something.

 

 You talked about the deal that is underway, the negotiations.

 

 Now, is there any doubt that the Israeli prime minister has taken almost every step to scuttle the negotiations over the past few months?

 

 Do you have any doubt in your mind that he has taken those steps?

 

 Okay, but Mr. Haniyeh was the chief negotiator.

 

 He was the chief negotiator involved in these negotiations.

 

 So when Israel first kills his grandchildren, then kills all his children, then kills him, does that send like a clear message that they don't want these negotiations?

 

 He is the chief negotiator, correct?

 

 I mean, you mentioned that Israel, in your eyes, has shown a willingness or that it is a priority to get a deal done.

 

 But, I mean, certainly eliminating the person that you're trying to get a deal done with suggests that it's not a priority.

 

 You said that you've seen Israel engage in constructive conversations about a ceasefire deal.

 

 Is it still your assessment today that they're engaging constructively?

 

 So saying nothing about the eventual outcome of the talks or progress towards a ceasefire hostage release deal, can you say if given the response from key mediators from Hamas, will the assassination lead to at least a pause in the talks?

 

 Has there been any direct or indirect conversations between the U.S. and Iran following the assassination?

 

 Follow up on the assassination of Haniyeh and the implication on the Gaza ceasefire talks, actually, one of the mediators, Qatar's foreign minister, Al Thani, today said, I mean, asked a question, which is that how can mediation succeed when one party assassinates the negotiator on the other side?

 

 What is your response to this?

 

 One more, please, on the Middle East.

 

 Do you have any comment on two Al Jazeera journalists, Ismail and Rami, who were killed in an Israeli airstrike today in northern Gaza?

 

 You know, this raises today a number of journalists and media personnel killed in Gaza to 165.

 

 What is your reaction?

 

 You said you asked Israel for more information.

 

 There have been many incidents over the past nine months that you asked Israel to provide more information.

 

 I will have a non-medialist question later if I'm not.

 

 I'm sorry, but I'm saying, I'm just making a point that this particular journalist was actually arrested and tortured by the Israelis.

 

 So perhaps this is a good follow-up here.

 

 It's been 184 days now since Israeli forces killed Hind Rajab, her family, and medics sent to save her.

 

 Last month when myself and other colleagues asked about the investigation into this, the department said Israel said that they're still investigating and that Israel also said that the UN and Red Crescent did not respond to outreach from the Israeli government.

 

 I reached out to the Red Crescent, and they said that no, the Israeli government did not reach out.

 

 So has the Biden-Harris administration followed up on this alleged lie by the Israeli government or sought to confirm any of Israel's claims on the half-year-old killing now of this girl and her family?

 

 So I had reached out to the Israeli government as well, and while I was reaching out to the Red Crescent, they said they would get back to me with an answer, and that they did not after we reported the Red Crescent and said that the Israeli government- Well, it's really, I'm not a spokesperson for the responsiveness of another foreign ministry.

 

 This government gives them billions of dollars in aid.

 

 I imagine that such claims want to be fact-checked?

 

 With the 2024 election around the corner, how has the U.S. followed up on the reporting, I believe a month and a half ago-ish, forgive me if I'm wrong, of Israeli government-sponsored influence campaigns attempting to influence American politics?

 

 The New York Times reporting.

 

 The New York Times reporting.

 

 Always in the same Middle East issues.

 

 I want to bring you back to Al Jazeera, please.

 

 Al Jazeera, the network now assures you, confirms that it was a targeted killing.

 

 The crew of reporters were reporting by the house of Haniyeh, and they've been struck by that missile.

 

 What would you have to say?

 

 We know you're talking to the Israelis, but what are you specifically asking them?

 

 You have 22 Arab countries who need an answer.

 

 Just to quickly clarify what's been said on these articles.

 

 So you are confident that, as we speak, the deal is still possible, even if the political leader of Hamas is dead?

 

 And is it even if the, even if Haniyeh is dead, who's been representing Hamas' response and interest to that deal?

 

 With Hamas Hezbollah vowing retaliation, what's the U.S. position on how Israel should respond?

 

 Prime Minister Netanyahu just said that Israel, quote, will exact a heavy price from any aggression against us on any front, end quote.

 

 What I'm referring to is retaliation for Haniyeh's death, if you know, from Hamas, and then Hezbollah-Shakir's death.

 

 Thank you, sir.

 

 Two questions, please.

 

 One, as far as the Iran-supporting terrorists is concerned, who is supporting Iran?

 

 Is it Russia, China, or North Korea, or any other country supporting Iran?

 

 And second, sir, does Iran support this deal between Israel and Hamas?

 

 Favorite just a few minutes ago and a security source has said the strike was targeting a senior Hezbollah commander.

 

 Was this an Israeli strike as far as you're aware?

 

 has Israel been in touch with you prior to this about any potential upcoming strike?

 

 And have they given you any warning that they would strike Beirut?

 

 and we had reported that the US was urging Israel not to strike Beirut.

 

 Do you feel that this could escalate tensions if this is an Israeli strike and are you concerned about the repercussions?

 

 Is the US prepared to back Israel if it does devolve into a full-fledged war?

 

 Does this department believe that the Israeli government would agree to a ceasefire deal in Gaza while engaging in kinetic activity in northern Lebanon?

 

 It's less speculation.

 

 I I mean the secretaries read out with.

 

 the Egyptian foreign minister stressed the same that a ceasefire agreement can lead to a diplomatic Absolutely.

 

 but what I'm asking is whether you've had an indication from the Israelis that That is in the realm of possibility or whether they believe that it is important first to retaliate fully against Hezbollah Before they consider making a deal with him.

 

 You've already mentioned today the US is ironclad commitment to Israel's defense.

 

 secretary Austin speaking overseas said pretty much the same.

 

 Has Israel specifically requested through State Department channels a sort of unconditional commitment to assist should it struggle militarily against in the second front?

 

 I don't want to wordsmith or nitpick, but you said ironclad but not unconditional.

 

 Can you explain a little bit what that means?

 

 So needless to say you would understand that the Israelis understand that there would be conditions applied to whatever Assistance the u.s. Is providing militarily.

 

 shouldn't a second what?

 

 Okay, and last one.

 

 Can you provide any material update us to the status of the ceasefire talks on Gaza?

 

 Go ahead say let me just You know a couple of things I'm trying to understand here.

 

 You keep referring to Israel's right to defend itself and the groups like Hezbollah and others as maligned group Proxy groups and so on.

 

 don't you think you strip the people of the region of their right?

 

 To fight for their occupied territories.

 

 after all Israel occupies parts of Lebanon occupies the Golan Heights That is an occupied Syrian territory occupies the West Bank and indeed occupies Gaza.

 

 You keep saying that Israel has the right to defend itself.

 

 What about the people in the region that have suffered, you know for what decade now?

 

 Maybe close to 60 years under occupation.

 

 Do they have a right to freedom the right to defend a military occupation?

 

 do you believe that the Palestinians have an equal measure to live free about military occupation?

 

 okay, let me ask you about the Israeli police.

 

 detained soldiers yesterday or the day before yesterday suspected of raping a Palestinian Sparking protestants on.

 

 apparently, you know rape and killing and torture and all this thing Happens regularly in Israeli detention camps.

 

 Did that constitute a war crime to you?

 

 two quick points now.

 

 if proven to be true that does constitute a war crime.

 

 The UN is reporting that 86% of Gazans are now, you know being evacuated.

 

 Yeah under evacuation orders.

 

 Is that in any way, you know sort of Is there a disaster looming and in the next few days a few weeks and so on as far as the humanitarian situation?

 

 Has it carried out the strike in Beirut in retaliation for the attack on Golan Heights?

 

 Do you have any reaction to Israel?

 

 I'm happy to check with the team if we've got Anything more to offer at a later point and are you concerned that an Israeli strike on Beirut will escalate tensions?

 

 do you feel that Israel has disregarded your warnings about striking?

 

 Top US officials are in Saudi Arabia for talks regarding the Houthis as an emerging threat as the Israel-Lebanon crisis is also emerging.

 

 so the question is last week we have seen that Saudi Arabia distance itself from any type of like a Aerial spaceport or something like to join US coalition against the Yemenis because they have already a truce with the Yemenis from December.

 

 So this time?

 

 but what is US parts with the Saudis?

 

 is willing to break Saudi Arabia and Yemen truce and Any anything like that from the Saudi Arabia to join US coalition again against the Yemenis.

 

 secondly just one more.

 

 Yeah, Israel Prime Minister during its address at US Congress said that all the protesters who are protesting outside of the Parliament They are Iranian funded Iranian back have very clear position every right is given at this land to the peaceful protesters.

 

 so from the US Parliament this statement State Department will own this endorse this project.

 

 this condemned are just distances.

 

 So Biden and Netanyahu are due to meet.

 

 What's the main message that the U.S. is going to convey in this meeting?

 

 And what more does Israel need to do to bring this ceasefire to a reality?

 

 And what more do you need to see from Israel, and what more do you need to see from Hamas to get this over the finish line?

 

 And what was your take on Netanyahu's speech to Congress yesterday?

 

 Did it leave you with any concerns about his willingness to reach a deal?

 

 And then the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff today said he has still not been able to see much from Israel about its day-after planning once the war with Hamas ends, saying there's not a lot of detail he's been able to see from a plan from them.

 

 What's the latest on this, and are you satisfied with the pace at which the Israelis are putting this plan together?

 

 Just to understand a little bit more in terms of this meeting today, this is not an opportunity for the Israeli Prime Minister to push any new demands.

 

 We're just asking that in the context of these Israeli negotiators pushing back their trip to do in-person talks and whether that was related to the timing of Netanyahu's meeting with Biden.

 

 But on the just pivoting to his address to Congress, I mean, you mentioned that he didn't say anything that would affect hostage ceasefire talks, but he did say some pretty derogatory things about U.S. protestors.

 

 Having mentioned that this is a citadel of democracy, the United States, and then to call American protestors Tehran's useful idiots, and also to cite U.S. intelligence saying that Iran had financed protestors.

 

 That is something that has been said, but we don't know the full extent of that.

 

 Do you have anything to say in response to the Israeli Prime Minister labeling American protestors in that way, given that this is a substantial part of the voting population in this country?

 

 Can I just, on his address as well, he had mentioned that Israel has gone to extraordinary efforts to send, to drop leaflets, to make phone calls in Gaza, and also he cited a West Point expert saying that this is, you know, he said in the entire history of wars that Israel has, you know, done more to, you know, make sure that they don't hurt civilians.

 

 And do you have any comment on some of the things that he said when you look at the conclusions of the NSM report, which did question whether, you know, Israel is – has been able to be compliant with international law, that there is still concern that it hasn't, and that when it comes to things like leafleting, that perhaps more could have been done?

 

 I mean, you stand by the conclusions of that U.S. response to his – We do.

 

 Let me just move on then.

 

 I have a couple of other things to ask about.

 

 Now, I know you mentioned about the loss of life in Gaza and so on.

 

 But the new report, it's really, it's just staggering by airwaves.

 

 And it talks about, you know, how accurate the figures that are being announced by the Ministry of Health in Gaza.

 

 And these are horrific figures.

 

 I mean, you know, everybody talks about the day after.

 

 But really, the day now, I mean, the present day is a horrific day.

 

 I mean, we're talking about a place that is being subjected to war, where 80% of that space has been destroyed.

 

 Where, you know, a huge number of people have been killed and so on.

 

 When you look at it in those kind of percentages and so on, it really is staggering.

 

 And I, you know, I mean, how can we go forward looking at this carnage and this, you know, going day in and day out without feeling a sense of urgency to basically say, this is the time to end it?

 

 Now, my last question regarding the number of UN workers that have been killed, about 366.

 

 And my question pertains to the day after in terms of aid and so on, and aid workers and organizations and so on.

 

 Do you think this is discouraging for organizations to go in Gaza and do their work?

 

 So on Tuesday, you were asked about the Beijing declaration.

 

 Has the U.S. get a chance to review the text, and has the United States spoken to Abbas directly regarding the declaration?

 

 And the declaration mentioned unity under the framework of PLO.

 

 What is the U.S. perspective to bring Hamas under the umbrella of PLO?

 

 Is this agreement reached in China similar to any similarity to the 2002 Algeria broker deal?

 

 Back to Netanyahu's speech yesterday, following up on Said's question on foreign leader of a country who was speaking in front of American Congress, criticizing American protesters who are mostly using their freedom of assembly.

 

 Do you consider this as an interference in U.S. domestic affairs?

 

 But what was your reaction when you heard – when he said this at the American Congress?

 

 Just a quick one more on that.

 

 On the international side of things, many people around the world were outraged by what we have seen yesterday.

 

 You know, Netanyahu, who is accused of war crimes and genocides by international courts, spoke before the U.S. Congress and received more than 70 applause from U.S. Congress members.

 

 Are you aware of this, and have any countries expressed concern about this?

 

 Second, the UAE is more open now on discussing sending troops to Gaza.

 

 Do you have an agreement with them and other Arab states to send troops?

 

 Going back to Netanyahu's speech to Congress, actually, so Prime Minister said specifically with regards to Rafah, and I quote, practically no civilians killed in Rafah, and it got actually standing ovation from U.S. Congress, and you hear – I know it's different branches, State Department and Congress, and you hear acknowledging thousands of civilians, innocent civilians were killed by this – as a result of this military campaign.

 

 So I'm wondering, do you think your statements here and that Congress's reaction to Netanyahu's remarks – and it was a false claim, verifiable by various respectable news organizations, including ones in the United States – sending maybe conflicting messages to the rest of the world with regards to what U.S. really wants and how it approaches to this conflict?

 

 And I understand you're speaking on behalf of the United States.

 

 So should I – when you are saying we are a weak democracy, different branches – so Congress's reaction to Netanyahu's speech, doesn't that represent what the United States wants with regards to what Israel wants in that conflict?

 

 Thank you.

 

 Because I wanted to ask, because Turkish foreign minister just harshly criticized the U.S. Congress's reaction to Netanyahu, I wonder if – since the ceasefire talks are ongoing, I wonder whether – do you find those maybe false claims made by Netanyahu towards Congress somehow troubling the big eyes to the ceasefire talks?

 

 All right.

 

 So, in the meantime, Matt, you know, the UN says that 150,000 Palestinians, you know, flee the new assault on Khan Yunis.

 

 I mean, this is, you know, it is almost like the twilight zone.

 

 We see these people moving from place to place and so on.

 

 I know this issue has been raised time and again on the issue of UNRWA, but the Knesset advanced legislation that would designate UNRWA as a terrorist organization.

 

 Now UNRWA has been responsible for Palestinian refugees for a very long time, since 1950 or 49.

 

 So do you envision an alternative to UNRWA?

 

 How will schools be run?

 

 How will clinics be run?

 

 One last thing, if you could comment on.

 

 there's a, you know, about UAE hosting a secret meeting with Israel and the U.S. for the day after.

 

 Just a couple of things to follow up on from Said's questions.

 

 On UNRWA, didn't you announce a ban of – before this congressional action?

 

 you announced that the administration would no longer be funding UNRWA, and as far as I know, never lifted that.

 

 So your pausing of aid basically precipitated this – it seemed to precipitate a situation where everybody pulled funding from UNRWA, and now you're sort of criticizing other people for cutting off UNRWA or criticizing the Israelis for cutting off UNRWA.

 

 And also, just on the question of the day-after talks that Said mentioned involving the UAE, some mention in The Washington Post reporting on that of the U.S. playing a coordinating role with this international force that would – being responsible for securing Gaza would be invited in by the PA.

 

 These are obviously details I'm not sure if you'll get into, but I wonder if you could sort of address the possibility of the U.S. playing that kind of coordinating role and separately whether U.S. security contractors could also be involved in that.

 

 One more slightly separate thing.

 

 Just on the trip planning that you mentioned, I wonder, now that you're basically – the Secretary has decided to stay for an extra day to attend the Netanyahu meeting.

 

 I wonder what the message to ASEAN and to that region, to Southeast Asia, is that you're also – that means it was announced yesterday that you would be at – that he would be – or, sorry, earlier in the week that he would be attending the funeral of the Vietnamese former leader.

 

 Now not going to attend that funeral.

 

 It seems like the participation at ASEAN is much shorter than was previously planned.

 

 This is all happening because the prime minister of Israel has decided to come to the U.S. How do you square that with sort of trying to tell Asian allies, partners in the region, Southeast Asia – this is obviously a really important region – that the U.S. is sort of all in on your region, but when a crisis happens in the Middle East, this is a meeting that's run by the president.

 

 does the Secretary of State really need to be there?

 

 We've been talking about UNRWA, and America has very – it doesn't have anybody on the ground in Gaza.

 

 I just wondered if you had any comment about the rising cases of polio, a disease that's virtually almost eradicated from the rest of the world, rising in Gaza, and also hepatitis.

 

 Is there any?

 

 – we've seen American doctors have gone in there to volunteer.

 

 We've obviously got lots of aid organizations.

 

 Is there anything else that the United States can do to assist with reducing the risk of disease rising over the next months?

 

 And presumably those supplies are suffering from the same problems of not being able to move around inside Gaza.

 

 And now with the pier being out of operation, is that – are air drops continuing at all with the U.S., or is that something that we – I'm not aware of any, but I would defer to the Pentagon to speak to that.

 

 Two questions.

 

 American families victimized by Hamas by the lawsuit in U.S. federal court demanding $1 billion in compensation from North Korea.

 

 The argument is that this is because the weapons used by Hamas were provided by North Korea.

 

 What is your assessment on that?

 

 Is there any reaction from North Korea on this?

 

 Thank you.

 

 Didn't you name an Israeli guy?

 

 Just one more.

 

 Although I don't agree with the – I do not think that Congress is going to approve your request while – the way democracy is being treated under this administration.

 

 But my second question is about first time now a girls' school is blown up in North Waziristan, the tribal areas that I belong to as well.

 

 So I have mentioned to you that Talibanism is expansion – is expanding in that region, and I know the president of this administration has been under tremendous work since Ukraine war, now Gaza.

 

 But is there any, like, serious concentration being paid to this whole terrorism spread?

 

 this is the same time, by the way, when Malala was shot, and like – so that whole thing about girls' education has now passed from Afghanistan and has jumped into Pakistan as well.

 

 China's foreign ministry said that Hamas and Qatar agreed to end their divisions and form an interim national unity government during negotiations in China that ended today.

 

 What's your take on this agreement?

 

 Blinken is set to speak with Wang Yi in Laos.

 

 And then Israel's foreign minister said that instead of rejecting terrorism, Abbas embraces murderers and rapists of Hamas.

 

 Are you concerned that this could complicate reaching a ceasefire deal, this response from Israel?

 

 Thanks.

 

 Just on what Daphne just asked.

 

 So you're saying that it doesn't matter whether Hamas actually has a unity government with this, let's say, Fatah and the other groups and so on, and basically announced that they adhere to the principles enunciated by this group, by the PLO and so on.

 

 So they have no role to play whatsoever?

 

 So in fact, in their statements and so on, in their discussions, in their interviews – and we have seen their spokesmen engage on Arab satellite TV all the time, and they actually say that they will go along with the principles of the PLO, they accept the two-state solution, they accept whatever agreement that can come about, they are focused on the ceasefire and achieving a ceasefire.

 

 You don't think there is anything positive in these gestures, the fact that they most recently spoke about a two-state solution as a solution to the conflict?

 

 So just – I don't want to belabor the issue, but looking at how much influence Hamas has had in Gaza over the past for a very, very long time – 17, 18 years and so on – and do you see a situation where they actually can be completely taken out or can be decapitated as the Israelis – just to use the Israeli term and so on – from the political scene?

 

 I mean, they have – they are embedded in the society itself.

 

 1 Well, I agree 100 percent with you that I finally say it ought to be for the Palestinian people and nobody else.

 

 I agree with you with that.

 

 Let me ask you about prospects for the ceasefire.

 

 Are you inclined to believe that the Israeli prime minister may surprise everybody and announce that he agrees to the term of the ceasefire?

 

 What is your reading of what's going on?

 

 Because I mean, we are probably at the point where every little detail has been discussed, every iota or every i has been dotted and every t is crossed and so on.

 

 QUESTIONER 1 My final question is on – there was a report that Israel bombed a tent of journalists.

 

 I wonder if you know about this report.

 

 And of course, there have been something like 160 Palestinian journalists that have been killed thus far.

 

 Why is there no outrage on the fate of journalists in Gaza?

 

 Republicans are criticizing Vice President Harris for not attending or not planning to attend Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech to a joint meeting of Congress tomorrow.

 

 She'll be campaigning in the Midwest, but Republicans say she's boycotting the speech.

 

 Of course, there's also no public meeting right now between Secretary Blinken and Netanyahu.

 

 Can you say if this is a boycott or if there are any concerns on behalf of the Administration about the optics of meeting with Netanyahu publicly?

 

 Have Israeli officials reached out with any concerns?

 

 This is the first time this has happened, the Vice President not attending a speech before a joint meeting of Congress in over three decades, I believe.

 

 Just one chance.

 

 Will there be any meeting with other members of the delegation that will come with Netanyahu?

 

 I don't know who he's accompanying him.

 

 Donald Trump's confirmed that Netanyahu is going to go to Mar-a-Lago tomorrow.

 

 Do you have any concerns that this meeting is happening ahead of his Congress address and also meeting with the President?

 

 And I have one more after that.

 

 And one, just going back to the region, there's a report about this.

 

 It's described as a secret meeting with the UAE about the Gaza Day after plan, and the report – the reporting is that State Department Counselor Tom Sullivan attended.

 

 Can you confirm whether that meeting took place?

 

 And if yes, whether you can give us any more information about it?

 

 Just one more, because there's an op-ed coming from the Emiratis as well.

 

 Their special envoy wrote about this.

 

 She said that the plan involves deploying a temporary international mission to Gaza.

 

 Can you comment at all on whether that's accurate or — MR PRICE No.

 

 On the day-after plans, can you give us an understanding as to how far along those plans actually are, if you guys have agreements in terms of the countries that would partake in this international force to stabilize Gaza?

 

 And then just one question on the previous question she had about Trump meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Thursday.

 

 Are you guys concerned at all about the former president trying to influence the prime minister at a moment when there are these tense, high-stake negotiations to come to a ceasefire and hostage agreement?

 

 And can I just ask one clarifying question on that?

 

 The Hatch Act prevents citizens who don't have authority from the United States from directly or indirectly having correspondence with foreign governments to try and influence the measures or the conduct of those foreign governments.

 

 On the topic of presidents, with President Biden being done in six months, does the Administration thereby extension the State Department, Antony Blinken, are they at risk of losing any leverage of ending the war in Gaza or in freeing the hostages?

 

 If I may, if you'll indulge me, please, on Nicaragua.

 

 I know it's totally separate, but can I – okay, thank you.

 

 Religious freedom in Nicaragua.

 

 Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu is here, and there's a big protest planned for tomorrow outside the Capitol Hill.

 

 At the same time — Outside which building?

 

 At the same time, there are large groups expected in favor of Netanyahu also.

 

 The local media reports that there is a possibility of clash and disturbance on the streets of D.C. tomorrow.

 

 What are your thoughts on that?

 

 What is your message to the protesters coming here from different states?

 

 The Pakistani Government was reporting millions of Afghan refugees, but on the intervention of UN and United States, Pakistani Government extended their stay for one more year.

 

 What are your thoughts on this decision?

 

 And what is your – what is your comment on the situation of Afghan refugees in Pakistan?

 

 And then can I switch to the Middle East?

 

 Do you have any updates on the discussions around a hostage deal?

 

 Netanyahu said he would send negotiators later this week to continue negotiations.

 

 Will Bill Burns be there?

 

 What can you tell us about where things stand?

 

 So you don't anticipate this could be done by the time the Israeli Prime Minister addresses Congress on Wednesday?

 

 Will Blinken have any engagements with Netanyahu while he's here?

 

 And will he meet with the hostage families who are in town?

 

 With the Houthi attack on Tel Aviv on Friday, our video verification team did what they do best, and they determined that the UAV exploded about 200 meters away from the U.S. Embassy branch in Tel Aviv.

 

 Has there been any discussion with the Israelis or any conclusion as to whether the U.S. Embassy branch was indeed a target?

 

 And given the proximity, do you expect or has there been any change in security posture at that branch or any of the others?

 

 Just to be clear, you're not expecting the Israeli Prime Minister to come to this building for any meeting, are you?

 

 You don't?

 

 Now, let me ask you this about the Prime Minister, as an expert, not that I want you to get into his head.

 

 No, you are an expert on this issue.

 

 You're an expert in knowing the Israeli Prime Minister, for sure.

 

 You've encountered him many times.

 

 But my question to you, would he be less inclined to be cooperative on this deal?

 

 You know, I mean, he's opting by nature, but now he may feel that there's, you know, a great deal of disincentive to go ahead with this deal since the person who basically, you know, articulated this deal has decided that he will no longer run for office.

 

 Okay, so you don't feel that a great deal may have changed in what Israel would want or would agree to in the last 24 hours as a result?

 

 Yeah, a couple more questions.

 

 The U.S. criticized the ruling, the ICJ ruling, that the Israeli occupation of Palestine is illegal.

 

 Why would you do that?

 

 Because you guys, I just want to learn, you are a signatory to 242, 338, and so on, which speak very clearly on, you know, what is occupied territory and so on.

 

 Why would you be opposed to a statement that is stating the obvious, actually, that the West Bank and East Jerusalem are not?

 

 I mean, your position is very clear on the occupation, very clear on the pursuit of a two-state solution, and so on, and the settlement, all this.

 

 But the Israelis are not responding.

 

 Now, you continue to say that the best or the most feasible path forward on this is negotiation.

 

 But then we have the legislative body of Israel come out and say, you know, we're not going to negotiate on this issue.

 

 So why not then, you know, take this matter into some sort of international forum?

 

 Lastly, on the water.

 

 Israel is using water as a weapon according to different reports in Gaza.

 

 I mean, it's like water has been cut off by 94%.

 

 I think like what Saeed was kind of getting at, if you, you're basically saying we don't sort of see this court's opinion as useful, but that's not really what courts are for, right?

 

 They're not there as bodies to make useful political interventions and issues.

 

 This is an issue where you say you support international law, but in international law, the concept of international law means that there are courts that can rule on these kind of things, right?

 

 And now we've got the ICC and the ICJ have both taken actions regarding Israel in the last few months.

 

 And in both cases, you've sort of pretty strongly spoken out about the courts, those courts' interventions.

 

 So, you know, how can you say that you support international law when whenever the bodies of international law act, you denounce it?

 

 And by doing that, you're kind of, you're signaling to your ally Israel that it doesn't need to follow those rulings.

 

 Going back to the ceasefire deal, actually, Secretary's remarks, the 10-yard line, was on Friday, just before Sunday, President Biden's decision to drop out the race.

 

 Now, Prime Minister Netanyahu arrives in a very politically uncertain environment.

 

 No, I would just, I'd just like to ask, should we still expect that ceasefire deal put forward by President Biden stand as effective as it would be, given he's not running for the second term now?

 

 Because there are reports that Prime Minister Netanyahu might be dragging his feet until November to see who would be the next president of the United States.

 

 The meeting between the Prime Minister and the President doesn't take place tomorrow or before the Secretary travels to Asia.

 

 Do we expect a separate meeting between Secretary Blinken and Netanyahu?

 

 Just a quick follow-up on Netanyahu.

 

 Has there been any engagement or discussion with Israelis regarding Netanyahu's expected remarks to Congress on Wednesday?

 

 At the headphone, I understand that a UN conference was inquired on by Israeli forces in Gaza.

 

 Has the Israeli Government given you any information about this incident?

 

 Are you asking for information?

 

 I mean, this is happening, as you guys have touted, this new deconfliction mechanism.

 

 How do you make it safe for humanitarian convoys to move forward if even this isn't working?

 

 Is there any discussion of punitive measures for Israel if they continue to knowingly fire on marked humanitarian combat?

 

 Okay, and then just at the very top of what you said, you said over the last nine months the humanitarian situation in Gaza has been dire.

 

 Is it the view of the administration that prior to nine months ago, prior to October 7th, the humanitarian situation in Gaza was just fine?

 

 I'll defer to Johnnie, but on the pier, did it meet its goals?

 

 I mean, its goals as defined, and so on, you believe that it met its goals.

 

 I know you mentioned that it fed 400,000 Palestinians for one month, that's one-fifth of the population for one month, but that was exactly the intended goal that it will feed 400,000 Palestinians for one month?

 

 I defer to Jennifer, then I'll take my turn.

 

 Was this aid actually distributed within Gaza, Vedant?

 

 Because WFP had to suspend its operations due to security issues, and I know they did a one-off thing to move it all to their warehouses, but was it actually distributed to the people?

 

 And then the coordination cell you mentioned, when did the Israeli government agree to?

 

 Isn't this something that the Israelis had said they were going to be working on after the deadly strike on the World Central Kitchen Convoy?

 

 Are there any updates on the opening of the Rafah Crossing?

 

 Where do those discussions happen?

 

 And then my last question on Gaza.

 

 There was a very disturbing BBC report earlier this week about a man who had Down syndrome, whose mother said he was attacked by IDF dogs and left to die.

 

 Does the State Department tracking this report?

 

 Have you asked the Israeli government to investigate?

 

 Yeah, the Israeli Knesset yesterday voted against the Palestinian State, ever.

 

 Do you have any comment on that?

 

 Would that sort of make you adopt a different approach, or would you have a mechanism to ensure that there is going to be a Palestinian State despite now it is legislated into law, or will be legislated into law, that no Palestinian State will ever emerge?

 

 Yeah, but the Knesset makes the laws for Israel like our Congress makes the laws for us in this country.

 

 So, I mean, with all due respect, if it remains contained to rhetorical commitment, I mean, it doesn't make any difference.

 

 Would it make any difference?

 

 Is the United States, in other words, willing or able to take some steps to actually make this happen?

 

 I just want to ask you a couple more.

 

 You know, the Mossad leader, the Israeli intelligence leader said that Netanyahu is really intent on thwarting any deal.

 

 Do you have any comment on that?

 

 Thank you, Vedant.

 

 I just wanted to follow up on my question yesterday, the photo of Israeli soldiers posing in front of the Turkish-Palestinian hospital in Gaza.

 

 What is your reaction to this photo and the reports that the IDF is using this hospital as their military base in Gaza?

 

 Will the U.S. make its own assessment, in this case, on whether or not IDF is violating international law?

 

 At this point- Because this is not the first time we are seeing photos of Israeli soldiers- At this point, we have asked our- Posing in front of civilian infrastructure and using hospitals as their military base.

 

 There are many reports about that.

 

 Yeah, a follow-up on that.

 

 So these sanctions against, it's a visa ban against Elor Azaria, does that sort of imply that he hasn't had, that his treatment, the treatment of his case by the Israeli authorities was not fully in line with the standards of justice that the U.S. would like to see?

 

 Right, so this was one of the cases that was involved in earlier this year, the Leahy determinations that you guys made, according to the memo of justification that the organization Dawn obtained and posted online.

 

 It includes a discussion, it's a State Department document, but it includes a discussion of the case and says the Secretary of State determined that the government of Israel is taking effective steps to bring justice, bring to justice the responsible member.

 

 So specifically talking about this case, isn't there like a mixed message here, if you're also saying we're, you know, this is eight years after the fact, but we're taking this action against this individual, but you're also saying, you know, justice has been done in this case.

 

 But I guess people would say, you know, people would look at this and say, well, you're imposing a sanction on the individual, but the institution that he's part of, the whole point of the Leahy law is to stop U.S. assistance going, weapons and assistance going to units that are involved in human rights violations.

 

 In this case, you've determined that this unit, this was a gross violation of human rights.

 

 I think he ended up serving nine months in prison.

 

 As you said, that's debatable, but, you know, isn't there a question here over whether you're really following the spirit of the Leahy law where this unit is still able to receive U.S. weapons?

 

 So do you think that, you know, someone who's been found guilty of extrajudicially killing an unarmed Palestinian, you know, given everything you've said about about the need for action to be taken on to make sure, you know, stability is maintained in the West Bank, this is a very sort of febrile atmosphere there.

 

 Cases like this have have have contributed massively to to that instability.

 

 So the institution that we're talking about has basically concluded that that crime needed a nine month jail sentence.

 

 And that's sort of that's sufficient.

 

 Does that does that do you agree that that's sufficient?

 

 But you had the opportunity in this case, you know, there's a detailed case here that you've named this individual in a press release.

 

 I'm not sure whether you were required to do that, but it's quite clear in this case when it comes to, with reference to the Leahy law, when it comes to the question of whether to restrict weapons to the Israeli military, you're willing to take these steps up to that point.

 

 And then at that point, you're not willing.

 

 Can you just help us understand, though, the process a little bit more?

 

 Because it seems you rolled out some restrictions for action that's been taken in the last few months, and then there's this one of eight years ago.

 

 I mean, it just, it's a little bit confusing to understand what kind of process is being embarked on here.

 

 And then just one last thing.

 

 You said that there hasn't been better accountability across the board when it comes to Israel.

 

 Is there any, is there any broader action that you guys would consider taking?

 

 I mean, if you find all of these violations have occurred, is it as meaningful to go after individuals, perhaps like the IDF itself needs to be targeted?

 

 Sorry, I missed the top, or maybe even more than just the top.

 

 But in response to these questions right here about this latest sanction that you introduced, you say that you're judging their effectiveness by the loudness of the complaints?

 

 But the complaints from the people who have been targeted and complaints from the Israeli government mean that they've been affected or just that they're angry?

 

 Now, expanding these sanctions and so on, would you expand it to include the – Smutrich, who is a very powerful minister, he is virtually the governor of the occupied West Bank and so on, and he encourages these acts and encourages settlements and so on.

 

 Would you do something like this to include someone in the Israeli government?

 

 With one exception, you know, as compared to other governments and so on, I mean, next week we're expecting the prime minister of Israel to come to this town.

 

 You know, he will probably – it will probably be a love fest in Congress.

 

 There will be a lot of standing ovations and so on.

 

 But he is – he enjoys the support and he supports these two particular ministers.

 

 So I mean, where is the beef, so to speak, in this?

 

 One last question about Gaza.

 

 There was an analysis in Haaretz that says the Palestinians were quite hopeful that there will be a deal, but now they have lost hope.

 

 Are you as hopeful as you were last week?

 

 Did this hope dissipate in terms of arriving at a deal and so on?

 

 Knowing what you know now about the course of this latest round of negotiations – now, if it falters like the others have, will the onus be placed on Hamas, as you guys did in the past, or would it be placed on the Israelis?

 

 Back on Gaza.

 

 There is a photo of Israeli soldiers posing in front of the Turkish-Palestinian Friendship Hospital in Gaza widely circulated online.

 

 Turkish foreign ministry also condemned it.

 

 And I'm going to ask your reaction to it, because whenever we ask you about civilian killings in Gaza, you blame Hamas, accusing Hamas of hiding behind civilians, operating within hospitals and schools.

 

 And here in this case, it appears that IDF soldiers are also using a hospital in Gaza as their military base.

 

 There are also reports indicating that.

 

 Is this concerning you, and do you think this is a violation of international law?

 

 There was also a report by Washington Post in May shared the satellite images using – showing that Israeli soldiers is using this hospital as their base.

 

 And generally, I mean, do you think using hospitals as military base is a violation of international law?

 

 You said yesterday that you had seen civilian casualties come down from high points of the conflict and from where they were six weeks ago, but that you wanted to see them end completely.

 

 Palestinian health officials said at least 57 people were killed in Israeli bombardments.

 

 Does this increase your concerns at all, and have you raised this with your Israeli counterparts?

 

 Hamas has accused Israel of stepping up attacks to try and derail efforts for a ceasefire deal.

 

 Do you have any concern that that is the case?

 

 On this point that was just raised, Israel says that they were targeting Hamas, but you don't have any independent sources that confirm there was actually Hamas leaders in that building that was targeted, do you?

 

 But that makes, let's say, targeting one person worth killing 100 people?

 

 Well, the whole of Gaza is the size of Washington Metropolitan, Washington, D.C. I mean, it is a guerrilla force.

 

 It's not an army.

 

 They're not allowed to have airplanes and tanks and so on.

 

 Let me ask you about something that you just said, that Israel wants to degrade and deplete and render Hamas totally incapable of launching an attack like the one we saw on October 7th.

 

 Well, the president himself said that Hamas was unable to do that anymore back on the 31st of May.

 

 So why do we continue to do the same thing over and over again?

 

 If Hamas no longer is capable of doing this, if the United States of America, the preeminent power on earth, and the one that keeps the Israeli military sustained and so on, says, look, they are no longer – this reason is no longer valid because they no longer are able to do that, as the president said.

 

 So taking these two positions exactly that you just articulately illustrated, isn't that like a catchment to a situation – the war will go on forever because there will always be Palestinians who will fight the Israeli occupation no matter what, under whatever conditions?

 

 So are you saying this war can go on forever?

 

 We need to have completely neutralized Hamas, completely neutralized movement.

 

 Now, my last question.

 

 There was – UNRWA was – an UNRWA headquarter was flattened in Gaza.

 

 Do you have any comment on that?

 

 I mean, UNRWA has been the primary provider of aid and help, education, health care, and all these things for the Palestinians.

 

 Without UNRWA, there would be a humanitarian disaster on your hand.

 

 Do you have any comment on what has happened to UNRWA thus far?

 

 On your answer to Said about the day after and the plan for peace in the Middle East, you've been – I mean, from this podium or even from many other platforms in the U.S. Government, you've been pushing for months now for a day-after plan from the Israelis, and you're pushing with the regional players to find a formula for a peace that will – everlasting peace.

 

 But what we hear from the Israelis is a different page.

 

 They are opposing any Palestinian control of Gaza.

 

 They're not willing to enter any discussion internally about the day after, and in principle the Netanyahu government and his factions are against the two-state solution.

 

 You've been pushing for months.

 

 Do you have any way of pushing more or putting – exerting more pressure on the Israelis to engage in that?

 

 But what's the Palestinians' options here?

 

 I mean, until the Israelis or Israeli Government reach a sober moment to accept that it has to do tough choices, as you said, what are the Palestinians' options to fight this occupation?

 

 That will be acceptable to you?

 

 Let's just say the Palestinian Authority.

 

 I was asking specifically the attack on Saturday, Israel's attack on Gaza's HAN units.

 

 So Israel said it was targeting Hamas commander Mohamed Daif, and they are yet to confirm whether he was killed or not.

 

 Do you expect them to confirm it soon?

 

 If they won't, does this concern you?

 

 Because we know more than 90 civilians killed, including children, but we don't know whether the Hamas commander was killed or not, or even he was there after all.

 

 Do you think these kind of situations hamper ongoing ceasefire negotiations?

 

 Because we know civilians killed at the moment, but they are yet to confirm the Hamas commander they said they were targeting was killed or not.

 

 Do you think these kind of vague situations hamper the ongoing ceasefire process?

 

 Because we know the U.S. want to seal the deal as soon as possible.

 

 Thank you so much.

 

 Sir, you said that Hamas is a military organization, of course, several times.

 

 Can I go back to something you said in response to an earlier question?

 

 You said several times Israel is going to have to make tough decisions.

 

 I think you said three times.

 

 Does Hamas not, or do the Palestinians not have to make tough decisions too?

 

 Why are you saying it's all on Israel?

 

 I mean, your understanding of how this whole conflict started is still that it was Hamas attacking Israel.

 

 Okay.

 

 So why say now that it's only the Israelis who have to make tough decisions?

 

 Okay.

 

 So Hamas has to make a tough decision too?

 

 Okay, fine.

 

 But then it ought not to be a tough decision for Israel either, right?

 

 Because they would get, according to you, according to your theory here, if they take a tough decision and agree to a ceasefire, they're going to be safe.

 

 Would that the world be so simple.

 

 Same in connection with what I had.

 

 Recently in this connection question, recently Prime Minister Modi of India was in Moscow meeting with President Putin.

 

 They discussed about this situation in the Middle East in a big range many times, including this time when NATO meetings were going on here.

 

 So where do we go as far as Prime Minister Modi's discussion with President Putin that this war is – must be ending and people – countries must come to an end to have a peace for the – for peace forever in the Middle East between these nations, Israel and other countries, war going on in the region?

 

 The question is regarding the President Biden recent interview to 360 with Speedy in which he said that he got call from Saudis and they want to fully recognize Israel with the security conditions.

 

 The question is we have seen a brief security – brief by the national security team to the Congress about the nuclear cooperation, that is, civilian nuclear program with Saudi Arabia, and we got mistakes from the Congress, from the Republicans and Democrats.

 

 Some wrote a letter to President Biden to condition it with the nonproliferation, and some said, like, you have to look twice on this.

 

 So it seemed like there is some prioritizing by the U.S. And in this interview, President Biden didn't mention anything that Saudis are mentioning two-state solution for the Palestine.

 

 So is there anything under consideration regarding the – just with the security guarantees for the normalization between Saudi Arabia and Israel?

 

 On the diplomatic solution between Israel and Hezbollah, is there an agreement already ready to be signed in case there is a ceasefire in Gaza?

 

 I just wanted to, I guess, follow up really briefly on the Saudi Arabia question.

 

 Just to be clear, the President's characterization of it was broadly correct.

 

 And then do you think that you have time to, in this administration, to work out that kind of deal if events unfold in Israel the way you want, or has that window closed?

 

 Yesterday the President, in an interview, said that the Saudi conditions for normalization with Israel would be a guaranteed protection by the United States and the provision of arms and a security agreement, and also the ability to have a peaceful nuclear program and so on.

 

 He did not mention a Saudi condition that has always been laid in the back about a Palestinian state and all these things.

 

 That's fine.

 

 Israel was saying that the talks have already stopped.

 

 You don't think that but Mr. Netanyahu did the Prime Minister of Israel by reversing, you know a major concession that they made apparently to the negotiators.

 

 this this past You know only yesterday or the day before.

 

 you don't think that is actually an attempt on his part to scuttle the negotiations or If anything just to stall it.

 

 You don't feel that the attack on Mawassi that killed close to 100 Palestinians injured about 300 others and so on under the pretext of Targeting Hamas leaders, which is really a very convenient.

 

 Okay, I mean Under the claim that they were targeting Hamas leaders, which they really they never have to prove.

 

 Anyway, they can say we know that this X person was there and Y person was there So we target them we kill all these people.

 

 then nobody's going to ask us and and the most they can do is just you know We will launch an investigation Which we never hear the results of.

 

 so you don't feel that such a such a crime really, you know Using F-35 to bomb two places one of them You know Against the respondents, you know, the first responders and so on while the other was going on.

 

 You don't think this is an attempt by the Israeli government to just basically say, you know, you can go You know fly a kite.

 

 I think what we have seen in statements and indeed the negotiations that Hamas is really at least it appears to be committed to the negotiations But what we have seen is a pattern by the Israeli government that every time you get close The result we get something like this We get a bombardment that you know in the hope that it will scuttle, you know and leave it.

 

 Leave it, you know to keep the onus on on Hamas so to speak.

 

 So we're not concerned about the Palestinians are committed to this ceasefire But are you certain that Israel is committed to the points that were you know?

 

 Stated by the president on them on May 31.

 

 I just want to follow up on your answer to say it about the about the reported in Israeli media that the Benjamin Netanyahu and his government is trying to Sabotage the the negotiation every time we reach to a point where it's closed.

 

 And I remember there was so much hope when you received the latest Hamas proposal and there was Statements from the White House and the State Department.

 

 but we heard over the weekend either from sources in the Israeli media or from Mr. Netanyahu in his press conference that he is not budging he will stick to the letter of the proposal of the May 31st, which and sources also in the Egyptian side said that the Israeli delegation is just Stolen the there is a discord among Israelis and they also said that the negotiation is in a dead end.

 

 Mr. Letton young is a press conference also put five red lines.

 

 He stated them.

 

 One of them is what been Understood to be that Israel has to stay in the Philadelphi Corridor.

 

 Is that something within the May 31st?

 

 Israeli finance ministers much reach today opposed releasing Palestinian prisoners as part of any You know potential Gaza Gaza ceasefire agreement.

 

 Have you seen that comment and do you have any reaction to this especially with regards to Gaza ceasefire?

 

 Take one more, please.

 

 Do you have any comments on the?

 

 Israeli attack on the on a UN school in Sarah at refugee camp in Gaza Over the weekend.

 

 Anwar also said its heads headquarters in Gaza has been completely Destroyed in an attack.

 

 What is your reaction and do you think a Israel is targeting on the side sides?

 

 Intentionally, so.

 

 No Update as to if the strike actually killed a top Hamas commander.

 

 did you expect that they will eventually have certainty on this one or is this one where I can't say expect?

 

 okay, and can I just have it to one thing still on Israel.

 

 but my CNN international colleagues reported over the weekend that commanders of the Israeli military battalion the Israeli Netza Yehuda have been promoted to IDF positions and are running operations in Gaza.

 

 now I asked about it because obviously this is one of those battalions that was accused of gross human rights violations Committed before October 7th but the United States didn't make a decision as to whether or not you guys are going to restrict US military assistance that Could get to that battalion.

 

 So I just wonder if you guys have a response to the fact that now some of these former Officials part of this command are now in Gaza and if you've talked to Israeli officials about that at all.

 

 So you don't know if the US government was made aware or not that they were going to go on to Positions in the IDF and in Gaza.

 

 I don't okay, and I mean Like timeline here.

 

 I mean this.

 

 you know, you guys made this determination more than almost three months ago now.

 

 the secretary said that you guys were engaging to identify Effective remediation path for this unit.

 

 did the secretary Discuss with the Israeli officials the delivery of arms to Israel and is there any update regarding the two thousand?

 

 Bombs.

 

 Thank you, Matt.

 

 A meeting was held a few days ago in Cairo regarding the arrangement of boarding between Egypt and Israel and the United States.

 

 While Egypt is insist Israel to withdraw from Philadelphia Philadelphi Corridor Israel is stay there and Control over this area.

 

 There is any new arrangement regarding this issue?

 

 Okay, next question, please When will the United States condemn Israel targeting of civilian in Gaza, especially consideration?

 

 considering that US administration is providing Israel with the Weapons that killed the Palestinian civilian.

 

 Yeah I Didn't think you were gonna ask me a NATO question when I called on you Anyway, and are you aware of the Lancet group report?

 

 It's a medical magazine British medical magazine that estimated the deaths as a result of the war in Gaza could be 186,000 and of course, it's taken into account.

 

 the expert took into account Indirect deaths.

 

 you know that have happened thus far and may happen as a result of war including disease and other things and starvation.

 

 So are you concerned that?

 

 you know, the figures could be far more staggering that what we've seen Published by let's say the Ministry of Health in Gaza?

 

 you know I remember early on the Assistant Secretary of State Barbara Lee said told that I guess one of the committees on Capitol Hill that the death may actually be more than what the Ministry the health ministry The death toll could very well be more.

 

 I wanted to ask you about the status of the top I know.

 

 yesterday you said and Kirby at the White House who call you the White House said that you know That you are optimistic.

 

 Although there are gaps.

 

 Are we any closer today?

 

 Do you have any assessment as we're to where we are today and so on?

 

 and Of course Hamas is saying that the latest Israeli attack actually made, you know, may jeopardize.

 

 And my last question now the Israeli Prime Minister is expected to come to the city in two weeks and so on.

 

 Is it your assessment that he actually would come and speak before Congress if a deal has not been arrived?

 

 Simon Just staying well in the region.

 

 on Gaza that supposed to be talks in Doha tomorrow.

 

 Is there any sort of update from from the US side?

 

 That you can give us on the possibility of a hostage deal.

 

 You know, there's been some positive talk last week.

 

 But you know, are we any closer to to getting a deal?

 

 We've seen there's been some reporting that Arab foreign ministers Have been invited to the NATO summit.

 

 I think there's an Israeli delegation here.

 

 Is anything you can say about about Who's here whether the secretary will meet with them and also what the What how much that the Gaza situation the Israel Palestinian situation will be part of the talks?

 

 Is there a meeting involving Secretary Blinken and those those?

 

 Middle-eastern foreign ministers including the Israelis?

 

 is that they all in one meeting?

 

 that's going to be discussed?

 

 So if there is a there will be bilateral meetings between Secretary or other US officials and those countries where you'll talk about the future of Gaza.

 

 That's that's on the agenda.

 

 are you hoping for the as a whole to express some view on The conflict in Gaza?

 

 you know, particularly are you expecting are you hoping that that NATO?

 

 leaders will endorse the peace deal and Let me defer that question until further in the week when we actually have the communique.

 

 Yeah, I know you don't want to get into You know a full assessment as to the ongoing talks for a ceasefire But I do.

 

 I do wonder if you could just help us understand how this moment is different than it has been in the past.

 

 It was about a month ago that Blinken said in in in the region that there are some of the changes that Hamas had put forth are workable and some are not.

 

 is that still the case or has that changed?

 

 so you can't say or you're not willing to say if Hamas has dropped any of its Demands that were made about a month.

 

 Okay, and then I know we talked briefly about this yesterday with Modi Visiting with Putin, but they did make some announcements Particularly with regard to continued agreements when it comes to energy and oil and Obviously that is a key factor in fueling Russia's war in Ukraine and so I just wonder how you guys respond to that.

 

 Previously a little bit reluctant to criticize India For importing Russian oil.

 

 So we know the u.s is working for the day after planning gaza and for the nato summit.

 

 turkish president erdogan and his delegation Including the foreign minister will be here in town.

 

 Is that something you will discuss with your turkish counterparts given ankara has long pledged to?

 

 Guarantorship in the region and we know we hear from the turkish officials that they are encouraging hamas to accept the ceasefire proposal And also right after joe biden announced the ceasefire deal.

 

 We know secretary blinken and turkish foreign minister.

 

 How confident.

 

 held a phone call immediately right after that So i'd like to hear more on that.

 

 Should we expect similar meetings on the sidelines of the nato summit this week between american?

 

 But you probably can guess what I'm getting at is.

 

 You know in the other Situation that we're often talking about in Gaza When there are strikes there have been there have been strikes that have hit hospitals other facilities Universities in in those cases and often and in some cases, you know weapons are actually involved in those strikes, but you've been pretty unable in a lot of those cases to say definitively what happened.

 

 You know, why.

 

 why the disparity there among about your sort of information gathering?

 

 the Israeli case often, you know, we're left with after months You know You haven't got come up with a real conclusion about what happened in a certain Specific incident that you know.

 

 and these are these are US weapons that are being used.

 

 you have the ability to Sort of demand answers from the country involved.

 

 So I think people will watch this and think you know, there's a disparity here and and I'm wondering you know is there not a Difference in the way that you're approaching these and giving the benefit of the doubt to one side?

 

 Thank you.

 

 I wanted to ask you first If you read or heard about the Hart report on Israel employing the Hannibal directive on October 7th.

 

 okay Alright now you and your answer to Simon.

 

 you you gave to answer you.

 

 you you were saying that you know Almost with certainty that People were killed in the crossfire.

 

 Do you have any figure on how many people got killed in the crossfire?

 

 No, or how many people that died as a result of direct Israeli attacks?

 

 300 people died that day, but At any rate.

 

 so let me ask you what is the status of the negotiation now?

 

 Is there I mean is there a ceasefire in Gaza's future and you?

 

 So you believe that the Israeli prime minister is okay with this new proposal?

 

 let me ask you a couple of things.

 

 I mean, you know, we see Israel Rafah is completely destroyed and people are dying.

 

 Israel is just the grabbing land in the West Bank.

 

 It's really doing a lot of things.

 

 Would you be agreeable to any other state doing what Israel has done?

 

 Let's say in the past 48 hours or the past 72 hours or the past week and so on against Palestinians whether in Gaza or in the West Bank.

 

 I mean, wouldn't you be outraged?

 

 I mean we hear reports by Israeli soldiers themselves.

 

 They're saying they were killing children because they were bored.

 

 So any particular response to what happened last week in terms of the size of land?

 

 Confiscated by Israel for settlement purposes, which is apparently the largest since the you know The 1967 war in the sense 90 definitely since the Oslo Accord in 1993.

 

 have any particular comment on that?

 

 Because There was a list of principles.

 

 The Israeli Prime Minister.

 

 Mr. Netanyahu His office issued yesterday on the ceasefire one of which appeared to be a desire or he said insisting on Resuming fighting until all the objectives of the war have been achieved.

 

 I mean, we know that one of his objectives is the complete destruction of Hamas not just his military existence, but also its administrative Governance capabilities and so on which goes way beyond what the president announced is may Framework that was described as the Israeli proposal.

 

 So have you got any reaction to what he said yesterday?

 

 I'm just I mean the reason I'm pushing back on that is it was a very public announcement by the president about in Some detail about what should be in this Proposal and we have a very public announcement by the Israeli prime minister about what he believes.

 

 So this isn't.

 

 I'm not asking to negotiate in public.

 

 I'm just asking for Whether you believe this is a shift in the Israeli position or is this something that mr Netanyahu is simply saying?

 

 So do you think he's saying this for domestic consumption and he doesn't actually mean it?

 

 you Warned of widespread starvation in Gaza all the way back in December.

 

 We've had aid organizations and relief groups who said over and over again that Israel is using starvation as a tactic of war.

 

 You've had 12 US government employees who resigned and they accused the US government of undeniable complicity in the starvation of Palestinians Doctors, we've spoken to Al Jazeera has told us that they in part also blame the US government for the horrors that they are seeing.

 

 How do you respond to the allegations of complicity of the US government and what more will it take for The u.s. To stop Israeli military funding?

 

 So just follow up on that.

 

 the latest IPC report actually says that 96% of the population of Gaza is facing acute Which is why I just said it's a dire.

 

 It's still very dire and you've spoken about what the u.s. Has them at.

 

 the u.s Also continues to be the biggest funder of Israeli military and under u.s Law it is required that any country receiving military support must up must not obstruct the flow of humanitarian aid during war.

 

 Every major rights group from the United Nations to Human Rights Watch has said that Israel is using Salvation as a tactic of war.

 

 Do you disagree with that?

 

 Are you just sorry?

 

 one final question.

 

 Are you not afraid of completely losing legitimacy?

 

 So, let me let me just answer Supporting human rights in one country.

 

 Let me just not when it comes to Palestinian.

 

 Yeah The political or diplomatic solution that the US is working on between Israel and Hezbollah, especially after the visit that Mr. Hochstein made last week to Paris.

 

 I have any.

 

 Yeah Situation in Gaza.

 

 given some of your answers earlier that you mentioned the IPC report.

 

 so one of the things that that report said was that the A lot of the progress that Israel that had may have been made after you kind of gave this ultimatum to the Israelis About about opening new gates and things had actually been reversed by the Israeli operation in Rafah.

 

 You know, there was a lot of talk about that operation in Rafah.

 

 You know main a major operation Rafah shouldn't go ahead.

 

 Some kind of operation did go did go ahead.

 

 you haven't said it's a major operation and Foreign journalists have been taken there by the Israelis for the first time.

 

 I think a lot of people have seen the images.

 

 You still stick with this this assessment that this wasn't a major operation given some of the destruction, you know Noting that these journalists were taken in by the Israelis So they were only able to see what the Israelis wanted them to see.

 

 and if you see the footage it looks You know pretty devastating.

 

 I think a lot of people would say the way that you?

 

 You gave a very strong warning a very clear warning.

 

 you know, don't go into Rafah.

 

 Yeah, we can do but we can debate whether it's a major operation but there is a still a huge amount of destruction hundreds of thousands of people displaced.

 

 Yeah, the death toll might be a little bit lower, but but there's still a rising death toll.

 

 this was supposed to be or I think was communicated as a way that the u.s. Was You know restraining the Israelis from from committing more of the the worst kind of Or creating the worst kind of images that we'd seen earlier on in the war and worsening the humanitarian situation.

 

 The humanitarian situation has got worse as a result of the operation.

 

 Yeah, maybe it falls short of Some category for a major operation, but doesn't this?

 

 Basically what has happened is that they Israel has gone ahead with what you Almost what you were telling them not to.

 

 Just two really quick questions on Israel.

 

 there's a report that the and Egypt are going to work on a high-tech underground barrier to prevent smuggling of weapons from Egypt Into Gaza and they've told Israel that they will work on this.

 

 effort is if there's a ceasefire and hostage agreement.

 

 Is that accurate?

 

 Can't give you any kind of okay.

 

 and then just one more on on another Report with regard to Israel that over the weekend.

 

 There was a Hezbollah missile attack towards Israel and according to a local Medical center there was an American citizen who was injured.

 

 Is the State Department able to confirm that?

 

 give us any details on the status of that American citizen?

 

 I can confirm that there was American citizen who was injured in Israel one American citizen who was injured in Israel, but I can't Give you any details of the situation other than to say that we are monitoring the situation and are in contact with Israeli authorities And are you in contact with this American citizen's family and we are providing assistance to the US citizen and their family.

 

 Go ahead I'm gonna do a few more around the room that I gotta go.

 

 Which is a different stance than what Orban seems to be laying out there.

 

 So are you concerned that this shows division?

 

 and then there's reporting that the US invited the foreign ministers of Israel and several Arab countries to the NATO summit.

 

 Can you confirm that and who was invited?

 

 Can you say if Israel is one of these?

 

 All right, I understand.

 

 So anyway, on the Middle East, and as it relates to one, Gaza, but two, Lebanon.

 

 So one, on Gaza, is there any movement at all that you guys have seen on this ceasefire proposal?

 

 And then two, on Lebanon, where do things stand now if they're any different than they were yesterday?

 

 And if they're not different than yesterday, then OK.

 

 Thanks for that.

 

 Sticking on Lebanon, the New York Times is reporting that Israel's top generals want a ceasefire to start as soon as possible without Hamas having to be eliminated, that Hamas could still remain in power.

 

 They want to do this in order to, reportedly, to get the hostages out, which is something that everybody wants.

 

 Do you have a comment on that at all?

 

 Obviously, this is no surprise, given that we've seen IDF spokespeople come out and say, Hamas cannot be defeated.

 

 Whereas, is there anything that you can give us on that?

 

 So that main goal of getting a ceasefire does not require immediate defeat of Hamas?

 

 and just on Lebanon, just following up on that, there's absolutely no change in security posture for the embassy there?

 

 and then on West Bank, Israel's far right finance minister, he agreed, this was end of last week, but he finally agreed to release funds for Palestinian Authority.

 

 It was a tit for tat exchange for legalizing, or for Israel legalizing, five Israeli settlements.

 

 Do you have a comment on this kind of tit for tat engagement?

 

 Is that something that the US would tolerate moving forwards, if there's anything that belongs to the Palestinian Authority that should go to them?

 

 What's your comment on them saying, we'll only do it if we legalize settlements?

 

 I mean, just on this reported Smotrych deal, and you've said that you obviously see outposts as inconsistent with international law.

 

 But I'm just a bit confused, because the reason these outposts are created by settlers is to, one of the reasons is to draw in the Israeli military, because they then are a protection force for those settlers that are there.

 

 So you say they're inconsistent with international law, they're destabilizing.

 

 But you are, at the same time, arming the military force that goes to protect the people that do it.

 

 Isn't that a very confused policy?

 

 But I don't ask.

 

 I mean, I just ask not because these are sort of one-off incidents, but this is systemic.

 

 Outposts, and now they're being legalized by the finance minister as part of this apparent deal, outposts are there.

 

 One of the reasons that they exist is very specific.

 

 It draws in the military to Palestinian-owned land that, in many cases, is a privately-owned Palestinian land that is taken by settlers.

 

 So it's more than just inconsistent with international law.

 

 It would be seen by any objective observer as the theft of land.

 

 And the point I'm making is that you're arming the military force that goes in to protect the people that do that.

 

 And you have seen us- But those protocols are not, obviously, in place for these particular actions, because it's been going on for years and years.

 

 And now you have the Israeli government actually, as part of a deal, not to withhold correspondent banking, which is- Tom, I stood behind this podium- These are not individual incidents.

 

 But the point I'm making is you say that's your policy, but it's actually not your policy.

 

 It's something you're saying, but what you're actually doing is militarizing the force that allows those outposts- It absolutely is our policy, Tom.

 

 The point that I'm making, Matt, is that- Okay, so where's the accountability then?

 

 We have a number of tools at our disposal and you have seen this administration utilize them when it comes to the government of Israel.

 

 Okay, so what have you utilized?

 

 What tool have you utilized so far, other than the 2,000 pound bombs, the suspension?

 

 Before I go to Gaza, I just want to follow up on the West Bank to Tom's question.

 

 On the settlement, is there any evidence, do you have any evidence that the Israelis listen to what you say, your expression of displeasure with the settlement and so on, let alone heed your warnings and so on on the settlement?

 

 Has there been a shred of evidence over the past so many months?

 

 Now, you've spoken against the settlement and this bit of settlement.

 

 Do you have any evidence that they actually said, okay, now we better stop because the United States is getting angry?

 

 But this is actually, I mean, that's a physical thing that you can point to.

 

 Has there been any sort of tearing down a settlement, backing off plans to increase housing by so many folds and so on?

 

 On Gaza, I wanted to ask a couple of questions.

 

 Now, the Israelis ordered new Khan Younis evacuation, and we heard the Secretary of State say yesterday that there's no sign that Israel is really lowering the intensity of its attacks on Gaza, and we also hear of looming starvation in Gaza.

 

 I mean, this is really a very horrific situation.

 

 Are you guys sort of reconciled?

 

 This is the order of the day.

 

 Things will go on like this indefinitely.

 

 I mean, do you have any kind of vision how this thing is going to end?

 

 When will it end?

 

 What is the United States of America doing about it?

 

 Can you tell us with certainty that Israel accepts this?

 

 Did the prime minister say that himself?

 

 Let me ask you one last question.

 

 Wounded Palestinian telling the BBC, more wounded Palestinian telling the BBC that they have been held as human shields and so on.

 

 Are you aware of these reports, and do you have any comment on that?

 

 Well, there were reports by the BBC that more Palestinians, I mean, we saw this, I guess, 10 days ago and so on, when the Israelis strapped a wounded Palestinian in the front of a jeep.

 

 Now, it seems that this is basically what's used time and time and time again.

 

 I was wondering if you are aware of these reports and if you have any comments.

 

 A couple of questions, if you don't mind.

 

 First, is the U.S. coordinating with Germany in its efforts to find a diplomatic solution for the war between Israel and Hezbollah?

 

 And are you aware of a visit that a German intelligence official made to Beirut and met with Hezbollah officials?

 

 On Syria and Turkey, do you have any comments on the clashes between Turks and Syrians inside Turkey and in northern Syria that killed seven people yesterday?

 

 My last question on Iran.

 

 Iran is expediting its nuclear program and they are more open now about declaring that they need the nuclear bomb based on the last round of missiles with Israel.

 

 What's your comment on that?

 

 The German newspaper Bild reported Israel could invade Lebanon this month.

 

 Will Israel forewarn the US of such action?

 

 Do renewed travel warnings for Americans to avoid Lebanon have anything to do with an impending Israeli operation in Lebanon?

 

 And is there any consideration of plans for the US and NATO to enforce a no-fly zone in parts of Ukraine?

 

 But you've seen the latest from Hamas that it's not good enough, right?

 

 I'm not asking you to get into it.

 

 Have you seen it?

 

 And then last one, just on the north, Israel's north, Lebanon's south, what's your current concern about the possibility of a broader conflict there?

 

 Just to follow up on Gaza, what do you make of the evacuation orders, again, that were released today in Kanunis and Rafah?

 

 You've always said that you were against all displacement of populations.

 

 And the Palestinians have been going up, down, east, west.

 

 And now, again, they had just fled.

 

 Now they came back.

 

 Now they have to leave again.

 

 What do you make of those orders today?

 

 It was reported over the weekend that the US proposed new language to bridge the gaps.

 

 You were saying you've been working to bridge the gaps between Hamas and Israel for a hostage release and ceasefire.

 

 Can you share with us if that new proposal was signed off on by Israel before the US put it forth?

 

 Or did you guys share it with both sides, just where that stands at this moment?

 

 So no time frame for expectations as to when the issue might get back?

 

 Thank you, Vedant.

 

 Secretary Blinken today at Brookings stressed again the need for a plan for the day after.

 

 And without it, it would be chaos.

 

 And he's also said that there's three things that the US will not accept, Israeli occupation, Hamas getting back to power, or chaos.

 

 But what we hear from the Israeli government all the time, that they are not ready yet to discuss such plans.

 

 And they don't want this Gaza Strip to be ruled by Hamas or even the PLO.

 

 And we know that you've stated many times, you are mad that you are stressing the Israelis and keep talking with them about this.

 

 Did you reach anywhere with them?

 

 Are they going to talk to you about their future plans for the day after?

 

 But are they susceptible to this push?

 

 Because publicly, they seem not.

 

 Tagging onto the debate question, is it some concern in this building that not just a lot of the international community, but even President, former President Trump said that, no, Israel is the one that's ensuring that the war, that the attack in Gaza continues there.

 

 Is there some concern that there's gonna be a broader consensus contrary to the claims of the State Department or the administration that Hamas is the holdup here?

 

 Well, there was some substance in the debate and- As there tend to be in presidential debates.

 

 And Trump and Biden depicted Hamas as the lone holdout for preventing a stop to the fighting.

 

 And Trump said, no, actually, Israel is the holdout.

 

 And then he quickly added that it should continue to kill Palestinians.

 

 So although he took a very militaristic perspective, he actually acknowledged the underlying truth shared by a great deal of the international community that in fact, it is Israel that is holding up a stone to the conflict.

 

 That must be a concern to you.

 

 Yeah, can we go back to Israel?

 

 Some German newspapers have said today that Israel's invasion of Lebanon is expected to be imminent or in two weeks.

 

 Do you have any signs that support such prediction?

 

 And are you aware of any U.S. official or officials going to the region this week to- I don't have any travel to announce.

 

 The Islamic resistance front in Iraq announced on Sunday that it will target U.S. interests if a conflict erupts between Israel and Hezbollah.

 

 What is your position and your response?

 

 The Islamic resistance front in Iraq.

 

 Announced on Sunday that it will target U.S. interests if a conflict erupts between Israel and Hezbollah.

 

 Many war journalists in Israel who were reporting this weekend on the protest of ultra-orthodox Jews against the Supreme Court's order to enlist them for military service have complained publicly about insults and violence from these protesters who called them whores among more insults.

 

 What is your reaction to these insults, to this violence towards women journalists?

 

 On Gaza, half a million people are facing a strong level of hunger, especially in the north, and actually WFP is describing the situation as full-blown famine.

 

 So what exactly are you doing to pressurize or persuade or cajole the Israelis to make sure that this is not going to happen and not materialize and actually a full famine?

 

 That was my follow-up, actually, because the UN said that Israel – I anticipate that.

 

 I've read my mind.

 

 Or I – That Israel – so do you believe that actually the Israelis can improve the way that the UN agencies, especially their workers, are delivering the aid?

 

 It could be met?

 

 One last question is – I'm sure you've seen these detailed reports.

 

 Most of them have harrowing accounts of Palestinian prisoners being rounded up.

 

 Some of them are being sexually assaulted, shackled for hours, inhumane conditions.

 

 And that's a description of Israeli human rights organizations like B'Tselem and others, and witnesses who are actually part of the IDF who came and talked about what happened.

 

 So you often call Israel as an ally who you shared values with.

 

 So how can the United States make sure that these things, which is obviously unacceptable for most democracies, that it's not allowed to happen?

 

 What exactly are you doing?

 

 What mechanism are you using to make sure that this is not happening, and if you're investigating it yourself?

 

 Oh, I apologize.

 

 It was a follow on her.

 

 On investigation of the use of Palestinians as human shields, or video that was on social media today about Israeli forces using attack dogs, you talk about investigations.

 

 Logistically, what does an investigation look like, and when would we see results of that type of investigation?

 

 So when I get asked about the IDF claim, but he was a doctor and he was also involved in Hamas's missile program?

 

 Rocket program.

 

 But Matt, don't you make assessment to other countries when you don't have equally the same information, whether it's Iran, whether it is China, whether even in Russia or Ukraine or others?

 

 So is it just with Israel that you're always unable to make that conclusive results, or is it just because you don't have the information?

 

 And to be clear, you have explicitly asked Israel for evidence that this doctor was involved in the strike.

 

 So I know you talked about Kenya, that the US is calling for the Kenyan forces to use non-lethal methods, but is the US government investigating reports of abductions by police during these protests in Kenya?

 

 Okay.

 

 Okay.

 

 And what's the latest on the Gaza pier?

 

 And is the US concerned that Israel and Hezbollah will fight a full-scale war?

 

 But not just that.

 

 There were also allegations that in 2016 that the Trump campaign was involved in trying to do some stuff behind the scenes with Israel and with Turkey.

 

 And then there are also maybe non-political campaign-related things, Bill Richardson's efforts and others of that ilk.

 

 Are you saying that – or are you discouraging any non-governmental attempt to free Evan and Paul Gershkovich and Paul Whelan?

 

 So, you know, I'm not wearing it because it's too hot.

 

 anyway Can you?

 

 there seems to be a lot of concern that the the UN is I'm gonna pull out of Gaza and not.

 

 you know, stop halt.

 

 It's a relief assistance operations there.

 

 I Understand there was some kind of a meeting that you guys brokered or tried or arranged yesterday To try to you know, figure out a way to that.

 

 They could keep operating.

 

 So on that what mechanism does us thing could be put in place to improve the lawlessness To improve the law and order in Gaza to allow a distribution?

 

 Is there anything specific?

 

 Is this the best option right now?

 

 for US government to You know to improve distribution and to get in more aid into Gaza the best option is to get a ceasefire.

 

 And final thing is and I've asked whether this is the main thing and this is your best option because you must have seen IPCs update it now talks about nearly half a million people are Living are facing the most severe form of starvation And they say clearly that after some slight improvement things have there is renewed deterioration after Israel is started.

 

 It's Rafah offensive.

 

 so, you know, how is the u.s. Going to remedy the situation and How it's like.

 

 help us wrap our heads around the fact that how are we still in this situation eight months into this war?

 

 final final thing.

 

 Sorry Did you get any specific assurance from?

 

 Israeli defense minister y'all Galan towards this end yesterday.

 

 He said that Golan indicated that they want a diplomatic resolution.

 

 Is that?

 

 Do you think that's?

 

 is that shared across the Israeli government some of the actions?

 

 For example, the Prime Minister is saying moving to the north.

 

 I know he Is that consistent with.

 

 So there is a.

 

 I just want to start off see if I could ask you for a reaction to medicine sans frontiers Saying that one of their colleagues Fadi al-wadiyah was killed in an attack this morning.

 

 The attack killed five other people including three children.

 

 Do you have any comment on that?

 

 I want to take a step back for a second if I could and just go over.

 

 You know over the past nine months folks in this room Have repeatedly raised potential war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by Israel and Gaza.

 

 That has included repeated mass casualty events that have resulted from strikes Sexual abuse in detention allegations thereof And as well as malicious destruction of civilian property.

 

 in many of these cases you've called on Israel to investigate itself.

 

 Generally speaking.

 

 Are you satisfied with how your ally has responded to these appeals?

 

 There are some reports speaking about that.

 

 Hamas is thinking to move from Qatar to Iraq and the Iraqi government approve it To host the Hamas leaders last month.

 

 Do you have any comments and have you seen these reports?

 

 Have you received any signs any indication from Iraqi government that just not gonna speak to private diplomatic conversation?

 

 And second question the Islamic resistance in Iraq.

 

 repeatedly They are threatening the US forces to leave Iraq.

 

 and what they said in the in their last statement?

 

 The four-month Guarantee that they gave it to Iraqi government to work with you to set a deadline to for the US withdrawal in Iraq has passed And it's been expired.

 

 so they're saying that they are going to resume their attacks on the US forces in Iraq if there's no Deadline for the US withdrawal in Iraq.

 

 So this is not something that you are wishing for.

 

 So, how are you going to prevent this?

 

 Attacks not be resumed in Iraq.

 

 Yeah, Jackson good Matthew Sorry.

 

 so If Israel does plan to intensify combat along its northern border with Lebanon Will we get forewarned?

 

 to get US citizens clear?

 

 and Canada's reportedly considering plans to evacuate its citizens from Lebanon.

 

 Is the US considering a Similar evacuation plans or changes to its Lebanon travel advisory here soon?

 

 The US vetoed multiple UN Security Council resolutions for a ceasefire over the last several months, of course But finally drafted one itself, which claimed that Israel had accepted the ceasefire.

 

 You say that they did.

 

 other people don't see it that way.

 

 My question is about the timing the.

 

 it came just after the latest orders from the International Court of Justice on May 24th.

 

 they ordered Israel to not invade Rafah And they stipulated that the invasion had in fact started on May 7th.

 

 Was that the actual purpose of the US backing that resolution at that time in order to forestall the UN Security Council doing?

 

 it's normal job of instituting the Security Council.

 

 No, it was not ICJ orders.

 

 You talk about the hostages.

 

 Israel has a Hannibal Directive in which it has orders in place to kill at least its own soldiers lest they fall into the hands of Palestinian groups and Their substantial reporting that that in fact What was utilized on October 7th, not just against Israeli soldiers, but against civilians.

 

 Are we not now in a situation where Israel may be?

 

 Using the Hannibal Directive not just on Israelis civilians and military but on u.s Citizens and other foreign nationals.

 

 fixed investment in israel has declined almost 68 during the last quarter of 2023 also plunged almost 20 percent.

 

 Uh, there's a 27 Dropped in private consumption and almost half a million people have fled the country according to local sources.

 

 Uh, how worried are you is the u.s. Government about this?

 

 Potential economic crisis in israel and how to help the country.

 

 Yeah Do you have a written or a public?

 

 Statement from hamas stating that they don't support the ceasefire Considering that according to you they were the ones who in previous months Yeah proposed something similar?

 

 Okay Moving on to the Middle East.

 

 So the secretary right now is meeting with the Israeli defense minister.

 

 Yes, what is he telling him and what are you hoping to hear from him?

 

 Okay, and are you expecting there to be any kind of any kind of a result?

 

 Okay Yeah, the Israeli prime minister said that the fighting Specifically in Rafah is winding down.

 

 The intense fighting is winding down.

 

 What have they told you specifically on that issue or given?

 

 have they given you a timetable or what have you and You what is your assessment of what that means?

 

 it's winding down according to and with the risk Playing up north.

 

 Thank you.

 

 the prime minister of Israel also said over the weekend or claimed that the u.s That Israel seen a dramatic decrease in u.s. Munitions to Israel And could you explain to us what the Biden administration understands from his word decrease?

 

 And whether that's correct.

 

 to.

 

 in Gaza There was a strike overnight on a medical clinic Reportedly killed the director of the ambulance emergency department.

 

 there's been a lot of Comments from from the US about the importance of protecting humanitarian workers, you know.

 

 Have you been able to verify anything about that incident and and do you have a comment?

 

 there's been some comments from Israeli officials talking about You know over a long period but but you know talking about the future security arrangements in Gaza You talked a little bit about about the sort of post-war future.

 

 I wonder is there Is there an agreement between the US and Israel on on what you know?

 

 What that might look like.

 

 who's actually going to be in charge in the meantime when they seem to be moving towards that You've been talking about?

 

 this is something that's going to happen.

 

 you know off in the future But but you know if they're actually moving to that Situation.

 

 I Think you've said before, you know, you don't want to see the Israelis reoccupy Gaza.

 

 Isn't that kind of what we're heading towards?

 

 Said over the weekend that there's the possibility that Israel we need to discuss to establish temporary military control Over civilian life in Gaza.

 

 Is that something that the u.s. Would temporarily support?

 

 we put we oppose military control.

 

 Look, they have temporary military control now, but we want to see that end.

 

 We want to see a transition to a different security environment and ultimately ultimately transition to a Reunified Gaza and the West Bank.

 

 now.

 

 you're not going to get there overnight.

 

 There has to be a transition plan There has to be a path to get there.

 

 what that looks like and when a different authority can take control are all things That we need to work out with our partners in the region and ultimately with the government of Israel.

 

 Do you think he's talking about this?

 

 For a limited amount of time or do you think he's trying to talk about this for an extended amount?

 

 okay, and then He also made comments that after this intense phase of the conflict in Gaza Concludes in the near term here Israel will continue mowing the lawn in Gaza.

 

 Does the u.s. Know exactly what Israel means?

 

 By continuing to mow the lawn and do you support that if there's no ceasefire in place?

 

 and then just last question You've obviously expressed u.s. Concerns that Israel Hasn't been fully focused on the day after conversations.

 

 Is that changing at all?

 

 Do you think Israel is taking any more seriously those conversations given that they are planning to wrap up these intense operations?

 

 You know do those conversations look a little bit different now.

 

 Sorry, I had one more I forgot.

 

 Okay, there are these reports of increased looting and gangs in Gaza You know and I Wonder who the United States thinks the onus is on to try and drive that down.

 

 I mean, is it the IDF that should be?

 

 Creating more law and order.

 

 Let me begin by asking a question that I've raised here for the past four years.

 

 on this occasion Today marks the fourth anniversary Since the Israelis killed the cousin of mine, Ahmed Erekat, on his way to pick up his mother and they kept his body Four years later.

 

 Do you think that Whatever he did he did not do anything But you know, whatever he did warrants to keep a body and prevent the family from having closure?

 

 but such a practice is not condoned in any way by anyone.

 

 And very quickly on your response to Simon now, you're saying that The Palestinians or Hamas, you know uses a human Or whatever, you know civilian facilities and so on for their own purposes and so on.

 

 Are you because this is The person that was killed, Dr. Hani al-Jafrawi, you know in a missile.

 

 He worked for the Ministry of Health, which is you know, a Hamas run, but he's a civilian He's been doing this job for 35 years and so on.

 

 Does that make that clinic a legitimate target?

 

 You know over the weekend we saw that the Israeli army and occupied West Bank had a Wounded Palestinian man strapped to the jeep and so on.

 

 So this is really by the way I've raised this issue many many times before this war many times because the Israelis have done this practice since 1967.

 

 I don't want to go into details of every incident and so on but isn't that Basically the army using Palestinians as a human chain?

 

 Just a couple a couple more issues if you allow me.

 

 I want to ask you on the.

 

 you know The new legal powers of the settlers facilities and the West Bank and you know the apparently annexation is underway under you know, everybody's eyes and so you're referring to the The action the reported actions by the finance minister.

 

 Yeah, but yet the Israelis are never deterred by your position and so on.

 

 could we expect some sort of Leveraging?

 

 Yesterday the prime minister the Israeli prime minister basically is projected the whole Biden Plan and he said, okay We want to exchange some some of the hostages for few prisoners and that's it.

 

 That's the end of it.

 

 So do you still think that the ball is in Hamas's court?

 

 So not in Israel's court.

 

 Yeah, thank you Matt.

 

 I have a couple of questions to first will the US support Israel in case of a Full-scale war breaks with Hezbollah?

 

 just quickly going back to Prime Minister Netanyahu's statements on how quickly US arms are flowing into Israel based on your ongoing engagements across levels of government with Israeli Officials, can you say if you assess that that's a sentiment that's broadly held across the Israeli government?

 

 and going off the video That's how you'd raised.

 

 the State Department said last month that although it's aware of many Investigations that the Israeli government has launched.

 

 It's unaware of any Conclusions of cases any sentencing that's coming down.

 

 Can you say if that's changed in the last couple weeks?

 

 Thank you Matt.

 

 It's been reported that the political leadership of Hamas Iraq and Iran have decided that Hamas moves Move its offices in Qatar to Iraq to Baghdad and That Iran is going to be providing the security and all that.

 

 I was wondering if the if you're aware of this and what you think.

 

 research group concluded Israeli tank likely killed six-year-old Palestinian child hindra job.

 

 Investigation revealed that Rajab's car was hit with 355 bullets and it's not plausible that Israel Israeli tank couldn't see children inside the car.

 

 Have you seen the reports and you have any updates on the investigation?

 

 It's been more than four months and a lot of my colleagues have been asking about Yeah.

 

 So who shot the 355 tank bullets?

 

 Okay, one last question.

 

 So the municipality of Gaza fixed the water pipes last week But two days ago Israeli forces dropped a bomb on the team who worked on restoring The water system and the bomb killed Anwar al-Jindi, which is the director of water and environment at Gaza municipality and four other Water technicians.

 

 I know you're gonna tell me that maybe there were Hamas people next to next to them embedded, but isn't this excuse like Is this still valid after eight month of?

 

 and like hundreds and hundreds of health care Have died because of that?

 

 how can we verify that?

 

 And then just one other one briefly.

 

 in a very early answer to the Middle East questions You talked about Israel's qualitative military edge and how you're what.

 

 Well, what's the US belief?

 

 what country in the in the region does Israel not have a qualitative military edge over none?

 

 Oh, but so so you're.

 

 but you say that if you didn't continue to give them weapons They would lose that edge.

 

 They could yes, which is why we continue to support and and okay Do they have a qualitative qualitative military edge over Hamas?

 

 Yeah, would they without with?

 

 would they without all the additional?

 

 would you do you accept it more?

 

 Palestinian civilians have been killed in Gaza in the Gaza war than Hamas militants.

 

 Well, then how about that?

 

 answering this then does.

 

 does Israel have a qualitative military edge over the Palestinian people?

 

 three Iranian back militia in Iraq part of the so-called axis of Resistance had Have said they will fight Alongside Hezbollah if there is war between Israel on Hezbollah.

 

 What is your comment?

 

 So your position?

 

 I want to follow up on your answer to Michelle regarding Lebanon.

 

 You are saying that you're seeking a diplomatic solution for what's happening and then on the northern borders But you are talking to the Israeli government.

 

 Who are you talking to in Lebanon?

 

 So are the Lebanese politicians now the mediators between between you and Hezbollah?

 

 Well, when it relates to the, quote-unquote, north of Lebanon — Israel.

 

 Well, I know, the north of Israel, yes.

 

 We can talk about the north of Lebanon if you want.

 

 I'm sure you've been — Let's talk about the north of Israel on the Lebanese border.

 

 What is the situation there as you understand it?

 

 Is there some kind of operation that's going to be mounted anytime soon?

 

 And if there is, what do you think of it?

 

 Well, yeah.

 

 But, I mean, have you told them, the Israelis or the Lebanese, that – well, have you told them anything?

 

 Have the Israelis told you that they're about to launch some kind of a strike and to – They have not.

 

 Right.

 

 So have you told the Israelis that you're going to – that you will support them or help them if they decide to go in?

 

 I think I'll leave – Well, look, that's not what I'm asking.

 

 After Mr. Hochstein's visit to Israel and Lebanon, is it fair to say that the diplomatic solution has failed?

 

 And do you have any comments on Hezbollah Secretary General's speech yesterday and his threat to Cyprus?

 

 And did the Secretary discuss this topic with the Cyprus foreign minister in their call yesterday?

 

 Just to come – keep on the Lebanon border issue.

 

 Is it fair to say that this has now become like a greater focus of your diplomacy, like in the meetings this afternoon, than the situation in Gaza?

 

 This seems to have really heightened in terms of the rhetoric coming from both sides.

 

 Do you see this as a sort of – the priority is now avoiding a broader conflict in the north?

 

 And also on the relationship with the Israeli Government, there's obviously – there's been this fallout from the video that Prime Minister Netanyahu made talking about what Secretary Blinken said to him in their meeting.

 

 There's obviously – the administration has spoken about this and said some parts of it are not true.

 

 I just wanted to get your response, because there's a latest comment from the prime minister.

 

 He's saying he's willing to absorb personal attacks – he calls them personal attacks, apparently in a reference to the way that the administration has responded to this video – in order to get the weapons that Israel needs for its survival.

 

 So yeah, how do you respond to this kind of – there seems to be a continuing discord between the way you're talking about this and specifically on the issue of whether you're providing Israel with everything it needs.

 

 you and other U.S. officials have made clear that you don't want a second front to open, but how likely at this stage do you believe that a new confrontation between Hezbollah and Lebanon and Israel — I'm not going to give you any kind of assessment of likelihood.

 

 A U.S. official told us today that Israel hasn't come close to achieving their stated objective of destroying Hamas in Gaza.

 

 Its defense minister made similar comments publicly.

 

 Does the U.S. believe that Israel is militarily capable of succeeding militarily against Hezbollah, with or without American support?

 

 And then just because so much of this has also been predicated or has been accompanied by the U.S. diplomatic push to achieve a ceasefire in Gaza, where do those talks stand?

 

 Have mediators engaged – re-engaged with Hamas to get a read on what their – what the bridgeable gaps are at this stage?

 

 I have one more on Ukraine, then I'll — Okay.

 

 And so there's no further support that they're providing to them?

 

 And then just one question on – the Secretary previewed last week that the department was going to be rolling out plans for day-after plans in Gaza.

 

 I just wonder if you can give us an update as to where those efforts stand, how many plans you guys are going to roll out if a few weeks is still kind of the timeframe that we're dealing with here.

 

 Just where you were responding to Olivia, I guess, on the path forward.

 

 I mean, a lot of – according to political, U.S. officials see no path forward to resolving the Gaza War anytime soon or coming up with a ceasefire that can endure.

 

 So I just want perhaps a few elaborate on this.

 

 Where are we with the talks?

 

 QUESTIONER Well, since you mentioned humanitarian aid, I mean, today marks the 43rd day of the closure of the Rafah crossing and Karam al-Basalam and so on.

 

 There's virtually no aid, and the pier is not functioning, obviously.

 

 Although Israel has destroyed it completely, they're saying that it is now rendered completely inoperable.

 

 But let me ask you about the – what Navi Pillay, the chairperson of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, announced yesterday that Israel did indeed commit war crime.

 

 Just to come back to the Netanyahu video, I mean, the White House has said today that what the Israeli prime minister said was, quote, incorrect.

 

 So I'm just trying to – there were a few things he said, but I'm trying to understand which part was incorrect.

 

 You say that it's not for public exchange, it's back and forth and all this, but I mean, the White House this morning went quite strongly against Netanyahu's comments.

 

 And so is the State Department not at the same line as the White House?

 

 The Israelis.

 

 So I mean – I'm sorry, but you have daily contacts with the Israelis.

 

 Netanyahu, the prime minister, is lying or not saying correct things?

 

 Well, I mean, I started, so I'll finish, as they used to say.

 

 So the UN Human Rights High Commissioner's Report, one of our colleagues — I don't recall who asked you about that — and you noted the State Department report, and you said we're continuing to look at specific incidents to draw final determinations as to whether international humanitarian law was broken.

 

 Are the incidents, the six incidents mentioned in the UN report, among the specific incidents that we're looking at?

 

 But, I mean, in this case, like I can't go through all six of them, it'd take too long, but one instance, a strike on the Taj V Tower in Gaza City, the UN says was caused by several thousand-pound bombs, killing 105 people, including 33 women and 47 children.

 

 I mean, should it take eight months to make a final determination as to whether that was within international law?

 

 But how does it come – I don't want to belabor the point, Matt – but how does it come that UN, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty, International Criminal Court can all find compelling evidence of war crimes by Israel, and the United States, with its enormous powers of intelligence and direct contact with Israel, can't find those things?

 

 Talking about people on the ground, Global Spokesperson James Elder reported an incident that he witnessed in Gaza when Israeli forces shot two fishermen and then denied them medical care until they both died.

 

 Do you know about this incident?

 

 Do you have any comment?

 

 And Haaretz published a story on Tuesday about another Palestinian doctor dying after being detained and tortured, an Israeli person.

 

 His name is Dr. Eyad Rantisi.

 

 Do you have an answer of why doctors are being detained for – in the first place?

 

 QUESTION And lastly, there's a picture circulating of Israeli soldier displaying Zionist flag of the greater Israeli – Israel on their uniform.

 

 So Saudi Crown Prince calls for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to be held criminally accountable for his actions against Palestinians.

 

 He's maybe hinting like with the Netanyahu-led Israeli state, maybe he will not ready for U.S.-led peace process with Israel, Saudi Arabia and Israel.

 

 How do you see that?

 

 And secondly, India just surpasses Pakistan in nuclear arm race, standing at 172, where Pakistan at 170.

 

 And meanwhile, China is also accelerating like 500 nukes.

 

 So meanwhile, members are in talks about to make stand by their nuclear weapons regarding the Russian threats.

 

 And at the same time, some support suggests that Chinese officials are showing concerns.

 

 It said like undermining nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation regimes, and it should stop doing it, some of the Chinese officials quoted.

 

 With this timeline, do U.S. have some concerns on China and India nuclear acceleration?

 

 Hello.

 

 After Israel took control of the Philadelphia route and the Rafah crossing, Egypt expressed its reservation and refused to coordinate with Israel regarding the operation of the Rafah crossing.

 

 How did Egypt address this issue in conversation with the United States?

 

 Another question, please.

 

 Last month, the Israeli Broadcasting Authority published statements referring to the IEDF Minister Galland, in which he said that Israel, there is no Palestinian state, and the American understand this, adding the American public statement are not important.

 

 At the same time, the price of the Saudi Arabia peace includes the establishment of a Palestinian state.

 

 What's your comment, please?

 

 Can I just ask you one quick question on the Dermer and Menge meeting?

 

 Does the Secretary plan to reiterate that there are no bottlenecks in U.S. weapons going to Israel despite Netanyahu's comments?

 

 So you don't think you have to make clear that perception again?

 

 Can I go to Gaza?

 

 I'm just wondering if there's been any progress on the ceasefire talks.

 

 Has there been any progress on the workables and not-so-workables of the Hamas counterproposal since last week?

 

 Amos Hochstein met with Netanyahu, I believe.

 

 Any more word from that meeting that lowers your level of concern about an escalation up north with Hezbollah?

 

 And given the ceasefire still remains elusive, in the meantime, is the message to Israel don't do anything in the north?

 

 Matt, do you have any comment on the dissolution of the war cabinet?

 

 Do you anticipate this will make conversations with the Israeli Government more challenging, easier, particularly around the ceasefire?

 

 And the Israeli Government over the weekend announced these tactical pauses that they say is meant to increase the amount of aid that's going around Gaza.

 

 Aid groups say they haven't seen any impact at this point.

 

 What's the U.S. read on this?

 

 And how does the U.S. intend to hold Israel accountable for honoring these tactical pauses?

 

 I mean, we've seen a number of instances where they said that areas were protected, that humanitarians would be protected, and then ultimately the results on the ground don't bear that out.

 

 Can I just ask one thing on that?

 

 You said we will judge Israel by the results.

 

 So it was April the 4th.

 

 President Biden basically said – well, threatened Israel to put conditions on aid if it wouldn't do a better job of protecting civilians and if more humanitarian aid wouldn't go into Gaza.

 

 It's been more than two months.

 

 U.S. Government has taken no action and also has not basically made an assessment on how well or not Israel has done.

 

 So I don't quite understand the judgment part.

 

 But that improvement in the steps didn't actually translate into results, because you just said that the distribution hasn't improved, and that has a lot to do, especially in the south, with the start of the Rafah operation.

 

 Okay, it's not the major, you guys don't call it the major military operation, but in the end it basically obstructed the aid, the delivery of aid.

 

 And that was an action taken by Israel.

 

 Okay, final thing on this.

 

 Is the U.S. Government actually going to give itself a certain timeframe on when to deliver or make an assessment on what the President said on April the 4th?

 

 You talked about the dissolution of the Israeli war cabinet and said this was an internal matter, but it's not an internal matter if it affects who is in the direct line of decision-making of the use of U.S. military assistance and U.S. weapons, particularly in relation to this war.

 

 And we know it seems very likely now that the ministers for national security and finance will be a far more significant part of that decision-making process.

 

 Does that concern you?

 

 But these are people you've repeatedly criticized for, I think, what you call destabilizing rhetoric for, you know, effectively what are their values.

 

 One is a convicted supporter of terrorism, another is openly called for the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.

 

 So if these people are now, you know, in a direct line of decision-making over the war in Gaza, surely that's a concern for you?

 

 So one question first on administrative detention.

 

 So you've discussed how civilians shouldn't be held as leverage with regards to, of course, the Israeli hostages.

 

 Israel has held thousands of Palestinians in administrative detention for months with no trial or charge.

 

 Our colleagues at CNI and The New York Times, of course, recently reported on a prison camp where thousands were rounded up and allegedly abused, tied up, assaulted, stripped.

 

 They're kept away from legal support and the Red Cross.

 

 And of course, Israel has said they're moving away from that specific camp.

 

 But what's being done to ensure this kind of thing doesn't happen again?

 

 What consequences are there?

 

 And then what about this larger issue of detention, where thousands of Palestinians are just rounded up with apparent no legal or judicial accountability?

 

 So will there be any sort of, like, material response to this specific camp beyond just, of course, this one's shutting down?

 

 And then on your mention of the West Bank parts, a newspaper reported recently on Israeli snipers killing seven innocent bystanders in the Jenin refugee camp, which is, of course, to say not Gaza.

 

 The dead included two teenagers and reportedly the director of the government hospital surgical ward.

 

 So these are soldiers putting seven people into their lines, sniping them.

 

 They have the moment to see who these people are.

 

 It's in the West Bank.

 

 What's the explanation for this?

 

 Have you – has the U.S. communicated with Israel on this issue at all?

 

 And then just one quick question on Ukraine.

 

 What exact – when exactly, sorry, was the ban on arms transfers to the Azov Brigade lifted?

 

 Can you say whether there has been any change in position or stance on weapons deliveries to Israel in the past week or since the beginning of Blinken's visit?

 

 There have been, you might have noticed, some unsourced and unattributed news reports saying that they promised to release all restrictions that Blinken told Netanyahu that.

 

 Do you see the comments from China's president over the weekend claiming that various U.S. shows of support for Taiwan, including military exercises in the region and congressional delegations, relate to a general desire by the Biden administration for China to invade Taiwan?

 

 And one quick second one.

 

 A few minutes ago, you described the persons or groups that have been attacking some of the aid trucks at some of the Gaza crossings as, I think, criminals and looters, for your words.

 

 Has there been any sort of internal discussions within the State Department about determining whether this is like an organized action against aid trucks or whether this is truly some sort of disorganized band of criminals?

 

 And if you have had those discussions, has the U.S. raised any of these concerns about aid trucks being attacked with the Israeli Government?

 

 The – now that the Rafah crossing is closed, aid workers now have to go through Kerem Shalom, but the Israelis are putting more restrictions on them.

 

 I'm just wondering what your message to the Israeli Government is about that.

 

 They say the Israelis are making them stay longer though, which makes it hard to find people to do it.

 

 Is there specific reasons that the Israelis are giving you about that?

 

 Are there any concerns from the State Department about the populist wave that won the European election in terms of help towards Ukraine for the future?

 

 And the second question would be that Italy won a lot of consents for the European Parliament, so it's kind of leading also after the G7.

 

 So what, like a state like Italy, can do more to support the United States in foreign policy looking at Gaza and China?

 

 And anything else that can be improved in foreign policy to support the United States or Gaza or China, since Italy is now – is going to be leading in the European parliament?

 

 In terms of aid distribution.

 

 Of course, one pivotal group that's operated there is, of course, UNRWA, a group that has had issues from the Israeli Government in accessing and operating there, and one in which, of course, the U.S. has also withdrawn funding.

 

 So I'm wondering, have you interfaced with the Government of Israel on specifically UNRWA's ability to access and operate?

 

 And then secondarily, what is the future of U.S. support for UNRWA?

 

 I know it's been months of this ongoing open investigation.

 

 Gaza?

 

 Yeah.

 

 So the Secretary, during his trip, talked about, you know, in coming weeks, you're going to, the U.S. will put forward proposals for the day after the conflict in Gaza.

 

 So just to try to, I know, obviously, it's not coming weeks just yet, but to understand what that will be, what that might look like, is this, this is something that can, Will, you're planning to, you know, put forward in detail whether or not there's a ceasefire agreement in the meantime?

 

 And is there a plan that regional countries have signed up to?

 

 Is it the Israelis who are left to convince, you know, something that you're going to put forward in order to get them on board?

 

 Sure, and I'm sure other people will have questions on this, but just on Israeli operations in Rafah, you know, there's reporting that they've sort of gone deeper into the city, reaching the beach.

 

 I think the Israeli military themselves said they struck 45 targets over the past day.

 

 Does this constitute the full-scale operation that you've been warning about?

 

 Could you talk a little bit more about Hamas wanting these written guarantees from the U.S.? Do you see this as, in any way, reasonable or outrageous?

 

 Have they done this before?

 

 Yeah, I just wanted to know if there's been any contact through the mediators with Hamas since they submitted their proposal the other night.

 

 When do you expect there to be any contact?

 

 There's some reporting that the Israelis aren't going to participate in further negotiations.

 

 You were disappointed, but were you surprised that they came back with these changes?

 

 I mean, given that Netanyahu didn't ever publicly commit to this, I know the U.S. says that Israel has been on board, but I don't think they'll publicly commit.

 

 Welcome back.

 

 We missed you, so a couple of questions that follow up on Simon and Kamala.

 

 First of all, on the talks itself, you said that Hamas's response was late in coming, but the resolution at the Security Council was on Monday.

 

 Their response was on Tuesday, almost like 24 hours and so on.

 

 On the issue of their response, now, we're a bit confused because the National Security Advisor, Mr. Sullivan, said actually they were minor.

 

 You know, most of the, in fact, all the suggestions by Hamas or the amendments were quite workable, quite doable.

 

 Now, we heard something different.

 

 That's what, that's my question, actually, but the Secretary said that there are some workable and some are not workable.

 

 Can you share with us some of these things that are not workable, for instance?

 

 So as far as I know, there's been no official Israeli response, but you guys keep saying that Israel agreed to this, yet we have not heard from the Prime Minister.

 

 We have not heard from any senior official saying, yeah, we accept or reject, you know, for whatever.

 

 There's been no response.

 

 There are reports, Israeli media reports, that say that the Prime Minister did not even share the document with many of his ministers, and that, you know, like Ben-Gvir or Smotrich and so on.

 

 Do you have any comment on that?

 

 If the Israelis have not responded, why are they taking so long to respond to something that initially was their proposal?

 

 In an official statement, did he support it?

 

 Okay, but then clear for us, because at least I'm confused on the issue of the first phase and the second phase and so on.

 

 It seems that the Israelis, in all their statements, they focus on the first phase, but not on the transitional second phase, and on, let's say, allowing all the stuff that is in the second phase and the third phase.

 

 So could you explain to us where, is this the sticking point, for instance, between the Palestinians and the Israelis?

 

 Okay, just a couple of follow-up.

 

 There's been a UN report detailing Israeli war crimes during the first month of the war.

 

 Have you seen the report?

 

 Okay, so you don't have any comment on that?

 

 And lastly, on last Saturday's raid, now there's been more than 276 Palestinians were killed in Jabaliyah.

 

 And I know that the U.S. government, the Western government congratulated Israel on releasing, freeing four hostages, but then we had 276 Palestinian civilians, mainly civilians, and 600 others wounded.

 

 How do you respond to this kind of enormous death toll?

 

 So you think that Israel adhered to the laws of war in this particular incident?

 

 I have one on Gaza and a couple more on Lebanon.

 

 First, did the Secretary ask Qatar to close Hamas office in Doha and expel its leaders from Doha to put more pressure on Hamas?

 

 But is it a step that you are considering?

 

 President Biden and Secretary Blinken were expecting a ceasefire to calm the front between Hezbollah and Israel.

 

 Since Hamas didn't agree on the U.S. proposal, what are your expectations now?

 

 What is this diplomatic resolution and who's working on it and we don't see any activities?

 

 All right, and one last question.

 

 Now, given the situation in Gaza Strip, the war going on, uptick in Hezbollah's attacks on Israel, and the early elections that Iran is to hold soon, do you think the release of the French citizen could be maybe an attempt by Tehran to show a better picture of itself with all of these going on?

 

 Two brief questions, if you'd indulge me.

 

 The first, Israeli Finance Minister Beziel Smotrich has announced that he is transferring $35 million in tax revenue that Israel collected on behalf of the PA to Israeli victims of terrorism.

 

 Last week, you said these funds were Palestinian and should be released to the PA.

 

 Do you have any reaction to Mr. Smotrich's action?

 

 Is it appropriate?

 

 And then in the occupied West Bank, Israeli forces have been carrying out a raid on the Jenin refugee camp for over 12 hours today, bulldozing buildings and roads and preventing civilians from entering or leaving the city's government hospital.

 

 That was confirmed by the city's governor to Anadolu.

 

 Does the administration have concerns about the raid?

 

 Should civilians be allowed unimpeded access to the government hospital?

 

 Thanks, Matt.

 

 A new report released yesterday by Human Rights Watch talked about the white phosphorus attacks in Lebanon.

 

 And they said that in their investigation, Human Rights Watch verified the use of white phosphorus munition by Israeli military at least on 17 municipalities across South Lebanon since October 7th.

 

 Have you seen these reports and do you have any comment on that?

 

 According to Palestinian Authority numbers, in eight months, Israel has killed one or both parents of at least 17,000 children in Gaza.

 

 You always talk about the day after the conflict ends.

 

 How can this work in favor of peace and the future between both Palestinians and Israelis with all these killings and traumas and wounds?

 

 I mean, is there a strategy for the future?

 

 How can they coexist and live in peace if there's all this killing?

 

 There are like 17,000 who lost either one of their parents or they don't have limbs.

 

 So how they can coexist after in the future?

 

 On these censured resolution last week, you probably have seen the reports on how Iran is retaliating and how it's reacting to the resolution.

 

 And diplomats are saying that these actions are at the lower end of expectations and their escalation is not as big as many feared.

 

 Before there were reports, I know that US categorically denied it all, that US is fearing that Islamic Republic is gonna react worse if you pass any resolution.

 

 So now we have a better idea of what Iran is doing, how they are retaliating.

 

 So what is your assessment of these reactions?

 

 And do you think that there is a reason why Islamic Republic is keeping this escalation very limited?

 

 Okay, and one more about a few days ago, Jake Sullivan made a statement.

 

 He said that the President Biden is ready to confront any Iranian aggression and is trying to choke off its support to Hamas.

 

 Can you describe these efforts, what you're doing to choke off Iranian's support of Hamas?

 

 Do you have any tangible success in that regard?

 

 First question on the hostage operation last week that Said mentioned.

 

 Of course, the 274 killed, the 698 injured, the four hostages saved, and allegedly, Hamas alleges at least three hostages killed.

 

 I'm wondering, there seems to be some confusion as far as to what extent, if they did the US support this operation, if so, in terms of resources, troops, and beyond that, I'm wondering, along with those question marks, if the US considered preemptively how such support could have contributed to such death or contributed to maybe an upending of the ceasefire negotiations.

 

 And then on, or American personnel broadly, I should say.

 

 On ceasefire negotiations, I know the administration, and you have said today that Prime Minister Netanyahu has assured and reassured Israel's support for the proposal.

 

 But he and other officials have said they will not stop until the aims of their war are fully achieved.

 

 And of course, they recently opposed an earlier version of that UN resolution that passed unanimously and supported the deal.

 

 And beyond that, there's sort of this main contention point of whether this deal assures a permanent ceasefire.

 

 And to something you had said earlier, there's the reported homosphere that they could accept the deal without reliable assurances for permanence, lose leverage conceivably, and then after the six weeks- By lose leverage, you mean turnover hostages.

 

 Absolutely, of course, of course.

 

 But after that, and of course, this is homosphere, Israel finds another prerogative to continue attacking.

 

 And of course, then lead to more civilian death, which is of course another concern that I'm sure we all have.

 

 And then can I ask on this deadly Israeli strike on a school that was housing IDPs in Gaza, what's your response to that?

 

 Were U.S. weapons used in this strike?

 

 I'll come to you.

 

 To follow up on the broader issue of civilian harm, so we had this NSM process that came to an end, and you came to these specific conclusions that didn't lead to any impact on provision of arms to Israel.

 

 Now that that kind of 90-day process with the NSM is finished, I guess there's a – there's an annual NSM requirement for you, but just to sort of be clear, as of now, what kind of – are there any, like, timelines you can give on when you're going to be able to make conclusions regarding Israel's conduct?

 

 Is there a date when we can – when all of these, or at least some of the assessments that you've been making since the beginning of the war might be completed and you can actually make a definitive?

 

 So it's for the old age.

 

 Anyway, so this area in Serab was an area that the Israelis even did not ask people to evacuate.

 

 I mean, this is really refugees.

 

 We don't know how many was killed.

 

 I mean, what possible advantage?

 

 I want to ask you, because the other day you said that maybe Sinwar prefers the safety of the tunnels, the comfort of the tunnels, to coming out and so on.

 

 So why would Hamas militants – what possible tactical advantage or strategic advantage for them to be in the school?

 

 Isn't it just like that red herring, something that the Israelis could use time and time and time again as a cover to continue to kill people?

 

 I mean, considering that 130 civilians were killed in the preceding 24 hours.

 

 You know, we are no military experts.

 

 At least I speak about myself.

 

 But one knows from reading so much and so on, I mean, the safety of the rubble area, the safety of the destroyed cities and buildings and so on that becomes a concrete jungle is a lot safer for these fighters.

 

 There would be no incentive whatsoever for them to go and be among their families and so on, because the food is probably better in the tunnels or in these places.

 

 Safety is a lot better.

 

 Well, from these areas.

 

 I mean, they want to launch attacks where the Israeli military is actually present and so on.

 

 Not likely in – and then Saratow, where they could be bombed from the air and so on.

 

 I mean, you know, this thing that we keep hearing about human shields and so on.

 

 I just want to remind you that this is basically an Israeli thing, to the point where the Israeli Supreme Court told them you could not do it.

 

 You could not use Palestinian kids as human shields, to wrap them around their jeeps and walk into the cities and so on.

 

 And in fact, they continue to do it.

 

 So what possible – I mean, Israel has no credibility whatsoever to believe what they say that there are Hamas fighters that are hiding there.

 

 We have not seen any evidence.

 

 They have not shown us any of these people that were killed.

 

 Can I ask you a couple more questions, if I may?

 

 And on – yesterday, there was the march into Jerusalem, the old city, and so on.

 

 And the marchers just beat the heck out of Palestinian journalists and so on.

 

 And Palestinian journalists seem to be at the tail end of recognizing, whether in Gaza or in the West Bank and so on.

 

 Is there any particular reason for that?

 

 And do you expect Israel to take what you just said seriously enough to actually abide by that?

 

 So you said you can't say if it's a U.S. weapon that was used in the school attack.

 

 Have you at least pressed Israel to use more strategically targeted weapons, as opposed that could explode widely, and then what is their response to that?

 

 And so what is their response to these past two attacks that have used what they say are precision weapons but have been very destructive?

 

 Just – you've said repeatedly transparent, but you're looking for something for the Israelis to be transparent.

 

 I mean, the Israelis are basically saying that militants were killed in this.

 

 I mean, do you expect them to investigate beyond that, say whether children were killed or villains were killed?

 

 And is there a track record of Israel actually investigating that on the ground?

 

 But the names of the militants?

 

 Just a bit of a point on that.

 

 I mean, do you think it's – are you basically calling on Israel also to identify those who were killed who were potentially noncombatants, who were children?

 

 Do you expect Israel to do that?

 

 But if it turns out that they name these people and they are confirmed to have been militants and you are able to – or there's some kind of confirmation that they are, in fact, the ones who were hit, is that enough for you, even if they don't go into any civilian — So we also want to see — Whether they're identified by the Israelis or not.

 

 Just to follow up on what you said you unmet, actually.

 

 Kogath has the names of every Palestinian born in Gaza.

 

 They do have a list of everyone.

 

 So, I mean, are we going to see names of, let's say, commanders, recognizable commanders, or any Mahmoud, Ahmed, Yusuf, Dawood, you know, anybody?

 

 Do you have any update on how the policy towards a revitalized Palestinian Authority is progressing?

 

 I mean, some of that might sound a bit like understatement.

 

 I was chatting to a PA official earlier today.

 

 He talks about the financial situation is unprecedented.

 

 finances are on the brink of collapse.

 

 If nothing changes in a few weeks, next month, there is no extra income.

 

 There will be no ability to pay public wages.

 

 So they're paying 50 percent already to tens of thousands of teachers, doctors, nurses, security forces, crucially.

 

 And they're talking about weeks to potential collapse.

 

 So how concerned are you?

 

 That sounds like a nice way of trying to persuade them, but I'm interested in the issue of American power here, because your key partner, your ally, and the key figure in that government, the finance minister, is somebody who has an ideological background.

 

 He's an expulsionist.

 

 He wants to get rid of Palestinians from the West Bank.

 

 History of making racist, anti-Arab statements.

 

 And so when he is the key figure that appears to be holding back all those revenues, and I think it stands at $1.6 billion, I mean, surely, as the United States, the key ally of Israel, its key military backer, you can change that situation.

 

 We continue to have, as I said, very direct conversations with the Government of Israel about the dire consequences this would have for Israel, or for the Palestinian people, and for Israel's own security situation.

 

 But do you see something like that?

 

 Just finally, because I know you want to move on, but I think people might find it very puzzling that you have the leverage of $3.8 billion of defense supply to the Israelis per year, and you cannot compel this situation to change, given the ideological background of a figure like this in an absolutely key role in your key partner and ally in the region.

 

 Just related to Palestinian Authority reform, I would imagine you've seen that there's also been another report about a shouting match that happened between the Emirati foreign minister and a senior advisor to the Palestinian Authority, where the UAE foreign minister called the Palestinian advisor Ali Babran 40 thieves.

 

 This was in relation to him accusing the Palestinian Authority of being corrupt, reforms not being effective.

 

 Can you give us an update on how it's going or not going well with other Arab nations in terms of supporting the Palestinian Authority, the new leadership reforms?

 

 Do you feel at all confident that an Arab nation might step up and help at all with the financial issues of the PA?

 

 Going back to the risk of escalation and conflict in the Middle East, today the Islamic Resistance in Iraq said in a statement they carried out two joint military operations with Houthis on Israel's Haifa port.

 

 Today the Islamic Resistance in Iraq said in a statement they carried out two joint attacks with Houthis against the Israeli Haifa port.

 

 And I think this is the first time that the Islamic Resistance in Iraq, that they are cooperating with the Houthis to attack the Israelis.

 

 How do you see this development, especially cooperation between Iraqi militia groups backed by Iran and the Houthis?

 

 And this may trigger a retaliation attack by Israel.

 

 And you said earlier that when there were attacks on the U.S. forces in Iraq, you worked to try to mitigate these threats from occurring.

 

 Have you reached the Iraqi Government to rein these groups to not attack Israeli from 100 miles away?

 

 Were Prime Minister Netanyahu to come to the U.S., would Secretary Blinken meet with him?

 

 He said were Prime Minister Netanyahu.

 

 So the Israeli ambassador to the United Nations has said that Israel is now going to oppose the resolution that the United States is putting forward to push forward the Israeli ceasefire plan.

 

 Did that come as a surprise to the United States, and does that undermine the U.S. effort to get Hamas to agree to this deal if Israel is saying that it's going to vote against its own deal at the UN?

 

 Which means that Israel does not get to vote.

 

 They don't have a vote.

 

 Yeah Staying in the region.

 

 How are you?

 

 Do you with given the the Israelis Prime Minister's comments on the northern front Lebanon?

 

 How worried are you that that could spin out of control at any time?

 

 Well, we'll take it.

 

 Today marks the 57th anniversary Of the israeli occupation of east jerusalem the west bank and gaza and just to give you some of the things that happened on daily Basis, they blew up two homes in jelaboon.

 

 you know, there's a statement by the un saying that the killing of People in in the west bank is unacceptable 500 people and so on and so on and so on.

 

 I mean My question to you How long must the palestinians endure?

 

 should they endure another 57 years of occupation?

 

 Shouldn't is it time?

 

 For the united states of america to make good on its so many commitment So many times over the decades that this occupation must end?

 

 well, you know, uh looking at what this president has done or former presidents have done in terms of you know, exercising or leveraging The weight and the prestige of the united states On israel to make good to stop the settlement you have not to end the killing you have not.

 

 I mean, you know We see this war that has been going on for the past eight months, which is just a small part of the past 57 years.

 

 It has already Already more than 40 000 palestinians, maybe more have been killed many of them women and children.

 

 The entire gaza is probably you know Destroyed or parts of it is destroyed.

 

 the same thing goes on and on every day in the west bank Which you know seems to have disappeared from the radar screen.

 

 So that is my point When will we see a real action by the united states of america?

 

 one last comment We also see that the president of the united states yesterday.

 

 They got the This administration signing a deal with israel to give it one more wing of f-35 that have Been solely used in gaza nowhere else, you know Giving 15 billion dollars of arms and so on for this word to continue.

 

 We've seen the president basically say that mr.

 

 Netanyahu is want this war to continue For a political reason then he backstracks and so on.

 

 I don't think these signals would in any way You know Sort of show show the red eye or as we say in arabic or or show the stick so to speak To the israeli government to end its atrocities in gaza.

 

 Thank you Um, actually a spokesman for hamas just told al arabia an hour ago that they wanted a guarantee from the biden administration To make sure that israel implement what the president has asked for in the three phases.

 

 can you respond to that?

 

 And I want to follow up on lebanon.

 

 I know that you gave the answer that uh, the u.s has been working to de-escalate from opening a front in the north.

 

 But the statements coming from nathaniel and his ministers are more extreme and more serious To the degree they're actually discussing it in the cabinet in the kinetic in the war cabinet tomorrow.

 

 So, um, do you believe that?

 

 Uh that nathaniel is trying to open another front to escape any kind of accountability By Prolonging this war from gaza to the north.

 

 And finally, uh, the new york times said that israel has spent two million dollars on creating fake accounts trying to influence lawmakers and the u.s Officials on their pro-israel narrative.

 

 How do you see this differently from what iran russia?

 

 And china will do when you accuse them that they're interfering in u.s election and influence in u.s politics.

 

 Thanks, matt that the bbc is uh reporting, uh today about the aftermath of the al-shifa Raid by the israelis which happened in a two-week period at the end of march.

 

 Um now the israeli government said that this was a precise and surgical operation.

 

 There was not a single civilian casualty.

 

 Palestinian civil defense workers speaking to the bbc say they found corpses of women children Individuals without heads as well as torn body parts.

 

 Another said signs of field executions binding marks gunshot wounds to the head and torture marks on the limbs were observed on some of the bodies.

 

 um, I mean is the u.s government?

 

 Has the u.s government been looking at this particular incident?

 

 And if so, um, what is your view on what's taking place there?

 

 um, I mean This particular case is this one you've been looking at?

 

 I mean this was a very significant raid and I think it's.

 

 the importance of it was that the israelis went in once in the middle of november Pulled out and then they went back in several months later um, which is sort of indicative of perhaps military strategy, but also this very significant number of dead people in Palestinians described as mass graves.

 

 And can I just just one one final thing on this because it raises the wider point which we talked about before about the ban and the lack of uh Ability for international journalists to get into gaza and the fact that the israelis and the egyptians will not still allow this despite You know large numbers of humanitarian workers now being able to to get in and out and assess things.

 

 What are the israelis saying to you about?

 

 What is the reason that international journalists cannot find out what is happening in gaza?

 

 because these situations are a very good example About the need for transparency so that we can all understand what's going.

 

 but apart from safety issues Which you know media organizations are expert at working in war zones and they make their own risk assessment decisions on this Do you know of any good reason why international journalists shouldn't be able to get into gaza?

 

 If I may, um, I was going to ask I think my question still holds up whether hamas has responded formally or not in the last hour.

 

 So it was six days ago that the president You know announced publicly that the new ceasefire deal was on the table already agreed to by the israelis.

 

 I was going to ask If there's any concern or if this is just as you would expect it to be that six days in There didn't seem to be any back and forth any movement on hamas's side.

 

 Just for so clarity when you say a version that they agreed to a few weeks ago Is that the one that they spoke publicly about and said the hamas did correct you and then it fell apart?

 

 Thanks I'm just going to come back to nadi's question on on the lebanese.

 

 uh, israel lebanon border.

 

 So You're kind of asking us to you know, ignore the public statements of of prime minister netanyahu and other members Of the israeli military that they're ready uh to launch an offensive.

 

 and you know behind the scenes they tell you they don't want they don't want a war.

 

 but um Are you could you say whether?

 

 sort of the the u.s has intelligence or is able to see whether Israel is actually preparing on the ground for a possible offensive because the language that they're using suggests that they are.

 

 So this is a potential action that israel could take uh in terms of You know crossing the border and and and escalating from from their side.

 

 um When it comes to to rafa we had this, you know, you've been quite clear that the u.s. Disapproves of a full-scale operation in rafa.

 

 so Uh, there's a sort of a warning attached to that and there's a potential for the u.s to change to change policy towards israel based on that.

 

 but in the north You sort of say you don't you don't want them to go in but if they do there's no Uh, there's no sort of warning attached to that that you might actually change policy.

 

 and then just when it comes to the proposal that's on the table right now Obviously you guys have gone to great lengths to try and pressure Regional allies and regional players to put pressure on hamas to accept the deal.

 

 Um, many of them have put out public statements.

 

 i'm wondering if The biden administration feels like these countries are doing enough privately to pressure hamas as well.

 

 Do you think they're doing enough?

 

 can you just be a little bit more clear about what the consequences for hamas will be if they don't accept it?

 

 I mean you keep saying they must accept it.

 

 They must but like to what end I look?

 

 Just said it doesn't ensure that israel is fight is going to fight a war against the palestinian people.

 

 I thought the whole point was that they're not fighting.

 

 But of course, can I just follow up on a point that it wasn't I don't think a slip of the tongue so you've said this before in relation to kylie's question, which is that you know you say that Hamas and sinua should bear in mind that What should draw them to a ceasefire is that palestinian people are being killed but your position is that no civilians No, palestinian civilians should be being killed.

 

 So why do you raise that point?

 

 You know as a point of pressure on hamas.

 

 this is Of course But the fact you're raising it.

 

 the u.s government raises this as a point of pressure on the proposal on the table.

 

 But it just feels rather contradictory if your position is that palestinian civilians should not be being killed to raise that as a specific point Of pressure on hamas come to a ceasefire.

 

 Two two questions matt one egypt is unhappy over a rate of aid entering gaza.

 

 Do you have any comment on that?

 

 Did they discuss this issue with you?

 

 And any updates on the fact.

 

 and then in today and yesterday the iraqi interior ministry.

 

 They announced that they arrested Assailants and including the members of security forces.

 

 So what concerns do you have when the security forces in iraq should protect the security of these Companies and brands but they are getting involved within the attacks into these plans?

 

 and last thing About the escalation in the region today The iranian irqc commander-in-chief said that the israelis should wait for our response over the attacks that happened in alipo.

 

 What concerns do you have about that?

 

 Sorry, thank you.

 

 today a group of israeli settlers attacked palestinian journalist saif And journalist near hassan of the israeli newspaper haritz Who was protecting al-kawazmi in jerusalem during the nation's flag march.

 

 So firstly i'm just wondering if the u.s has any response to this attack on our press colleagues.

 

 And then following up on nadia's question on the new york times and hearts reporting Um a little over two months ago The u.s announced sanctions on russians for creating false websites and then using fake social media accounts to amplify the misleading content So similar to what the government of israel is reportedly carried out.

 

 And of course the u.s has taken similar stances over the past few years.

 

 So i'm wondering I know that you said the u.s has laws.

 

 you expect, uh compliance Um.

 

 will us take similar action here?

 

 So, uh prime minister Netanyahu is expected to address congress for the fourth time.

 

 He'll be the first world leader to do so.

 

 Uh, how does that?

 

 is that reflective of us israeli relations?

 

 So along those lines, the very intense focus – your very intense focus since Friday has been on – or appears to be, at least from the readouts that you've just been outlining – on getting Hamas to accept this deal.

 

 And you keep saying that the Israelis have already – it was their idea or it's their proposal and they've already agreed to it.

 

 And yet, are you really convinced that that's the case?

 

 And is – are you convinced that the focus should be entirely on Hamas?

 

 Right.

 

 And what has been – other than all these statements of support, what has been the impact that you have seen from Hamas?

 

 So let me – It goes along the lines of what Matt was asking, but the Qataris, of course, who are playing a key role in this, they said basically that they don't see a unified position from Israel.

 

 I know you're saying that the onus is on Hamas, but the fact that you do have dissonant voices within the Israeli government, do you think that complicates things at all in terms of getting a response from Hamas or moving this forward?

 

 Matt, U.S. Sassa representatives is due to vote on this legislation that would sanction after its prosecutor applied for S.

 

 Warren for Netanyahu and others.

 

 The U.S. State Department supports this?

 

 One other thing is this time interview with President Biden.

 

 In there, he says when he was asked if Israeli forces have committed war crimes in Gaza, he says it's uncertain.

 

 The fact that he did not say an outright no, don't you think that's something that the State Department should consider launching an atrocity determination on, given that you've also said in your NSM report that it is possible that there may have been violations?

 

 Is atrocity determination one of them?

 

 So you're just saying that we don't know if Israeli forces have committed war crimes in Gaza or not.

 

 You said we don't know.

 

 So despite these assessments, you think there is no change in the U.S. policy to continue providing arms to Israel?

 

 And I know you said that there has been no response received as yet from Hamas.

 

 Is it known from either Egyptian or Qatari interlocutors whether the proposal has actually reached G.I. Asanwar for his evaluation, even if a response hasn't come back?

 

 On aid, you mentioned yesterday that there were constructive discussions that took place in Cairo.

 

 Obviously, a number of international aid groups have been raising alarms that the situation is dire and getting worse by the day.

 

 So where do efforts to reopen Rafah stand, and what is the broader aid picture in terms of what the U.S. is facilitating on a daily basis?

 

 One more, just to tag onto Humeyra's question about President Biden's remarks in this recent interview.

 

 Is the Secretary of the view that Prime Minister Netanyahu may be prolonging the conflict in an effort to stay in office?

 

 The President said there's every reason for people to draw that conclusion without commenting permanently.

 

 So just one follow-up.

 

 I mean, so the proposal is on the table as a contingency.

 

 Have you had any indication that the Israelis are also planning for a day-after scenario as you have urged them to do?

 

 Just to follow up on Olivia, about the interview in Time Magazine, I thought the president was very clear that, you know, it is Mr. Netanyahu's desire to keep this war going, because he sees his political future or the continuation of his political future and the continuation of the war.

 

 But also, that comes along with a statement by the prime minister himself, who called the proposal incomplete, you know, making remarks that seemed aimed at sabotaging the deal and so on.

 

 So, but you are, you know, I don't know how that meshes with the fact with what you said, that Israel would agree.

 

 If Hamas agrees to this proposal, Israel is going to agree to it.

 

 There's an element of certainty in what you're saying.

 

 So, you know, Hamas is supposed to say something today, I guess.

 

 The spokesperson is going to hold a press conference in Beirut or somewhere else and, you know, say their say, whatever it is.

 

 So if they agree, how do you see what – you know, what kind of timeframe we have to begin the ceasefire, you know, to start, you know, to actually cease the guns from firing?

 

 So you also said yesterday that this was very close or identical to the proposal that Hamas signed on to on May 6th and so on.

 

 And now, suppose this falls apart or falls – doesn't come to be, how will that impact your plans for aid?

 

 And including the reopening of Rafah?

 

 Related to Israel, how do you view the escalation of fightings between Hezbollah and Israel?

 

 And do you expect a total war, especially that there are calls from the left and the right in Israel for a full-blown war against Hezbollah?

 

 And any comments on the Israeli calls for a full-blown war with Hezbollah?

 

 Just quickly circling back to Qatar and the statement from his foreign ministry questioning Israel's position, are you fully confident that Qatar is putting as much pressure as they possibly can on Hamas to accept the deal, given that the U.S. and Qatar apparently are on different pages?

 

 I have another on Iran, sort of separate.

 

 Does the U.S. have clarity on these Israeli airstrikes in Syria that appear to have killed an Iranian general?

 

 Has it asked for information as to the target and intent of the attacks?

 

 Have you consulted with the Israeli government as to their purpose?

 

 I wanted to ask you about India's elections.

 

 After three months, the people of India have voted.

 

 Election results are out now.

 

 Prime Minister Modi's ruling coalition has crossed the halfway mark.

 

 How do you see the election results from the elections?

 

 During the election campaign, India's External Affairs Minister Jai Shankar and Prime Minister also indicated multiple times that there have been attempts to influence India's elections from Western sides, U.S. and other countries.

 

 Two statements that came out from this podium about – you expressed concerns about arrest of Indian chief minister and the freezing of bank accounts of the Congress Party were also not taken into account.

 

 How do you see that?

 

 So are you saying that U.S. is against the possible offensive that Israel is talking about carrying out?

 

 But they are also saying today, Military Chief of General Staff Harzi Halevi is saying Israel is ready for a military offensive along the border and that it was nearing a decision point.

 

 So what is your comment for that?

 

 Have you told the Israelis in the past couple of days or today specifically about these, like advising them not to do it?

 

 And from a U.S. point of view, would it be unacceptable for Israel to start this offensive in the north in the event of a ceasefire in Gaza?

 

 Matt, one follow-up, please.

 

 Are you confident that you will be able to find a diplomatic solution for the fighting and for the crisis between Hezbollah and Israel?

 

 So I'm really confused by this proposal that the President said Israel put forth.

 

 There seems to be a misunderstanding between the sides and there are conflicting reports.

 

 Israel says its objectives have not changed yet.

 

 This deal would not, say, result in the elimination of Hamas.

 

 Prime Minister Netanyahu said some of what President Biden said in his speech on Friday is inaccurate.

 

 Can you please clarify?

 

 But it doesn't require Hamas to be gone, right?

 

 But the proposal doesn't require Hamas to relinquish control of Gaza, correct?

 

 It is up to – for negotiation if Hamas can stay in charge of Gaza?

 

 Thanks, Matt.

 

 I'll just be very quick, and I'll pick up on my colleague here beside me.

 

 So you mentioned the President's remarks, which included the idea that as long as Hamas lives up to its commitment, there could be, and I quote, the cessation of hostilities permanently.

 

 And you say that is an Israeli proposal.

 

 So the government of the state of Israel is signed up to a proposal that there could be a permanent end to hostilities and Hamas still in existence in a meaningful way.

 

 No, but I understand that — but if the provisions required would be the dissolution of Hamas, why would Hamas sign up to get that ball rolling?

 

 Thank you very much, Matt.

 

 We hear more from the U.S. administration about Netanyahu, which sounds like there may be a frustration.

 

 For example, recently, a follow-up to my colleague's question about President Biden's comment, which you clarified, that President Biden said that Netanyahu may be prolonging the war on Gaza for political reasons.

 

 And last week... It's not what the president said.

 

 Actually... It's not the president's quote.

 

 Go ahead, but... It's not his quote.

 

 Last week, also, President Biden implied that there's a risk for Israel to be isolated from the world.

 

 So given these statements by President Biden and the amount of Palestinians killed by the Israeli attacks in Gaza and the destruction in Gaza, is it fair to say that the U.S. administration frustrating about Netanyahu?

 

 I'll just be very brief.

 

 Indonesia, Prabowo, the incoming President, he says that Indonesia is willing to send peacekeepers to Gaza to monitor any potential troops.

 

 Is that something the U.S. has been in discussions with, or do you have anything to – any comment on that?

 

 So nothing today yet.

 

 Okay.

 

 So where do things stand?

 

 I mean, I think you tried to make it very clear right now that everything rests with Hamas.

 

 But there seems to be a lot of friction, to say the least, inside the Israeli Government about this.

 

 Are you confident that the Israelis have, in fact, signed off and are willing to go along with this?

 

 And then – but then on the other side, you make the case how it's great for Israel.

 

 What does Hamas get out of it?

 

 And I'm not asking because I think or that they should necessarily get something out of it.

 

 But it's a negotiation and there's always give and take and concession.

 

 So what's – what are the selling points for Hamas, do you think?

 

 And there's – the way you've approached this so far is that – the way a lot of people have approached it is that Hamas doesn't care about the Palestinian people.

 

 They only care about themselves.

 

 And so there are, in a sense, three parties to this – Israel, the Palestinian people, non-Hamas, and Hamas.

 

 But I think the answer to my question, which is what's in it for Hamas, is essentially nothing for them.

 

 My last one, I want to focus on this nearly identical.

 

 What does that mean?

 

 Because a lot of small changes – I've seen negotiations break down over the placement of punctuation marks, commas, dashes.

 

 What do you mean, nearly identical?

 

 And if – are they nearly identical, does that apply to the – what the Israelis submitted?

 

 Or is this word-for-word what the Israelis submitted?

 

 Maybe just following up on that, it's – this is basically what Israel has proposed or accepted.

 

 Of course, there's criticism within Israel as well.

 

 It's not a monolithic country.

 

 Are you sure that Israel can follow through on this, that if Hamas says yes, that considering the coalition politics and the politics within Netanyahu's cabinet, that Israel would definitely go ahead with this?

 

 Can I just follow up on two things with that?

 

 First of all, in the proposal itself, I mean, in the president's remarks, he was saying that Hamas basically can't do another October 7 attack.

 

 In terms of what's the assessment for that, what's the basis for that, and is there anything else that needs to be done to ensure that outcome?

 

 Basically under this, would Hamas need to more formally lay down some arms?

 

 Is there some sort of settlement that would be involved to make sure that that's the case?

 

 Do you want to just... Can I just... Yeah.

 

 Actually, just one thing that's slightly different.

 

 But just, in the proposal, just the language, major population centers, that the Israelis would have been talking about.

 

 Is there actually a list of what the major population centers are?

 

 Or is there some wiggle room?

 

 Could this be something that could become a point of contention in the future?

 

 I just wanted to follow specifically on this assessment of Hamas's military capability, because some Israeli officials seem to have taken objection to that line in the President's speech about what they are capable of doing.

 

 John Kirby has since said that this stems from U.S. intelligence and military assessments as to what they're capable of.

 

 Are those assessments something that the Israelis share in terms of what Hamas is capable of?

 

 And then secondly, is that the same bar for the Israelis?

 

 Because it seems to be that that's at the crux of whether they're willing to agree to a permanent ceasefire or not.

 

 Without getting into specifically what the Israelis assess, is there a difference between the U.S. assessment and the Israelis' assessment?

 

 So speaking only for the United States, is this a recent assessment?

 

 Because presumably Hamas's capabilities would have been steadily degraded up until this point.

 

 Has something changed where they've reached a sort of benchmark, in our view?

 

 And sorry, so they're – so the U.S. is unilaterally assessing this.

 

 There may still be a difference as to what the Israelis think Hamas is capable of.

 

 I mean, if this, as you guys have put it, is the best possible deal that negotiators to this point have been able to present Hamas, what is the plan if they say no?

 

 If they do reject it, though, you would expect the Israeli campaign to continue and for the U.S. to continue supporting Israel as it pursues that campaign?

 

 Yeah, thank you.

 

 I wanted just to try and understand what the space for – we're talking about going from phase one to phase two in this deal.

 

 If you're saying you still have this strong line that Hamas can't run Gaza in the future, but you're also saying that there's no path to total victory, to total sort of eradication of Hamas.

 

 So what you're asking is for Hamas to peacefully – the leaders and the members of Hamas to peacefully disarm and sort of just disappear.

 

 What is the actual sort of proposal here for someone like Yair Sinwar, who's there, he's a leader, you're saying him and his cadre of leaders of Hamas have no role in the future of Gaza.

 

 So where are they going to be in the future?

 

 But you have kind of moved from earlier in the war, I think, you were strongly supporting Israel's goal of completely eradicating Hamas.

 

 Now there seems to be this little space for they can exist in some form.

 

 Thank you, Matt.

 

 If the president said that this was an Israeli proposal, in essence, why would there be the need to implore the Israelis to accept it?

 

 Could you explain that to us?

 

 So knowing that there is the war cabinet and there is a larger cabinet and so on, where there is a great deal of veto power among certain people in the larger cabinet and so on.

 

 So conceivably, they could turn it down.

 

 What would be your second plan in this case?

 

 Because we heard the president, we heard the president say this war must come to an end.

 

 And using the most authoritative podium on earth, which is the White House, to say this.

 

 I mean, there seems to be some sort of commitment that this war has to end.

 

 Fair point.

 

 But, you know, we know that communication with Hamas, especially in Gaza, is very tenuous.

 

 It's not that easy.

 

 So that may take time.

 

 So it could be just an issue of time.

 

 They may agree and so on.

 

 So if they do, that's it.

 

 There's no backing down.

 

 Israel will have to sort of abide by this agreement.

 

 One couple of last points.

 

 Allow me.

 

 On the West Bank, I really want to ask.

 

 Because, you know, we have seen a situation that is really deteriorating in the West Bank.

 

 We see towns like Taqqua, for instance, where it's being almost besieged.

 

 The land is taken.

 

 They erect steel doors and so on and all these things.

 

 And I wonder, what is your position on all this?

 

 Is this reversible?

 

 Is this something that you could sort of pressure the Israelis to sort of pull back from?

 

 And finally, Samantha Power, the Israeli—I mean, I'm sorry.

 

 Samantha Power said that Israel is the chief impediment to Gaza aid.

 

 How do you assess what she said?

 

 Thank you, Matt.

 

 Prime Minister Netanyahu said neither Hamas nor the Palestinian Authority will play a role in the day after in Gaza.

 

 Do you agree that the Palestinian Authority should be excluded from playing any role?

 

 So do you see this as a point of – that might be not acceptable for Israel in terms of this proposal that the President put forward?

 

 I want to have another go at some previous questions on Hamas.

 

 The President said that Hamas' capabilities have been degraded to the degree that they don't pose a threat equivalent to the October 7th.

 

 Would you entertain or accept some kind of political presence for Hamas?

 

 Or do you think that is going to be a situation analogous to the de-Baathification that we have seen in Iraq after the war, which is de-Hamas-ization, I don't know if the term applies, but basically that nobody will be allowed to take part in any kind of shape or form of civil authority, of, you know, local authority, whatever.

 

 We're not talking about a definition of a brigade.

 

 And finally, Saudis and Qataris have condemned an Israeli Knesset attempt – or a rebel, actually – to label UNRWA as a terrorist organization.

 

 Do you condemn this attempt by the Israeli Knesset to do that?

 

 Matt, could I have clarification on your engagement with the PA?

 

 Are you engaged with the Palestinian Authority right now?

 

 We have conversations with the – Where are the whereabouts of Mr. Hadi Amr, for instance?

 

 Matt, did you hear back from the Israeli regarding the investigation on the strike in – last weekend?

 

 And on this proposed deal, the President, also the Secretary yesterday in his call with Gantz, he mentioned that this proposed deal will unlock a calm on the northern borders.

 

 Do you have something substantial?

 

 Did you – is there a progress made here with Hezbollah?

 

 Did you discuss such a deal or diplomatic resolution for the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah with Hezbollah and Iran?

 

 And one more on Iran.

 

 Iran's acting foreign minister said today that the process of negotiations between U.S. and Iran are currently underway and exchange of messages and consultations continue.

 

 Can you confirm that?

 

 Just a question on the framework that's currently on the table.

 

 Can you say if it's the U.S. expectation that during phase two and three of the deal, if it's implemented, if Israel would still be able to carry out specific targeted military strikes should a threat emanate from within Gaza?

 

 Getting back slightly to the Middle East, but staying in Europe, I don't know how many times you get asked about Slovenia.

 

 So the parliament is debating recognition of a Palestinian state, of the state of Palestine.

 

 It's been put on hold by the opposition.

 

 I know in the previous three years as European countries, the reaction, you had a reaction coming up, but as it's actually in process, does the U.S. want to tip the scales one way or another, or do you have a position on whether Slovenia should go ahead and recognize a Palestinian state?

 

 Can I just ask you briefly about two elections?

 

 I know you issued statements on them already, but two major countries, Mexico and South Africa.

 

 I know that there have been statements issued on both, but particularly in the case of South Africa, it seems the ANC, for the first time since the end of apartheid, is going to lose a majority.

 

 The U.S. has a relationship with South Africa, but obviously there have been some ups and downs recently with regard to Russia, with regard to the issues in The Hague.

 

 Does the United States anticipate any changes to the relationship with South Africa coming out of this?

 

 Anything more to the U.S. is liking potentially?

 

 Back in February, the White House announced sanctions on people undermining peace, security, and stability in the West Bank.

 

 I'm not sure if you saw, but Senator Chris Van Hollen just suggested that those sanctions ought to apply to Smotrich, who you mentioned earlier today as an obstacle to the peace deal.

 

 Is that something that the State Department would consider?

 

 Quick Pakistan question.

 

 Regarding the bilateral deal between the United States, Saudi Arabia, and Israel that included a defense deal between the United States and Saudi Arabia and Saudi Arabia and Israel normalization, we have seen that Secretary Blinken in a Senate hearing mentioned that the United States and Saudi Arabia are very near to a defense deal.

 

 It seems like the U.S. is prioritizing its defense deal with Saudi Arabia but not the ties with Israel, the basic effort that the U.S. led for the mediation between Saudi Arabia and Israel.

 

 So, with this testimony in the Senate hearing, is it understood that it will be a bilateral deal only with the defense deal between Saudi Arabia and the United States and the normalization between Israel and Saudi Arabia is sidelined?

 

 Then secondly, from the second time in 21 years, the United States allowed a jailed Pakistani lady who is facing 86 years of sentence in a Texas jail with the allegations of alleged attacks on US troops in Afghanistan, that is Dr. Opia Siddiqui.

 

 So, a former Pakistani caretaker, a government official in a private conversation told, he revealed that US and Pakistan were very close for a deal, a possible deal between US and Pakistan that might be a swap deal, basically.

 

 So, you have any information on that, or is there something behind US and Pakistan are considering that?

 

 You said that you would hope that the Israeli law enforcement would follow through in curtailing violence from settlers in the West Bank.

 

 However, on Thursday, last Thursday, the Israeli military raided a vegetable market in Ramallah, in Albira, to be specific, one of the largest vegetable markets in the West Bank, which lit on fire.

 

 Who is going to hold Israel accountable, the Israeli military in this sense?

 

 Which law enforcement authority should?

 

 Thank you.

 

 So Algeria has proposed a draft UN Security Council resolution that demands a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip, the release of all hostages held by Hamas, and essentially orders Israel to immediately halt its military offensive in Rafah.

 

 What's the US stance on this resolution, and have you been engaging with Algeria on negotiations on it?

 

 Would you veto it as it stands now?

 

 and then the United Nations said on Wednesday that the amount of humanitarian aid entering the enclave has dropped by 2 thirds since Israel began its military operation in the southern Rafah region this month.

 

 What is the US doing about this?

 

 The amount of humanitarian aid entering Gaza has dropped by 2 thirds.

 

 And then just one more on Gaza, if I may.

 

 Stacey Gilbert, a State Department employee of more than 20 years, said she resigned after the administration released the NSM report this month, which she said was wrong.

 

 She said a draft of the report had said clearly that Israel was blocking humanitarian assistance, but that subject matter experts were removed and it was edited at a higher level before being published with the conclusion that Israel was not blocking assistance.

 

 What was the reason for the change to this conclusion and do you have any comment on this?

 

 Thank you, I have a few other questions on other things.

 

 Further on the assistance to Gaza, with the DOD's temporary peer out of commission, has the US engaged with Israel to try to get some of that assistance that's presumably sitting in Cyprus to come in through the port of Ashdod and then land there?

 

 Yeah, I was just hesitating, but you said that the part of this peer has been crucial to distribute aid to Gaza.

 

 But in fact, since it started, it's been having a series of issues and problems.

 

 That's a lot of aid.

 

 I mean, since the operation in Rafah began.

 

 Does that tell you that these, I'm sorry to call it this way, but band-aid kind of solutions, like the pier and so on, they really, they have no long-term effect.

 

 They're subject to all kinds of weather or mishap or whatever it is.

 

 And the only way are really the land crossings.

 

 Isn't that the case now?

 

 Isn't that the proof?

 

 I mean, you guys said time and again that it's not an alternative to land crossings.

 

 Then why not bring to bear whatever abilities you have, whatever pressure you have, on the Israelis to allow more aid to go through the crossings, the land crossings?

 

 Or you Egyptians, your Egyptian allies, or whatever.

 

 I mean, whatever land crossing there is available or can be available.

 

 Now, there is a CNN New York Times investigation that determined that the weapons used in Rafah were American weapons, the GPU-39, whatever.

 

 Do you have any comment on that?

 

 Because yesterday, I think the Secretary said he was not sure yet whether it was American-made weapons and so on, something like that.

 

 So what is your position today?

 

 And just on the – I think there was a bit of confusion, perhaps on Monday, about the location of the tents and the fire and where the bomb – or the bombs were dropped.

 

 And certainly the aerial images that have emerged since then appear to show the structures that were attacked very close to quite a lot of tents.

 

 The Palestinian journalist that took the photos of the tail fin and the electronics board of the weapon says that a child told him he found the electronics board in his tent, which would suggest a close proximity of the tent to the strike.

 

 So have you got any further three days on now about proximity?

 

 The Secretary said yesterday that in light of the horrific consequences for their actions within Rafah, they have to consider whether the incremental gains made against Hamas are worth those unintended consequences.

 

 Is the administration – does the administration believe that Israel is moving closer to that red line that they drew for reconsidering supplying U.S. weapons?

 

 I just have one more related question.

 

 Can you confirm some of these reports that U.S. and Israel and Egypt will be meeting next week to discuss opening the Rafah crossing and securing the border between Egypt and Gaza?

 

 And what does the U.S. hope to see as far as who would be administering the Gaza side of the – Well, Abby, I'm not going to speak to specific reports and diplomatic conversations.

 

 Thank you, Vedat.

 

 On the wording you use on Rafah, you say it's not a major operation, but I mean, 54 people have been killed in Gaza over the past 24 hours.

 

 Nearly one million people have already fled Rafah over the past three weeks as Israeli strikes continue.

 

 We have seen Israeli tanks in Rafah, although you deny.

 

 Are these acceptable for you?

 

 I mean, is that a line – where is the line, the limit for you to say, okay, this is enough and this cannot continue anymore?

 

 Thanks, Adam.

 

 Just based on your answer, you don't – you haven't seen a major military operation or – and you oppose a ground military operation in Rafah.

 

 You support Israel in going after Hamas.

 

 You're saying Hamas is embedded within the civilian population.

 

 Obviously, this is how the Israeli can go after Hamas, and these consequences would look like what we have seen during the weekend.

 

 So just can you say on the record that what's – you support what's taking place now without calling it a major military operation or a target military operation?

 

 Just can you give us an answer whether you support what's happening and what's taking place the way it's taking place now in Rafah?

 

 One more question, if I may.

 

 Regarding the tension, nobody can deny that there's a tension growing between the Israeli and the Egyptians.

 

 Now we have a delegation, the White House is sending a delegation.

 

 To what extent the State Department, this department, is engaged in at least avoiding this escalation?

 

 Leave Gaza?

 

 You want to leave Gaza?

 

 There are Gazans, most of these people that are fighting.

 

 Thanks, Said.

 

 So you've mentioned these transparent investigations and sort of allowing Israel to conduct those investigations.

 

 Obviously, you've mentioned — or rather, Matt mentioned on Tuesday that lawyers have been integrated with the IDF to make sure that things are going in a way that's in accordance with international humanitarian law.

 

 Then we've also mentioned how images from this past weekend are devastating.

 

 And then the NSM-20 report that you put a lot of trust in just now says specifically that the intelligence community, quote, assesses that Israel could do more to avoid civilian harm.

 

 So at what point would the department see a pattern of civilian harm rather than just individual instances that they allow for investigations to continue?

 

 A couple of questions.

 

 First of all, you say that there are ongoing diplomatic moves to try and get more aid into Gaza.

 

 The U.S. has been talking since November about getting more aid into Gaza.

 

 So is the fact that there isn't more aid getting into Gaza a failure of U.S. diplomacy, or is it just empty rhetoric?

 

 And if I can, sorry, follow up to Said's question.

 

 If Nikki Haley's comments are made by a private citizen and therefore don't require any comment from you, why did this administration criticize people who spoke out in favor of those in Palestine demanding a ceasefire and were quite vocal?

 

 How much of the Indo-Pacific priorities have been affected by the wars in Ukraine and Gaza?

 

 Security analysts say leaving Taiwan, Japan, and the Philippines to deal with China's gray zone tactics may lead to a failed deterrence.

 

 Do you agree with that assessment?

 

 And another one on the region.

 

 To what extent the U.S. aid administrator Samantha Power reflects the views of the administration when she said that the conditions in Gaza are worse now than ever before?

 

 But is it your view, as the views that Samantha Power expressed?

 

 Hi, Matt, yeah, thank you.

 

 This weekend, the death toll in Gaza passed 36,000 Palestinians.

 

 There are now one million Palestinians displaced by Israeli operations in Rafah and in the north.

 

 There hasn't been much at all humanitarian aid that can be delivered within Rafah, within, I'm sorry, within Gaza for the past several weeks.

 

 We all saw the pictures, as you said, this weekend of the civilians on fire in their tents and the child who had their head blown off, if that was an ethnic video.

 

 And today, numerous witnesses are reporting to news outlets that tanks have moved into the center of Rafah.

 

 And today, we had a strike, an Israeli strike, according to the Gaza health officials, on a tent that killed 21 civilians in an area that was not an evacuation area with 13 of the civilians as women who were there for non-combatants.

 

 And none of this, obviously, has crossed the red lines that President Biden has said or the U.S. has said against about providing, improving humanitarian conditions or not going into the center of Rafah in a way that harms civilians.

 

 Can you tell me why it hasn't crossed those red lines, why the humanitarian situation is acceptable and why the situation in Rafah is acceptable right now?

 

 Yeah, Jake Sullivan said recently that the United States would be watching very carefully the level of number of deaths, actually, and level of destruction in Rafah specifically.

 

 Given the number of deaths and the level of destruction that we are seeing in Rafah, and today you have Israeli tanks that entered the zone, and you have already over 800,000, if not more, Palestinians who fled the zone, has Israel crossed the red lines that Biden has, that the president has given?

 

 So, I mean, there has been a lot of mistakes like this, correct?

 

 First, let me establish, does the United States believe that Israel, what happened over the weekend was a result of a mistake?

 

 Right, so if we take the initial statements, Netanyahu said it was a tragic mistake.

 

 There has been a lot of headlines with those same comments, right?

 

 World Central Kitchen killings were also a tragic mistake.

 

 There was another one late last year on Magazi camp that Israel has also called a mistake.

 

 Those are the two that comes to mind.

 

 There are, I can find, numerous other incidents.

 

 Is the United States comfortable sending this many weapons to an army that seems to be making a series of mistakes?

 

 I have a million follow-ups to that, but I'm sure my colleagues will do.

 

 I have one final broader question I wanna put to you.

 

 So since the start of this conflict, but specifically since U.S. response to ICC over the weekend, there's been a lot of accusation that U.S. is actually eroding the very rules-based order it has long promoted, particularly against China and Russia, because certain truths, they say, are in contradiction to its policies when it comes to the war in Gaza.

 

 I'm just wondering, are you not worried that your credibility in the world is on the line here?

 

 You were saying that on the strike today, it seems like you were saying, no, I'm sorry, the strike on Sunday, you seem to be saying two things, one of them that the Israeli military hit 1.8 miles away.

 

 Kilometers.

 

 Over the weekend, it was reported that there was a U.S. official who said that Israel told the U.S. that it used the precision munition to hit the target, but that they believed it was shrapnel from the explosion that ignited a fuel tank nearby and started the fire.

 

 I am no military expert, but I don't understand how shrapnel could have flown 1.7 kilometers in order to ignite that fire.

 

 Okay, and then just when it comes to the continuation of Israel using precision-guided munitions in Rafah, at this point, the U.S. still supports that?

 

 With regard to the reports of the Israeli tanks that are in central Rafah right now, I know you said you don't, you haven't verified those reports.

 

 Has the U.S. asked Israel about those reports and an explanation for why those tanks might be in central Rafah?

 

 So it's safe to say you've interrogated them?

 

 On the numbers of people who fled Rafah in the past few weeks, it's one million is the reported number that's coming from UNRWA.

 

 Is the U.S. satisfied with the plan, or lack thereof, of where these people are going?

 

 Obviously, there's the argument that they're not safe wherever they go, especially since Rafah was a place where they'd gone to be safe.

 

 What's your understanding on, Israel is also saying that they've been evacuating people.

 

 What level of evacuation are they assisting with?

 

 What's your understanding?

 

 I understand, but just more specifically, does the U.S. have an understanding about where most of these people are going and whether or not where they're going?

 

 And does the United States have an understanding of how much the IDF, the Israelis, are assisting them or not assisting them?

 

 And I just want to go back to the ICJ ruling over the weekend, or last Friday, and a lot of the reading in the region now is that this two incidents now in Rafah is an Israeli respond to the ICJ, that we're not going to stop that.

 

 What is your assessment?

 

 And so do you want Israel to then, to accept this order from the ICJ?

 

 First, I want to give a shout out to my student visitor friend from Gaza, sitting in the back, who came with me today to attend the briefing.

 

 I wanted to follow up on Leon and Homayoun's questions, on the red line.

 

 Is there actually a red line?

 

 I mean, do you have like a yardstick by which you measure a red line that Israel may cross or may not cross?

 

 So in theory, Israel can strike anywhere, basically, and say they're Hamas opposition.

 

 But that is plausible hypothesis.

 

 So I just wanted to ask you, the statement that was issued by this administration over Rafah, when you say Israel has a right to pursue Hamas or to go after Hamas, isn't that implicitly a green light for them to do whatever they want under that pretext?

 

 Okay, well, I mean, two weeks ago, I remember asking you from here on, and I, in fact, mentioned the name of those who were killed.

 

 Four of them were children and so on, whether they are going to be safer in Mawassi and in Tel Sultan, where they were asked to leave.

 

 At the time, it seemed like part of a larger plan to move people into a safer zone.

 

 But obviously, it's not.

 

 I mean, we saw killing 45 people in Rafah.

 

 We saw killing another 21, nobody knows how many, and so on, just yesterday.

 

 So there seems to be no end.

 

 Do you guys have any kind of perception on how this thing is going to end and when this horror show stops?

 

 Lastly, on the aid.

 

 If you guys are unable to influence Israel on allowing aid in, what makes you think that you don't want to be influential with their military operation in Gaza?

 

 One, you have called behind this podium many times for the protection of Palestinian civilians in Gaza.

 

 Can you tell us where are the safe zones?

 

 Can you just name them, identify where are safe zones in Gaza that people can go to?

 

 Okay, and second, the co-founder of Human Rights Watch and a Holocaust survivor, he was actually born in Nazi Germany.

 

 He said yesterday, and I just wanted to quote him, he said that, over a period of time, Israel has obstructed delivery of humanitarian assistance.

 

 The victims were young children who were starved or badly malnourished that will be affected their ability physically and mentally for the rest of their lives.

 

 And on this basis alone, he believes that Israel is engaged in an act of genocide.

 

 So is he wrong, whether it's legally, ethically, or politically?

 

 How can you counter-argument this for the co-founder of Human Rights Watch and a Holocaust survivor?

 

 Okay, can you take a question on an investigative reporting by The Guardian and Magazine 972, which is basically saying that Israel, for the last 10 years, nine years, have been pressurizing the ICC, spying on them.

 

 And what will be the response from the US if you think an ally of yours has been pressuring an international legal entity that's trying to try people for crimes against humanity and war crimes?

 

 Do you have any examples of where an internal Israeli or IDF investigation has led to meaningful accountability?

 

 I mean, I asked the question because you're hanging an awful lot on faith in this process.

 

 And for example, in the National Security Memorandum 20 report, you talk about being convinced by Israel's, quote, credible and reliable assurances over this.

 

 I mean, there are two cases in which American citizens who have been killed at the hands of the IDF have had no meaningful accountability.

 

 So I think people will perhaps be puzzled by your belief in assurances in that.

 

 These are ongoing, but there've been many in the past that have been ongoing and have reached no conclusion.

 

 And they also create a situation where you're able to get into a holding pattern and say, okay, there's an investigation going on, so we'll hold judgment.

 

 I'm not asking you to pass judgment on these current incidents.

 

 I'm saying, where is the evidence that there is meaningful accountability and the evidence that these things are prevented from happening, which follows up what Humera was saying on the basis of internal Israeli processes?

 

 Because a huge amount weighs on this now.

 

 The International Criminal Court, one of your objections to it is that they have an independent internal process.

 

 The ICJ, same thing.

 

-20, same thing.

 

 All of these incidents, you are hanging on a belief in that process being effective.

 

 And I'm asking you for the evidence that it is.

 

 This conflict is 100 years old.

 

 In its current form, it's probably 40, 50 years old.

 

 And when the IDF says that, or the internal system says there is a process of internal investigation, I'm asking you for some evidence that that is effective, that it stops it happening again, that it creates accountability.

 

 And so, for example, in the last two years, with two American citizens who have been killed, there has been no meaningful accountability.

 

 When at the time, what the Israelis said was, there is an investigation, and you have relied on that as well.

 

 I mean, what do you think of a military court system that in the cases of Palestinians that appeared before it, there was a 99% conviction rate.

 

 In the cases of Israelis that are held before separately, the civilian system, because they don't, in the same territory, have to appear before the military system, rights groups say that these are whitewashes, that there are virtually no, there is no accountability or investigation.

 

 Speaking of the reactions to the conflict in Gaza, today, Iraqi Clerk, Muqtada al-Sadr, said in a statement that what Israel is doing in Gaza, they are doing with the support of the U.S. and U.S. President.

 

 And he asked that the Iraqi government to shut down the U.S. embassy and expel the U.S. ambassador in Iraq.

 

 Do you have any concern or reaction to that statement?

 

 And what's your reaction to the recent attacks to the U.S. branch in Baghdad?

 

 They attacked the KFC and also there were different attacks, which the Iraqi police says that this is anti-Israel motive behind these attacks.

 

 And what consequences could the U.S. impose on Israel for the bombing in Rafah?

 

 And how does the U.S. feel about Israel taking responsibility for the bombing in Rafah?

 

 Is it sufficient?

 

 Just a quick one on Gaza.

 

 Do you have reports on Gaza, specifically humanitarian aid, and specifically on the pier?

 

 There are reports saying that the pier in the U.S. has suspended aid because the pier broke down or what have you.

 

 I don't have the details on that.

 

 And you said that this could jeopardize efforts for a ceasefire.

 

 Why is that?

 

 Why should this jeopardize efforts for implementing a ceasefire?

 

 So Hamas a couple weeks ago basically agreed to the American points for a ceasefire.

 

 So let me ask you just one more question.

 

 There are many others that would like to ask many other questions.

 

 Let me ask you about Rafah.

 

 You know, according to the UN, we have 900,000 people flee Rafah.

 

 So they just fled.

 

 So you were saying all along that unless Israel has a plan to relocate 1.4 million people, you are not going to agree to it.

 

 But obviously, this assault is, you know, full fled now.

 

 They are in the center of Rafah, as we understand it.

 

 900,000 people, which is, you know, almost a million people, that is, so have already fled.

 

 So what is the United States going to do about this?

 

 And how does it view it?

 

 And my final one on the issue of the crossing at Rafah.

 

 I mean, we have not seen any aid trucks go through for a number of days now through Rafah and Karmel Bessalem.

 

 So how are you getting – you said that you're getting the aid through to those that have been forced to flee.

 

 How are you getting this?

 

 Is it likely to open the next day or so?

 

 I was kind of momentarily stunned by your original answer, so I forgot my question, but these will be brief.

 

 So are you okay, then, with the application for arrest warrants against Hamas?

 

 You don't think that Hamas leaders should be prosecuted?

 

 But obviously, the administration is also troubled by actions that Israel has taken post-October 7th.

 

 So where is the accountability for that?

 

 Where do the Palestinians go?

 

 This is a question I asked Matt – I mean, Ned, a long time ago, over and over and over again.

 

 Where do the Palestinians go to seek redress?

 

 Over the occupied territory.

 

 Over Gaza, which is not entirely occupied.

 

 So the Palestinians, if they have a complaint, they have to bring it to Israeli court.

 

 I'm sorry.

 

 Matt, what about the merits of the arrest warrant?

 

 You talked about – you pushed back on the jurisdiction and the process.

 

 Does the United States – is it able to challenge the substance of the arrest warrant?

 

 I mean, some of the things that the prosecutor says, evidence his office collected showed Israel has systematically deprived civilians of objects indispensable to human survival, including restricting food, water, medicine, and energy.

 

 Is the State Department able to challenge the arrest warrant application on those bases?

 

 But I don't understand why you can't address this right now, because when – Because I'm not – well, I'm not a lawyer in court going point by point by his arrest warrant.

 

 Yeah, but when South Africa brought the case to the ICJ, U.S. called it meritless.

 

 And right now, can you call the substance of the arrest warrant applications meritless?

 

 In terms of accountability, though, you talk about the fact that Israel has open investigations.

 

 So what kind of timeline did Israel provide you to conclude those investigations?

 

 And have they provided you a timeline?

 

 Right.

 

 So the fact that the prosecutor has applied for an arrest warrant and talking about crimes against humanity, does that give the State Department a pause or, like, give you second thoughts about the found – the conclusions of the NSM report?

 

 I mean, you have raised certain concerns there, but then you did find Israel's assurances credible.

 

 Is that something that would make you rethink that conclusion?

 

 You mentioned that the U.S. thinks this is fully unfounded.

 

 Did you just mean coming to the conclusion of these arrest warrants being sought, or did you mean the whole process?

 

 But the ICC coming to this conclusion, presumably they're looking at pretty similar material to what the U.S. looks at when they're, when you're doing your own process and assessment of the actions that the U.S., that Israel, sorry, has taken.

 

 So if they are looking at open source evidence and that kind of thing, are you, is the U.S., can you say whether you're confident in the process that the ICC uses to get to its conclusion?

 

 A lot of it's open source.

 

 Do they have to go to, do they have to go to Israel to figure out what public comments from Israeli officials?

 

 What about Hamas?

 

 So, so they, they don't need to go to Gaza and talk to Sinwar and – who's the other guy?

 

 And they don't need to go to Doha, but they do need to go to Israel.

 

 I get that, but – So I would say – but I would say if you – But if they don't have jurisdiction, then why are you saying that they should have gone to Israel?

 

 Because we have – Because Israel is not a member of the court, and you are not a member of the court, so why should they go to Israel?

 

 I'm just wondering why it's a problem for you guys, for the ICC, to go after Israeli officials, and doesn't seem to be a problem for them to go after Hamas.

 

 But – so should Hamas be held accountable for what they did?

 

 But you would accept – just so I can – I just said the opposite.

 

 There was just an indictment of Hamas by itself and of Israel by itself.

 

 You can say we take the indictment against Hamas but not against Israel.

 

 So you said Israel does have open investigations.

 

 Are you satisfied with the way Israel conducts these investigations?

 

 Will there be any consequences if you are not satisfied?

 

 Just one more on this.

 

 In accusations, the ICC accuses Netanyahu and Gallant of causing extermination, starvation of civilians as a method of war, deliberately targeting civilians.

 

 Do you think those things are not happening in Gaza?

 

 Are you satisfied with the amount of humanitarian aid getting into Gaza?

 

 A couple of questions in addition to everybody else asked is, you know, you said that Israel is not a member of the ICC, which is true, but also, I don't know if you're aware of this or not, but Israel has supported the candidacy of Mr. Khan when he was elected in 2021, and they wanted him to be there.

 

 So the fact that they actually endorsed him, they know there are some consequences, otherwise they wouldn't bother in the first place.

 

 So this is just to – It doesn't change the underlying jurisdictional question.

 

 And one last thing is, on the issue itself, many international lawyers, very well known, different background, they said they found a reasonable ground that actually Israel has committed crime against humanity and war crimes.

 

 Does the State Department lawyers have a different conclusion, or you have not reached this conclusion, or they disagree with them?

 

 What exactly is the difference between the lawyers who worked at the State Department and international lawyers who found different conclusions?

 

 So on the – back on the question of jurisdiction with the international community, you said that because the Palestinians are not a state actor, they don't have jurisdiction over their side.

 

 But in 2014 – I just Googled this one up – Jen Psaki was up here, your colleague.

 

 The statement was, today the ICC convicted Jermaine Katanga, the commander of the FRPI militia, for his responsibility for war crimes and crimes against humanity.

 

 The ICC's DRC cases represent a significant step toward delivering justice for victims in the DRC.

 

 She then went on to say the United States reiterates its call for the apprehension of Sylvester Mutakumara, another leader of an abusive rebel militia in the DRC, who is subject to an arrest warrant by the ICC.

 

 The Department of State continues to offer a reward of up to $5 million for information leading to his arrest.

 

 So at least in 2014, it was the position of the administration that you could even put out a reward for the arrest of somebody that would then go to the ICC and would have jurisdiction.

 

 So why does it not – that apply to the current Congress?

 

 And one quick follow-up to what Said had asked about whether or not the U.S. had approved the deal that Hamas said it agreed to.

 

 There's a lot of reporting in the region that CI Director Burns was involved in that, had approved – are you saying that – is that not the case?

 

 What was Burns' involvement there?

 

 Just extremely briefly, it's not just the DRC that you guys have supported the ICC investigations into or offered rewards.

 

 It was Uganda, the Lord's Resistance Army, there was a big push made and rewards offered for that.

 

 So I'm glad that you said that it's not just the DRC.

 

 But secondly, when you said that the ICC in this case, at least with Israel, didn't go to Israel to interview people, they also didn't go to Gaza or to Doha, correct?

 

 So in other words, then it's okay if they go to one side but not to the other?

 

 That is the fundamental – that is how jurisdiction is fundamentally applied under the Rome Statute, is if one of the parties to the conflict is a signatory to the conflict, and that's not a case – should be – then apparently it's okay if they don't – the prosecution doesn't go to that country, in this case Russia.

 

 So it is not – And then this current case, Israel, which is not a signatory to Rome.

 

 But you don't have a problem with it where they didn't go to Russia, but you do have a problem with it when – There is a fundamental difference here in that Israel said they were going to cooperate with the investigation.

 

 For the last month, Israeli officials have been going off about how horrible it would be and how awful it will be if the ICC comes forward with these arrest warrants, to the point where people in this government were like, what are they so – what are they getting so concerned about?

 

 Nothing is yet happening.

 

 Well, now it has happened, okay?

 

 But they have made clear from day one that they don't think this is a legitimate investigation.

 

 What makes you think they were prepared to cooperate?

 

 In a recent media interview, Indian Prime Minister Modi revealed how he made an effort to stop Israel's attack in Gaza during the holy month of Ramadan by sending an envoy to Tel Aviv.

 

 Is the State Department aware of this?

 

 Let me start with a peer.

 

 The UN – your counterpart at the UN was saying today that they're still looking operationally in terms of how to deliver the aid, that there are concerns about safety, about the logistics – I'm paraphrasing – of the UN workers there in Gaza, even if it comes off the pier.

 

 Do you think this can be sorted out?

 

 And on a similar note, Rafah, of course, is closed.

 

 I know you spoke about opening the Rafah crossing and you spoke about opening further crossings.

 

 Prime Minister Netanyahu, I think it was yesterday, had some choice words for Egypt, saying that Egypt needs to act to open it.

 

 Egypt also has responded quite forcefully, saying that basically, truck drivers don't really want to go essentially through an Israeli checkpoint to get in.

 

 How confident are you that these issues can be resolved?

 

 Is the U.S. trying to do anything to solve this?

 

 And do you, I mean, basically, do you think, do you agree that Egypt should just open it up?

 

 Or do you think it's more complicated than that?

 

 Just one more.

 

 But I'm just wondering if you have any reaction to the Arab League emergency meeting, their two main takeaways.

 

 One, they want a regional summit or a peace conference on what's going on now.

 

 And also, speaking of UN or UN-backed peacekeepers in the Palestinian territories.

 

 On this, if you don't mind, can you give us a more clear answer if you support the deployment of UN forces in Gaza until the implementation of the two-state solution that the Arab summit called for today?

 

 Martin Griffiths warned today that famine was an immediate risk in Gaza with food stocks running out, said the humanitarian operation was completely stuck, the relief operation was unplannable, and said that the consequences of an operation in Rafah that everyone warned about are coming true.

 

 Do you agree with that assessment?

 

 And do you have an updated number on aid trucks getting into Gaza?

 

 And then do you have any update on the group of American citizens who are doctors and medical professionals that had been stuck in Gaza since the closing of Rafah?

 

 I just want to repose this question, given your exchanges now with Daphne, I mean, it was a few days after the World Central Kitchen strike on April 1st that both the President and the Secretary have said that a change in U.S. policy would come if Israel didn't improve the humanitarian aid front.

 

 So it's a month and a half later, are there any consequences being thought about, considered by the administration, specifically in response to the humanitarian aid problem?

 

 There's no timeline or deadline that you're working with?

 

 Tangential but related, because the president and secretary also stressed the importance of establishing a better deconfliction mechanism.

 

 So where do Israel's efforts on that stand, as you understand them?

 

 Just to be crystal clear, a deconfliction cell within the IDF does not currently exist.

 

 There are pictures of Jack Lew getting a tour of some of them.

 

 I have one more with your press corps indulgence.

 

 Just because the secretary said yesterday that it was imperative that Israel come up with a clear and credible plan for post-war Gaza.

 

 Obviously, you've seen comments from the prime minister.

 

 In response to those, do you have any indication that the current Israeli government, apart from the defense minister, is interested in crafting such a plan?

 

 If I could go back to the aid workers, the medical workers in Gaza.

 

 You had mentioned that we don't control the Rafah border crossing.

 

 That's what's complicated it.

 

 But Israel does control Kerem Shalom.

 

 Why can these workers not leave Kerem Shalom and Israel allow other aid workers in to replace them?

 

 Thank you.

 

 Following up on these humanitarian aid questions in Gaza, so in the NSM report you say that Israel is not deliberately restricting aid.

 

 But you also say today that you continue to press Israel to allow entry of more humanitarian aid into Gaza.

 

 So if Israel is not restricting aid, then what prevents Israel from allowing more aid into Gaza to do land crossings, considering that these land crossings are under Israeli control?

 

 Israel is not doing enough, but you still think that they are not deliberately restricting the aid?

 

 Very quickly on the aid, I don't know, maybe you touched upon it.

 

 Are you aware that the Israelis or Israeli sectors have destroyed or, you know, stopped five trucks from going in?

 

 So what is your position on the Rafah crossing, you know, at the present time?

 

 And lastly, yesterday marked the 76th anniversary of the Palestinian Nekta.

 

 And of course, the Palestinians commemorated it in the shadow of the ongoing war in Gaza.

 

 So incredible, right?

 

 Not only that the issue was not resolved over a period of 76 years, but there's a second Nekta ongoing.

 

 I mean, there's the movement of people, 600,000 here and 600,000 there and so on.

 

 And I remember what the Secretary of State said just before the crossing, that the time has come for the Palestinians to live in a measure of dignity much like the Israelis and so on.

 

 So has the time come to really end this Nekta and allow the Palestinians the measure of dignity that the Secretary talked about in their own land?

 

 So you feel that the time has come to end this Palestinian Nekta?

 

 No, I'm not talking about Hamas.

 

 I'm talking about that this issue has gone on for 76 years.

 

 I just want you to acknowledge that.

 

 The issue has been going on for 76 years and not just, it did not begin on October 7th.

 

 Thank you, Vedant.

 

 I'm Mark Stone from Sky News.

 

 If I could just take a step back on Gaza.

 

 How have we got to a place where families, children are now being displaced multiple times, the borders are hardly open, heavy bombing and fighting has returned to the north of Gaza and to central Gaza?

 

 Because that seems to be what you do an awful lot.

 

 Hamas should take a huge amount of blame.

 

 What about the other side?

 

 So first, can you confirm that the administration has notified Congress of a $1 billion arms package for Israel?

 

 And when will aid begin going through the pier?

 

 I apologize for being late.

 

 And finally, what's your reaction to South Africa telling the ICJ that Israel's, quote, genocide has continued at pace and has reached a new and horrific stage?

 

 I was gonna change topics, unless you wanna.

 

 I was gonna go to Gaza.

 

 Gaza.

 

 You said yesterday that you were aware of reports of U.S. citizens unable to leave Gaza.

 

 Do you have an update on how many and any progress on that?

 

 And then on the aid, do you have an updated number on aid trucks getting into Gaza and how much has Rafah being closed impacted that?

 

 Okay, and has the Israeli government been receptive on that?

 

 And then has the U.S. finalized a deal with the U.N. to distribute the aid from the pier in Gaza?

 

 And where in Gaza will the U.N. take possession of the aid?

 

 So you can't say if a deal's been reached?

 

 Sure, back in Gaza, I'm still in Gaza.

 

 The Qatari prime minister today, I'm sure you saw his comments, but he was quite downbeat on the prospects for further negotiations and was blaming Israeli actions and words going to Rafah.

 

 I mean, do you still believe that talks are possible?

 

 Do you think, is diplomacy ongoing on this?

 

 And when you say talks are ongoing, does that mean like in virtual form or?

 

 Could I ask you one other thing about Gaza?

 

 There was some attention yesterday's statements by the deputy secretary regarding Israel.

 

 He was speaking in Florida, Kurt Campbell, saying that Israelis talk of sweeping victory in the battlefield, total victory.

 

 I don't think we believe that is likely or possible.

 

 Now, the day before, Secretary Blinken, he said at one of the talk shows that it's perhaps not possible for Israel to eliminate all of Hamas.

 

 Are they saying the same thing?

 

 I mean, Deputy Secretary Campbell's remarks might have implied that perhaps there's not a possibility of victory in some form by Israel.

 

 Can you clarify what?

 

 I have some things on other topics, but I imagine.

 

 Thank you, Vedan.

 

 Here I have a copy of my newspaper exactly 20 years ago, the 13th of May, 2004.

 

 And in it, I have my full interview with the then National Security Advisor, Condoleezza Rice, in which she says, maybe by next May, 2005, we'll have a Palestinian state.

 

 And the irony is, I was probably here that day asking Richard Boucher about it later on.

 

 And the irony is, had the United States kept coming through on its promises, we would not have October 7th, we would not have any of the dozen wars that Israel has waged on the Palestinians.

 

 And I'm asking you, do you ever, guys, do you ever exercise introspection?

 

 Do you look back and say, all this wreckage, all these problems, all these vetoes that you cast, all these notes that you are including last Friday, was it wise?

 

 That is not my point.

 

 Well, let me ask a couple more questions, if you allow me.

 

 Yesterday, you talked about human shields and how Hamas embits itself and so on.

 

 Well, there's a report today or yesterday on how Hamas used, I mean, how Israel, the Israeli Occupation Army, used Palestinian teenagers as human shields.

 

 I wonder if you're aware of the report and if you have any comment on that.

 

 Yeah, and lastly, yesterday, somebody said something about the number of Palestinians dead and so on, and the United Nations came out and corrected that.

 

 I hope that you're aware of this report.

 

 Thank you, Vedant.

 

 As we speak now, there's almost 400,000 people forced to leave their homes from Rafah with no shelter, no food, no fuel, and no safe place to go.

 

 So how could this be different than your insistence, the administration's insistence, that we have to see a viable plan to evacuate people?

 

 Because you're doing it incrementally.

 

 What's the difference between moving half a million people as we speak today, we don't know if they're gonna move more later on, but basically they're doing it on stages.

 

 So what difference from the position you were till now?

 

 I mean, the consequences are the same, aren't they?

 

 But isn't forcing half a million people to move, with forcing them to move out of Rafah to nowhere, where nowhere is safe, isn't it by itself a violation of international law?

 

 Okay, two quick questions.

 

 On the UN worker who was killed yesterday, the UN said that they clearly communicated to Israel where they're moving, the exact movement, and yet one UN worker was killed.

 

 And that will bring the total to almost 250.

 

 So you still believe that Israel is not targeting aid worker, considering what happened yesterday with the clear communication and what happened with the World Central Kitchen?

 

 Okay, and finally, just to follow up what you told, Said, you said that the administration worked effortlessly to establish a Palestinian state.

 

 And you gave an example of the Secretary's visit to the region.

 

 Would the United States consider an all-out attack on Rafah as being a strategic error by Israel?

 

 And we have Israeli politicians saying that they want to see Gaza being erased off the map.

 

 We have Israeli politicians saying that they are going to move back in and recolonize Gaza with the people of Gaza or not.

 

 Do you hear any echoes on that from language that you've used about other conflicts from that platform?

 

 In light of President Biden's decision last week to halt the munitions to Israel, what are President Biden's reasons for criticizing Israel, our most important ally in the Middle East for their use of munitions in their war with Hamas in Gaza, but not criticizing Ukraine for their use of munitions in their war with Russia?

 

 And a couple of quick follow-ups.

 

 The issue is dealing with Hamas and Iran as a greatest threat and I just was wanting to know about the concern that many people have about the criticism of Israel.

 

 Okay, a couple of quick follow-ups.

 

 Does President Biden believe that halting munitions to Israel will make it more likely for Hamas to stay in power in Gaza?

 

 And what is President Biden's response to the exaggerated Gaza death statistics provided by Hamas?

 

 What about President Biden's response to the exaggerated Gaza death statistics provided by Hamas?

 

 I know that earlier you had made a comment here about there's a question about Hamas inflating their statistics.

 

 Yeah, I'll go back on Gaza again.

 

 Also, because Portman and also Jake Sullivan said that yesterday happening in Gaza is not genocide.

 

 Let me read United Nations genocide definition in general, Genocide Convention.

 

 Genocide is a crime committed with the intent to destroy a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group in whole or in part.

 

 According to the definition of UN genocide and reports, happenings seems as a genocide.

 

 How could United Nations reports and international society convince you about genocide?

 

 Because until now, 15,000 babies and children killed in Gaza.

 

 Can you confirm that the State Department did not have any personnel on the ground in Gaza for the development of the NSM-20 report?

 

 And then as a follow-up, if that's the case, can you name what NGOs, government entities were actually collecting the information that the administration made their assessment off of and what the confidence level is in them?

 

 Since you don't have personnel on the ground in Gaza, then are you at all, or is the administration at all, concerned about the dissonance between the NGOs that are actually providing the information and saying that these things are in crisis and do violate law versus what the report has concluded?

 

 So confidence in those sources is low, then?

 

 Can I just clarify, given what the ICG has said and a number of international organizations have said about genocide, referring to the question earlier, is it the U.S. position that Israel can't be committing genocide because of what happened on October the 7th?

 

 Great, thanks.

 

 Has the Secretary had any more conversations with Israeli counterparts since yesterday?

 

 I saw the readout of his conversation with Israel's defense minister.

 

 Can you provide any more detail on what they discussed as well?

 

 The readout didn't go beyond the usual lines.

 

 And what has the tone of these latest conversations been?

 

 Has Israel provided any assurances to the US that the operation in Rafah will remain limited?

 

 And you say you haven't seen a credible plan, but how much detail does Israel provide on its plans in its conversations?

 

 And then I just have one more on Gaza, sorry.

 

 There's some footage on social media reportedly showing protesters blocking trucks carrying humanitarian aid into Gaza at the Turkum Yag crossing and damaging its contents.

 

 Are you aware of this, and have you raised this with Israeli officials?

 

 Just one more for you on this.

 

 In terms of the message that's being sent from this, what message do you expect Israel in particular to see from this?

 

 The fact that you're saying that they're, not you personally, but the State Department is saying that they're potentially violations of the spirit, things that are going against international humanitarian law, but there's no firm evidence here, no repercussions.

 

 But what message do you think should be taken from this?

 

 Do you think there should be a sense of they should do more?

 

 They should do more to, they could do better potentially?

 

 Just sticking on the National Security Memorandum, would you, I mean, you say, you've mentioned, Chug, you've mentioned that the State Department has its own internal process of assessing cases for Israel and other countries that are in conflict.

 

 Would you say that the National Security Memorandum has at least been a useful tool for the State Department in being able to bring forward some of these conclusions in a public light, whereas perhaps your other internal processes wouldn't have necessarily done so or wouldn't plan on doing so anytime soon?

 

 Can I just add just one on something that was mentioned in the report released on Friday?

 

 It said that 40% of the Israel-Gaza-related cases within the State Department's CHERG process are now closed.

 

 Can you give us an idea of what closed means?

 

 Does that mean that some of them have gone through to the Leahy process?

 

 Have other cases been deferred back to Israel for them to come to some kind of conclusion or agreement on what could be improved or done better?

 

 How do we assess the word closed there with those 40%?

 

 Can I just clarify a couple things you said?

 

 Sorry, on the raising with Israel the incident on aid trucks, that was today's incident, is that right?

 

 And then you told Sean that a country's overall commitment to international humanitarian law is not necessarily disproven but by what may be individual IHL violations.

 

 There have been accusations for dozens of incidents.

 

 If all those end up being violations, can you still say Israel is fulfilling its commitment to abide by IHL?

 

 But given all that, do you still feel Israel is fulfilling its commitment to IHL and that it is committed to it?

 

 The report is public- The report says they did not likely break the law?

 

 So when the president of Israel heads up, says there are no civilians in Gaza, that's what he said.

 

 When Golan says, you know, there are human animals and we're going to wipe out Gaza, those were his words.

 

 When the prime minister of Israel, Netanyahu, says the Amalek spare no one, kill the children, do all that, that is not enough evidence that they were planning, that they were planning, and they were planning.

 

 Let me, just a couple more questions, if you indulge me.

 

 The president said yesterday, I mean, we're talking about the negotiations and is there a deal in the offing or no deal.

 

 The president said that Hamas could have a ceasefire now if they wanted to, if they release the hostages.

 

 But there was a deal, basically the American deal, to which Hamas agreed, you know, that would have done this last week or 10 days ago and so on.

 

 But it was rejected by Israel, isn't that the case?

 

 So the ball now is in Hamas's court.

 

 Okay, one last thing.

 

 I don't know if you saw the CNN report on the prisoners, you know, they're strapped down, blindfolded, held in diapers, Israeli whistleblower detail abuse of Palestinians in shadowy detention center.

 

 I wanted to get a response.

 

 Senator Chris Van Hollen said after reading the report that there's enough on the books to be able to point to specific cases and make specific determinations, and on that score, the administration is ducking the hard questions in the report.

 

 Do you have a response to that?

 

 So you keep mentioning that the report makes the administration's position and findings clear.

 

 I guess on the flip side of the coin, you have folks like Senator Tom Cotton.

 

 His reaction to the report was, he said, it's very clear, there's no evidence Israel is violating international law.

 

 All civilian casualties in Gaza are solely the responsible of Hamas.

 

 Given these divergent interpretations of this report, do you think State Department's gonna take any steps to clarify those findings further with the Hill or?

 

 Do you have a base on the Rafah crossing?

 

 Did you ask Israel to open it and do you support an American company to manage it or to control the?

 

 Did you get any promise from Israel?

 

 Can you give us an update on the number of American citizens who might still be in Gaza and want to come out, particularly given Israel's start of its operation on Rafah?

 

 Yeah, at the intercept, we're hearing that there are two medical missions of American citizens, doctors, who are at the European hospital in Khan Younis, facing dehydration.

 

 At least one of them is on an IV drip now.

 

 Our understanding is that relatives have been in touch with the State Department, US administration.

 

 Is there anything you can say about efforts to get them out, and was the UN vehicle that was on the way to the European hospital part of those efforts?

 

 And what does it say about conditions more generally in RAFA and in Khan Yunis if American doctors who only arrived there recently are already suffering from dehydration and malnutrition?

 

 I want to follow up on Said's question on the CNN report regarding the human rights violations at the detention center in Israel.

 

 You asked Israel to investigate itself, but would you support an independent investigation into those allegations?

 

 And one thing on the State Department report released Friday, you say that you do not currently assess that Israeli government is restricting the aid, but I want to go back to the April 4 phone call between Biden and Netanyahu, after which Israeli government opened more aid corridors into Gaza and immediately increased the number of aid trucks, and after Biden pressured Netanyahu.

 

 So how do you explain Israel's refusal to take these steps six months ago, and does this suggest that Israel was deliberately restricting aid?

 

 But again, you mentioned the steps that were taken by Israel recently, but how do you explain that?

 

 Israel could have certainly taken these steps like six months ago, right?

 

 Just final one, do you have any updates on the number of trucks currently going in to Gaza, daily number?

 

 The UN has lowered the number of, the estimate of women and children who've died in Gaza.

 

 Does the US have confidence in those numbers?

 

 But the US does not have its own estimate.

 

 On Gaza, yeah.

 

 You say there are instances where the Israelis have acted which are not consistent with international humanitarian law, but you can make no definite conclusion.

 

 A lot of people will be asking, where's the gap?

 

 Why can't you make a definitive conclusion?

 

 And is it a political gap rather than a legal gap?

 

 And to follow up on that, how do you have better visibility in Ukraine when there's a belligerent in far as the US is concerned with Russia, but you don't have that same level of visibility when you're dealing with an ally in Israel?

 

 But his question was not about what the Ukrainians and Russians are doing, or the Israelis and Hamas are doing.

 

 His question was about your visibility.

 

 But it's not about the government of Israel or the government of Russia.

 

 How could you have eyes in Ukraine to determine?

 

 Because technicality, I think what you mean by violating international law, that you have to prove intent.

 

 This is the standard, right?

 

 Was this an independent US investigation to decide whether or not Israel had broken international humanitarian law, or was this a US investigation aided by the Israelis?

 

 That's not an answer to the question.

 

 On Friday, the UNRWA shut down its office in occupied East Jerusalem because of two Israeli arson attacks.

 

 The Israeli police and fire departments didn't come out to put out the fire.

 

 It took them a long time for them to come out and the employees of UNRWA had to put out the fire while Israeli mobs were outside chanting with sticks and throwing rocks at the UNRWA employees.

 

 Israeli police said that they couldn't prosecute because it was apparent to them that these were minors that did this, these arsons.

 

 And they said that according to Israeli law, they do not prosecute minors.

 

 Do you have anything on this?

 

 I have a follow-up to this, but are you aware of this?

 

 Well, it's UNRWA, but now on the other hand, the government of Israel has a policy of detaining minors, Palestinian minors in the West Bank, between 400 and 600 are the estimates every single year.

 

 And my question is, given this difference, which many international humanitarian or human rights organizations say that Israel is an apartheid state and is practicing apartheid in the West Bank and in Gaza and in Israel itself, how does the United States not acknowledge this apartheid when it's very, very obvious that there are two different treatments of minors?

 

 But I mean, it's a consistent practice.

 

 It's not something that happened one time or two, over years, many years, it's very consistent and obvious.

 

 It seems that the Iranian nuclear ambitions is getting more momentum at the moment inside the country.

 

 The Supreme Leader's senior advisor, Mr.

 

 Kamal Kharozi, recently has said that in the face of threats by the enemy, referring to Israel, the Islamic Republic will have no option but to change its nuclear doctrine.

 

 Do you have anything about that?

 

 Is that a concern to US that Iran may change its nuclear doctrine because we knew before this, they were not pursuing a nuclear bomb?

 

 But knowing that Islamic Republic is a nuclear threshold of state, do you have any new strategy for now about that?

 

 Because the negotiations at the moment is going nowhere.

 

 There is no negotiations based on what we hear from you, not based on what we hear from Islamic Republic.

 

 They are claiming that they're ongoing behind the curtain negotiations.

 

 So what are you doing at the moment about a country that we know it's a nuclear threshold state?

 

 And then the last one, which is probably a little bit broader, but I'll let other people pick up on it, is Rafah.

 

 So your understanding of the current situation and how that relates to the pause in these arms shipments.

 

 With respect to what your understanding of what Israel intends to do.

 

 Well, I mean, you have these concerns, and then there's the halt in this shipment.

 

 So what's the message from that?

 

 Is it the idea that this will make it more difficult operationally for Israel to do this, or is it more of a political statement why this, and how does it directly affect the Rafah operation?

 

 I mean, is there a timeline for when that – are you waiting to see what happens in Rafah before making a decision?

 

 Is there a timeline?

 

 It's not – these would be the first ones.

 

 Is there a message to communicate to the Israelis that they should not be using these weapons in Rafah or elsewhere?

 

 Just to follow up on that, what exactly are you asking Israel to do in order for this pause to be lifted?

 

 And if they continue on with these limited incursions like we're seeing happen at this moment, do you expect there will be further pauses?

 

 Just to dive in a bit, you mentioned looking at the way Israel has conducted operations in the past, that that is weighing on this decision to pause now.

 

 So what is it in the way Israel has been operating in Gaza that means you don't think it's right to provide 2,000-pound bombs?

 

 But just specifically on the impact in terms of bombing, because what you've held back is these 2,000 pound bombs.

 

 Does that mean, I mean, the President has talked about indiscriminate bombing in that campaign, but is there some kind of assessment that U.S.

 

 weapons have been used in an indiscriminate way, in a way that's caught up more civilians than were necessary?

 

 Do you have any update on operations at the Rafah crossing?

 

 But so you just said you haven't seen movement from Kerim Shalom on the Gaza side.

 

 So – but I mean, basically you're back to a situation that you were in the first weeks of the war, where you've got nothing open, apart from areas where there's not much happening at all, it seems, according to aid groups.

 

 That seems very significant.

 

 And on Rafah, I mean, you've called it a limited operation, but the Israelis are occupying the Palestinian side of the Rafah crossing.

 

 I mean, that's quite a big move on the ground.

 

 And so I wonder what you see as the future for both aid supplies getting in, Palestinians who desperately need hospital treatment getting out.

 

 We've heard this morning in a briefing from some NGOs saying they can't rotate their teams, they're stuck, the ones in Gaza, they can't get out, they can't get humanitarian workers in, they don't have Israeli visas.

 

 So this is now potentially a very big problem.

 

 And it was the – a signature achievement of the president after a couple of weeks.

 

 He said, or you've been saying, to get Rafah open, you're now all the way back seven months of what you had then.

 

 I mean, how sustainable is it to have Israeli control on the Palestinian side at Rafah crossing?

 

 And what are some of the problems that that potentially brings?

 

 What's your, first of all, assessment to how feasible and sustainable that is?

 

 And do you have an alternative policy you're going to put to the Israelis on that?

 

 Thank you.

 

 Just to follow up on what Tom and Matt raised, on Rafah, let me ask you a straightforward question.

 

 Do you think the encouraging happened with U.S.

 

 okay or with total defiance – I'm talking about the Israelis – of the United States?

 

 So let me ask you about this then.

 

 I mean, you mentioned that aid workers can only go through Rafah.

 

 Would the United States ask Israel to allow aid workers to go through the other points of entry?

 

 Okay.

 

 So do you expect that the Rafah crossing will be open anytime soon?

 

 On the NSM-20 issue, Tim Reiser, who basically wrote the Leahy statute way back, said that Israel has violated the Leahy law consistently, always.

 

 Now you guys say here that Israel did not get preferential treatment and so on, but according to the author of this document, Israel has always done that.

 

 Do you have any comment on that?

 

 Okay, but that's the guy that wrote the book, right?

 

 Let me ask you about something the president said yesterday.

 

 He said that Hamas is motivated by the ancient desire to eliminate the Jews.

 

 Is that the thinking in this building, that Hamas is only motivated by ancient desire to eliminate the Jews?

 

 But contextually, that is wrong, because Hamas came into being in 1987 in the midst of an intifada against the occupation, responding to a brutal Israeli attack on Gaza.

 

 So when we say ancient desires, I mean, that goes back 2,000 years.

 

 There is reports that Israel is using white phosphorus in Rafah.

 

 Do you have any – I mean, any information?

 

 And yesterday you said that this operation is limited, and you're still hoping that Israel is not going to go with the bigger operation.

 

 But what difference does it make when they evacuate 100,000, and yesterday there is videos of them attacking tents that has refugees, including kids?

 

 I think it's like tens of kids were being killed yesterday.

 

 So in the end, I mean, the results are the same.

 

 And finally, what message does the State Department send to people who really truly believe in the respect of international law of the Geneva Convention?

 

 When you have lawmakers in the U.S.

 

 are threatening the ICT judges or basically sanctions if they indict Netanyahu, when you have an important report to look into whether Israel is misusing U.S.

 

 weapons against civilians is being delayed, when there is a unit in the U.S.

 

 Army – in the Israeli Army – that's been accused of gross human rights violation in the West Bank has been pushed aside.

 

 So – and also there is a statistic – 56 percent of the Democrats, which is the party of the Secretary and the President, say they believe that Israel committed genocide.

 

 So what message would you send to the – equally, people who believe in democracy and rogue state who just trample all over these principles?

 

 On the ICC part of her question, forget about members of Congress for the moment, but the last administration actually did impose sanctions on the ICC prosecutor and a bunch of others.

 

 And when you guys came in, when this administration came in, you made quite a big deal out of rescinding that.

 

 Can you rule out that – a change in that and that you might go back to what the previous administration had done in terms of the ICC with – if they go ahead with this – with indictments of Israeli officials?

 

 The minister of defense of Israel was this morning at the border between Lebanon and Israel and he said that it's going to be a very hot summer.

 

 Do you have fear that this war could expand wiser and, like what we see in Rafah, could be also another attack inside Lebanon this time?

 

 I did go examine the protests that are going on on the campus.

 

 We did not feel that it was anti-Semitic speeches.

 

 They're asking for a ceasefire, they're asking for humanitarian aid, they're asking to stop war, they're asking not to attack civilians, they're asking to end the genocide.

 

 So why President Biden said, oh, we will not allow these protests to keep on going, while they're asking for human things, that this administration has always been a big advocate for human rights and democracy, and now we see that this democracy has been oppressed on college campuses.

 

 So I would completely disagree with that assessment of the state of American democracy.

 

 The Human Rights Watch today published a report saying Israeli security forces have unlawfully used lethal force in fatal shootings of Palestinians, including deliberately executing Palestinians who pose no apparent security threat, based on documentation of several cases since 2022.

 

 I would argue there were probably many before.

 

 Have you seen the report?

 

 Do you have any?

 

 And one more question on the Palestinian Authority.

 

 So you're saying that you would like to see the Palestinian Authority take over governing in Gaza and also the Rafah crossing?

 

 Well, is there any progress to that end?

 

 Is there any movement on plans to make that happen?

 

 Is there any talks with the Palestinian Authority on this?

 

 One more on these unity talks between Hamas and Fatah.

 

 Matt, one of the SM criteria is being an impediment to humanitarian aid.

 

 Is one of the reasons of the holdup of the assessment because of the disruptions at Karam Shalom and Rafah, which are clearly impediments to humanitarian aid getting in?

 

 Yeah, for the time being, two quick questions.

 

 The first one is, is there something that the State Department would like to see in Europe towards the war in Gaza that the State Department would appreciate Europe to do, looking at countries like Italy that are very close in the Mediterranean to those countries?

 

 And the second one, I know the State Department already had a statement yesterday.

 

 If you can say something about what happened to the Italian student in Miami that was arrested and got tied from the police.

 

 We'll just collapse 10 buildings.

 

 buildings.

 

 That's what we'll do.

 

 So she's threatening that if Israel is held accountable for war crimes, they will respond by committing greater war crimes.

 

 What kind of effect does that have on U.S.

 

 Will the U.S.

 

 pause all military shipments to Israel, or are the bombs and munitions the only ones on hold?

 

 And then lastly, is the administration concerned that Republicans in the Senate could place holds on nominees, like for State, until the hold is – munitions and bombs for Israel is lifted?

 

 The GOP has done this practice in trying to get the administration to reverse certain policies.

 

 I mean, just back on this.

 

 I know you don't speak for Langley, but I thought I would just ask if you did have anything to say about Director Burns' meeting with Netanyahu, or more broadly on the hostage the hostage – I don't have any readout of specific meetings.

 

 I'm going to surprise you because I don't want – before we get into the long back-and-forth about Rafah and the ceasefire, I want to ask you if you can just answer this straight and – simply and straight about the Israeli closure of al-Jazeera.

 

 You are quite concerned about this action?

 

 Are you asking the Israelis to do anything?

 

 So you oppose?

 

 Okay.

 

 All right.

 

 Then getting on to – so you've seen these reports in the last hour about Hamas accepting a ceasefire, but also the Israelis ordering or telling people in Rafah to get out.

 

 What's your take on that?

 

 There have been some reports that – from Israel that perhaps Hamas agreed to a proposal that was put together by Egypt and Qatar that was softer than the initial framework that was in the works last week.

 

 Is it possible that there has been a different proposal that the U.S. is not involved with tracking?

 

 And can you say at this point – maybe you can't – but Hamas's political wing and their militant wing, are they on the same page here?

 

 Do you feel like this is a response that at least indicates where the entire group is?

 

 Can I ask about this – the threatened Israeli offensive in Rafah?

 

 In the hours before this, there were lots of reports about evacuations – not just reports, but Israel talking about evacuations from Rafah.

 

 How does this – what's the U.S. message in this now?

 

 Do you think that Israel should hold off on any operations in Rafah as we discuss this response from Hamas?

 

 I mean, you just said it in terms of that's the standing U.S. position on this, but has there been any communication with the Israelis about – I mean, in the past hours or so, about the response from Hamas and how this affects the situation in Rafah?

 

 Is there a message out there?

 

 Matt, under the current circumstances, do you still think a ceasefire is achievable based on what you know coming here?

 

 Yes, but I mean, it's because over the weekend there was like – there was a quiet impasse, and right now Hamas has accepted it.

 

 But from Israel, we're hearing that that's not the proposal that we've sent.

 

 That's a soft inversion that throws into – the whole thing into doubt.

 

 And I think I – So I'm just wondering, like, what's your sense here?

 

 And one thing on the humanitarian aid.

 

 Last week when the Secretary was in Israel, there was an increased emphasis on – during his trip on the delivery of humanitarian aid.

 

 We visited Karim Shalom, which got shut down over the weekend after the Hamas attack.

 

 But can you give us, like, a sense of what a RAFA offensive – how that would impact all of Gaza?

 

 Because there are issues with distribution in the north.

 

 If we have a RAFA offensive in the south, could there be any meaningful humanitarian aid delivery in the north?

 

 Just going off of that for a second, you said earlier, reiterated that the U.S. doesn't support a full-scale invasion into RAFA.

 

 What about a limited invasion into RAFA?

 

 The Israeli Government has said limited.

 

 So just to be clear, what you've proposed to them isn't your understanding of what they're planning to go ahead with in the near future?

 

 And then without characterizing the Hamas response, given you guys are still reviewing it, would you say it's a hopeful sign that they have given a response here?

 

 And when do you think you'll be able to complete that review?

 

 When should we expect an assessment from the administration?

 

 Last week there was some reporting that the Biden administration had put a hold on a shipment of U.S.-made ammunition to Israel.

 

 Have you seen that report?

 

 Can you comment on its accuracy?

 

 Just to clarify on the offer, the offer that you said was generous and on the table and what seems to be accepted now, does that mean that the ball is no longer in Hamas's court?

 

 All right.

 

 On Al Jazeera, now we know that Israel is accusing the correspondents of Al Jazeera, our colleague, who are Israeli citizens, by the way, accusing them of incitement that goes back many years and all these things, a crime that is punishable by imprisonment.

 

 Are you worried that these correspondents might actually be imprisoned by the Israelis?

 

 And if they are, what would the Government of the United States do?

 

 Yeah, I think most countries have had an issue with Al Jazeera.

 

 Let me ask you about Rafah, now the movement, 100,000 people and so on.

 

 Now, how many would need to move before Israel can go in and legitimately go after Hamas's position?

 

 I mean, the area is so small.

 

 Al-Mawsi, where they are moving and so on, just meters, maybe kilometers away.

 

 What would prevent, let's say, Hamas fighters or Hamas leaders and so on to actually move to another place?

 

 They allegedly have a network of tunnels that would allow them to do that and so on.

 

 And then, you know, we have the same kind of situation.

 

 We see the Israelis saying we want to go after them in that area.

 

 I mean, how do you read this situation?

 

 I just want to – because I'm a little bit confused, if you can clarify.

 

 So the Hamas response is not on the General's proposal.

 

 It's not accepting this proposal.

 

 We'll do a few more in the Middle East before we – Did you ask Qatar to expel Hamas leaders from Doha, and is it the time for these leaders to leave?

 

 Thank you.

 

 For World Press Freedom Day last week, the Secretary did put out a statement about that.

 

 I'm just curious as to why there was a decision not to mention the Gaza war.

 

 Granted that many journalists are being affected by a lack of press freedom around the world and that – and also being killed in various conflicts, but there was a substantial number of journalists that were killed in Israel and Gaza at the end of last year.

 

 Was there a reason why that wasn't mentioned?

 

 Just one more on the – just on Kerem Shalom.

 

 Is it your understanding that the Israelis have agreed to reopen it after the attack that happened on Sunday?

 

 Because the Secretary was just there on Wednesday, and you believe that Kerem Shalom is critical — It is — — with or without a RAFA operation?

 

 What action would the U.S. take if Israel were to invade RAFA?

 

 And what's the department's reaction to Turkey suspending trade ties with Israel?

 

 And finally, what is the department doing to hold the CCP accountable for continued Chinese assistance to Russia's defense sector?

 

 QUESTION Just one more.

 

 And what is the department's message today, given it's Yom HaShoah, Israel's Holocaust Remembrance Day, especially with Israel having suffered several months ago the largest single-day massacre of Jews since the Holocaust?

 

 For a limited – more limited operation in Rafah, and you're working on a ceasefire with your partners.

 

 What comes first?

 

 I mean, you shared the objective, you said, with the Israelis that they have to defeat Hamas in Rafah.

 

 But since you are working on a ceasefire, it's a little bit confusing.

 

 What do you support?

 

 What's the priority here?

 

 One more question.

 

 In case these negotiations fail, are you preparing for a worst-case scenario that the Israeli went into – goes into Rafah and this lasts until the fall?

 

 But just a couple of moments on a serious one.

 

 Just a couple of moments ago, the Israeli army saying that the evacuation orders that it issued earlier confirming that this is preparation for a ground invasion.

 

 I know that they've been speaking about a ground invasion – a ground operation in general terms for some time.

 

 Do you have any further comment on that?

 

 I mean, the – whether you have signs that the Israelis are actually going ahead imminently with the ground operation?

 

 And last question.

 

 As we are speaking of Iran, minutes ago the Iranian foreign minister put a post on Irqus, and he said that we send Hamas response to the plan proposed by Egypt and Qatar.

 

 What he says that – he said that to stop the attacks by Israel, and second, exchange prisoners, and third, lift the human blockades.

 

 And now the ball in the opposite court.

 

 We are honest with – in our intentions.

 

 This is what he posted.

 

 So how do you see the Iranian role in bringing the Gaza conflict into the end?

 

 A little over a week ago, China held unification unity talks between Hamas leaders and Fatah.

 

 Sir, and they – I think it resulted in them just saying that they're agreeing to — Keep talking.

 

 Keep talking.

 

 What's your reaction to China being involved in unity talks between these?

 

 One more on Saudi Arabia.

 

 The other day you had said that in order for normalization to take place between Saudi Arabia and Israel, that Saudi Arabia is looking for calm in Gaza.

 

 Correct.

 

 Is that something different than Oslo?

 

 Since fire deal doesn't end the war in Gaza, it means returning to fighting again and more Palestinian civilian victims, as it's happened daily.

 

 Ten of thousands have already murdered due to the bombing and the famine imposed by Israel, most of them children and women.

 

 My question, why the U.S. doesn't intervene to stop the war completely?

 

 I mean permanent ceasefire, especially that the Palestinian civilian killed with the American weapon.

 

 1 But it's not permanent.

 

 Excuse me, another question.

 

 1 That IDF already requested the people in Rafah to evacuate.

 

 I wonder if the evacuation for Palestinian in Rafah across the Egyptian borders being considered.

 

 Question is regarding the administration's priorities on the normalization talks regarding Saudi Arabia and Israel.

 

 As National Security Advisor Jack Selvin mentioned, insisted in an interview that the administration will enter in any defense pact with Saudi Arabia if they normalize ties with Israel.

 

 So question is, is it diplomacy of United States for integration of Israel in Middle East, or it's another defense pact by the United States to counter Iranian-backed movements in future from the Middle East?

 

 3 Secondly, Canadian authorities arrested three individuals linked with the killing of a Sikh leader, Habib Singh Nader.

 

 United States have many findings on the connections of Indian foreign operations at U.S. soil, as Wall Street Journal reported last week regarding the connection of Indian government with some targets here in United States.

 

 So with this recent development, what United States have more to take up with the Indian administration?

 

 4 Matt, those apologies for not asking you the Israel section, but I had nosebleed seats today, so I didn't get it.

 

 But — I'm just happy to see you here in the briefing.

 

 4 Great to be here.

 

 In response to the Axios report that the U.S. is withholding an ammunition shipment to Israel, the Biden administration has told several reporters around town that the U.S. has surged weapons into Israel since October 7th.

 

 I'm kind of curious about this response because for much of the conflict, the administration has downplayed reports about the near-constant approval and shipment of arms to Israel.

 

 I'm just wondering if you could clarify what's the case.

 

 Has the U.S. been surging weapons to Israel since October 7th or not?

 

 And one more question.

 

 The memorandum requires all recipients of U.S. weaponry, including Israel, to make assurances that they're using those weapons, quote, in a manner consistent with all applicable international and domestic law and policy, including international humanitarian law and international human rights law.

 

 Will U.S. officials at the department be probing those assurances that they get from Israeli officials if there's reason to believe that they aren't credible assurances?

 

 So you're not taking those assurances on face value?

 

 Just one thing on that, actually, Matt.

 

 So when the report is produced, we have reported that there are people – there are some U.S. officials at the State Department who have raised serious concerns about Israel's possible noncompliance with international humanitarian law, and what they say is it's arbitrary restrictions on humanitarian aid.

 

 So when you produce that report, you're basically weighing in on whether the assurances are credible or not.

 

 Is there going to be a section where you address those countering, let's say, opinions from different bureaus, or is it just going to be we found that credible or not?

 

 Very quickly, but on breaking international law and so on, is the threatening of the ICC by Israel or even by members of Congress itself a violation of international law, the threat itself?

 

 I'm just saying the threatening of the ICC by Israel – I see.

 

 What's the latest on the hostage deal?

 

 A delegation from Hamas is set to visit Egypt soon for further ceasefire talks, according to a statement today.

 

 And Israel's war cabinet is meant to meet today on hostages and a plan for Rafah.

 

 Has there been any movement toward a deal?

 

 Why do you think they've taken so long?

 

 And just quickly, there's been reporting that a Saudi-US bilateral defense pact is close to completion as part of a wider Saudi-Israeli normalization deal.

 

 When do you plan to announce the full plan, and how confident are you that it will materialize if no truce between Israel and Hamas is reached?

 

 Sorry, just to clarify.

 

 You're close on US-Saudi part, but not the Israeli part.

 

 And how confident are you that that will materialize while there's no truce between Israel and Hamas?

 

 And sorry, just one more follow-up.

 

 Netanyahu has repeatedly objected to a Palestinian statehood, a key condition for Saudi to agree to normalization, as you've said.

 

 What's the point of your progress with Riyadh if in the end Netanyahu will end up objecting anyway?

 

 Following up on Daphne's question, I understand you could reach an agreement, I guess, in principle, with the Saudis on this bilateral component.

 

 But is there any world in which that would be operationalized without this broader, mega two-state normalization deal?

 

 So there was no discussion in the meetings in Riyadh about breaking off that bilateral piece and getting an influence?

 

 And then on Rafah, did you get any sense of timing on when the Israelis plan to move forward on their agreement?

 

 Do you get the sense that they are waiting on Hamas's response before making a final decision?

 

 What was the reception to those deals?

 

 And did you get any sort of commitment, or is it your understanding, that if a deal was reached on the hostages and ceasefire, that Israel would not move forward on Rafah incursion?

 

 And if I could quickly, on the determinations under Leahy law, are there any updates on the status of cutting off military assistance to that fifth unit?

 

 Just to follow up on something that Ellen raised on the hospitals and ambulances and so on, I want to bring your attention.

 

 I don't know how we could probe this issue further.

 

 A Palestinian surgeon, Ahmad Al-Bursh, was killed on the 19th of April.

 

 He was taken from Sheba Hospital back in December and was killed by the Israelis recently.

 

 I mean, he was shot, I guess, in cold blood and so on.

 

 Is there any way that the United States could look into this issue and find out the authenticity of such a?

 

 Just to follow up on a couple of things.

 

 Now, you said that it's a generous offer.

 

 Everybody used that word and so on.

 

 Now, if the prime minister of Israel keeps saying that he will not agree to any permanent cease fire, that this war will go on, I ask you, what incentive is there for Hamas or the militant groups to say, OK, we will give whatever leverage we have, and then they can come and so on?

 

 I'm just curious.

 

 But the prime minister is not committing himself to a cease fire.

 

 He's saying that this war will continue.

 

 I'm saying that in the long run, he has the prerogative to continue this war however they please.

 

 Go in, destroy, conquer, whatever, take hostages, do all kinds of things in the future.

 

 I'm not talking, I'm not defending or saying, I'm asking, exploring, if the prime minister of Israel, if the cabinet in Israel is determined not to have a cease fire, doesn't that make it less generous than people think it is?

 

 let me ask you a couple of questions on the aid.

 

 Israeli settlers have vandalized Gaza aid trucks and so on.

 

 I think the trucks that left from Jordan, that probably the ones that you guys bid farewell to.

 

 I don't know.

 

 Do you have any comment on that?

 

 Do you know of what happened?

 

 Lastly, the prime minister of Israel says that the ICC arrest warrant would be an anti-Semitic hate crime.

 

 Do you agree with that?

 

 But in terms of the number of occurrences that Hamas has diverted aid, is this how many times would you say this has happened?

 

 Are you talking now about a permanent ceasefire or a temporary ceasefire?

 

 And did you talk to the, and how will you build on it, as the Secretary has said yesterday?

 

 And second, did you talk to the Israelis about their northern front with Hezbollah?

 

 And on the north.

 

 Also under the Syria policy, it's reported that the Caesar Act that you just mentioned expires at the end of this year.

 

 Are you guys looking to extend that?

 

 And secondly, just can you talk about there was a report or a group in Bahrain today claimed to have attacked Israel?

 

 That seems to be a new, if accurate and true, that's a new front that's open.

 

 Is it the department's assessment that US policy towards trying to contain this conflict in Gaza is successful today?

 

 Two questions, please.

 

 As far as these demonstrations are concerned across the US universities and colleges, before my question, if I say one thing, that when I used to go to college and university in Chandigarh in India, my mother told me, you are going there to study, not create any trouble for yourself and for others.

 

 My question is now here that who is behind these demonstrations?

 

 How the US diplomacy with other countries around the globe, who also have many students from across other nations also, in these higher universities and colleges, their studies are also affecting, because I'm getting many calls from the Indian-American community and their parents also.

 

 So how are the relations affecting as far as these demonstrations are concerned?

 

 Violations are going on and breakings and all that.

 

 We never heard in the US, as far as students in colleges and universities, except during the Vietnam War, because there was a cause because America was involved in the Vietnam War, but America is not involved as far as what's going on in Palestine and other places.

 

 Thank you, Matthew.

 

 Excuse me.

 

 Is the administration looking to admit into the United States refugees from Gaza?

 

 If so, how would the administration ensure there is no Hamas infiltration?

 

 And Republicans have called for the administration to revoke visas of students on American college and university campuses who express support for Hamas.

 

 What's the administration's reaction to those calls?

 

 Would the administration do such a thing?

 

 One more thing.

 

 What is the administration doing regarding Qatari funding of America's college and universities that critics have said have contributed to the Berlins?

 

 Well, I mean, not just these protests, but the protests on American college and university campuses regarding Israel, even before October 7th.

 

 There have been critics who have said that Qatari money has contributed to this Berlin riots, like through funding university programs.

 

 Well, it is a spread of conflict, regardless, in many people's eyes, that there is a conflict emerging on U.S. campuses as a direct result of Israel's actions in Gaza.

 

 Was it the, did it come up in any of the conversations?

 

 Is Israel seeing these protests, and is it concerned about losing the messaging more?

 

 And then conversely, are there any concerns that Hamas is seeing these protests and is feeling emboldened by the anti-Israel sentiment of them?

 

 And on the bilateral agreement you have with Saudi Arabia, I got a bit confused there when you were answering at the beginning.

 

 So the disagreement that you are going to have with Saudi Arabia, is it tied to the conflict between Israel and Palestine?

 

 Because you said it's a package.

 

 So obviously you are not gonna have a finalist package to present to Senate to give the approval, to get Senate's approval.

 

 So my question is that a few of these components, like the AI or nuclear or the security agreement, all of that, can they be executive before the other components even being finalized?

 

 Thank you so much.

 

 Prime Minister Netanyahu said today that Israel will carry out an operation against Hamas in Rafah regardless of whether or not a ceasefire and hostage release deal is reached.

 

 Is it still the case that the U.S. hasn't seen a credible plan for entering Rafah, and what will you do if they go ahead, as Netanyahu is warning?

 

 And are you concerned that this warning that they would go ahead with – whether or not a ceasefire and hostage deal is reached could derail hostage talks?

 

 Follow-up on that?

 

 Israel's track record in heeding to the U.S. statements or calls could be arguably not great.

 

 What gives you confidence or what makes you think that Israel would in fact listen and hear your calls not to going to Rafah?

 

 Just because the Secretary was also asked about this not long ago.

 

 He said that the U.S. views on this were well known, but he didn't address part of the question that whether Israel had in fact committed to present a military and humanitarian plan.

 

 So absent the plans themselves, has there been a formal commitment from the Israeli Government to present those plans before launching any ground invasion?

 

 I mean, I totally appreciate not asking you for the Israeli perspective on this, only whether the U.S. has actually received a commitment from the government to have formal plans presented prior to any invasion.

 

 I have two others on the region.

 

 I'm just wondering if State has any comments or any information, anything today on the anti-Israel protests across the nation now, really going from California all the way to New York.

 

 A lot of these student protesters are accusing the Biden administration of being complicit in genocide.

 

 I'm wondering if you guys – if it's a radically foreign policy-wise, you guys have – Yeah.

 

 Quick follow-up, one thing that's kind of new as far as I'm aware, is you're seeing regimes now like the Iranian regime, China started to weigh in the government and criticize the Biden administration's response to these protests.

 

 We saw overnight the Chinese saying that the way, I don't know, the U.S. government is responding is violating these students' rights.

 

 Do you have a comment on these adversaries?

 

 What are these statements?

 

 Now, on the statement by the Israeli prime minister on Rafah, he's saying very plainly that whether there is a deal or there is no deal, I'm going to storm Rafah.

 

 You don't have a position on this?

 

 I mean, he's not waiting for a deal.

 

 I am quoting what the prime minister of Israel said.

 

 So would it be appropriate for the United States of America to say whether there is a deal or not a deal, we find that the storming of Rafah is unacceptable?

 

 Now, I have a question on the humanitarian situation.

 

 Officials at the United States Agency for International Development, USAID, leaked – they leaked a document that says that the Israeli Government intently sort of puts obstacles in the way of these humanitarian aid convoys or whatever getting through to government.

 

 Are you aware of that report?

 

 Why won't you comment on this document?

 

 Would you agree that there is a – almost a common opinion among professionals and experts and so on that Israel is, in fact, and the prime minister of Israel are, in fact, take measures day after day to sort of make this humanitarian aid, including American – portion of American aid possible?

 

 I know the State Department and Secretary Blinken have made clear that the ICC doesn't have jurisdiction in your view over the Palestinian conflict, but I wanted to get your response to remarks from Netanyahu just today, especially in context of the conversation we just had about the campus protests.

 

 He said, branding Israel's leaders and soldiers as war criminals will pour jet fuel on the fires of antisemitism, those fires that are already raging on the campuses of America and across capitals around the world.

 

 Do you agree with that assessment, that it's antisemitic for the ICC to pursue Netanyahu?

 

 And what do you make of him connecting this to the protests?

 

 And then if I may, another on Saudi Arabia.

 

 There have been reports that Saudi Arabia has decided to normalize relations with Israel but is waiting to determine when they do that based on the U.S. election and the results of the election.

 

 What do you make of Saudi Arabia potentially weighing this presidential election so much when the urgency is now?

 

 So basically, Amnesty just published its report.

 

 I don't know if you've seen it in details, but they say there is a reasonable evidence that Israel has committed war crimes, gross violation of human rights, and violation of international humanitarian law.

 

 I was just wondering, I mean, was something as serious as this from a very reputable organization that normally use it to talk about rogue states, et cetera, when they're finding and they publish their reports?

 

 Why the State Department still now has not published anything to either contradict or to support other human rights organizations being talking about what's happening in Gaza?

 

 Can you just assure us that actually you treat Israel the same way as you treat any other country that found in violation of international law?

 

 Because what we hear from you is all the statements and some actions, like we see with the settlers, but many believe that when the prime minister of Israel pick up the phone, call the White House, the finding is changed and delayed and pushed, just like we heard about even the Secretary.

 

 We were together in Italy when he assured us that we're going to hear about this report, about the Leahy report and the violation of U.S. weapons, but we haven't heard about it.

 

 So I just wanted an assurance from you that actually you're taking these things seriously.

 

 The Secretary said that the offer they gave to Hamas is generous.

 

 Who decide what is generosity?

 

 Is it the United States and Israel?

 

 What does it – is it Arab partners in the Saudi summit that they decide is generous?

 

 I mean, I guess my question, how do you defy what is generous?

 

 Just one point of clarification on Leahy, which I know you amply addressed yesterday, but you mentioned yesterday that the process was open-ended, right?

 

 It's subject to the MOU that exists between the Israeli Government and the United States.

 

 This new information that Israel has provided with regard to the fifth unit, can it continuously supply new information with regard to that unit until the U.S. sort of adjudicates in a particular direction, or is this a finite set of information on whose basis the U.S. will decide whether to take punitive action?

 

 And then a separate question on aid.

 

 The Secretary from Jordan earlier mentioned the opening of new crossings into northern Gaza.

 

 I was hoping if you could just update us on the overall metrics on the volume of aid that's going in and how that compares to what the U.S. believes is necessary.

 

 I've asked several times about the right to defend oneself for Palestinians, and out of this room we've heard that the U.S. does not exhibit any double standards.

 

 And today in the West Bank, the Israeli occupation forces chased, beat, and threw off a roof a 32-year-old man, a Palestinian man, Hassan Mansia, in the Hebron district.

 

 Also, the Israeli forces attacked at least two schools with tear gas, two inside and outside schools in the Hebron and Janin districts, where students were and teachers, and some of them experienced some suffocation.

 

 Since October 7th, we've had 95 minors that have been killed in the West Bank.

 

 I asked before, do Palestinians have a right to defend themselves?

 

 I'm not talking about rogue individuals.

 

 I'm talking about as far as a legal authority to defend Palestinians.

 

 Do they – does the State Department view that Palestinians have a right and duty to defend themselves?

 

 But does the Palestinian Authority have the right to defend its citizens?

 

 Well – and let me ask you about Netanyahu's – the news on Netanyahu today, where he said that even if there's a hostage deal, they're still going to – Fine, you've got to be on time.

 

 Today, photos of pair in Gaza were published.

 

 My question, will the Palestinian Authority PA be the one who will control this pair?

 

 The port.

 

 Today I – there is photos of this port published.

 

 I wonder if the PA, the Palestinian Authority, will control this port in Gaza?

 

 Don't – just a minute.

 

 Don't you think this port will build over the Palestinian territories?

 

 And should Palestinian people have the authority of this port?

 

 I just wanted to ask about the Aras border crossing.

 

 It's obviously reopening in the north weeks after POTUS' call with Netanyahu.

 

 What should we read into the timing of this opening, considering that Blinken is now there to request more aid and also this ceasefire deal hangs in the balance?

 

 And I just want to touch on some of the other questions as well.

 

 Was it the U.S.'s aim to try to beat the clock on a Rafah invasion by getting this ceasefire deal in place beforehand?

 

 And if so, have Netanyahu's comments this morning altered that at all?

 

 Can I have a quick one on Middle East?

 

 Do you have any comments on the Hamas and Fatah leaders meeting in Beijing at the invitation of China?

 

 Secretary Blinken has made a decision to give Israel more time to rectify the situation with the IDF unit that, after deeming that it was guilty of gross abuses of human rights and that Israel has not held it accountable.

 

 And separately, there are the four other cases where there was, I believe, a staff recommendation, according to ProPublica, that these other groups had also committed gross human rights violations and the Leahy Law should apply to them.

 

 And Secretary Blinken waited five months, according to the ProPublica article, to make a decision on that.

 

 So the one unit, Neta Yehuda, is, according to the Israeli military, still operating and operating in Gaza sometimes.

 

 There's not much of a sign of urgency from the State Department that there are these Israeli units accused of gross human rights violations, extrajudicial killings, killing, torture, rape, and the death of the US citizens.

 

 Yes, getting there.

 

 There doesn't seem to be that there needs to be any urgency to protect the Palestinian civilians who are being exposed to these gross human rights violations, including with a postponed decision on Neta Yehuda.

 

 There doesn't seem to be a sense of urgency.

 

 In the meantime, the concern for Palestinian civilians exposed to these units doesn't factor into the timeline.

 

 So you won't speak to what the process you're expecting to play out here is how long you're giving Israel for remediation.

 

 And then the Secretary said 10 days ago that a determination on the Leahy front with Israel had been made and that we would see results.

 

 So I'm wondering if the determination that he made 10 days ago is this determination that you guys are now making public or if that changed due to engagements with Israel.

 

 Just to clarify where we are, because this is a bit complicated.

 

 The U.S. government has concluded that five different Israeli units committed gross human rights violations.

 

 But as of now, all of those units can still continue to receive U.S. arms, weapons, ammunition.

 

 But as of now, even the fifth unit, where you're unsure whether there's been remediation, they are still eligible to receive U.S. arms.

 

 Can you talk about within what timeframe this new information from the Israeli government reached the State Department?

 

 But was that additional information supplied after the Secretary made his, revealed that some determinations had been made?

 

 So this is a completely open-ended process and violations can stretch on for an indeterminate amount of time.

 

 And at what point, then, does the department actually take any punitive measures?

 

 But that seems to be at the core of the problem here, is that Israel is a unique country being offered unique treatment.

 

 My last question on this is that, does the State Department believe that actually taking punitive measures under Leahy in this instance, with regard to this one unit, would somehow damage diplomatic relations with Israel?

 

 We agree that all this is pre-October 7, and involves the West Bank, abuses in the West Bank, okay?

 

 So quite a while ago, I don't know exactly how long, depending on which of the units you're talking about, but I find it a little bit strange that in four of those units, they have remediary corrections that they did, and you accept that, evidently, and in this fifth unit, what sort of additional information could have come through all of a sudden in the last couple of weeks that would make it that you are not able to make the determination yet?

 

 And then second question, what kind of remediary decisions are we talking about?

 

 Disciplinary?

 

 What kind of corrections?

 

 I'm confused.

 

 Do you know whether or not the Israelis have remediated this unit?

 

 The other thing is, it seems that Israel has rebuked the United States call, or your call the other day, for investigating the mass grave, the mass burial, and all these things.

 

 Do you have any comment on that?

 

 Okay, so you accept their answer.

 

 I mean, their answer was, we did not do that, we don't do this.

 

 I mean, that's what, and they consider the matter to be over.

 

 Do you consider the matter to be over?

 

 Okay, a couple more questions, if you allow me.

 

 It has been reported that the US is working with Israel to prevent any kind of ICC warrant of arrest of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

 

 Let me ask you one last question on the Saudi trip and the Secretary's trip to Saudi Arabia.

 

 It has been said that the Saudis suggested or came up with a proposal that basically says, let's focus on the security issues, arrangement on security issues, and the civilian nuclear program, whatever, and leave the normalization, the Palestinian state, to another time when things are more propitious to discuss these things.

 

 Can you confirm that to us?

 

 Said, I'm- Did the Saudis submit a new proposal that you like?

 

 Yeah, as far as you know, there has been no proposal delinking these issues and focusing on the security issue versus the Palestinian normalization.

 

 On the ceasefire aspect of the Gaza war, the Secretary in Riyadh today said that, and I quote, between the people of Gaza and the ceasefire is Hamas, unquote.

 

 He met with the Arab foreign ministers.

 

 He met with the Turkish foreign minister there.

 

 Does the State Department see a role for the Islamic Republic of Iran on this decision by Hamas that everybody's waiting on whether to take the proposal or not one way or another?

 

 Yeah, thank you.

 

 Let me try to approach the whole Leahy law thing in one or two different ways.

 

 You say that U.S. law is applied systematically throughout.

 

 Does Israel have nuclear weapons?

 

 Because there's U.S. law that says that there should be a funding cutoff under the Arms Export Control Act and the Glenn Symington amendments that says that there shouldn't be aid to nuclear proliferators.

 

 And Israel is a damn sure nuclear proliferator.

 

 But last time I asked, you folks won't even acknowledge the existence of Israel's massive nuclear arsenal.

 

 All right, let me try a different fact then.

 

 Tomorrow there'll be a decision issued by the International Court of Justice, Nicaragua invoked to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.

 

 Not just simply to punish genocide, but to attempt to prevent it in real time.

 

 Nicaragua's lawsuit says that it is, quote, enabling Israel to perpetuate genocidal acts, quote, Germany has provided political, financial, and military support to Israel fully aware at the time of the authorization that the military equipments would be used in the commission of grave breaches of international law by this state and in disregard of its own obligations.

 

 As I understand it, Nicaragua's doing this against Germany and not the U.S. because the U.S. has a reservation in the Genocide Convention saying that it will not adhere to any judgments by the International Court of Justice.

 

 But it doesn't have to invoke that.

 

 My question to you is, would the United States invoke that?

 

 Or if a state wanted to go to the international court, will the United States actually adhere to international law and say, we will not invoke this, this way of bailing out of the legal system.

 

 We will actually abide by a court decision.

 

 But I'm not asking you for your alleged assessment.

 

 I'm asking you, will you adhere to a court ruling from the world court?

 

 Secretary Blinken himself has made clear that there's not remediation by this unit.

 

 The letter to the House Speaker says that Blinken will work to identify steps to get Israel on a path of remediation for this unit.

 

 And as my colleague here pointed out, that's not in the Leahy Law.

 

 The Leahy Law doesn't say you can enter, when you enter negotiations, to try to bring a country into remediation.

 

 Gaza university protests which have intensified across American campuses over the past week, with citizens making several demands, including calls for policy changes and calls for a ceasefire in Gaza.

 

 And according to a poll by CNN over the weekend, young Americans under 35 disapprove the administration's handling of Israel's war on Gaza.

 

 And many countries, including your allies in the region, also expect you to change course and put more pressure on Israel.

 

 So are these objections and protests considered in policy making process in this building?

 

 And specifically, I'm wondering, will US policy be changed or affected by these protests in any way?

 

 But will the U.S. policy be changed or affected in any way by this process?

 

 On the normalization between Israel and Saudi Arabia, Secretary Blinken said that we're getting close to an agreement on bilateral things.

 

 Can you elaborate on that?

 

 Public comments by the Secretary this morning, he indicated that a new offer by Israel on the table was extraordinarily, extraordinarily generous.

 

 Is there a sense that a deal is closer than it has been in recent weeks, or is Hamas the same unknown that it has been?

 

 I just wanna follow up on Said's question regarding Omar Assad now.

 

 Netanyahu has been cited for violations, gross violations of human rights, including for being responsible for the death of an 80-year-old American citizen, Omar Assad.

 

 So, that took place almost two years ago in 2022, and now you're saying that Israel presented new information and that there's a discussion for remediation of that military unit.

 

 What kind of new information, provided almost two years later, could make the family of Omar Assad, an American citizen, feel like they've received any kind of justice?

 

 I wanted to start with, so tomorrow will mark one week since Secretary Blinken said that he had made determinations regarding a review of potential Leahy law violations by Israeli military units before October 7.

 

 He said at the time that we would see the result in the coming days.

 

 And I'm just wondering if you have an update on the timing of such an announcement or unveiling.

 

 when the National Security Advisor was asked yesterday about reports in the Israeli media that the US may reverse course and not actually issue any punitive action in association with these determinations, he deferred to this building.

 

 So I wanted to present the question to you and whether you have any response to those reports in Israeli media that the US may not actually take punitive action.

 

 And the last one is on Rafah.

 

 And there's this swirling commentary and developments, again, overseas as to whether something is imminent or not.

 

 I'm wondering whether you've gotten any clarity from Israeli officials about the plan, whether an actual plan for humanitarian or military operations has been presented.

 

 And if not, is there one on the books in the foreseeable future?

 

 Thank you.

 

 I want to ask you about a colleague of yours, Hala Ratid, who was the most senior spokesperson in the region and a diplomat who served the State Department for 18 years in different places, Hong Kong, Yemen, South Africa.

 

 She resigned.

 

 And basically, she said that she has been calling the administration to restrict sending arms to Israel.

 

 She is resigning in protest about your policy towards Israel.

 

 And she warned of that this policy will endanger diplomats like herself and US troops in the region.

 

 It's against US interests in the region.

 

 So what's your message to somebody like her and many in the State Department that the normal channel that you give them to express their opposition and their views is not going anywhere?

 

 It's basically they're just allowing them to speak, but there is no change of policy.

 

 Yesterday, the Israeli prime minister called for a crackdown on pro-Palestinian protesters in the United States of America.

 

 Do you find this to be a gross, I mean, a galling interference in American affairs, especially from a leader of a country that had just received $26 billion of American taxpayer money?

 

 Do you find that to be annoying or, in any way, interfering in the affairs of the American public and exercising their right to demonstrate?

 

 I understand everything that you said.

 

 But I'm asking you, there is a foreign leader who's saying that American law enforcement, including the National Guard, ought to crack down on Americans exercising their First Amendment right to free speech.

 

 I'm asking you on this particular issue, not on October 7, not on all this that happened.

 

 I'm asking you, do you find this to be appalling by a foreign leader in direct interference in the way Americans conduct themselves?

 

 I have a couple more questions, but I have one last comment.

 

 Don't you feel offended by the fact that a foreign leader is trying to fan the flames against Palestinian-Americans in this country?

 

 That's exactly what he's doing.

 

 You don't feel offended by that?

 

 The Gaza Civil Service today held a press conference this morning, which was televised.

 

 And they said that evidence showed that many of those pulled out from the three mass graves that they found, including children, were tortured before being killed.

 

 Some even showed signs of being buried alive, along with other crimes against humanity that they accuse Israeli forces of.

 

 They called for an independent forensic investigation.

 

 This administration repeatedly says that it asks Israel, the Israeli government, to investigate itself.

 

 As a mediator for peace between Israelis and Palestinians, how does it ever make sense that the United States asks the accused party to examine itself and provide reports that you have previously said that you actually trust?

 

 What's wrong with an independent scientific forensic investigation?

 

 I mean, if the results of such an independent investigation prove the accusations to be baseless, then that would be in Israel's favor, wouldn't it?

 

 But why not have an independent forensic scientist, which the Palestinians are calling for?

 

 But the issue of the humanitarian side of this subject, is there a list of vetted NGOs that can deliver aid via the Mediterranean route right now?

 

 And the reason I'm asking is because apparently the Freedom Flotilla was delayed for a few days over there, although apparently now they do have a date to deliver their aid.

 

 And it was said that the delay was due to US and Israeli and also German pressure.

 

 First, I want to thank you and your staff for putting together a great Take Your Child to Work Day program this morning.

 

 It was really appreciated by a lot of people.

 

 And with your indulgence, and as we discussed, I have a question for you, and then we'll have a second question.

 

 My question is that yesterday, House Speaker Johnson said on a talk radio show that he had received an emailed written assurance from National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan regarding an assurance that USAID that had been passed by Congress in the supplemental would not be restricted from an Israeli battalion that is reportedly being considered for a penalty under the Leahy Law.

 

 So my question to you is, has there been any assurance by the White House that would restrict the terms of any Leahy Law finding that the department might reach about that particular unit?

 

 Yeah, with the indulgence of my colleagues, Calvin, do you want to ask a question?

 

 I know we're talking about Gaza right now, but what kind of weapons do they have?

 

 Does Ukraine have enough weapons to defend themselves?

 

 On the Middle East, just two things I'm trying to get an answer for.

 

 One of the thing is this country pride itself on the First Amendment right, which is the freedom of expression.

 

 And in this, what we see now in this polarization and the protest movement in the universities, how can the State Department send a clear message that people have the right to protest peacefully and criticize Israel legitimately, but not being labeled as anti-Semitic?

 

 Because these anti-Semitic things have been used loosely for anybody who criticized Israel.

 

 Considering that a large number of the demonstrators are Jewish, the Jewish voices for peace are demonstrating in the universities, whether it's in Columbia or in DC or elsewhere.

 

 So this is the message that have been used by lawmakers in Congress, and also when other people hear, whether you hear it on TV or in American media.

 

 So how can you send a message to say that it is legitimate to criticize Israel, but it's not obviously everybody condemned anti-Semitism or Islamophobia as it stands?

 

 This is not even open for question.

 

 This is, we know, this is the message that's been repeated over and over again.

 

 But how can you separate the two?

 

 That's what I wanna get to the bottom of.

 

 Sure, and finally, how can you avoid being accused of double standard if you condemn the Iranian regime for cracking down on peaceful demonstrators and you refuse to condemn another leader, in this case, a friend, an ally, Israel, who's calling on you to crack down on the U.S., to crack down on peaceful demonstrators?

 

 David Satterfield, in his last appearance, warned that there's a strong possibility of famine in the north of Gaza.

 

 Yesterday, Gian-Carlo Siri, the head of the WFP, he says we're six weeks away from famine.

 

 Are you aware of these reports and what is the position of the United States in terms of having some sort of urgent plan to deal with this?

 

 Would she be contacting WFP on this very issue?

 

 Israel?

 

 A former State Department security and human rights official, Charles Blaha, took part in a panel presentation on credible allegations of human rights abuses by Israeli forces this afternoon.

 

 And he said that in his experience in 30 years at the State Department, the State Department gave Israel special treatment that no other country in the world got, and that it showed undue preference to Israel in accepting its accounts of incidents that involve allegations against Palestinians.

 

 So aside from the fact he's a free citizen and free to say what he wants to say, is he correct?

 

 Is the person who was central to the kind of reviews that are happening now in the State Department, is he correct in saying that's the situation?

 

 Or did he misunderstand how things worked over 30 decades?

 

 A former U.S. time forward now to say that's not the case, should that prompt an examination of the State Department of its own process?

 

 Senior Israeli defense official has said that Israel's military is poised to evacuate Palestinian civilians from Rafah and assault Hamas holdouts in the city.

 

 Do you feel that U.S. concerns about an operation in Rafah have been heard or addressed?

 

 Have you gotten any assurances on protection of civilians from the Israelis?

 

 Will the US take any action if they go ahead with an operation?

 

 and if I could just ask, Palestinian authorities reported finding hundreds of bodies and mass graves at a hospital in Qom Yunis this week after it was abandoned by Israeli troops.

 

 I know you said earlier this week that the reports are troubling, but will the US call for an independent inquiry?

 

 Point out, my colleague, at that event, actually, where they released something called the Independent Task Force on the application of National Security Memorandum 20, I'm sure you are aware of.

 

 Now, these two former officials from the State Department, they were, of course, private citizens, but they were speaking officially of their time spent in the State Department.

 

 So you are saying that there's never been, at any time, a special treatment of Israel in terms of dispensing aid, military aid, or otherwise, or even political aid?

 

 There's absolutely no special treatment of Israel at any given point in the past 50 years, whatever.

 

 It is a law.

 

 So can you share with us the mechanism that you apply in enforcing that law?

 

 And lastly, on the mass grave, now an Israeli spokeswoman for the Israeli army basically dismissed the whole thing, dismissed the chart.

 

 Now you're saying you find it troubling and you ask the Israeli government for a clarification.

 

 Do you expect them to come back to you with these clarifications?

 

 Do you have a time frame?

 

 There was a report in Israeli media over the weekend that Israeli finance minister, Sumo Church, is pushing to legalize 68 outposts in the West Bank.

 

 Does the State Department have a reaction to that report and is this something you've raised with Israeli officials?

 

 Hamas released a video today of Israeli-American hostage Hirsch Goldberg-Pollen.

 

 I wondered if you had any comment on the video and if you had any further information on proof of life or the date of the video and more broadly, if you could give an update on the hostage discussion.

 

 Does the U.S. support an investigation into the mass graves found in Gaza, an independent investigation?

 

 So you want Israel to investigate but not an independent?

 

 So in the Human Rights Report released on Monday, you said that Israel, the government, took some credible steps to identify and punish officials who may have committed human rights abuses.

 

 However, we have not seen some credible steps regarding several investigations since October 7, including the killing of Hind Rajab.

 

 I wanted to follow up on what Matt said last week.

 

 He said that you would ask for more information in light of the recent Washington Post report which casted doubts on earlier Israeli findings.

 

 Any updates on these?

 

 Have Israelis gotten back to you?

 

 Any updates on World Central Kitchen aid workers?

 

 You were reviewing Israeli findings.

 

 Have you made an assessment?

 

 Can I ask about the work being done for the findings that will be finished on May 8th?

 

 Are there any additional new investigations or inquiries being done as part of that examination of Israel's?

 

 I understand that the same processes and standards as before, my question is, are there new, any additional investigations, reviews?

 

 I just did a follow-up, but I didn't get to finish my question about the Netzah Yehuda battalion, and this is the question.

 

 In light of jewishpress.com and Middle East forum reports regarding the Democracy for the Arab World Now organization criticism of the IDF battalion and their ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, which supports Hamas in its war against Israel, does the U.S. government vouch for the credibility of the Democracy for the Arab World Now organization reports regarding those U.S. sanctions against the Netzah Yehuda battalion?

 

 And a quick follow-up.

 

 The United States continues to sanction more and more Israelis.

 

 Can you describe in detail what is the basis for these sanctions, why there isn't a public hearing so that the American public can see or hear the evidence, and which other allies does the United States currently have sanctions against the citizens and military units?

 

 Yeah, thank you, Vedant.

 

 A question on Iran.

 

 Rafael Grossi, Director General of the International Atomic Agency, said in an interview with Dutch Wella that Iran is weeks rather than months away from having enough enriched uranium to make a nuclear weapon.

 

 What's the U.S. assessment on that?

 

 Do you have the same belief?

 

 There have been reports that President Erdogan's meeting with the Hamas leader might have affected his anticipated White House visit.

 

 I will not ask you to confirm whether the Turkish president is coming, but I will ask you what is your message to your allies?

 

 Will a meeting with the Hamas leader potentially set an obstacle to a White House visit?

 

 So does that mean that a meeting with the Hamas leader is business as usual, so it can influence a visit in the United States?

 

 So would you like to see your allies, like Qatar, for instance, throw the Hamas leadership from Qatar?

 

 You said there's been a lot of talk about this.

 

 This was brought up now.

 

 Thank you, Ambassador.

 

 I don't really get a sense exactly of the precise details about how close Israel's compliance has come to the level that President Biden said he wanted to see when he said, you know, policy would be shaped by it allowing humanitarian aid.

 

 You talk about 200 trucks a day, but aid groups have said the minimum is 500 trucks a day.

 

 And there's, you mentioned communication systems to help with deconfliction.

 

 I mean, there was communication systems if you're talking about actual, you know, the comms.

 

 Yeah, those were there with the World Central Kitchen.

 

 And you talked about negotiations on the comms.

 

 Those are two crucial things.

 

 How, it sounds like there's actually, it's actually pretty far from meeting the level that's needed.

 

 And how long is Israel going to have until to meet that standard?

 

 Thank you for being here.

 

 Just to put a fine point on my colleague's questions, three weeks later, can you say you're satisfied with the steps that Israel has taken so far?

 

 Has the de-confliction mechanism that you talked about, you said there's progress, is that in place now and is working?

 

 And the final thing is about the pier.

 

 We're being told U.S. will rely on Israel for security.

 

 Can you elaborate on that?

 

 Is it gonna be security of U.S. troops provided by Israel?

 

 Who will distribute the aid inside Gaza?

 

 Ambassador, can you talk a little bit more broadly about how you see, since October 7th in particular, the Israeli government's conduct of humanitarian affairs versus Hamas's conduct of humanitarian affairs broadly speaking?

 

 Well, yeah, for an example, yesterday, the State Department released the annual Human Rights Report and featured Israel alongside Hamas in the first page.

 

 Right, so I'm asking you about the humanitarian conduct of those governments as they're represented side-by-side.

 

 Can you, first of all, clarify that you have not put a timeline on Israel to take certain steps forward when you talked about potable water, more UN trucks.

 

 It sounds like it's more of just a constant discussion that you're having with Israel.

 

 Also, has Israel provided assurances that jaylots will not be in lieu of these land corridors, that they will both remain open?

 

 I have two quick questions.

 

 Would you say that famine that was looming a couple of weeks ago, three weeks ago, has now been averted?

 

 That's one.

 

 And second, I mean, this insistence on the six-week ceasefire, why can't we have a permanent ceasefire?

 

 Because the implicit message for the Palestinians is that after six weeks, Israel can resume its bombing of Gaza and bombing civilian targets and so on.

 

 So why can't we have a permanent ceasefire?

 

 John Hedren with Al Jazeera English.

 

 To what extent will an operation in Rafah affect your ability to get this aid in there?

 

 Will it not certainly push back that effort and make things more difficult?

 

 It's fair to say that Israel views that differently up till now.

 

 I want to follow up on the pier.

 

 How will the U.S. ensure the safety of aid workers who are concerned over the Israeli military's presence in the area and role securing it given the past failures and de-confliction?

 

 And also, will Israel's so-called dual use restrictions be applied to goods entering the pier?

 

 And the dual use goods?

 

 I have two questions.

 

 First, did the U.S. ask Qatar to expel Hamas leaders from there?

 

 Second, are you preparing for humanitarian emergencies in case a full-scale war breaks between Hezbollah and Israel?

 

 I wanted to know about Egypt's role in about giving relief for the Gazans to be able to go into Egypt.

 

 Is Egypt open to taking a lot of the people to Gaza to go out through that into a safe area so that Israel can deal with the Hamas battalions?

 

 Are you in touch with the organization, Palestinian organizations, like the Red Crescent, as far as with these updated comms?

 

 Because we've seen medics, for example, attacked as well by the Israelis.

 

 So.

 

 Regarding the maritime corridor from the Republic of Cyprus, do you have any updates about any possible logistic challenges, or how we move forward with that plan?

 

 The maritime corridor from Cyprus, from the Republic of Cyprus, to Gaza to provide humanitarian aid?

 

 And the report also found that Israel was yet to present any evidence for the accusation that hundreds of UNRWA staff were members of terrorist groups.

 

 Is the U.S. going to be encouraging Israel to provide that evidence?

 

 Are you going to do anything towards that end?

 

 Okay, and the final thing is you must have seen the reports about mass graves containing hundreds of bodies around al-Shifa.

 

 chief said he was horrified by these reports.

 

 I'm wondering if U.S. has a comment on this and whether you guys have raised this with the Israeli government.

 

 So Ambassador Satterfield seemed pretty pleased with how Israel's progressing.

 

 Has the U.S. shared with Israel what would happen if Israel takes its foot off the pedal with regards to humanitarian aid?

 

 And then also a question on Ukraine.

 

 has already beaten us to the punch, biggest military package ever.

 

 Can you characterize if the U.S. package to Ukraine is gonna look to be, is it shaping up to be the biggest ever?

 

 If Secretary General Guterres asked for your support in this effort, would the United States support him?

 

 All right.

 

 Now, on Israel is said to be expanding the so-called safe zone in Gaza as it prepares to invade Rafah.

 

 I wonder if you've seen the report and if you have any comment on that.

 

 Yeah, I was just gonna say on the issue of investigating or finding out the truth of the allegations of the mass grave, the State Department's human rights report yesterday had said along the lines of it knew of no instances where Israeli officials had brought accountability basically for crimes alleged in Gaza.

 

 In those circumstances, I mean, with that kind of determination by the State Department itself, is waiting for Israel to investigate it the appropriate course of action?

 

 Indirect, indirect, not direct.

 

 And one on Israel-Lebanon, the war is escalating between Hezbollah and Israel on the border.

 

 Do you expect a full-scale war between the two sides?

 

 And what can you say about the U.S. efforts to find a diplomatic solution for this crisis?

 

 According to Jewish press and Middle East foreign reports, the US State Department has announced that it will take legal steps against the Israeli Army's unit known as the Netzah Yehuda Battalion, based on reports that the US gets from Don, which is a- We've spoken to this pretty regularly since Friday.

 

 But this is a follow-up to this.

 

 According to US State Department website report, the US has declared that it will take action against those who undermine peace, security, and stability in the West Bank, which undermine the national security and foreign policy objectives of the United States, including the viability of the two-state solution.

 

 So does that mean that the US will take action against Arabs who raise millions to support any Arab who murders a Jew or take action against the Palestinian Authority for the pay for slave, the salary for life to any Arab who murders a Jew?

 

 And finally, take action against the Palestinian Ministry of Education, whose new curriculum indoctrinates Palestinian Arabs to destroy Israel?

 

 So on the reforms, today, the new Palestinian Prime Minister announced a new package of reforms designed to strengthen the Palestinian Authority.

 

 And it seems like largely these reforms were the same as promised by the previous Prime Minister.

 

 Has the United States, has the State Department been in touch with the Palestinian Authority?

 

 And about these reforms that were announced?

 

 Are you familiar with the report?

 

 Okay, so regarding the recent diplomatic push by the United States towards Saudi Arabia and Israel about normalization ties.

 

 So do you think so with the ongoing circumstances, what is the line of action you have as Netanyahu is not even bothering United States regarding the aid measures, regarding the ceasefire, regarding the hostages there, then meanwhile you have many Israeli politicians you hosted here just for another attempt, just for possible house change in the Israeli Knesset.

 

 So what is the line of action you have?

 

 Yesterday, Secretary Blinken released the human rights reports and he said in his speech that, in quote, we repeatedly have pressed concerns about Palestinian civilians' access to humanitarian assistance, displacements of the majority of the population in Gaza, and unprecedented number of journalists killed, in quote.

 

 So, actually, one of the journalists killed in Gaza was one of our colleagues working for another agency of Turkey.

 

 His name is Mustafa Al-Karouf.

 

 And I wanna ask a journalist, I mean, what would be your message to Israeli government, Israeli military, to protect the journalists working in Gaza?

 

 I did, thanks for that.

 

 I just wanted to circle back to what one of our colleagues asked, which was in relation to the mass graves story, my colleague referred to calls for an independent investigation.

 

 And you said that you were asking for more information from the government of Israel, and that is squarely where we're leaving the conversation.

 

 Why is there a resistance to supporting an independent investigation into how 300 people ended up in a mass grave?

 

 And do you believe that the government of Israel is a credible source in enlightening you on that?

 

 As one point of clarification on Humeyra's question, has the Israeli Government been officially apprised of the Secretary's determinations on the Leahy law?

 

 Well, has official notification been offered to the Israeli Government?

 

 In the region.

 

 On Iran, do you have reason to believe that we've seen the last of the direct kinetic exchanges between Iran and Israel?

 

 And by that I mean, has this department had messages with both indicating that it stops here?

 

 And then, sorry, one last one.

 

 Late last week, the CIA director acknowledged he's been taking part in hostage talks and characterized them rather bleakly, saying it was like a big rock to push up a very steep hill right now.

 

 He signaled pessimism that the talks would restart, let alone result in a deal.

 

 Does that characterization track with the view from this building of the talks?

 

 And sorry, that's the state of play.

 

 Hamas either accepts this deal or nothing.

 

 On Saturday, Palestinian civil defense crews have uncovered a mass grave with 180 people, including women, men, and children, that Israel had basically killed those people.

 

 That's what they're saying.

 

 And do you have any comment on that?

 

 Will the U.S. press the Israelis to find out more about this?

 

 One more question on Andorra.

 

 The final report shows that Israel has failed in submitting any evidence on the participation of Andorra staff in the attack on October 7th, and it seems that the Secretary General has accepted the finding by Ms.

 

 Catherine Colonna, Ryan, the report.

 

 If – will that be acceptable to you, that the Secretary General has accepted that?

 

 And would you have any further comment on this?

 

 Was the U.S. a bit too precipitous in cutting off funds to UNRWA before all the facts were found?

 

 I just want to follow up what the Secretary said.

 

 He said that the State Department does not practice double standard when it comes to Ukraine and Gaza in terms of human rights violation.

 

 I mean, I want to put aside whether it is targeting civilians, whether it's mass graves that have been discovered, whatever.

 

 I just want to ask you specifically on the statement that the Secretary made, and he said Russia is committing war crimes when it cuts off water, electricity, and fuel on a civilian population.

 

 Israel did exactly the same.

 

 How can you say that Russia is committing a war crime and the Israelis are not?

 

 What's the technical difference?

 

 But legally, that's even – you cannot target civilians even if you have a terrorist organization embedded in hospitals and schools.

 

 And just one last thing also about what he said.

 

 He said, like, there is a difference between dictatorship and democracy in terms of investigation.

 

 Israel is – does its own investigation.

 

 I'm just wondering, because Israel is not just – the democracy in Israel is not analogous to Western Europe or to United States because it's still an occupying force, and that's the difference – fundamental difference between Israel and the rest of the democracies, because it has an army that's occupying people by force in the West Bank and Gaza as well, even if they withdraw the troops.

 

 So my question to you is, is this – how do you judge him if most of this investigation – basically the results have no accountability for most of the soldiers?

 

 Because even if it's a democracy, we have not – Israel does not have a track record of investigation.

 

 It's investigating itself and give us a credible record that we can go by and we say, yes, they are right because they are capable of doing that.

 

 Just a couple of small follow-ups here and there.

 

 When you were answering about UNRWA, you said the United States has taken into account what UNRWA told the United States.

 

 But have you seen any evidence either from UN itself or Israel with regards to those allegations?

 

 Have you seen any evidence from UN, UNRWA, Israel, anyone, regarding these allegations on both of those, just evidence?

 

 Can I just follow up on that for one second, and then I want to transition to China, unless others – but with regard to the U.S. military assistance to specific military units potentially being prohibited, is there a way for the U.S. to actually track if that military assistance that we're giving to Israel is prevented from going to a unit, or is the onus really on the partner government, in this case Israel, to make sure that that happens?

 

 On the – Israel?

 

 So regarding the evacuation of displaced Palestinians from Rafah before the starting of IDF military operation, will they be transferred to a buffer zone between the Egyptian and Palestinian borders?

 

 And what the role of the Palestinian Authority will play in this issue?

 

 There is no plan to transfer them?

 

 Yeah.

 

 Before I get into what's going on at the UN and then with Iran and this other kind of thing, can you clear up either to kill or keep alive these persistent reports that you guys have told the Israelis that you're okay with them going ahead with a RAFA operation as long as they don't attack Iran?

 

 That's an excellent answer to a question that I don't think I asked.

 

 I asked you whether or not the U.S. has told the Israelis that you're okay with a RAFA operation as long as they limit or don't attack Iran in response to what happened over the weekend.

 

 All right.

 

 So regardless of whether Israel does anything with – in response to the Iranian attack over the weekend, you still would oppose a RAFA operation unless what you've just mentioned are – so why can't you just say no, that it is not true that you have told – It's not true.

 

 And then as it relates to RAFA, this call today, is it over?

 

 But as far as you know, the call is not over?

 

 Last one.

 

 The UN right now, I think – the Security Council is voting or about to vote on this Palestinian recognition resolution.

 

 How are you guys going to vote?

 

 And then you said the most, you believe, the U.S. believes that the most expeditious way to statehood is through direct negotiations.

 

 So just to make sure, I just kind of, I just Googled expeditious.

 

 Marked by or acting with prompt efficiency.

 

 How many years has it been since Oslo?

 

 It's been – Isn't the most expeditious way to Palestinian statehood to have a – to have some kind of an announcement or a determination by the UN?

 

 Unless you're not – unless you don't really mean expeditious, because expeditions means fast.

 

 But you see, you have – you're pursuing this mega-deal in the Middle East, like Saudi-Israel normalization, and then tied to that is PA reform and the creation of a two-state solution.

 

 And let's assume for a moment that all of that would go swimmingly.

 

 Netanyahu has to agree to that, and he has repeatedly rejected to the creation of a Palestinian statehood.

 

 So can you explain how your alternative approach is going to prevail, expeditiously or not?

 

 One last thing on this.

 

 I mean, do you think that the creation, like the path for a Palestinian state at the UN – U.S. would veto this regardless of the timing?

 

 If this would come up again in three months' time, you would still veto it?

 

 Or does it have anything to do with this particular moment in time?

 

 And the final thing is on aid.

 

 So over the last couple of days, both you and Matt this week have talked about an improvement on the overall humanitarian aid picture from Gaza.

 

 But Guterres and other UN officials have been still talking about limited progress.

 

 They're giving pretty specific examples.

 

 For example, one is, like, Israeli authorities have cleared more aid convoys, but apparently those clearances are often granted when it's too late in the day to make the deliveries and return safely.

 

 They don't want their personnel to operate in darkness, in a war zone, literally with unexploded ordnance.

 

 So are you aware of these difficulties?

 

 Because it does sound like while you guys are talking about improvement, on the ground that improvement doesn't seem to be happening.

 

 To that point, Secretary Blinken and others said earlier this month, if we don't see changes that are – that we need to see, there will be changes in our policy – and this is referring to Israel and their operations in Gaza and not doing more for humanitarian aid.

 

 So should we expect any changes in policy?

 

 And if not, why not?

 

 How soon would we see those changes in policy if Israel doesn't do more?

 

 As you said, it's such a dire situation.

 

 And then also on – second question on Rafah.

 

 We're hearing from Israel that they have a plan.

 

 It involves tents in central Gaza.

 

 They are trying to do more to address the civilian need there.

 

 Is that plan satisfactory to the U.S.? Let me answer the second first.

 

 I think we have been clear about this since October 7th, is that any kind of forced relocation or displacement of the Palestinian people within Gaza cannot and should not be part of any plan for an operation.

 

 That has been one of the principles that Secretary Blinken has been fairly clear about since the onset of October 7th.

 

 But dating back to your – going back to your first question, the Secretary and the President were very clear about – it was about a week and a half ago when the Secretary spoke to this in Brussels, is that we expect there to be changes.

 

 Otherwise, there will be changes when it comes to our policy within Gaza.

 

 Like I said, there have been measurable and important positive steps in the right direction, but important work continues to be – needs to be done, not just in the context of additional humanitarian aid, but also when we talk about deconfliction and the protection of civilians as well.

 

 So I don't have a timeline or an assessment to preview on this, but the President and the Secretary spoke quite clearly, and this is something we'll continue to be clear about with Israeli officials as well.

 

 Kylie, go ahead.

 

 Just thinking in the region, Qatar said today – the prime minister said that they're considering – what's the exact phrasing here?

 

 They're considering basically pulling out of their role of mediating between Israel and Hamas, saying that they have been subject to political exploitation because of that role.

 

 What's the U.S. response to that?

 

 Are you guys encouraging them to stay as mediators or allowing them to walk away if they want to?

 

 But if you're saying they're indispensable in their role, it sounds like you don't want them to walk away from it.

 

 And then ProPublica had a report out today that I want to ask you about, saying that the State Department – a panel, the Leahy Vetting Forum, recommended months ago that Blinken disqualified multiple Israeli military and police units from receiving U.S. aid after allegations that they had committed serious human rights abuses.

 

 I'm not sure if you saw the Iraqi prime minister's comment about the Iranian attack to Israel.

 

 He denied if any drones or missiles were launched from the Iraqi to Israel during the Iranian attack.

 

 And the U.S. Government, including the President Biden statement, they said that there were attacks on Israel from Iran.

 

 How did you get to that conclusion, and have you shared these facts with the Iraqi Government?

 

 And one more question.

 

 So yesterday, Israel attacked south Lebanon, specifically Hiram, alone with 100 strikes, including phosphorus.

 

 And this is not the first time or second or tenth time phosphorus has been used in Lebanon much more.

 

 And we know that this is like – it's banned against civilians.

 

 So do you have any comment on that?

 

 Do you condemn that?

 

 Have you seen the reports about the use of white phosphorus?

 

 So the Jerusalem court ordered the eviction of Palestinian families from Sheikh Jarrah on Monday.

 

 We always talk about a long-lasting peace in the region and a two-state solution.

 

 How do you see these evictions working towards a peace?

 

 As my friend mentioned, the Iranian president is coming to Pakistan.

 

 Yesterday, a former Pakistan intelligence, very popular officer, Major Ahmed, on a TV interview stated that in the 80s they had reported that Israel was going to attack Pakistan nuclear weapons.

 

 Finance Minister is here, as you mentioned.

 

 Imran Khan is in jail because when the Ukraine war started, he – the day he was there in Ukraine.

 

 In all this scenario, what's your – like – and the finance minister is asking for money here.

 

 Do you see Pakistan with any independent policy, or do you have any suggestions for them what kind of route they should take?

 

 Ivor has recently said, and he's said many times in the last year or so, quote, were there no Israel, there wouldn't be a Jew in the world that is safe.

 

 Isn't that both false and antithetical to the First Amendment?

 

 Jews, Muslims, Christians, atheists, whoever, are safe in the United States because of the First Amendment, because of the nature of U.S. society.

 

 How can this administration stand behind a remark like that, particularly about a foreign power that itself stands accused of not only genocide but being an apartheid regime?

 

 Isn't that statement, were there no Israel, there wouldn't be a Jew in the world that is safe, antithetical to the First Amendment, and false?

 

 Well, I mean, he said this several times.

 

 It wasn't a one-off.

 

 He said it when he met Netanyahu at the UN, I think last July or August, and he said it since then.

 

 I think he said it once he arrived in Israel.

 

 It's – But it says in the world Jews are safe in the United States and have been safe in the United States way before Israel existed.

 

 Isn't that correct?

 

 So it applies in Gaza?

 

 So is Israel the occupying power in Gaza?

 

 So Israel is exempt — All right.

 

 — from the obligations of being an occupying power in Gaza.

 

 And then lastly, what's your latest understanding from the Israelis about what they intend or not intend to do?

 

 And then – sorry, I said that the last one was the last one, but this really is the last one.

 

 Is – but you've seen that both David Cameron and Baerbock, the German and British foreign ministers, were in Israel ahead of the Capri meeting.

 

 Secretary has no plans to follow suit?

 

 David Cameron said it was clear Israel had made a decision to respond to the Iranian attack.

 

 Have you gotten a similar message?

 

 What contingency plans does the U.S. have to contain the aftermath of any attack should Israel choose to go ahead with it?

 

 And sorry, I've just got two more.

 

 The UN Security Council looks set to vote on Friday on a Palestinian request for full UN membership.

 

 Diplomats tell us the resolution has the support of at least nine members.

 

 Does the U.S. plan to veto this?

 

 And then UNRWA has said that some of its staff members and other people detained by Israeli forces in Gaza were subjected to ill treatment, including severe beatings, and being forced to strip naked.

 

 Have you been in touch with the Israeli Government on this, and what's been their response?

 

 And any updates on Rafah?

 

 Vidant, just to follow up on your statement earlier about the – your efforts to have a unified respond – diplomatic respond to Iran's attack between you and your partners and allies, is this designed to negate the need for Israel to respond militarily or regardless of that?

 

 On Thursday, April 11th, the State Department spokesman, Mr.

 

 Miller, said that Biden administration fully supports the rights of the Israeli people.

 

 And for our audience, could you explain a disconnect between Biden administration's words and behavior, how on one hand that you can say you fully support the rights of the Israeli people, and on the other hand, not fully support the rights of the Israeli people to defend themselves as they see fit, and then a follow up.

 

 Well, specifically about not allowing them, the issue of a counterattack against Iran and not allowing them to easily go into Rafah, to take care of Hamas, delaying this.

 

 Israel could have been into Rafah a long time ago.

 

 So the audience is really concerned about the disconnect, about that they see, you know, the Biden administration preventing Israel from going into Rafah for these operations.

 

 Along that, our audience is concerned about the pressure on Israel to accept the two-state solution that you were talking about.

 

 And so what is your response to our audience that really believes that it's a way of hurting Israel when many Israeli people do not support a two-state solution, the idea of sharing their land with terrorists, specifically with Gaza, with Hamas, that Hamas blew their opportunity to really have a peaceful area there?

 

 Along with that, what do you say to those people that felt pressured to accept it?

 

 Sorry, let me – could you have any update on the investigation into what Israel actually hit in Damascus on April 1st?

 

 Thank you, Vedant.

 

 So you said support a two-state solution, but it seems you also oppose Palestine's membership at the UN.

 

 Do you think this is contradictory?

 

 And when you say a two-state solution, is it like a – is it a Palestinian state based on 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as the capital?

 

 What is your understanding of the two-state solution?

 

 Yeah, I have one for the West Bank as well.

 

 I keep asking this question, trying to rephrase it in regards to the Palestinian Authority.

 

 Within the jurisdiction of Area A, does the Palestinian Authority or Palestinian law enforcement have the right to arrest settlers that are attacking Palestinian homes or Palestinians?

 

 Earlier today, Israel's COGAT published footage of what it said are contents of 700 trucks' worth of humanitarian aid that is sitting on the Gaza side of Kerem Shalom Crossing waiting to be delivered.

 

 COGAT said it has scaled up its capabilities over the past several weeks, but that the UN has failed to deliver its job in delivering aid.

 

 Ambassador Satterfield said last week that the biggest obstacle at this point is UN and international agencies bringing more trucks into Gaza in order to distribute the aid.

 

 So where does this stand?

 

 The U.S. regularly does urge Israel to boost its aid efforts, but are you willing to call on the UN also to improve its capabilities to deliver this aid that's piling up on the Gaza side of the border?

 

 Do you have any comments on the escalation of fighting between Hezbollah and Israel, and do you expect this conflict to be broadened?

 

 Euromed Monitor, human rights monitor, reports that Israel is using drones to lure residents and then shoot them.

 

 They explain the sounds of women screaming and babies crying were heard late at night on both Sunday and Monday when some of the residents went out to investigate and tried to help.

 

 They were shot at by Israeli quadcopter drones.

 

 The sounds they heard were, in fact, recordings played by the Israeli drones with the intent of forcing the camp residents out into the streets where they could be easily targeted by snipers and other weapons.

 

 Will you look at this report?

 

 Do you recognize the Geneva Conventions as a part of — No, you haven't.

 

 You've evaded it and your colleague deceitfully responded to it.

 

 Do you recognize the Geneva Conventions?

 

 It's a simple question.

 

 Do you recognize the Geneva Conventions as applying to Gaza?

 

 And you're not — you're refusing to answer it.

 

 Do the Geneva Conventions apply to Gaza or not?

 

 They apply to everywhere on the planet except for the Palestinians.

 

 Isn't that right?

 

 Yeah, my question is – sorry.

 

 So my question is that there was any – was there any conversation between U.S. diplomats and Chinese diplomats or Russian diplomats about the conflicts between Iran and Israel?

 

 How about Russia?

 

 A follow-up, sorry.

 

 So there are reports, Wall Street Journal reported that the Iranian regime has evacuated their bases in Syria.

 

 So is there an indication that Israeli Government might attack some targets outside of Iran?

 

 So Benjamin Netanyahu testified to the U.S. Congress in 2002.

 

 This is before we invaded Iraq.

 

 And he said, quote, There is no question whatsoever that Saddam Hussein is seeking and is working and is advancing towards the development of nuclear weapons.

 

 He then went on to say he was hiding nuclear facilities underground.

 

 We now know this was a lie, one that many U.S. service members and innocent Iraqis paid the price for.

 

 Netanyahu, in that same congressional hearing, goes on to say, Obviously, we'd like to see regime change, at least I would, in Iran.

 

 The question now is, what is the best way to proceed?

 

 It's not a question of whether you'd like to see regime change in Iran, but how to achieve it.

 

 So my two questions for you are, one, how can we trust somebody who goaded our country into war in Iraq based on falsehoods?

 

 And two, given this weekend's events, why are we confident he won't do the same thing with Iran, given he's been calling for us to enact regime change in that country for 20 years?

 

 But you – one individual, Netanyahu, is the head of the entire Israeli government, and when – you might condemn those, but there's a difference between condemning those actions and the U.S. getting roped into a war with Iran.

 

 Even if they strike Israel?

 

 Any role that Russia is playing between Iran and Israel?

 

 Journalists become... Okay.

 

 Today, Time Magazine has a journalist, Palestinian journalist, as 100 more influential people.

 

 No country in the world protects and talks about journalists like the U.S. We have a Pakistani journalist, Arshad Sharif, got killed, and we still don't know who killed him.

 

 It's been two years now.

 

 Can the U.S. and you personally take some interest in the case, or at least let us finally know who killed the guy?

 

 I just want to go back to something that was raised a little bit earlier.

 

 Can you ask – can you find out from El or from whoever if the United States believes that the Geneva conventions apply universally – in other words, to everywhere on the planet as – and also the same question on the Vienna conventions?

 

 And obviously, the question before was about whether Geneva conventions apply in Gaza, but then specifically it would be whether the Vienna convention applies in Syria.

 

 Or are there – or do you – does the administration think that there are certain exemptions to these conventions?

 

 That's – I don't expect you to have an answer, but maybe you could add.

 

 Yeah.

 

 So have the Israelis told you what they plan to do in response to what happened over the weekend?

 

 Okay.

 

 And have you gotten any response that leads you to believe that the Israelis will heed your advice?

 

 Well, does he plan to speak to Netanyahu or does he plan to speak to Gallant or – I don't have any other calls to announce.

 

 Can you say at the current moment, where we are right now, do you – are your concerns still as high as they may have been over the weekend for escalation?

 

 Israel?

 

 But before that begins, is – are there any messages received since the attack?

 

 And is there a U.S. assessment on whether – if in the event of an Israeli response, if – as expected, the Israelis – or as might be expected, the Israelis strike in Iran itself, does the U.S. have an assessment of how Iran would react to that?

 

 And do you have any updates since yesterday on the conversations with the Israelis about Rafah, their Rafah operation, any anything from them about a humanitarian plan on Rafah?

 

 And do you also have an update on the number of Americans who may be still – American citizens who may still be in Gaza who want to leave Gaza, including their non-American family members?

 

 Matt, I want to go to – about the Shifa Hospital.

 

 Today a UN team entered and the – what they are saying is – what they are witnessing is horrific scenes.

 

 Yesterday a mass grave been discovered on the outskirts of a Shifa Hospital that contains so many unknown bodies.

 

 Did you see these reports and do you have any comment on it?

 

 But did you reach out to the Israelis?

 

 Did you – are you opening an investigation on that?

 

 It's a mass grave.

 

 My last question will be any updates on how many trucks are entering Gaza now daily?

 

 Are they still at the 400 level?

 

 On trucks going into Gaza, is the – is these numbers – are these numbers based on Israeli figures?

 

 This is my first question.

 

 And secondly, UNRWA released a report today saying that there has been no significant change in the volume of humanitarian supplies entering Gaza.

 

 Or improved access to the north.

 

 Since the beginning of April, they said an average of 881 trucks have crossed into Gaza per day.

 

 What is your assessment on this?

 

 And it seems that maybe Israel has taken some steps in this regard, but it seems it's not enough.

 

 Do you agree?

 

 And also – we'll follow up on that.

 

 Some reports say that quantity changed, increased, quantity of trucks changed, increased, but trucks are not fully loaded.

 

 Is this something that you also observe or raise with Israelis?

 

 Thank you.

 

 Two questions on Israel and Iran.

 

 It was reported that the director general of IAEA said there were concerns that Israel would attack Iranian nuclear facilities.

 

 What is your opinion on this possibility?

 

 On Iraq?

 

 Rob, just before we leave this, have you guys decided yet or made a determination about whether what Israel hit in Damascus was a diplomatic facility or not?

 

 So how long is this going to take?

 

 So the content of the trucks going into Gaza, are you talking to Israel about the contents of these trucks?

 

 Medical supplies are in — Gaza is in major need of medical supplies, and some people on the ground are saying, yes, we're getting food, canned food, but we're not getting medical supplies.

 

 And one question about the West Bank.

 

 Two Palestinians were killed in Israeli settlers' attack on the — some villages on the West Bank.

 

 Are you pressuring the Israeli Government in regards to that, especially in light of Ben-Gvir's open arming of settlers?

 

 Do you expect Israel to alert the U.S. when they decide to retaliate?

 

 The United States emphasized it's unwilling to escalate the region, and at the same time, you support – United States support Israel, which occupied the Palestinian territories, and in the same – and it's – which is the main and direct cause of the escalation and instability in the region.

 

 Why don't you – why you ignore this reason and you work in different direction?

 

 Yeah, one more.

 

 I wonder if you heard about what's happened today in Maghazi camp in Gaza, the massacre, what's happened.

 

 And today more – the most who killed are children and women today, this morning in Gaza.

 

 There's a new Washington Post report today about a 6-year-old girl in Gaza City who was killed in the paramedics who went to rescue her, and that report finds that the ammunition matches that of Israel.

 

 Does the State Department have a new comment?

 

 You've spoken to it before, said you've been in touch with the Israelis.

 

 Are you satisfied with their explanation?

 

 You've said repeatedly that there are processes that the State Department has.

 

 Admiral Kirby's referred to them as well.

 

 Is this one of those such processes where the United States could you do something independently here?

 

 And one more on aid, but the humanitarian peer that DOD is leading on, are you facilitating relationship with NGOs to get that aid into Gaza?

 

 I wanted to ask about Qatar.

 

 It sounds like they have prior ties to Hamas.

 

 So does the Biden administration see them as a reliable mediator with Hamas now?

 

 QUESTION Do you feel like they've done the most they can do?

 

 I just want to follow up on a question I asked yesterday.

 

 Today, Reuters reported that some Palestinian residents are expressing – in the West Bank are expressing concern that – they're expressing a lack of trust in the authorities meant to protect them.

 

 So my question is, they're saying that the Palestinian Authority is not protecting them.

 

 Does the Palestinian Authority have not only a right but a duty to protect them?

 

 And I'm talking about within the areas of their jurisdiction.

 

 So don't you think so it will let another dead end for at least diplomatic conversation you have with Iran?

 

 And what are the channels of communications you have, what are the level of communication level you have with the Iranian side?

 

 Because they have mentioned several times during this crisis that they did inform United States before this attack.

 

 Then secondly, apparently it seems like what Israel did, it is unjustified to attack a declared diplomatic mission before this Israel attack many positions in Syria by claiming that Iranian alliance are involved in the weaponizing the Syrian.

 

 But this time, this thing pinch Iran to this – to the direct engagement with the Israel.

 

 We have seen that United States initiated diplomatic efforts with its Western allies to halt Iran to strike back and then to Israel to attack Iran.

 

 Why you and your allies didn't join any condemnations to stop Israel to further continue the – this escalation that will prolong this escalation?

 

 But you are doing diplomatic – you are doing at best your level of diplomatic measures, but not with the condemnations.

 

 Hi, Matt.

 

 So you've been – U.S. has been cautioning Israel about its retaliation.

 

 I'm wondering what's the most recent steer you're getting from Israel on what kind of further retaliation they're going to launch.

 

 Let me go at this a little bit more.

 

 It's taken you months to convince Israel on a number of things, like aid to Gaza, how they're conducting their military operation in Gaza.

 

 What makes you think they're going to heed your warning this time?

 

 I understood that you don't know exactly when Israel is going to go ahead or don't feel the need to share it, but is the U.S. expectation that Israel will share with the U.S. before they actually retaliate?

 

 The U.S. hasn't asked to look at what their plans are before they go ahead?

 

 And then, obviously, the U.S. was hand-in-hand with Israel defending against this attack over the weekend.

 

 Can you speak to how you think that might impact the way that Israel responds?

 

 Do you think that they felt supported by the U.S. and regional allies as they were under assault that might make them feel like they're in a better place today than they would have been defending themselves on their own?

 

 And are the RAFA meetings still going to happen this week?

 

 Just in a similar vein, that – the fact that Israel didn't take a preemptive strike and that the U.S. and others were warning that a strike from Iran, an attack from Iran would likely be coming, there was no preemptive strike.

 

 So should we read that as it's – that the U.S. and allies have been successful in actually stopping Israel from doing what it might otherwise normally do?

 

 And also, the Secretary spoke about this this morning alongside the Iraqi PM, but he said that in the next – in the 36 hours since the attack, this diplomatic response and seeking to prevent escalation will continue from the U.S. So we – are we supposed to see that as a – as primarily aimed at Israel, given that the ball is now in Israel's court?

 

 One more, Matt.

 

 Did you clearly ask Israel not to retaliate, and in case they responded, will you continue to defend Israel?

 

 I just had a follow-up, Michel, regarding this.

 

 I mean, you are now pressuring Israel not to respond on the Iranian attack, and at the same time saying that if they've been attacked, you will defend them.

 

 Do you see that this was counterproductive to what you're trying to do?

 

 You're enabling them to respond to Iran while you're saying to them, we'll protect you when Iran retaliates back.

 

 And do you willing to risk a regional total war for this?

 

 Last question, but I want to go back to a statement you issued an hour earlier about West Bank violence.

 

 You started the statement by saying, we strongly condemn the murder of 13-year-old Israeli Benjamin Achim Mayer.

 

 And the second paragraph, you say we are also increasingly concerned by the violence against Palestinians that led to the death of two Palestinians.

 

 Why the distinction?

 

 The U.S. Embassy in Israel noted that the threat of drone and missile barrages diminished over the weekend when it lifted its shelter-in-place order for U.S. Government officials, but the travel restrictions are still in place for those personnel.

 

 Is that something that's going to be the posture going forward, or do you anticipate lifting those as well?

 

 We have seen some major airlines cancel flights out of Tel Aviv.

 

 Is there any concern at this point about U.S. citizens being able to transit in and out of the country safely?

 

 The question I keep hearing from Ukrainian people, why do you think they don't deserve the same?

 

 But what happened in Israel last week happens in Ukraine every week, and it bears – I face the same drones coming from Iran and they're giving to Russia to attack on them.

 

 My question is, which U.S. that they have seen on TV yesterday, which U.S. is the true friend of Ukraine?

 

 For the Italian television, so we heard the President saying that he will support Israel, but he doesn't want an escalation, so – but Netanyahu doesn't seem to be listening too much to this ally.

 

 He just go his own way for his political reason, although the ally keep supporting Israel.

 

 So in case of a further escalation, will the U.S. willing to be involved in a potential war toward Iran?

 

 But they will join in case Israel needs support with the U.S. I just don't want to speak to any hypotheticals.

 

 We are committed to Israel's defense, and we showed that over the weekend, but we want to achieve de-escalation and we do not want to see a wider – Can I do a follow-up for the Saudi and the Jordan, because they're supporting the U.S. and Israel?

 

 Israel?

 

 Israel?

 

 Israel?

 

 Regarding to the rubber of the – the rubber of the – of the pear, we seen all – we seen the rubber, how they build the pear from the rubber of the destroyed houses in Gaza from the remain of the people who killed in Gaza.

 

 And this is – this pear is built specially for – it's built specially to human aid for people of Gaza.

 

 This is – do you – do you don't think this is inhuman for – and it's a contract with the purpose of – to build this pear?

 

 The U.S. condemned the violence in West Bank between Palestinians and Israelis.

 

 But the violence from Israeli settlers is under the protection.

 

 They burned the houses attacking the Palestinians, and this is under the Israeli protection, Israeli authority protection.

 

 Why you don't clearly condemn the Israeli authorities?

 

 So we have made very – Not only between Palestinian – the Palestinians, there is no – nobody protect them.

 

 How do you counter the argument that not striking back against Iran represents an appeasement of Iran?

 

 But in a region where deterrence counts for so much, the fact that Iran was able to fire ballistic missiles at Israel proper, that – does that not – Unsuccessfully.

 

 But you could argue that that was in part a consequence of the 12 days or so that they publicly announced they were going to do something.

 

 But does it not – the fact they were able to do it largely unsuccessfully, does that not for them give them some sense of deterrence, of reestablishing their own deterrence, which is a problem, is it not, for Israel and America?

 

 And can I just follow up on that point?

 

 In regards to the attacks on Palestinian civilians over the last few days, does the State Department view that Palestinians have a right to defend themselves, to self-defense?

 

 How would one defend themselves, though, like defend their homes?

 

 Do they have the right to defend their homes?

 

 Okay, but is there a mechanism for Palestinians – is there a mechanism for Palestinians to defend themselves, given the Palestinian Authority or its security?

 

 On Thursday, April 11th of this year, you said that the Biden administration fully supports the rights of the Israeli people.

 

 And according to CNN and New York Times reports, President Biden has threatened Israel Prime Minister Netanyahu and the majority government to change course in their military actions or risk loss of his support for their military strategy with Hamas in the Rafah area of Gaza, and now with Iran.

 

 How on one hand can you say that you fully support the rights of the Israeli people, and on the other hand, not fully support the rights of the Israeli people to defend themselves as they see fit, and a too brief follow-up?

 

 Okay, and then Israel has been under attack from Iran and its proxies since before October 7th, with April 13th's attack by Iran being the worst and not the first.

 

 Why was the Biden administration and State Department, according to a recent CNN report, so quick to telegraph the U.S. would not support any counterattack of Israel on Iran?

 

 And then what would it take for America to retaliate against Iran, since according to an Associated Press report, Iran murdered three Americans and dozens more were injured in an overnight drone attack in northeast Jordan over the past several months?

 

 What was the – what was the reason for not – for that – not allowing Israel to have a counterattack on Iran?

 

 So as far as Iran's attack, what does it say about Iran's military capabilities?

 

 And how do the – how does this attack affect any diplomatic strategies between the U.S., Israel, and their allies?

 

 So then – just to follow up on that, them being unsuccessful, does that say anything about their military capabilities?

 

 So the Iranian regime said that they responded to the attack that occurred in Iraq, Damascus, against their consulate.

 

 So my question is that what the United States positions now on that attack – do you condemn that attack?

 

 Do you think that that attack against the Iranian consulate was appropriate, was wrong?

 

 What is the United States position?

 

 In other – sorry.

 

 So the United States condemned Iranians' attack against Israel.

 

 So what else the United States would do?

 

 Which kind of action the United States would take against Iran?

 

 So just condemn?

 

 Thank you very much, Matt.

 

 One question is that the Saudi foreign minister is in Pakistan right now.

 

 What is something from Pakistan and Saudi Arabia you would expect to do to improve the situation in the Middle East?

 

 And whether then what these countries accepting Israel will play any constructive role if their only demand of Palestine, which the Biden administration also supports, if that is done?

 

 I didn't want to raise this with the previous two speakers because, obviously, the Sudan situation is a situation in and of itself.

 

 But so much of what they said very powerfully about the conflict in Sudan could also or does also apply to what's happening in Gaza.

 

 And when they say – when the ambassador and special envoy talk about how every arms shipment leads us closer to famine and a failed state, do you not think that that same logic applies in Gaza?

 

 I would – Just because it's you who are supplying the weapons as opposed to whoever it is – the Iranians, the Emiratis, the Egyptians, whoever it is that's supplying the weapons in Sudan – doesn't the same thing apply?

 

 But is it correct, then, though, that the administration believes that every arms shipment to Sudan leads us closer to famine and a failed state, that that does not apply in Gaza?

 

 I don't think that every arms shipment to Israel leads us closer to famine.

 

 Reports say today that Iran delayed or changed plans to attack Israel at the last moment due to U.S. warnings.

 

 Can you confirm that?

 

 And do you still expect an Iranian reaction to the attack on Damascus?

 

 I wanted to ask this question actually to the ambassador, but the Iranian mission at the UN said that basically if the U.S. or the Security Council rather condemn the attack on the consulate in Damascus, this could – any retaliation could have been avoided.

 

 So is this your understanding that actually you don't condemn it because you cannot verify whether it is a diplomatic mission or not?

 

 And also, do you think that Israel can go and attack any other diplomatic mission if this is proved to be actually a diplomatic mission and you don't expect any country to retaliate?

 

 Yeah, I – not Iran, but like Matt, I was struck with what the ambassador said, the similarities.

 

 You could change the word Sudan for the Palestinians or Gaza and it'd be exactly the same with one difference.

 

 I mean, you don't have any control over the conflict in Sudan, but you certainly have – Can I just finish my question?

 

 I have not asked my question.

 

 If I may, I just want to follow up.

 

 I mean, you talked about Palestinian legitimate aspirations and so on.

 

 But insisting that this conflict began on October 7th does not recognize that, does it?

 

 Does it recognize that this – that the Palestinians have legitimate aspirations that go back 75 years, not just October 7th?

 

 Yeah, but do you acknowledge that Gaza was under siege for basically 17 years and – Said.

 

 Every other year there would be an attack and a war by Israel time after time after time, killing hundreds and thousands of Palestinians?

 

 Were you hoping to avoid the Israelis attacking an Iranian military?

 

 I was asking because we have a statement from Khamenei last night saying that any Islamic countries supporting Israel or not supporting their narratives, they engage in treason.

 

 Any Islamic countries that do not fall in line with their narratives, they engage with treason.

 

 I just wonder how much this – their calculation of calling Turkey, in this case, is powerful.

 

 On the hostage talks, can you give any update on whether there's been a response from Hamas?

 

 And also, is there a level of concern in the U.S. Government about the Israeli strike that killed Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh's family members and how that might affect the talks?

 

 There is a record number of land that's been confiscated in the West Bank that came out today.

 

 It's like between 2018 and 2023, it's 5,900 acres that are being confiscated.

 

 Administrations always talk about this two-state solution, and the major – one of the major obstacles is settlements.

 

 So if this land has been taken – and there's not just a condemnation from the administration, but actually there is nothing practical that we see that will stop this land from being taken that will undermine the President's vision.

 

 So what – or how can you go forward when actually there's not even base for – to have a state in the future?

 

 Okay, just very quickly, the ambassador made a passionate appeal to us, the press corps, to cover Sudan, not to forget civilians – rightly so.

 

 But we haven't heard from any senior officials the same appeal about Palestinian civilians in Gaza.

 

 Number one, we have many journalists who have been killed, including our colleagues.

 

 We don't hear any – apart from condemnation, nothing's being done to protect them.

 

 And second, why can the United States allow independent journalists to go to Gaza since you don't have anybody on the ground so they will have access and tell us what's happening there?

 

 Thank you, Matt.

 

 America has a number of allies.

 

 What message do they receive when America harangues one of its closest allies, Israel, and their democratically elected leader, Benjamin Netanyahu, in a follow-up?

 

 Thank you.

 

 Benjamin Netanyahu is the longest-serving prime minister in Israel's history.

 

 Clearly a majority of Israelis agree with his policies, since a majority of voters keep re-electing him.

 

 How does this mesh with what President Biden seems to be calling for, which is essentially a rejection of Israeli democracy?

 

 Well, it seems like there's an attempt to demonize the current Israeli government, their efforts to support the overthrow of the Israeli government with a lot of protests.

 

 And have you received any signals from the Iranian Government that they're taking these messages into their consideration?

 

 In the past few times, the Iranian used it to – used it to base their sophistication to attack the Erbil and also Qusayn region in response to the threats from Israel.

 

 Is that something that you're concerned maybe Iran this time use the same sophistication and to attack the U.S. allies and U.S. friends in the region in the retaliation for the attack?

 

 Due to situation in Gaza, there is too much hate spreading all around the world, even here in U.S. as well.

 

 Is it a concern?

 

 Thanks, Matt.

 

 On the State Department's latest travel alert for the U.S. embassy in Israel, it details how American personnel have now been limited from traveling within the country.

 

 It says it's been done out of a, quote, abundance of caution.

 

 I'm just wondering if you can say definitively whether this is linked to the threat to Iran.

 

 Saudi Arabia joined Pakistan in addressing Jammu and Kashmir dispute while engaging with India through dialogue.

 

 Will United States encourage any mediation from Saudi Arabia between Pakistan and India?

 

 Because from very recent past, we say – we observed that United States encouraged all those engagements that goes according to the regional interest of U.S., including the Houthis and Saudis talks.

 

 After October 7th, U.S. stressed Saudi Arabia to halt their talks.

 

 Before October 7th, U.S. was encouraging that.

 

 And number two, National Security Advisor had scheduled visit to Saudi Arabia for talks on Israel normalization.

 

 Is it rescheduled, or with the ongoing circumstances in Middle East, there is some policy change expected from United States?

 

 What is the State Department's position regarding Israel possibly conducting an offensive attack on Iran or Iranian interest?

 

 As Netanyahu today said, they're ready for defensive or offensive attacks.

 

 Wouldn't an offensive attack be part of that escalation that you say that we're trying to prevent?

 

 So – but it is correct, though, that you guys have not yet come to a determination as to whether the steps that Israel has undertaken now in the last couple days or is undertaking meet your – I don't want to say requirements, but meet the criteria that you have laid out.

 

 It's not – you haven't decided that yet?

 

 But you guys have been calling for these actions for months now.

 

 Why do you think that they've now started to – you have – you can't hazard a guess?

 

 Let's just start from January 1st of this year.

 

 Between January 1st and now, April whatever it is, 8th, what has changed on the ground in Gaza?

 

 I wonder if we could come to the hostage negotiations.

 

 One of the other things that the President said to the Prime Minister Netanyahu in the call, according to the readout, was that the Israelis should empower – or Netanyahu should empower his negotiators to make a deal.

 

 Have you seen any evidence of a change in that regard?

 

 But the implication of the way that came out in the readout was that so far those negotiators hadn't been fully empowered, and there's been criticism from the Israeli opposition that they haven't sought a deal as hard as they could have done, right?

 

 Is that not the case?

 

 So now there's a deal which Hamas – you hope they will accept.

 

 What is different about this deal from the previous ones that they've rejected?

 

 I'm just sticking in the region.

 

 The prime minister just said, like in the last hour or so, that a date for the Rafah invasion has been set.

 

 Have the Israelis shared that date with the U.S.? To my knowledge, we have not been briefed on that date.

 

 And given what the Israelis have briefed U.S. officials on to date in terms of their plans for the operation, I assume that what you've seen thus far would not be something that the U.S. would approve?

 

 Just to follow up on the talks.

 

 So you're saying that there is a deal on the table and it's up to Hamas to accept it and so on.

 

 Now, would that deal include the withdrawal of all Israeli forces from the whole of Gaza?

 

 I fully understand, but is that something that the United States would consider, would support?

 

 I mean, I'm sure there is some sort of conversation.

 

 Do you feel we're closer to a deal today than we were, let's say, a couple days ago?

 

 Let me ask you on Rafah.

 

 Now the United States rejects any kind of plan that does not include the safe movement of 1.4 million Palestinians from Rafah.

 

 Right.

 

 But is it feasible to really move 1.4 million Palestinians?

 

 A couple more questions.

 

 The Secretary General on – the United Nations Secretary General on Friday expressed concern that Israel is using artificial intelligence to target Palestinians.

 

 Are you aware of that report?

 

 And lastly – I promise it's lastly – on UNRWA.

 

 You know, I mean, if the last couple weeks taught us anything, it taught us that the only people that really can conduct the dispensing of aid and movement and so on are really UNRWA, effectively, simply by virtue of a very long experience.

 

 So I know that the United States, at least until next year, will not be funding UNRWA.

 

 But would you pressure the Israelis to allow UNRWA workers to conduct their operations in Gaza?

 

 Would you tell them that there seems to be no one else that can do this job as good as they can?

 

 I have two questions.

 

 So you show – you expressed concern about the fate of 1.4 million civilians who are trapped in Rafah.

 

 As you said, these people moved twice or three times at least.

 

 Would you accept returning these IDPs to the north, especially women and children?

 

 Because the Israelis seem to be opposing that.

 

 And by moving people from Homs way to an area that's being cleared and declared by Netanyahu as no military operations there and Hamas is not viable, so why not allowing these people to go back to their original homes and not left from there?

 

 How many livable homes in the north do you think that there are in Khan Yunis?

 

 How many – actually, you talked about being safe and all that kind of thing.

 

 So it's — I mean, the destruction is pretty massive.

 

 Can you follow it up for me?

 

 The second question is Mr.

 

 Kirby said on Sunday that – and let me quote him so I'll be accurate.

 

 He said, the U.S. has not found any evidence of Israel violating international law.

 

 He refers to the State Department.

 

 He said the State Departments have a normal process where if there's an incident reported, they will follow up, and they concluded – you, the State Department concluded – that Israel has not violated international law.

 

 So my question to you is, in the face of all the human – or the organization – humanitarian organizations working in Gaza, including MSF yesterday, that they said Israel has targeted not just aid workers but doctors and journalists.

 

 And Chef Jose Andres said as well that Israel has committed a crime against humanity.

 

 Why the U.S. is not conducting an investigation regarding – regardless of these incidents?

 

 A full investigation like you asked for – like you asked to be conducted in Ukraine after the Russians invaded?

 

 Matt, I want to follow Matt's line of questions regarding the steps that have been taken by Israel to elevate and ease this humanitarian situation.

 

 And I cannot but think that this because of what's been reported, the threat of change of U.S. policy toward Israel during the call between President Biden and Prime Minister Netanyahu.

 

 But don't you think, because you've been pressed here by press and by humanitarian organizations to do that early, a few weeks early, maybe a couple of months early, don't you think that you were a few – several steps behind?

 

 And if you acted this way by the – given this – by waving this wand toward Israel and they took the steps earlier, so many lives will be saved.

 

 But my question was, don't you think that you – the process is slow?

 

 If you push harder by threatening earlier, you will get better results?

 

 Because it seems that the Israelis are susceptible to you when you wave this one.

 

 My last question is about the Iranians threatening to retaliate on the airstrike that struck their consulates in Damascus by attacking Israel directly.

 

 The Israelis say that they are – put steps to ready themselves for such a strike.

 

 Are you worried that this will ignite the whole region if it happened?

 

 It's a diplomatic facility, and there were also IRGC folks in there.

 

 Would that justify an attack?

 

 And just one more question on this Iran threat that has been discussed by U.S. officials.

 

 There are some reports that the expectation is that the target is expected to be in Israel.

 

 Thank you so much, Matt.

 

 I just wanted to follow up on Gaza humanitarian aid issue.

 

 You said that these setbacks by Israel should have happened months ago.

 

 So I'm wondering if those steps could have been taken months ago, but Israel did not take them.

 

 Does that mean Israel was blocking the aid?

 

 Because we had this discussion before in this room, and you said you didn't think that they were blocking.

 

 Thank you, Matt.

 

 Netanyahu said the military is preparing to move more than million Palestinian civilian out of Rafah and then carry out an attack.

 

 Would you please clarify – you repeated many times confirmed that the Palestinian will not be evacuated.

 

 Also, how and where will they evacuate – to Cyprus, to Egypt?

 

 Regarding – excuse me – regarding the humanitarian assistance, in fact, Muslim citizens of Gaza and Christian citizens of Gaza are not protected, and even the animals are not protected.

 

 How many Palestinian citizens should be killed, whether by fire or starvation, so you can seriously intervene?

 

 Why United States could not link the providing of military aid to with allowing humanitarian aid into Gaza?

 

 But you could put conditions – to put conditions into — I have already – I've spoken to that.

 

 News just broke that Hamas has rejected the latest ceasefire proposal from Israel.

 

 Any reaction?

 

 And while the administration has pressed Israel to get humanitarian aid into Gaza, isn't the famine and food insecurity ultimately Hamas's fault?

 

 Just I want to follow up on the strike on the Iranian consulate in Damascus.

 

 You've been saying that you don't want to – you didn't want to expand the war, and you conveyed message to the Iranian that you don't want the escalation.

 

 But what about your conversation with the Israeli?

 

 Did you tell them on whether this was an escalation?

 

 What's your position?

 

 As you might guess, I'm sure all of us want to start on the situation with the foreign aid workers who were tragically killed in Gaza.

 

 What do you make of the Israeli explanation of it?

 

 Prime Minister Netanyahu says it was unintentional and that they're investigating.

 

 And is that enough at this point?

 

 What is the United States looking for as well to do?

 

 No, I mean, this obviously isn't something that's happened before.

 

 Not exactly the situation, but there was the tragedy with people searching, receiving aid who were killed.

 

 If you go even before October 7th, there was the investigation into the killing of Shirin al-Badakhli.

 

 I mean, do you think that the Israeli investigations and the U.S. responses have had an impact, particularly the U.S. responses?

 

 I mean, do you think that just saying that you're going to wait for the Israeli investigation for the Israelis to act has had an impact?

 

 Just one more following up on that, but I mean, the President himself laid out this aid plan at the State of the Union.

 

 It was quite a – the United States was very visible in that, saying that – talking about the Purple Pier and everything.

 

 What does this say about that?

 

 I mean, is this ruining the U.S. efforts to get aid in?

 

 I mean, obviously, the U.S. can still do it, but tons of aid that were supposed to go in have already gone back because of this killing.

 

 Matt, there's been reporting in Israeli media about how the attack has taken place.

 

 Basically, it said the drone fired three missiles in succession and like each of them sort of struck one of the cars.

 

 And Reuters just, we have an interview with Jose Andres actually just on our wire.

 

 And he told us that the Israeli army targeted the convoy, quote, systematically car by car.

 

 And, you know, President, Prime Minister Netanyahu talked about this being a mistake and unintentional.

 

 How do you reconcile those two, the reporting and what Jose Andres is saying and what Prime Minister Netanyahu is saying?

 

 And given there was an American citizen killed in this attack, why isn't the United States conducting its own investigation?

 

 But I mean, could the administration consider sort of Department of Justice can do that, FBI can do that?

 

 And I just wanna ask the evergreen question.

 

 We've reported and other media outlets have reported as well that the administration is looking at furthering a big $18 billion aircraft package, weapons package to Israel.

 

 We reported that earlier this week.

 

 And looking at President Biden's statement last night saying like, this is not a one-off.

 

 And you've just talked about the number of humanitarian workers who've been killed.

 

 There are a lot of journalists who've been killed.

 

 Doesn't this kind of like given the accusations of disregard for non combatants by the IDF, doesn't this kind of incident make US stop and reconsider its arms sales or military aid to Israel?

 

 I'm not entirely sure how the delivery date for this, being down the line four years, five years, has an impact on your decision-making today because you're making the decision today with the information that you know there are various accusations about Israeli military's conduct in Gaza.

 

 Elsewhere, there are incidents that the State Department is looking at whether Israel has breached international rules, like humanitarian law, so I'm not entirely sure how relevant it is that the delivery of those are down the line, but just one last thing.

 

 You said a minute ago, so you talked about misidentification.

 

 Are you referring to the video of Israel chief of staff, or are you?

 

 I mean, and also, is that what Israel, is that what U.S. government have been told, that it was a misidentification?

 

 But, I mean, that they took the strike, but they didn't, they weren't aware that it was a WCK convoy.

 

 Okay, and one on just timing.

 

 I know you say swift investigation.

 

 Can you give us any more detail, whether this is days, weeks?

 

 Just one more on this, and then a question on the Benny Gantz comments from today.

 

 So, has the government of Israel shared with you any information that proved that this was, what they're saying, a misidentification, or are you just trusting that?

 

 Benny Gantz, Israeli War Cabinet minister, said today that he would call for parliamentary elections in September.

 

 What is the U.S. response to that?

 

 Would you support such elections taking place?

 

 On the investigation, Matt, do you believe that Israel's record in investigating itself is a good record?

 

 They have come up with good results in the past.

 

 I mean, there have been — there's been so many investigations.

 

 Can you cite one investigation where they actually came clean?

 

 Now, I have a couple more.

 

 On the misidentification, so when they say misidentification, did that tell us that they were actually after three-car convoy that had Hamas fighters in it and they were targeting?

 

 Or, you know, I mean, movement of fighters by cars, which is obviously unusual, and so on.

 

 Is that what you think they meant?

 

 Okay, so, you know, there's been about 196, I believe, 196 aid workers killed in Gaza, 175 UN workers, including UNRWA workers and so on.

 

 So I want to ask you, do you believe there's any kind of, you know, what is different about this strike?

 

 The fact that this particular strike was, you know, owned or headed by a famous chef and had citizens of Canada and Australia and Britain and the United States and not just Palestinians?

 

 Is that the only difference for this strike, to garner such a great deal of space and to engender, you know, the anger of the president of the United States of America and your anger?

 

 Last question on Rafah and the meeting that took place on Monday.

 

 It seems that there are deep differences between the United States of America and Israel on the Rafah invasion.

 

 Can you update us on what's going on?

 

 What does the United States expect Israel to do?

 

 Because we're talking about, you know, movement of maybe one and a half million people.

 

 So you said that we have seven dead international aid workers and you want to avoid seeing more killing in the future.

 

 So therefore, you said that you asked Israel to coordinate better and to establish deconflicting zones.

 

 But this is contradict with what exactly happened with World Central Kitchen.

 

 They coordinated with the Israelis to every detail and they went into exactly the deconflicting zone on the beach and yet they were targeted.

 

 So how this applies now?

 

 What difference does it make?

 

 Okay, so as a result of the killing of the World Central Kitchen staff, also ANIRA, which is an American NGO, suspended their work in delivering aid to Gaza.

 

 And before that, UNRWA was targeted by the Israelis of saying there is some people who are involved in the October 7th attack and we're still waiting for the investigation.

 

 So practically, three of the vital organizations providing aid to Gaza either suspended their work or they don't have enough fund to help the people who are starving in Gaza.

 

 Some people believe that this actually is a kind of a strategy on behalf of the Israelis to use food as a weapon of war and to prevent Gazans of receiving the aid and therefore forcing them to leave as some kind of strategy by Prime Minister Netanyahu.

 

 Do you see, can you entertain this for a second, this thought that actually this is not a mistake or unintentional or haphazard or what accident, but actually there is some kind of thought process that get into it by the Israelis?

 

 Just wanna follow up Said's questions on the nearly 200 aid workers killed in Gaza and your difference in your approach.

 

 President Biden yesterday expressed outrage over the killing of seven aid workers from the world's central kitchen in Gaza.

 

 Is the administration also outraged by the killing of nearly 200 aid workers, 100 journalists, 30,000, 33,000 Palestinians, mostly women and children?

 

 Are you outraged by this too?

 

 Just one more on that.

 

 Biden also in the same statement said that Israel has not done enough to protect aid workers and civilians, and you yourself said that you have repeatedly urged Israel to take some steps to minimize civilian harm in Gaza, and if there are steps that Israel needs to take and Israel chooses not to take them, doesn't it mean that Israel is deliberately attacking aid workers and civilians?

 

 How do you explain the killing of 33,000 Palestinians then?

 

 Follow up on the several questions about the value of investigations after actions by the IDF.

 

 You've called numerous times for investigations after Palestinians have been killed in recent years.

 

 Some of those have been U.S. citizens.

 

 In the last two years, Omar Assad, February 2022, found dead after being detained by Israeli soldiers.

 

 You called for a thorough criminal investigation, full accountability.

 

 Shereen Abu Akhla, as we know, May 2022, a U.S. citizen.

 

 You called for a full investigation.

 

 June 2023, Omar Khatyn, a U.S. resident in Tur Masaya, which is a town full of U.S. passport holders in the West Bank, you called for full accountability and justice.

 

 I haven't, you know, what, are you satisfied with the outcome of those three investigations for a start?

 

 And then what should we read into your call for an investigation in this case?

 

 I mean, Beth Salem, which is a very well-respected Israeli human rights group, several years ago said it would stop cooperating with military investigations in Israel because in its words, they are nothing more than a masquerade.

 

 Do you see that view?

 

 Do you have any sympathy with it?

 

 Matt, I just wanna follow up on Saeed and Rabieh question regarding this attack on the WCK convoy is not an isolated incident.

 

 Been attacks on convoys before, on honor was storage facilities, people queuing for aid in Gaza have been also targeted by the Israeli forces.

 

 And now you're calling them for investigation, you're calling them to make some changes so this incident doesn't happen again.

 

 But don't you think that the US soft approach toward Israel in this war also led them to get away with it, for example?

 

 But do you think it was better enough, let's say?

 

 I mean, the northern Gaza is in the verge of famine already.

 

 Aids are not coming in for a while now, for months.

 

 You're pressing the Israelis counterparts.

 

 It seems that doesn't yield results anymore.

 

 The last, my last question about the statement that issued by the White House yesterday on the President Biden statement regarding this attack on the latest attack on the convoy.

 

 The President sounded outraged and heartbroken and blamed Israel that they are not doing enough to protect aid workers.

 

 Does this language signal a change in policy or just a statement regarding this incident?

 

 Two questions, basically.

 

 First question, specifically for you being diplomat, do you think so attacking diplomatic missions and diplomats in an area that is dedicated or declared a diplomatic mission?

 

 It sounds like U.S. have no condemnation on this Israeli strike.

 

 It will be another continuation for Israel and other signal to continue this effort, because the attack where it happened, that location is very adjacent to other missions, like Canadian mission is very next to it.

 

 So what is your comment?

 

 And my other question is regarding the United States position on the strong support to Indian opposition as the State Department issued many statements in the support of Delhi Chief Minister KJ Val and then the asset phasing of Congress.

 

 So it seems like United States have very strong position to condemning the attempts to silence the opposition in India.

 

 But regarding the political prisoners in Pakistan, specifically the female prisoners, that are still behind the bars for many political charges.

 

 So why so strong position for Indian opposition and nothing for the Pakistani political prisoners?

 

 It's been 110 days since Gerdo Asimov was killed, 65 days since six-year-old Tenderjeeva's family, the medics said disabled, were killed.

 

 Per Sean and other colleagues' earliest question, today should be Shereen Abulakle's birthday, our Palestinian-American colleague and my dad killed in 2022.

 

 So I'm wondering if you have updates on not just the investigations, but actual accountability measures in response to these.

 

 And if not, how can this administration's approach of relegating things to months-long investigations while not changing policy, all as thousands more are killed, be a justified approach?

 

 When I was a boy and I would see scary things in the news, my mother would say to me, look for the helpers.

 

 You'll always find people who are helping.

 

 I imagine you and your colleagues have come into this work, hopefully, trying to be helpers, too.

 

 So I wonder, what's the United States' message to the helpers in the world, trying to help people in Gaza, given those helpers are being killed with American military aid?

 

 Just a couple of other things.

 

 Is it State Departments or is it U.S. understanding that there is already famine in Gaza?

 

 You have warned of imminent risk, but is it your understanding that there is already famine in Gaza?

 

 And two more things.

 

 Palestinian Authority wants a vote at the UN Security Council in April to become a full member.

 

 Does the U.S. oppose this?

 

 And if necessary, would you veto it?

 

 Okay, and the final thing is Kirby said, sorry, I'm almost done.

 

 Kirby said yesterday on the podium that State Department has not found that Israel's military conduct has violated international humanitarian law.

 

 His comments sounded conclusive and definitive.

 

 So I just want to follow up and clarify, does the State Department have such a definitive conclusion that it has looked at all of the incidents raised so far and all of the incidents and the review on those have been concluded, and as a result, you have a definitive assessment that no violations have occurred?

 

 I'm sure you are.

 

 I won't – never mind.

 

 Let's just start with Gaza.

 

 Two things.

 

 One, in terms of the Secretary's involvement or the State Department's involvement with this meeting, virtual meeting today, can you tell us, with the Israelis, about Rafah?

 

 Well, was there anything specifically that the State Department wanted to convey to get across to the Israelis in this meeting?

 

 And then secondly, I presume that you've seen some of the images, video, and still photos, plus witness accounts and written witness accounts of what happened at the Shifa Hospital.

 

 Do you have anything to say about that?

 

 And then when you say – and this will be it for me – when you say Israel needs a sustainable, long-term strategy for Gaza, have you seen one yet from them?

 

 And — Yeah, but presumably the meeting today is just about Rafah, right?

 

 So a political path to two states.

 

 But have you seen one from the Israelis that is even short of two states?

 

 Just to follow up on al-Shifa, Israel has given some numbers – 200 militants have been killed, 900 suspected militants detained, of whom some 500 have been identified as Hamas.

 

 Does the United States have any assessment that these numbers are correct?

 

 Do you have an assessment on how many civilians around that operation have been killed?

 

 Moving on to this strike, this suspected Israeli strike in Damascus, do you have anything to say on this?

 

 Do you know if the United States was given a heads-up by Israel about this?

 

 Two final things.

 

 This is about last – this is from last week about these authorizations of these bombs to Israel.

 

 They have been approved a long time ago by Congress, but it looks like the State Department has decided to do the transfers last week, the week before.

 

 Why was that decision taken, like, recently?

 

 So I'm going to have to combine my questions now that you've taken up so much time to answer.

 

 And my final thing on this is the Secretary and a lot of senior officials from this administration basically said far too many Palestinians have been killed.

 

 But when you go and make the – and we know that the administration's policy hasn't changed, it is not conditioning weapons to Israel, but when you go and make such an authorization of the transfer in recent weeks, even if the actual weapons transfer has been approved years ago, don't you think that is going to damage the weight of your word, your credibility, and basically your sincerity in saying that far too many Palestinians have been killed?

 

 Just to follow up, a 2,000-pound bomb is self-defense, in your opinion?

 

 But they've been using those in Gaza before, in the beginning in Gaza.

 

 Just a last question on the – back on Damascus.

 

 I understand it's a bit early, but obviously, you don't deny there was a strike by Israel on the consulate and the annex in the embassy of Iran in Damascus?

 

 But it's definitely escalatory.

 

 Thank you.

 

 Thank you, Matt.

 

 Now, you said that Hamas returned to Ashifa Hospital.

 

 There were some 800 fighters and so on and all these things.

 

 Now, is that – you are citing the Israeli narrative or you have your own independent information?

 

 I mean, they showed names and Hamas fighters in Ashifa Hospital.

 

 I'm not interrupting.

 

 I'm trying to understand what you're saying.

 

 Okay, so you are certain that the reason that Israel went into Ashifa Hospital one more time is because Hamas fighters were there and not hundreds of civilians that have taken refuge there.

 

 And you believe that Israel has achieved that goal now by eliminating Hamas, or are we likely to see them go back to Ashifa Hospital again?

 

 Yeah, just bear with me.

 

 A couple more questions.

 

 But why do you think, in your opinion, what value is there strategically for Israel to burn all the buildings, destroy all the equipment, destroy every last x-ray machine and everything in the hospital, and not keep it?

 

 If their fight is with the fighters, why must you destroy – as they left, there was no fighting when they left, just to burn the buildings and burn the things and destroy everything.

 

 Well, Hamas shouldn't be, as far as Israel and the United States is concerned, should not be there, period.

 

 Well, okay, but that's a different issue altogether.

 

 Okay.

 

 Let me ask you something.

 

 You talked about the 2,000-pound bombs and so on.

 

 You think that it is really wise to send it at this time, you know, when this far in this battle, you know, or this war, it has only been used in Gaza.

 

 I mean, I know you say that Israel is surrounded by, you know, people that wish it would and so on.

 

 But in fact, it's surrounded by Egypt, with very good relations with Israel, surrounded by Jordan, with good relations with Israel, surrounded by Syria, that is obviously embroiled in its own civil war and can't even defend itself against attacks, as we have seen today.

 

 So, by the contrary, Israel is surrounding Hamas, and it's using these weapons to do that.

 

 And in fact, I mean, you know, the F-35, to the best of my knowledge, I could be wrong, has only been used in combat against the people of Gaza.

 

 So, how could you justify sending all these weapons when you have the most hapless people, probably unearthed, you know, destroyed, moving from one place to another and so on, and you send these weapons to sort of just finish the job or continue the job?

 

 What logic is there in sending those weapons?

 

 Lastly, lastly, please, just one last one, if I may.

 

 Are you aware of a report made or a conversation that Israeli officers made to an interview with Haaretz, where they say that Israel established some sort of an illusory, you know, kill zone line and so on?

 

 Are you aware of that?

 

 And they actually kill whoever walks or moves about in that area?

 

 There's reporting that Israel submitted a plan to the that would essentially dismantle UNRWA, transferring staff and funds to World Food and some other organizations.

 

 Have you seen that plan?

 

 Do you support it?

 

 Matt, today the Knesset passed a law, 70 to 10, voting to pave the way for the closure of all al-Jazeera offices inside Israel.

 

 I'm just wondering if you have a comment on that.

 

 Our assessment with that passage of this law and previous incidents to our crew in Gaza that this, like, enhanced our suspicion from the beginning that our crews were actually targeted, not by mistake or by – do you – does this trouble you that a media organization just becomes the target of Israel and become part of the targets in this war?

 

 Just to get back to the meeting between U.S. and Israeli officials, why is this happening virtually?

 

 But I mean, there's an important diplomatic element, because we know – I mean, Benjamin Netanyahu said in press conference yesterday that he pulled the delegation traveling to send a message because of the UN Security Council vote.

 

 So it will worry people that on such an important issue, and it's not a long flight from Tel Aviv, that this meeting is not happening in person.

 

 I mean, what does that say about your ability to persuade the Israelis on the issue of an invasion of Rafah when you haven't been able to persuade them even to fly to Washington?

 

 Do you think you can persuade them?

 

 I mean, this – so far this doesn't feel like a huge success of your argument because you've been saying for weeks you don't support a ground invasion of Rafah.

 

 The Israeli prime minister has been saying for weeks they will go in.

 

 And just one more question on Israel.

 

 I understand the regular course of business when it comes to arms sales, of course, Israel, any other country.

 

 But I'm just trying to understand if you're saying that these weapons were promised, they were approved, the process went through, and now they're going forward.

 

 Is that regular process being examined at all, given what's going on in the Israel-Hamas war, or not at all?

 

 So all of those orders that have been approved will go forward?

 

 QUESTION If Israel wants them, they'll go forward.

 

 Thank you.

 

 You referenced Iran a couple of times just in the past 10, 15 minutes.

 

 It seems like the – their proxy groups in Iraq have attacked – conducted an attack against Iliad in Israel.

 

 So despite everything that the U.S. is trying to do to contain the war to just Gaza Strip, it's – Iran is doing the opposite.

 

 Now, what options are you – could there be, besides diplomatic options, that are really not going anywhere?

 

 How much confidence do you have in the Iraqi Government to contain them?

 

 Because the foreign minister was here, the prime minister is supposed to be coming, and it hasn't – the government hasn't really been able to deliver.

 

 In your answer, Matt, to me and a few others on the weapons thing, you mentioned the threat from Hezbollah, like on Israel and all that.

 

 So were you trying to suggest that in the course of this latest authorization for the transfer, did you get any assurances from Israel that it's not going to use these – like in its offensive in Gaza, but it's only going to use these against Hezbollah?

 

 Right.

 

 Yes, but just to be sure, there has been no assurances.

 

 United States has not sought any assurances from Israel just in the wake of this or just before this transfer.

 

 Like, you can use it in this place and you can't use it in that place.

 

 No, I'm just wondering if you had the option.

 

 Final thing, I promise.

 

 Are you expecting today's talk to feature at all the humanitarian plan that Israel is supposed to present to you?

 

 Just a follow-up on this discussion on Lebanon.

 

 You've been saying you are trying to resolve the issue on the northern border diplomatically.

 

 You've been successful so far, but are you concerned that now it's been escalating for the last two weeks?

 

 Is the risk higher now?

 

 One more question.

 

 During the Secretary's visit to the region, can you confirm the reports that the Arab ministers gave him an Arab proposal on how – on the day after and on the establishment of a Palestinian state within three years?

 

 Thanks, Matthew.

 

 Can you confirm that next week an Israeli delegation is going to come to Washington in person?

 

 Will Secretary Blinken participate in that?

 

 And regarding the likely shuttering of Al Jazeera in Israel, what the Israeli government has said over the years is that the channel has been known to instigate violence, and it's just – obviously, it's a propaganda arm of Qatar.

 

 What do you make of those pushbacks?

 

 Once – I have one follow-up on Said's question about the reports of kill zones in Gaza.

 

 You said that you haven't seen evidence of such a thing.

 

 But we've seen, for instance, the two Palestinians who were waving white flags killed just days ago.

 

 We've seen repeated reports of Israeli snipers killing people outside of hospitals, people afraid to even walk into the streets to save people who are bleeding out.

 

 So it seems understandable to say we've seen reports, Israel denied it, we'll look into it.

 

 But to outright say there's not evidence of Israel establishing some form of this kind of practice, does that seem preliminary to say that kind of thing?

 

 And then on al-Shifa Hospital, I know you've talked at some length about it, but I'm just wondering – we've gone from months ago the idea of Israeli forces targeting hospitals to being outlandish, to now they've done this attack on al-Shifa, and statedly and ostensibly they say that they've killed Hamas terrorists.

 

 Nevertheless, we've seen reports of kids, women found gruesomely killed, executed, reportedly even a surgeon who was there for 172 days, excuse me, treating patients killed.

 

 And some victims we can't even confirm their identity because of the state of their bodies.

 

 So I'm wondering, given this attack, given the evident lack of care for civilians, given that we can't get an update on investigations into, for instance, the now two-month killing of Hind, the medic sent to save her, how can the U.S. approve any action into Rafah, a slice of land where 1.1 million Palestinians are seeking refuge?

 

 If a targeted attack on a hospital looks like this, what would an attack in any form on Rafah look like?

 

 But that's sort of my point.

 

 Just one small follow-up on that, if you'll allow.

 

 I guess this just gets to a broader question about what does the U.S. see as sort of the path out of here?

 

 Is it political?

 

 Because what does it mean for Israel to defend itself ongoingly?

 

 Is it a matter of eradicating everyone who is associated with Hamas?

 

 Because that, I don't know, doesn't necessarily seem like a goal that has led to the protection of civilians up to this point.

 

 Maybe I have to switch topics and let somebody else answer the DPRK.

 

 I was wondering if you have a reaction to the ICJ, the International Court of Justice, just today on Israel, saying that Israel must ensure urgent humanitarian assistance and that famine has already set in in Gaza.

 

 Just one more for me.

 

 I know you just said that you want time to review it, but is it the – the word binding again – but the International Court of Justice, is it the view of the United States that Israel must comply with this, that it must do more?

 

 I see.

 

 We might come back to this, but just on – do you have a reaction on the new Palestinian cabinet that's been announced?

 

 Is it – what do you think about it?

 

 Because the U.S. has called for reform of the Palestinian Authority.

 

 Looking at the list and the fact that a new cabinet has been announced, is this something that the United States welcomes?

 

 So let me – You also said that you disagree with the position itself, that you don't approve having that position in the United Nations.

 

 Why not?

 

 So let me ask you something.

 

 Is there a reasonable definition of genocide that would include what happened in Bosnia or to the Rohingya and, at the same time, exclude what is happening in Gaza?

 

 And finally, I promise, an Israeli officer – That wasn't too – that's not too bad.

 

 No, no.

 

 Anyway, an Israeli officer said that Israel engaged in waste of – or overbombing and so on.

 

 He said we could have done the same thing with 10 percent of the kind of destruction that they levied on Gaza.

 

 Have you seen that report?

 

 No.

 

 He's saying that Israel engaged in obvious overkill in terms of the amount of bombing, the waste, the destruction of urban areas and so on.

 

 They could have done exactly the same thing with 10 percent of the destruction.

 

 Matt, I don't know if you saw the report in the Politico two hours ago about the day after Gaza, the day after, and the talks between the U.S. and regional partners.

 

 And according to the report quoting U.S. official, that there is two ideas that gaining traction.

 

 One is to form a multinational task force, and the second one is to form a peacekeeping Palestinian force.

 

 But my question is, if you can answer to this, that is the Palestinian Authority included in these talks?

 

 We – and you said before, Fred, on this podium that countries in the region are committed to Gaza the day after, but they want something from Israel to be committed, for example, to the two-state solution and all that.

 

 Israeli leadership still don't want to commit to this.

 

 Is there any update on your talk with the Israelis about that?

 

 Do you – are you being able to push them beyond their public stand?

 

 What role will the Palestinian Authority play in the operation of the pier in Gaza in two or three weeks?

 

 But do you want the PA to play any role there?

 

 It is said that the Israelis have agreed to actually provide security for the operation of the pier.

 

 Are you aware of that?

 

 A couple weeks ago, I asked you about repeated instances of Israeli soldiers rifling through and parading women's underwear, especially in light of ongoing allegations of sexual abuse against Israeli soldiers and allegations that they tortured and sexually abused UNRWA staffers in order to coerce false confessions.

 

 I'm wondering – since then, we've heard troubling details of these allegations, including soldiers sticking electrified rods up people's anuses.

 

 We've continued to see not single-digit but now piles of photos and videos of soldiers parading through women's underwear.

 

 So I'm wondering what are the updates on those instances we talked about a few weeks ago, and what is the update now that this keeps seemingly happening unabated?

 

 And then on the sexual abuse allegations, any sort of update on?

 

 And then just on the assurances, you know, earlier you said after receiving assurances from Israel that they're not violating humanitarian law.

 

 The U.S. so far has not seen proof of that.

 

 Wondering what these assurances look like, because, you know, we have all seen proof from the International Court of Justice, from the United Nations, and from footage, especially the past few weeks, over and over again of Israel seemingly targeting civilians, hospitals, churches, footage even yesterday showing Israeli forces seeming to execute unarmed Palestinians waving white flags.

 

 They're blocking aid to the point that the U.S. is trying to build a pier to deliver aid as if Israel is a belligerent and not an ally.

 

 So with all this, how is Israel not violating humanitarian law?

 

 Are these assurances just Israel saying that they promise they're not, and they evidently continue to do so?

 

 I'm wondering if you have any reaction and comments about Hamas leader visit to Iran and what he said about Israel.

 

 He said that Israel is losing the international community support, and he took the UN Security Resolution as an evidence that Israel is losing support.

 

 Do you have any reaction and comment on that?

 

 And do you have any sense that Israel is losing the international community support because they are not following the UN Security Council resolution?

 

 The United States approval of limited operation in Rafah acts as a green light for Israel to start a military operation in Rafah.

 

 This is seen as a step back in the U.S. stand, which affecting its image and credibility.

 

 What's your comment, please?

 

 Excuse me.

 

 There is a guarantee that a civilian will not affected, will not dangerous their life?

 

 Excuse me.

 

 I want to ask you about the mission of the American military delegation to Tel Aviv, whether as an alternative of visit of the Israeli military delegation to Washington, and what the idea they carry.

 

 And there is headlines of – for this delegation.

 

 I have a couple of other questions, but I'll just go to others on Gaza.

 

 Can we just – there are some reports that Israelis feel that dependent – their ability to depend on the United States has now decreased because of the abstention that the Security Council vote yesterday.

 

 Can you just speak to that and the relationship right now?

 

 And Netanyahu's office is indicating that the U.S. not vetoing the resolution actually hampered or harmed the hostage talks.

 

 Is that the U.S. understanding?

 

 Just one last question on this.

 

 I understand that U.S. officials say that there are domestic political concerns for Prime Minister Netanyahu when he went forward with canceling these Rafah meetings here in the United States but it does have a damaging effect on the U.S.-Israel relationship as well.

 

 And now he's going even further and saying that this move is harming hostage talks.

 

 Are there going to be ramifications for Israel for pulling back on these talks and for now blaming the U.S. for hostage talks not moving forward quickly enough?

 

 Just to clarify, what does it mean to say that it should be, that the resolution should be implemented?

 

 From the Israeli point of view, I guess they would say there's no deal to be taken at the moment.

 

 So how can they implement?

 

 Sure, I wonder if we can just talk about the meeting with the defense minister yesterday, the Israeli defense minister.

 

 Did he come with specific requests in terms of more arms that the U.S., that Israel wants the U.S. to provide for the continued operation in Gaza?

 

 So you've got an ally coming asking for more military support.

 

 You've already given quite a lot of military support during this operation, during this conflict, but they're also basically planning to go ahead with an operation that you're telling them is unwise.

 

 Are you saying, you know, your acceptance of these requests for future arms provisions is gonna be conditioned in some way on whether you listen to us on Rafah or not?

 

 Wondering on Rafah.

 

 I mean, you've been very clear from the very beginning that you don't dictate policy or operations to Israel.

 

 You've said that numerous times.

 

 You said you're not involved in the military planning.

 

 Here, you're telling them not to do a major offensive in Rafah, but you're giving them or want to talk to them about alternatives, whether they may be counterterrorism, what have you, I don't know specifically, but by doing that, you would get directly involved in the operations that were to take place in Rafah, and potentially, there could be more civilian deaths and what have you.

 

 So in that case, you would be directly involved.

 

 How big of a problem is that?

 

 Well, then either one of two things.

 

 Either you gave very bad advice because you have 30,000 civilians who got killed, or they didn't listen to your advice.

 

 So what about Rafah?

 

 You think they would, are they actually listening to what you're saying?

 

 Because they said, you know, if we don't have the U.S. on board, we're going it alone.

 

 A couple more questions.

 

 First of all, the Palestinian Red Cross just announced that an Amal Hospital in Khan units has been completely shut down.

 

 The Israeli army threw out the patients, the staff, and so on, and put, you know, dirt, whatever, and they closed it off, and so on.

 

 Are you aware of this?

 

 Will you look into an ML hospital situation?

 

 Okay, a couple more things.

 

 Now, on Rawal, I know that the largest contributor thus far has been the United States of America, so that's a big chunk, close to $350 million a year, maybe $400 million a year.

 

 It's, you know, I mean, these operations, not only in Gaza, but they are in Gaza, in the West Bank, in Lebanon, and in Jordan, and in Syria.

 

 How do you see this being replaced?

 

 Because, you know, obviously, nobody's going to shell out that kind of funding, and, you know, while the World Food Program and so on can provide food, they cannot replace UNRWA in terms of providing medical care, schools, all kinds of stuff that they do that they have uniquely done thus far.

 

 Because I have a follow-up on that.

 

 Just on your point about Israel being a sovereign country and the U.S. can't tell them what to do, back on May 19th, 2021, you have Joe Biden telling Netanyahu, his quote was, hey, man, we are out of runway here.

 

 It's over, and it was over.

 

 Ronald Reagan famously did the same back in 1982, told him it's over.

 

 Why can't he say it's over this time?

 

 Does that mean he supports the continuation of this war, even if it means going back to the U.S.? So we support Israel's ability to defeat Hamas.

 

 What is your assessment on those two Hamas battalions that the U.S. has said are so key to take out and that Israel has said are key to take out?

 

 What's the assessment on why Hamas wouldn't be able to just create new battalions in the absence of a political solution?

 

 Can the U.S. imagine Hamas or some version of it being a part of that political solution?

 

 I have a Pakistan question.

 

 U.S. allowed Gaza ceasefire, what does that mean for the war?

 

 That U.S. allowed Gaza ceasefire, what does that mean for the war?

 

 I want to go to the military aid.

 

 You've seen the reports that people drowned while trying to get to this aid, and previously the aid fell on the head of other people.

 

 There's still some difficulty in bringing convoys to the north in Gaza.

 

 Israelis still put a lot of restrictions on that.

 

 What your plan to ease this and prevent future incidents like that?

 

 But those tragedies, Matt, are man-made.

 

 They're not because of the nature or the geography of the region or whatever.

 

 They are because of the Israeli restrictions on letting aid to get in.

 

 This can easily be dealt with.

 

 How the USA look at the people, or like a human being that Israel arrested them.

 

 Around like 7,000 more have been arrested from Israel or by Israel in West Bank and in Gaza.

 

 Some of them like humiliated.

 

 Does USA look at them as hostage or are they like legally prison?

 

 Because Hamas now in the part of the negotiation is to exchange hostages, like to release some hostages from Israeli prisons and releasing some hostage at like Hamas, with Hamas.

 

 How USA look at those 7,000 people that USA arrested them and they humiliated them?

 

 The United States emphasized that release the hostages in Gaza is a priority.

 

 Why some of them were killed due to the Israeli bombing in different part?

 

 There is no safety peace, middle, north, south.

 

 And some were killed due to the hunger and thirst.

 

 Despite this, the United States still emphasized that the hostages issue is a priority.

 

 Don't you see U.S. appeared a large of, part of this responsibility because it's continued to supply IDF with the military aid?

 

 Yeah, we'll push on Israel and then I have like two, one.

 

 I'm kind of in a hurry, if you don't mind, Matthew.

 

 Yeah, just came in during the briefing, a statement from Senator Van Hollen regarding your comments yesterday about the National Security Memorandum 20.

 

 So he's seeking some clarity on, basically, what you said about this yesterday, have you determined, and what is the basis for determining that those assurances provided by Israel in line with the NSM-20 are credible and reliable?

 

 So to try to clarify that, to try to make sense of that a little bit.

 

 So you haven't reached the conclusion that Israel have violated international humanitarian law, but have you reached the conclusion that they haven't?

 

 That is, has any process concluded that they found that they haven't breached international humanitarian law?

 

 Given this war has been going on for nearly six months, then can we assume that there have been some incidents that have been fully assessed, that have taken place during this war that people might have seen?

 

 There's a few that have come up in this meeting, and there's been incidents that you've then raised with the Israelis.

 

 Have there been incidents that have gone through whatever black box process this involves and come out of the end with a sort of a green tick with the U.S. saying, we're fine with this?

 

 Can you say whether by May 8th, when you provide this report to Congress, would there be, will you be able to say something conclusively?

 

 So on Rafah, Matt, Israeli delegation is not coming here.

 

 How will the U.S. be able to present its alternative proposals to Israel since they're not going to be here this week?

 

 But, I mean, do you have a plan right now, like, when that would happen?

 

 Would that be over the phone?

 

 Would Secretary Blinken go?

 

 Would you try to – and also, has there been any communication with the Israeli Government at high level following this decision?

 

 Just one – a couple of other things.

 

 Just to be sure, so will the Secretary discuss with Defense Minister Gallant the alternatives that United States was going to – this – no.

 

 And I hope you don't call this a hypothetical.

 

 This is now very much a high possibility that everybody has the sense that whatever happens, regardless of you presenting alternative options or not, Israel will just go ahead with this offensive the way it sees it appropriate.

 

 They have said this publicly – actually, Prime Minister Netanyahu said it on the day that Secretary Blinken – we were there on Friday.

 

 We will go alone if need be.

 

 So what is the – is the United States going to try to stop it if that would be the case?

 

 So last week when you guys presented your resolution at the UN, there were complaints from people who said that it de-linked the ceasefire from the release of hostages, and the U.S. officials were rather vociferous in saying that that is not the case.

 

 However, what you guys abstained on today does appear to de-link them.

 

 Is that your understanding of the complaint?

 

 The other provisions you're referring to, is there something more than just a condemnation of Hamas?

 

 I'll refer to the human ambassador, Freddie Farhadi, for — Okay, but the abstention means that you're okay with it, you're willing to go along with it.

 

 And so what do you expect now to happen as a result of the passage of this resolution?

 

 So I think that — Do you expect that Israel is going to announce a ceasefire?

 

 It's – so — And that – do you expect that Hamas is going to release hostages?

 

 Just to put it in other words, I mean, do you expect – not just Israel, but Hamas – do you expect compliance with this resolution?

 

 You mentioned it's nonbinding.

 

 Is it your expectation that Israel would actually – and Hamas, for that matter – would actually say, okay, look, here's a ceasefire and nothing wrong with it?

 

 I don't know what you said yesterday that Israel told him that they will no longer allow convoys to enter northern Gaza.

 

 I mean, if we add to this the fact that the UNRWA convoys are not allowed to enter northern Gaza, do you still believe – or is it still the U.S. assessment that Israel is not using food or assistance as a tool of war?

 

 The budget deal that was passed in the Congress also prevent you – prevent the United States Government from funding UNRWA.

 

 And we've been – you've been asked about this here in this – asking you on this podium before, and you said that you want to – you don't want to talk about something that didn't happen, but now it seems that it's happening.

 

 What is your plan to give aid to Gaza now that you cannot deal with UNRWA?

 

 One last question, Matt.

 

 I'm seeking if you have any comment about the video that Al Jazeera broadcast on Friday about Israeli drone attacking Palestinian – five men with drone missiles.

 

 I don't know if you see the video or not, but clearly in the video, at least from the way that we see it, they were unarmed, they look civilians, and they were targeted numerous times by rockets from a drone.

 

 A couple of follow-ups.

 

 Now, you were saying, I think in response to Omera, on – you will share with the Israelis ways to target Hamas without having a full invasion.

 

 Is that what you said, Said?

 

 You made that very clear.

 

 Does that mean that the United States will actually go into combat against Hamas?

 

 I mean, does it have – I mean, it's a non-binding resolution, right?

 

 So does it have – could it be like a step forward towards a bigger binding resolution?

 

 Is that how you see it?

 

 Now, a couple more things on UNRWA, respond to Ahmed's questions and so on on UNRWA.

 

 Now, Israel, with the new law that – defunding UNRWA has become law, they can say we don't want any UNRWA operations anywhere in Gaza or the West Bank, without – are really totally dependent on the UNRWA operation.

 

 I know you mentioned the World Food Program and so on, but it does not have the kind of mechanism and logistics in place and the history behind it that UNRWA has.

 

 So do you expect that the Israelis will just throw out UNRWA, lock, stock, and barrel?

 

 And lastly, I don't know if you're following up on the West Bank, the Israelis confiscate or ordered – issued to confiscate 3,000 – it's the largest in many decades and so on.

 

 Do you have any comment on that?

 

 Have you seen this report about some Israeli general saying that he had been told by a State Department official that there was incontrovertible evidence that IDF troops had raped Palestinian women?

 

 Can I go – another aspect of the Gaza – the issue of NSM-20.

 

 Could we discuss that in terms of what the communication has been so far with Israel?

 

 There's a deadline, of course.

 

 Over the weekend, has Israel presented assurances, if you want to call it that, and what's the U.S. response?

 

 So you – so the credible assurances – I know you're saying not just Israel but all these countries involved.

 

 I mean, obviously, there's a lot of interest in Israel in light of what's happening in Gaza.

 

 So it's the understanding of the United States that what Israel is doing, it's credible in terms of their assurances about U.S. weapons.

 

 I mean, you yourself have discussed the civilian casualties, the civilian toll there in Gaza.

 

 So I mean, is that consistent with that?

 

 I mean, so you think that even though there's a civilian toll, that the U.S. – that the use of U.S. weapons, that there are credible assurances that have been given there.

 

 Is that non-consistent at all to say that?

 

 Just off the back of that, do you have – does this response from 11 NGOs saying that Israel is in breach of the National Security Memorandum, does that feed in at all to the U.S. assessment?

 

 Is the U.S. listening to NGOs that have had experience or on-ground experience in Gaza?

 

 Counsel resolutions.

 

 Has there been any – is there any ongoing discussion about this at the UN between the U.S. representatives and others?

 

 And also, you know, the – I remember it was last November the UN Security Council also adopted a resolution calling for extended and urgent humanitarian pauses and corridors in Gaza, which was binding and which was rejected by Israel, like several other UN Security Council resolutions in the past.

 

 So will the U.S. encourage Israel to comply with resolutions and international law if Israel is not above the law?

 

 What will the Secretary discuss this afternoon with the Israeli defense minister?

 

 In a video statement that he made in front of the White House, Minister Gallant has said, we have no moral right to stop the war until we return all the abductees to their homes.

 

 Stopping the war in Gaza before a clear decision is made endangers Israel's security and may bring us closer to war from the north.

 

 Do you have any comment?

 

 And what about when he said that any ceasefire will endanger Israel's security and may bring us closer as Israelis to war from the north?

 

 I'll just put a fine point on the resolution.

 

 You said a couple times that you were surprised by the Israeli Government's reaction to the U.S. abstention, but we do know the U.S. was involved in negotiations basically up to the vote.

 

 So is there some kind of disconnect for that surprise to be there?

 

 Did Israel not say they were against this kind of resolution?

 

 Like combat or any military troops on the ground.

 

 But do you will have military advisors and intelligence advisor on border of Gaza?

 

 The second question on Palestine and resolutions.

 

 Like last question from you, like 10 days ago, you told me, like, there are many Arab countries recognize Israel, even the border issue.

 

 Israel doesn't have a border.

 

 So why USA doesn't, like, take initiative and recognize Palestine regardless this border issue and, like, recognize it as a state and that maybe, like, help people feel that there is a hope that they will have a country, whether it's, like, one-state solution, two-state solution.

 

 It is – it – Like, as Arab countries recognize Israel without borders, why you don't recognize Palestine without borders?

 

 So with Netanyahu canceling this delegation and promising to go into Raqqa anyway, is the U.S. taking any precautions to make sure that U.S. weapons are not going to be used in that invasion that he's promising?

 

 And real quickly – I don't know if you've seen this report, but Shinbaid has sort of threatened an American citizen who posted, I think, on social media about the location of Netanyahu's son.

 

 Is that okay?

 

 You talked about relationship with Poland, right?

 

 You called it ironclad.

 

 So how would you characterize the relationship with Israel right now?

 

 Is that ironclad as well?

 

 Do you think there was any negative impact after – the disagreements have been piling up, but today we saw Israel threatening to do something if U.S. policy wouldn't change or if U.S. wouldn't act in a certain way that it wants.

 

 And the U.S. didn't act that way and they followed through on their threat.

 

 And right now, a conversation that Washington thought was important is not happening.

 

 How would you – is there any lasting impact on this, or how would you characterize the relationship right now based on that?

 

 You said you'd expect to present the alternatives for Rafah at some point.

 

 I mean, are you – is the U.S. determined to present them no matter what?

 

 I guess what I'm trying to understand is do you think Israel is genuinely willing to hear them out, or did you get any sense from them that this week was a bit of an exercise and the UN resolution saga gave them an out out of this?

 

 There is a fear among Palestinians that the new land, the seaport, will be built by U.S. Army, will be used as U.S. military base, and also will be used to displace Palestinians from Gaza to other country, and also indicate that Rafah will be attacked, because the aid – it's much easier to bring it through the Egyptian borders, not from the port.

 

 And also not to take the gas in Gaza?

 

 The gas in Gaza, in the Sea of Gaza.

 

 The other question, please.

 

 Is it logic to cut off the fund for the UNRWA, regarding to UNRWA?

 

 Even if there is 12 employees, they are cooperate with Hamas in October 7th.

 

 There is more than 30,000 served employees in UNRWA.

 

 So is it logic to cut off the fund because this reason?

 

 Unless there is another reason to get rid of UNRWA and to release or to get rid of the refugees issues?

 

 I guess starting with Gaza.

 

-20, follow-up on that.

 

 I mean, there's – the clock is ticking for an Israeli response, and not just Israel, but can you say where things stand now?

 

 Has Israel submitted a response?

 

 Has there been any correspondence with the Department?

 

 The Secretary, of course, it's been announced he's going to continue on to Israel this week.

 

 Do you expect this to be a – to be one of the issues that's raised, I mean, this response on Addis Ababa?

 

 It's sort of hard for me to be forecast on, but the – Rafah, how much do you figure that will be in the discussions?

 

 I mean, there's – there have been calls from the U.S. quite explicitly to hold off without a plan for civilians in Rafah.

 

 Do you expect the Secretary to speak in depth about Rafah with the Israelis?

 

 Netanyahu has said that he will soon approve a plan for the evacuation of Palestinian civilians from fighting areas after having greenlit the military's operational plans for Rafah.

 

 Has the U.S. seen any of these plans yet?

 

 And sorry, just not looking for any assessment, but have you actually received these plans I'm not aware.

 

 Can we stick on Rafah for one second?

 

 Will the Secretary be in the conversations next week with administration officials, with Israelis who are coming here to discuss Rafah?

 

 And then just on Rafah generally, you guys have repeatedly talked about the importance of protecting the civilian population there, and given the outreach to Israel to discuss this plan in more detail, is the Administration in a position where you guys would be willing to provide resources to Israel to actually protect the civilian population if they're going to go ahead with this operation, or is the onus on Israel to do that with their own resources?

 

 Can I keep – then I'll go to you.

 

 Go ahead, Kamala.

 

 Still on Gaza, I assume?

 

 First, I want to ask about a colleague of mine in Gaza.

 

 He's, in fact, the bureau chief for Gaza for our newspaper and the editor-in-chief for the Electronic Virgin.

 

 His name is Mahmoud Abawad.

 

 Abawad, I'll send you his name and his picture.

 

 He was taken by the Israelis on Sunday night, Sunday to Monday morning, and we lost his whereabouts.

 

 We don't know anything about him.

 

 Then there was a picture published with him stripped naked along with other men and so on.

 

 So my point is, when will the United States demand and say that this cannot keep on going with journalists that are credentialed, that have worked there for year after year, decade after decade, well known to the Israelis, well known to the Israelis?

 

 Why do they keep taking them, targeting them, killing them, imprisoning them with impunity?

 

 Why is that not outrageous to you?

 

 Well, honestly, with that, this slap on the wrist kind of language is not going in any way, shape, or form to sway the Israelis or to pressure them or to make them do stuff.

 

 You should – everybody believes that a civilized country like the United States of America, who is basically the umbilical cord for Israel to do everything under the sun, can stand and say this should not go on.

 

 This should not go on.

 

 Not just we urge them not to harm them and so on.

 

 Because this is obviously – it's systematic.

 

 I mean, when you – when 150 – I don't know how many – 150 journalists are killed and the president taken and so on, this is not just something that happens.

 

 A couple of things on Rafah.

 

 It has been assessed that it is impossible to evacuate Gazans from Rafah.

 

 There's about 100 – 1.4 million and so on.

 

 And it seems that the United States is having meetings next week or the Administration will be having meetings with Don – with Ron Dermer and Hanigbi to discuss Rafah.

 

 So if you are convinced – and that's what we get, at least the suggestion is that it is really very difficult, very – it's impossible.

 

 Why cannot this be made like the statement or the standard U.S. position?

 

 The standard U.S. position that Rafah should not be invaded.

 

 After weeks – that's my last one – after weeks of this Rafah dilemma has been going on, is there a conceivable way to remove such a huge amount of people and move them safely in your view or anybody's view?

 

 So you said that you expect Israel to act in line with international law, and last month you announced publicly that you are assessing whether or not Israel is complying with the international law, and you are also assessing the use of U.S. weapons.

 

 In Israel's war, have you come to any conclusion and do you have any expectation of that, how long it might take?

 

 Yesterday, Human Rights Watch and Oxfam said that they submitted a memorandum to the U.S. Government regarding Israel's violations of international law, and this includes the misuse of U.S. weapons and blocking the U.S.-funded humanitarian aid.

 

 Have you – what is your assessment of this report?

 

 Because this includes, like, serious allegations like use of white phosphorus in Lebanon and Gaza and attacking ambulances, hospitals, and blocking the U.S. humanitarian aid.

 

 You and Matt have stood at the podium and you have confirmed that there are incidents that are raised with the Israelis every time something happens in Gaza that you guys want answers on.

 

 Every time a journalist is subjected to inhumane treatment, or there's evidence of that, or a journalist is killed in Gaza, is this treated the same way, where you go to the Israelis and you ask them what has happened?

 

 And is there a list of journalists that you guys have asked about, especially ones that are colleagues of ours in Gaza who are working with us on this story every day?

 

 And have you had any response from the Israelis on any individual case of a journalist in There are – there certainly are.

 

 And would this be – besides colleague, would this be a case in which you would raise it with the Israelis?

 

 If it's a CBS colleague in Gaza, we would be expecting that to be something that would make the list of things to be raised with the Israelis.

 

 And then I can turn to Haiti after Gaza.

 

 With regard to the ongoing operation on the largest hospital complex in Gaza, obviously it was the same location where the Israelis carried out another operation in November.

 

 So I just wonder if they're having to go back again, if there are concerns about the efficacy of their operations as they continue to go after what they say are terrorists in this hospital.

 

 Realizing, of course, it relates to other countries' policies, but do you have any comment on Canada saying they're going to stop arms shipments to Israel?

 

 Is there a discussion with the Canadians on this?

 

 I'm sure most people want to talk about Gaza first.

 

 But first, can I just ask you about Hong Kong?

 

 In Hong Kong, there's the approval of the legislature of the security law.

 

 Some rights groups have said that this will further clamp down on free expression, on media freedom.

 

 Does the United States have a reaction or any preview of things it might do as a result of this?

 

 Sure.

 

 Let me switch to Gaza, unless anybody else wants to talk about Hong Kong.

 

 A few things, but the UN Human Rights Chief, Mr.

 

 Turk, said today that Israel may be using food or a block of food as a weapon of war, which, of course, would be a war crime.

 

 Does the US have a reaction to his remarks?

 

 That actually sounds fairly specific.

 

 Is there a call for Israel to rapidly approve Mr.

 

 Lazzarini's entry?

 

 If we can come to the call between the president and Prime Minister Netanyahu yesterday.

 

 Obviously, that's the White House, but this speaks to broader US policy.

 

 So you've sort of talked about what's been talked about from this podium, that the offensive in Rafah would be disastrous.

 

 And that seems to be the warning is made even more strongly on this call yesterday.

 

 But Prime Minister Netanyahu said today they're determined to complete an elimination of the Hamas battalions in Rafah.

 

 There's no way to do that except by going in on the ground.

 

 So do you have any response to basically this pushback to what US government is trying to tell the Israelis?

 

 So in that mechanism, there will be, what you're saying is the US will have some suggestions of how, basically, Netanyahu is saying, it's not possible to do it without a ground operation.

 

 You're saying it is.

 

 So you're going to give them ideas on how to do it.

 

 Also, just going back to what National Security Advisor Sullivan was talking about yesterday, he implied that there hasn't been a response from Israel on the president's national security memorandum.

 

 I was wondering whether you could confirm whether or not Israel has responded with a letter to that effect and if you could give us a bit more information on the what next, when they respond.

 

 Can you confirm to whether or not Israel has responded?

 

 Thank you.

 

 Just following up on what Sean was asking on the famine, you're saying you don't see that famine is imminent in Gaza?

 

 I have a couple of other questions.

 

 The Wall Street Journal reported that Israel is going to expropriate or steal, as they called it, 16% of Gaza for a buffer zone.

 

 Is that something that you're aware of?

 

 Or is that something that would be acceptable to the administration, considering that the administration said time and again that Gaza should not be reduced in size?

 

 So the administration would never agree to the concept of a buffer zone.

 

 There was also an article in the Washington Post that said that the president and the administration knew very well early on, in a meeting on the 27th of October, that Israel was purposely targeting Palestinian civilians.

 

 Are you aware of that report?

 

 So you think that the administration was surprised by the amount of civilian casualties, was unaware that the Israelis were targeting purposely?

 

 And lastly, now, you said that you want to make sure, or the administration wants to make sure, that October 7th could never be repeated again, because it falls under Israel's right to defend itself and all that stuff.

 

 Now, we know that it's been reported in the last couple of days that the Israelis have distributed something like 100,000 pieces of small arms to settlers, around settlers, to basically defend themselves.

 

 My question to you, do Palestinians have the right to defend themselves?

 

 And in what form should the Palestinians defend themselves?

 

 I'm saying that the Palestinians are being assaulted time and time and time again.

 

 I mean, Israel attacked Gaza.

 

 Unlike what many people like to think, that the whole issue began on October 7th.

 

 Israel has struck Gaza time and time again for decades before that, right?

 

 What about the military raid night after night?

 

 They're going with half-tracks and sometimes helicopters, Apache helicopters and so on, and even with drones and armed assaults and so on.

 

 Do they have the right to defend themselves against such military assaults?

 

 Thank you, Vinant.

 

 There was a Washington Post investigation published today about the killing of our freelancers, Al Jazeera freelancers in Gaza, Mustafa and Hamza, and Washington Post also sought the help of experts in this investigation and they found out that the reasons the Israelis give for this, it happens on January 7th, is not consistent with evidence that they found.

 

 I don't know if you saw this report, but it shows, according to Washington Post, that there was no Israeli military presence around them, both of them, they were alone, they were conducting a story for us, and they were targeted and killed both in January 7th.

 

 And I remember, I was in Tel Aviv at that time, but I remember Matt was asked here in this room about if they reached to the Israeli partners for clarification, and he said that you did, and I'm asking you here, did you hear back from them?

 

 Yes, on Gaza.

 

 Vedant, while you are talking publicly about your disagreement with the Israeli, and this is a departure from your policy, is it because you don't have any kind of leverage?

 

 What are you trying to tell us?

 

 I mean, I'm not talking about this month.

 

 I'm talking lately.

 

 At the beginning, you were very reluctant in talking publicly about the disagreement.

 

 Just, I want to clarify why I'm asking this question because yesterday, Jake Sullivan, when he was laying down the arguments why the administration doesn't support a military operation in Rafah, he said instead, the Israeli, instead of stabilizing areas, they are planning.

 

 This kind of criticism didn't come publicly this way before.

 

 Two quick questions on the aid drops.

 

 Question number one, U.S. officials have said that the rations airdropped in Gaza are pork-free, but I wanted to ask, was it- Are what?

 

 Pork-free, like there's no pork products.

 

 But I wanted to ask, was it ensured that all of the food provided was halal, including preservatives and such?

 

 And then question number two is, it also seems that the packaging was labeled in English.

 

 Was there any Arabic language material provided in those aid rations, including food names and instructions?

 

 Yeah, I wondered if on Gaza, we could get your response to the IPC, the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification Assessment.

 

 Basically saying it's already, the situation, food shortages in the Gaza Strip have already exceeded famine levels.

 

 Mass death is now imminent.

 

 And basically, the UN says a ceasefire immediately is needed to avert this.

 

 Is that something that, given the severity that's laid out in this report, that the US might consider?

 

 You mentioned unhindered land convoys.

 

 So is it correct that Israel is hindering the flow of aid across the land border?

 

 But just to clarify, the 18 trucks, surely there could be more trucks if it wasn't for the Israelis who are controlling that border.

 

 Sorry, I'll hand over in a second, but this 96 gates, there was this one load of trucks that went through.

 

 Is that now like a regular crossing that trucks will be going through every day?

 

 Thank you, Vedant.

 

 A couple of questions.

 

 Today, the Israelis assassinated Faik Mamhour, who is one of the police commanders, and in fact, he was responsible for the distribution of the American flour a couple weeks ago, and so on, effectively and efficiently.

 

 Now, if I recall, there was, back in February, I think February 24th, the administration requested that Israel not assassinate the police force because they keep order and so on.

 

 Has Israel broken this?

 

 I have a couple more questions, just to follow up on Simon's.

 

 says that 13,000 children in Gaza have been killed.

 

 That is really, it's staggering, but it doesn't seem to have any end.

 

 I mean, this thing keeps going day after day.

 

 The Israelis keep going to the hospitals over and over and over again, and so we see them now at the Shifa complex.

 

 So what is your comment?

 

 I mean, could this go on for the next six months?

 

 So nothing short of Hamas laying down its arms will bring this war to an end, right?

 

 I want to ask about UNRWA, but just to follow up on your point now, I mean, are there any indications, has there been any assessment that Hamas is about to lay down its arms, that it's reaching the very end where they could say, cry uncle, and say, that's it, we're done?

 

 Just to remind you, that last Monday, the intelligence chiefs, all of them, said that Hamas is not about to lay down its arms, so this war can go on.

 

 The head of UNRWA today, Fadi Mazzarini, said that he was denied entry into Gaza by Israel.

 

 Does the United States have a stance on that, or has there been any discussion about that?

 

 But do you think it's fine if they want to deny entry?

 

 Well, I mean, in general, shouldn't a senior official from UNRWA, which you say is an important organization, should be allowed to visit Gaza?

 

 Also, just, sorry, to clarify on your position on UNRWA, I think when the allegations first came out, the Secretary said these allegations are credible in terms of, I think we're talking about 12 UNRWA staff who may have taken part in October 7th, right?

 

 That's one kind of allegation.

 

 I think there's a broader allegation that Hamas is a proxy for, sorry, is a proxy for Hamas.

 

 Does the U.S. have, regardless of?

 

 Yeah, have you received any plan from Israel regarding entering Rafah, especially that the Prime Minister has confirmed during the weekend that they will be entering Rafah soon and they will be moving the people out of the area?

 

 You've been clear that Israel cannot and should not start a Rafah operation.

 

 What does that mean, cannot?

 

 I mean, of course they can.

 

 Right?

 

 Well, you say that they cannot and should not start an operation in Rafah without this plan, but I don't understand your use of the word cannot.

 

 Can I just follow up on Matt's?

 

 Because last week, the top Israeli commander, military commander, talked about something like three islands.

 

 He called them human islands and so on, for moving 1.4 million people.

 

 Now, could this look anything other than like a concentration camp in your view?

 

 So, is that a map, is that a plan that you may have looked at?

 

 I'll stay also in Gaza.

 

 Last evening, our colleague, our correspondent was arrested by ADF in Al-Shifa complex outskirts.

 

 He was wearing his vest, his helmet, he has his equipment with him.

 

 He was beaten, stripped, and got his equipment destroyed.

 

 This is, I mean, the IDF clearly saw that he's a journalist with his equipment and this didn't stop them.

 

 And just add him to a long list of journalists that have been either killed, injured, or detained by the Israeli forces.

 

 Do you have any comment?

 

 And about Al-Shifa Hospital, the ongoing operation, because the arresting happened right before this operation started and that led us to believe that it is a way to black out what's going on in Al-Shifa complex.

 

 Do you hear from your Israeli partners why they are targeting this hospital?

 

 Follow up on what they're asking about UNRWA.

 

 When you originally talked about the allegations against the 12 staff, you had said that UNRWA itself was the one that forwarded those allegations along.

 

 You said that you found them credible, but since then, UNRWA itself has said that its staff were tortured by Israel in order to get some of those confessions extracted.

 

 Does that change your view of the evidence that was presented by Israel?

 

 And if UNRWA was credible enough for you to believe the allegations the first time, is UNRWA credible enough when they make an allegation of torture against its staff?

 

 Your position, which is in opposition, as they said to so many allies around the world, has encouraged Congress to move forward with a ban.

 

 There's now an agreement between some Democrats and some Republicans to continue the ban I think throughout the rest of the year.

 

 Is that something that the State Department would support, tying the State Department's hands, even if the report comes back?

 

 On Gaza, you have seen, I'm sure, Senator Schumer's comments.

 

 I know that you can't speak for the senator or any member of Congress.

 

 But is there a concern in the administration at all that these remarks are going to make it more difficult to deal with Prime Minister Netanyahu and his government?

 

 Well, fair enough, except that there are members of the executive branch who have said roughly similar, if not exactly the same thing over the course of the last several months.

 

 And so I think there is a suspicion out there that Senator Schumer was putting out publicly what had been being said privately.

 

 So there's no frustration in the administration with Prime Minister Netanyahu and his government?

 

 In Israel for a second.

 

 Gaza's health ministry said today that six Palestinians were killed and dozens wounded in Israeli fire on crowds of residents waiting for aid trucks in Gaza City.

 

 Have you raised this with the Israelis, and do you have any information on this?

 

 On Israel.

 

 Thank you, Matt.

 

 I just wanted to follow up on something that Matt raised.

 

 Separately from Senator Schumer's remarks, there was – this week released an unclassified American intelligence community assessment that indicated that Israel was likely to face lingering armed resistance from Hamas for years to come, that its military would struggle to secure the tunnel systems in Gaza, and it also said that the viability of Prime Minister's Netanyahu – Netanyahu's leadership and coalition may be in jeopardy.

 

 Do those assessments comport with this department's view of the situation?

 

 And if so, is the department going to reach for partners other than Netanyahu in its diplomatic efforts?

 

 And on the question of – first, let me ask – let me just push you on the intelligence front, because the State Department has its own intelligence arm in INR.

 

 So did the assessment draw an objection from within this building?

 

 Was there a differing view from within this building?

 

 So you won't address the Netanyahu's coalition being potentially in jeopardy assessment deal?

 

 Just as an additional, I mean, unnamed officials as a result of these assessments within Israel have accused the U.S. Government of trying to oust the prime minister.

 

 Do you care to respond to those?

 

 One last one on hostage talks, because you mentioned there was ongoing work.

 

 Is it the case that the stakeholders surrounding the talks are just waiting for a response from Hamas, or is there a revised offer being put on the table?

 

 Sorry to beat a dead horse, but I do have one more question on the Netanyahu remarks, specifically what Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said.

 

 I understand that you're not going to talk about if you guys coordinated or anything like that.

 

 The White House did say that they were given a heads-up ahead of those remarks, but — No, I was – we did not coordinate.

 

 But he did – he called for a new election in Israel.

 

 Can you just clearly say if the administration agrees that this is time for a new election or not in Israel?

 

 So you won't take a position either way as to if you agree with those remarks or not?

 

 But do you think that Prime Minister Netanyahu is in strong standing right now as the leader of Israel?

 

 Very quickly on the Netanyahu-Chuck Schumer thing.

 

 I know Congress is a separate entity and so on, but do you agree that Mr.

 

 Netanyahu is an obstacle to peace when it comes to the two-state solution, considering that he said that time and again?

 

 Now, Israel says it plans – it's been reported that Israel – in fact, it was reported by AP that Israel plans to direct Palestinians out of – ahead of anticipated offensive.

 

 I mean, is that really acceptable?

 

 I mean, every – they – herd of cattle, you keep moving them north, south, and so on.

 

 You keep moving them from place to place.

 

 They're going to put them in, like, they call them human islands and so on?

 

 Is that really acceptable to the Government of the United States?

 

 But in principle, I mean, the notion of moving people like this, keep moving them endlessly – I don't know for how long.

 

 Maybe this war will take another six months and so on.

 

 Is that something that you – that's fine with you?

 

 Yesterday it was struck and the Secretary mentioned that the UNRWA warehouse, whatever, was struck and one person was killed.

 

 Now it has also been reported that Israel is planning or has begun, in fact, to dismantle – I asked you about this a couple of days ago – to dismantle UNRWA, not only in Gaza but also in the West Bank.

 

 Now would the United States come out and say, look, we will have whatever punishment fit the crime?

 

 If they are – if it's proven that members or staff members of UNRWA had participated in the October 7th attack, then we will hold them accountable on that level.

 

 But you will continue – you make a commitment to continue to keep aiding UNRWA?

 

 But you have been all along, since its creation, you have been the major support of UNRWA.

 

 will probably be – find it difficult to continue without U.S. support.

 

 Why can't the U.S. say we will continue to support?

 

 Two questions.

 

 I'll follow up on Said's in the second question.

 

 But the UN said – and I'm just going to quote, just to be accurate.

 

 So the UN said that the number of children reported killed in just over four months in Gaza is higher than the number of children killed in four years of wars around the world combined.

 

 That's a quote from the UN.

 

 So what will the U.S. do to make sure that this statistic is not going to get worse in the next few months?

 

 According to my information of talking to UN officials, they're saying basically that Israel never provided an evidence to show these 12 members are involved, and therefore as long as Israel does not provide this evidence, the investigation is still open and can be open for years to come.

 

 So in a way, they're indicating it could be a political, actually, accusation more than an actual one.

 

 And if it's an actual one, it can be political.

 

 So where do we go from there?

 

 Because following up with everything else that was said, UNRWA was created to cater for Palestinian refugees only.

 

 And the Israelis has always showed their contempt to UNRWA.

 

 And now they're saying that 12 members were involved without giving any evidence.

 

 My understanding is they give only oral – All right.

 

 So let me – Orally they convey the message, but no evidence.

 

 I really appreciate that.

 

 Just like finally, I really want to get to the bottom of this because, again, my understanding that UNRWA reported as a credible information just because a member state of the UN, which is Israel, reported it, not because they found a credible evidence.

 

 That is not – that is not – Because they are a member state and they have to investigate.

 

 On the maritime corridor, Matthew, for how long will it be set in Gaza?

 

 And then will it help in evacuating Palestinians from Gaza, or its main goal is only to bring in aid to Gaza?

 

 And secondly, on reports that the Palestinian president intends to appoint his economic advisor, Mohamed Moustafa, to the post of prime minister, do you support such an appointment?

 

 Happy Pi Day to all who celebrate.

 

 Question one is about the children in Gaza.

 

 Thousands of kids have been killed in Gaza.

 

 There's reports of crippling mental health conditions among all Palestinians, kids no less.

 

 Kidd-s as young as five saying that they want to take their own lives.

 

 If a child in Gaza is still alive at this point, their development education has been interrupted, their home is destroyed, their families and friends killed, so I'm wondering how the U.S. is thinking about supporting these kids who are still alive.

 

 And then secondarily, I'm wondering if there's any concern that this war may actually foment an entire generation to see Israel, and by virtue of its aid, the U.S., as more negatively and as entities to resist, as in – is there a fear that this war and this suffering might make harmony more – harder to achieve?

 

 And then on the investigations, we've talked about before the allegations of Israel killing journalists, of people like Hind Rajab, her family, the medics sent to save her, allegations now of torture and sexual abuse.

 

 On these and more, the U.S. often defers to Israel to investigate and checks in periodically.

 

 But for how much longer will the U.S. continue to defer to Israel, given that they kind of continue to reportedly commit the same violations?

 

 To put a finer point on it for our colleague in the front row's question on attacks on food lines, after the attack two weeks ago where at least 100 people were killed and 800 – nearly 800 were injured waiting for food, since then, Israeli forces have reportedly killed more than 400 Palestinians in food lines since that attack.

 

 So I know that that attack is being investigated, but how much longer can we keep sort of deferring as these violations continue to keep happening?

 

 2 on Palestinian children.

 

 So on Tuesday, a 12-year-old Palestinian child, Rami, was killed by an Israeli officer – police officer in East Jerusalem.

 

 He was lighting fireworks in front of his family home, playing with his brother and his friends.

 

 An Israeli national security minister, Ben Giver, praised the police officer who shot Rami as a hero and called the 12-year-old Palestinian boy a terrorist.

 

 What is your reaction to this?

 

 You haven't yet raised this with the Israeli Government?

 

 And I mean, we know that Israel is – we heard from the news that Israel is investigating this, but how can we believe that Israel will investigate itself impartially when its national security minister calling a child a terrorist?

 

 Pardon me, and I should be waiting and sitting and getting ready.

 

 Anyway, on UNRWA, if I may, Haaretz reported that Israel is moving to dismantle UNRWA without a replacement body to manage aid for Palestinians in Gaza.

 

 It says while the Israeli army plans to fully dismantle the UN agency in order to undermine Hamas' civilian rule in Gaza, including through a slander campaign, it is unclear which organization will assume its responsibility.

 

 Are you aware of this report?

 

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

 

 So in your view, UNRWA is the only organization that can – at least for now – can mete out the kind of aid that it has been giving to the Palestinians for the past 70 years or some odd years and so on, in education, health care, and so on.

 

 I mean, is there any other organization that could do this?

 

 In your view, any alternative organization?

 

 I have a couple more, if I may.

 

 There's also reports on – that the Israelis have tortured detainees, Palestinian detainees in Gaza.

 

 Are you aware of such reports?

 

 But also, I mean, the Israelis themselves, the Israeli soldiers themselves, are basically posting videos showing that they are hoarding groups of Palestinian detainees, even in the West Bank, bringing them, like, cattle and so on.

 

 Have you seen any?

 

 Just wanted to drill down on – you said you're exploring alternative options for getting aid into Gaza.

 

 Does that mean the U.S. has decided that UNRWA is not the – is not the organization for the future?

 

 But in the event – I know you're probably going to say this is a hypothetical, but I think that you are raising a pretty stark possibility that the main aid organization delivering aid to Palestinians at this time of extreme need is losing perhaps permanently its main funder.

 

 You said the U.S. has given $300 million to $400 million a year to UNRWA.

 

 I think you're the biggest – historically the biggest funder of this organization.

 

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

 

 An Israeli-American hostage was declared dead today by the IDF.

 

 Itai Chen, do you have any comment on that?

 

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

 

 And then on the questions that were raised yesterday about Israel restricting U.S. humanitarian aid from reaching Gaza and whether that would implicate the Foreign Assistance Act, you said you hadn't made that judgment.

 

 Is that something that is being reviewed?

 

 Do you assess they've blocked other humanitarian aid, though, that isn't U.S.-provided? I just don't have – I don't have an assessment.

 

 To stay on that subject, the EU top diplomat, Borrell, in his speech at the UN today at the Security Council, basically accused Israel of using food as a weapon of war, saying that that's what Russia was accused of in Ukraine, weaponizing food.

 

 And Israel basically, by blocking aid and forcing everyone to find alternate routes, like you are with the airdrops, the maritime and all that, by blocking the entrance of enough aid, is basically using food as a weapon of war.

 

 Would you agree with that statement?

 

 So precisely, you said there's this increase.

 

 So basically – fortunately, it's not a game, sorry.

 

 It's not the right word, but they're playing around with aid, opening, closing.

 

 So again, to my question, would you agree with the comment that Israel is using food as a weapon of war?

 

 Eyewitnesses who are leaving Gaza – some people leave Gaza – are saying that upon departure, they see, you know, a 45-minute drive of trucks that are stopped, not going anywhere, before Rafah.

 

 Could there be anything that can be done?

 

 Could there be anything that the United States would say could influence Egypt or Israel?

 

 Israeli Minister Itamar Ben-Gfir asked the Israeli defense minister to immediately attack Lebanon.

 

 He reportedly said we have to start responding, attacking war now.

 

 Do you have any reaction to that?

 

 And one on the U.S. and Saudi Arabia.

 

 Is the U.S. still discussing with Saudi Arabia the day after Gaza war and the normalization with Israel?

 

 And did you make any progress, especially regarding providing Saudi Arabia with a nuclear – civil nuclear program and the Defense Act?

 

 Going back to the delivery of aid to the Gaza Strip, be it now or in the future, in a structured form like UNRWA, you said you're considering all options now, irrespective of whether the U.S. will or will not be able to contribute.

 

 Have you considered Arab countries taking on this responsibility?

 

 A group of them may be – have you heard any appetite for such a thing?

 

 Well, UNRWA started from zero.

 

 A group of other countries can do the same.

 

 First one, Mr.

 

 Biden in the – in his speech for the Union of Speech, he mentioned that this temporary pier or, like, harbor is going to receive sheeps carrying food, medicine, and temporary shelters.

 

 Could you explain what that mean of temporary shelters?

 

 It's like, what is this purpose for?

 

 It's like, it's going to be, like, shelters for people in Rafah?

 

 Is this going to be for evacuating, like, Palestinian to service?

 

 Like, he mentioned temporary shelter.

 

 It's like, it's still in big area.

 

 Could you explain?

 

 The second question.

 

 You have been saying that Hamas or anyone else should recognize Israel, but Israel doesn't have borders.

 

 What is the position of the U.S. for, like, Israel's border?

 

 Israel doesn't have a constitution.

 

 They don't have a border.

 

 They don't recognize 4 June 1967, like, resolution for the United Nations.

 

 What is the U.S. position in terms of Israeli borders?

 

 If I want to – if someone want to recognize Israel tomorrow, in which land should recognize Israel, and what is the capital of Israel should Hamas or any other Palestinian recognize Israel based on?

 

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

 

 For Israel?

 

 Back to Gaza.

 

 The BBC reported yesterday regarding some medical staff from the Nasser Hospital in Khan Yunis.

 

 They've interviewed three doctors or three members of the staff at that hospital who've given detailed accounts of their detention by Israeli authorities.

 

 They told the BBC they were humiliated, beaten, doused with cold water, forced to kneel in uncomfortable positions for hours.

 

 One was set upon by a dog.

 

 I'm wondering, is that a specific – one of the specific cases that you would raise with the Israeli Government?

 

 And more broadly, there was also last week a report out of UNRWA about the treatment of UNRWA staff who had been detained by Israeli authorities.

 

 So there's sort of piling up allegations, and a lot of these accounts are quite similar, right?

 

 The treatment of – I guess these tend to be men who are detained presumably on suspicion of being part of Hamas.

 

 But given that there are numerous of these allegations coming from different places with similar accounts, are you concerned – have you sort of – are you able to establish from that that there might be a pattern here, and is that something that's – Well, I'd say first of all that any detainee ought to be treated in compliance with international humanitarian law.

 

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

 

 But that's a case where there's video evidence.

 

 They showed their faces in the video.

 

 President Biden a couple of days ago stated that any attack on the city of Rafah is a red line for himself.

 

 But just one day after President Biden's statement on Rafah, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu said that he has still intentions to go for Rafah.

 

 So what is your reaction to Netanyahu's statement?

 

 Okay, and then also part of that supplemental is some stuff for the middle The Middle East but but in the 2025 request you have 7.6 billion Right?

 

 Is it correct that about half of that?

 

 Roughly a little less than half.

 

 3.3 billion is for Israel alone, correct.

 

 Yes And then on Taiwan you mentioned the Indo-Pacific you say in one of these fact sheets that we got a little while ago It says that you're making a historic Investment in Taiwan's military.

 

 I I've seen individual arms sales to Taiwan That you guys have put out to tech row that are more than a hundred million.

 

 So I don't understand how this is historic.

 

 Can you explain that?

 

 and then I got One last one.

 

 it is about embassies and consulates.

 

 I Don't know if you want to take those.

 

 I've seen three.

 

 point three for Israel.

 

 Does that number include?

 

 For West Bank or Gaza.

 

 yeah Why is the United States building a port off the coast of Gaza when there's a perfectly good one?

 

 Why is the United States building a port off the coast of Gaza when there's a perfectly good one about a 30 mile drive?

 

 Further north in fact a major international container port.

 

 but that I mean it's turned What is a political issue into a logistical one.

 

 This is not about you know, trying to get into some remote region of the world with a natural disaster.

 

 This is a place that is very easily Accessible and you talked about you know, the current situation.

 

 you haven't been able to get to sufficiently.

 

 That means you haven't been able to persuade the Israelis to let Enough aid in over land and to secure its distribution.

 

 So why is that still a problem?

 

 Has the Israeli government presented Biden administration with a humanitarian and or a military plan for Rafah?

 

 What is your latest assessment based on your conversations with them?

 

 Whether or not they would go ahead without the humanitarian plan.

 

 and Netanyahu We've heard him say multiple times.

 

 I think over the past couple of days that the Rafah operation will happen one way or the other and the president said in the MSNBC interview that Rafah is a red line, although he then quickly said he will continue to support Israel.

 

 So I guess I'm asking what is the u.s. Prepared to do when and if Israel goes ahead with the Rafah offensive?

 

 Yeah, just a couple of things on on the Rafah thing because you know, we're talking about 1.4 million people.

 

 It's a lot of people.

 

 It's crowded and so on and in fact the Israelis been bombing it so they reducing the area in which people can live.

 

 so what in your view or When you discuss what method what methodology is Israel When Israel used to basically move these people and get them out of our way?

 

 I can't is conceivable.

 

 And one last thing have you are you aware that the UNRWA reports?

 

 Says that Israel coerced some agency employees to falsely admit Hamas links.

 

 Go ahead Can you just like trying to understand when President Biden?

 

 Said that entering Rafah as a red line in the same time.

 

 He will say we're gonna keep Sending weapons and we support Israel.

 

 I mean just in English wording.

 

 How does it work that line don't enter Rafah when the same time?

 

 I'm gonna give you weapons if you enter Rafah or not.

 

 is it right?

 

 so basically we experienced Like dramatically the the changing of tone of this administration.

 

 I mean from this podium Israel has right to defend itself.

 

 People are dying day after day.

 

 today The tonality changed.

 

 we saw the primary election.

 

 Some Arab voters decided to say uncommitted votes President Biden.

 

 his speech changes tonality toward the What's what's happening in Gaza.

 

 who's gonna hold accountability for all the crimes that Israel committed for the past five months?

 

 One brief thing about what you said in response.

 

 there you said let's wait until we see the plan before we pass judgment on whether whether it is credible or Implementable.

 

 So that does that mean that you are gonna pass judgment on the plan when you see it?

 

 So when the Israelis put out the plan We'll get the u.s I would expect up down.

 

 You seem to be putting a lot of hope on that plan But do does the administration have any indication or any knowledge that the plan is being indeed developed that the the government?

 

 Oh, that was a little while ago Like I mean this was really really fast and we've seen that's now who sort of you know Say things that they're gonna go ahead with Rafah regardless.

 

 still I cannot certain they're developing.

 

 and just one last thing because I think I'm just going through Your answer to Tom's question.

 

 you talk about how u.s. has pushed a lot Israel on the humanitarian aid and made progress even though incremental or sort of bigger and some other things.

 

 but what he was asking you I think was specifically related to 1961 Foreign Assistance Act.

 

 that says humanitarian aid should not be blocked by countries that are recipients of military aid from the United States.

 

 So we have heard you a lot from this podium saying Israel should do more.

 

 So based on that those the United States consider Israel to be impending the flow of u.s. Aid into Gaza or not.

 

 so in addition to the questions that were asked by my colleagues I have two more.

 

 so the president said that he We cannot afford to have 30,000 more Palestinian dead Indicating a red line if Israel carries on with the plan to go to Rafah.

 

 So a 60,000 Palestinian dead is a red line and 30,000 was not a red line?

 

 You are and if you answer just one second If you answer is we don't want to see any civilian Palestinians dead, which is the usual answer you give us.

 

 What did you do in the last five months to make sure that Israel avoid?

 

 Killing civilians, which we know as a fact is 70% are women and children.

 

 Okay, but Hamas is not your ally.

 

 It's not your partner.

 

 You're designated as a terrorist organization.

 

 I'm asking on the other side, which is you share the same value with them, which is Israel.

 

 So my question to you is not about Hamas and how the world was started because we passed Not to take away from what happened on October 7 But my point to you is what the this administration do to press to use the leverage that Israel So you have over Israel to make sure that no more civilians are dead.

 

 I have several brief ones in alphabetical order, but my colleagues should feel free to interrupt if they have, if they have anything on these that, by alphabetical order, are Haiti, Houthis, and Gaza.

 

 Starting with Haiti, what is the situation with Prime Minister Henry?

 

 The report that you guys want him out, is that correct?

 

 I understand that you, your ambassador to the UN, spoke to this earlier, but I'm wondering what you have to say about that.

 

 I'll go to Gaza in that case.

 

 On Gaza ceasefire, Matt, yesterday you said that U.S. believes that the obstacles at the moment are not insurmountable.

 

 How would you describe the talks today, given that there is still no breakthrough and it's day three and it's at a very critical week?

 

 So you wouldn't describe the talks as they're at an impasse?

 

 And what is the U.S. understanding that the biggest sticking point is at the moment?

 

 And would you say that it is right now up to Hamas or Israel or both of them – which one – to basically accept the deal, or it's not like that?

 

 It is something that they have to – So it is a negotiation.

 

 Have you seen in recent days that Hamas is not engaging in good faith and they actually don't want the deal?

 

 The World Health Organization said yesterday that its officials had visited Shifa Hospital where there were treatment – there was the treatment of 50 children suffering from severe acute malnutrition.

 

 In Kamal Adwan Hospital, 10 children had reportedly died from hunger and dehydration in recent days, and that it was overwhelmed by patients.

 

 They say the current rate of 15 percent of wasting among children under the age of two in northern Gaza suggests a serious and rapid decline.

 

 Such a decline in a population's nutritional status in three months is unprecedented globally.

 

 I mean, you know about this situation.

 

 So what is being done to alleviate this?

 

 And he said that on Friday.

 

 The Vice President has repeated it.

 

 We heard from the Secretary of State yesterday a similar message insisting that Israel facilitates more aid, and yet yesterday, 14 World Food Program trucks were blocked by the Israelis going into the north of Gaza.

 

 So they're not listening.

 

 Thank you, Matt.

 

 Just to follow up on Tom's referencing of the hospitals.

 

 I mean, of Gaza's 33 hospitals that were fully operational before, say, October 7, there are now three that are semi-functional and so on.

 

 It's creating a really horrific situation.

 

 Now, we talk about the food and the starvation and so on, but is there any way – I don't know – to make these hospitals more functional and able to care for more people, especially children?

 

 So six weeks would probably be a nice respite for the people and for everybody involved, but it also presumes that the fighting will continue thereafter for whatever reason after the end of the six weeks, especially in light of what you alluded to yesterday, that you support Israel and its pursuit of the defeat of Hamas and so on.

 

 And what we see, 150 days after this war began, we see that the fighting is still going.

 

 Hamas is not defeated by the best analysis.

 

 It has been degraded somewhat, maybe 30 percent, 20 percent, whatever it is.

 

 So conceivably, this war can go on for another year.

 

 I understand.

 

 But you know, you're saying that you want Hamas to surrender.

 

 That is – I mean, is there really serious thinking that this is actually going to happen?

 

 I mean, considering that the Palestinians have been waging some sort of, you know, an armed struggle against Israel for the past 75 years.

 

 I mean, they take – they go from Beirut to Lebanon to Jordan to places like this.

 

 But it goes on in the West Bank and so on.

 

 Is there really expectation that the Palestinians will give up the notion of getting their rights or getting their rights in the absence of the world doing anything about granting them their rights, that they have to do it on their own?

 

 And lastly, I'm sorry, but just to push this point a bit further, the Palestinians basically said, okay, we lay down our arms.

 

 They've done it time and time again.

 

 They recognized Israel.

 

 They signed treaties and so on.

 

 Hamas has not done it.

 

 Hamas said they will abide by the – I mean, let's not – Hamas won't even sign up to the principles of the PLO.

 

 But I'm saying that what we're saying is there has been a Palestinian effort that has failed.

 

 I mean, people look, whether it's Hamas or somebody else, they look at 30 years of effort to arrive at the resolution that the United States has signed to, and in fact sponsored in 1993.

 

 And it has gone nowhere.

 

 We see the settlements expand.

 

 We see the occupation become more violent against the Palestinians.

 

 People are more imprisoned, and so on.

 

 I mean, because you said that why wouldn't Hamas look at the numbers of dead – 30,000 – and effectively surrender.

 

 But that almost suggests or implies that the numbers killed creates a political or military pressure on Hamas to do so.

 

 But you've always said that any civilian death is unacceptable.

 

 But you connected those two issues.

 

 No, I – With a Hamas surrender, looking at the number of death, why would they not surrender?

 

 The Israeli Government has told you that if Sinwar was to purely surrender, that would be sufficient to end the war?

 

 Including Sinwar?

 

 And I want to push you on some of the many things the U.S. Government has called on Israel to investigate.

 

 Do you have any updates on the convoy shooting into the air, into the crowd, that lunch?

 

 And then on the investigations into the two American teenagers who were killed in the West Bank, what – Those investigations are also going – ongoing.

 

 Based on the investigations, it was two others specifically?

 

 The one on the implosion of the university in Gaza?

 

 And what about the incident that happened a couple months ago in which the Israeli agents went into the hospital, went room by room, and – I'll have to check to see if we have any updates on it.

 

 Not necessarily CHERG, but like all of these investigations – the university, the hospital, West Bank.

 

 Can you then commit that U.S. will somehow follow up with the results of all of those investigations and ensure accountability?

 

 And can you think of one example that the situation has moved to that level since the beginning?

 

 And let me just ask a question that we've asked before.

 

 Is there any process of atrocity determination or anything similar to that from this building looking into Israel's military conduct?

 

 You said to Jenny that the investigation is still ongoing with the convoy.

 

 Last week, it was notable that you topped the briefing with the incident of the convoy.

 

 I asked you yesterday about the apparent sticking point of a list – Israel wanting a list of names, massing they can't get a list of names.

 

 Was the incident – the convoy incident last week, was that a significant reason for derailing the talks this time around?

 

 The two Americans detained in Gaza now a month ago and the woman in the West Bank, any further consular visits with them?

 

 The Israelis are saying it was on suspicion of collaborating with Hamas.

 

 The family completely refutes that.

 

 Do you guys have any sense of where the truth is?

 

 Two questions on Middle East.

 

 First on humanitarian aid.

 

 Yesterday you said that Israeli ministers are preventing aid deliveries and this raises questions about the legality of U.S. military assistance to Israel.

 

 So I'm going to ask again, you know, is the U.S. still in the position of not considering cutting off military assistance to Israel?

 

 So you don't think Israel is deliberately preventing humanitarian aid to Gaza?

 

 And is there any further steps that the U.S. is planning to take in order to force the Israeli government to allow more aid in?

 

 Just a quick one.

 

 Do you have anything to say on Israeli government approving plans for more than 3,400 new settlements in the occupied West Bank since you leave these last settlements illegal?

 

 Well, do you think at the moment that the Israeli strategy is actually helping to defeat the ideology, or is it not?

 

 Okay.

 

 And then in – just in terms of the negotiations that are going on, I don't know if Minister Gantz is completely up to date on the latest of it, but presumably Sheikh Mohammed is, since his country is brokering them.

 

 What sense did you get, other than the ball is in Hamas's court?

 

 Are there – are the differences that still exist surmountable, or are they impossible?

 

 And this is my – this will be my last one.

 

 But when you say the obstacles – in your view, the obstacles are not insurmountable, one of the things that you have said repeatedly over and over again is that Hamas could end this right now by just surrendering, laying down all their weapons.

 

 Clearly, that's not going to happen.

 

 So is that not an obstacle that you are putting into the calculus now?

 

 So you don't think that Hamas has to lay down their weapons and surrender in order to get a temporary ceasefire?

 

 Just some comments in the past couple of hours, one by Hamas saying that this negotiations can't last indefinitely, and then the President, the – President Biden saying that it's dangerous not to have a ceasefire placed by Ramadan.

 

 Is there a sense that the clock is ticking for this, that – I know you say that's as soon as possible, but is there a sense that this is basically not necessarily now or never, but that we really need to get it before Ramadan?

 

 QUESTION Coming to the humanitarian situation, which you described as unacceptable and unsustainable, your colleague John Kirby yesterday in a briefing talked about – I was asked about what's preventing more aid from getting into Gaza, talked about there have been some inorganic obstacles thrown up.

 

 Inorganic obstacles thrown up in some cases by members of the Israeli cabinet that have made it hard to get aid in.

 

 What are those – like, what are the obstacles specifically that he's talking about there?

 

 Does that include the refusal to open the Erez crossing or another crossing in the north?

 

 QUESTION I want to ask about how this relates to the Foreign Assistance Act – 1961, I believe – that has a part of the act that basically says no foreign – no assistance should be furnished to countries that prohibit or otherwise restrict the transport delivery of U.S. humanitarian assistance.

 

 Is Israel in breach of that?

 

 Is this building working on an assessment that would determine whether that's happening?

 

 Thank you.

 

 Thank you, Matt.

 

 On the questions raised by Matt and Sean and Simon on the stated goals by Israel when this war began – there were actually four – decapitation of Hamas, hunting the leadership, freeing the hostages, and changing the regime.

 

 Those were the ones that were stated.

 

 Now, 150 days later, how far along have the Israelis gotten?

 

 I mean, I'm – they probably degraded Hamas by and large, but do you have an assessment on how much of Hamas has been degraded?

 

 QUESTION So – but certainly, I mean, you support their goals.

 

 You just said that you support their pursuit of these goals, which means that if you are going to continue with the same kind of support that we have seen thus far, it means that this war will continue to go on.

 

 Yeah, but you also said you cannot so easily defeat an idea, basically, and this idea was spawned by the occupation, by repression.

 

 I mean, it could happen in the West Bank where we see a very heavy-handed Israeli occupation.

 

 It could happen elsewhere.

 

 So, I mean, how could you overcome that without offering the Palestinians something tangible that they can hang on to?

 

 I wanted to ask you about UNRWA.

 

 I mean, I asked yesterday.

 

 But if – I know that the U.S. is trying to encourage other donors to be generous and so on, but thus far there is no – has there been any clarification on where you stand as far as the investigation that is ongoing?

 

 Or when is it – when are you likely to resume the aid?

 

 MR PRICE I know I asked about this yesterday, but millions of Palestinians depend on UNRWA aid daily, every day.

 

 I mean, they don't wait for policies to be investigated and so on and so on.

 

 They still need it, and these people are, by and large, they are in dire need.

 

 QUESTION On the Beri Gantz visit, the Israeli press, Israel Hayom, Israel Today, their diplomatic correspondent, writing about the visit saying that Mr.

 

 Gantz explained to government officials that in order to remove from Hamas the civilian capabilities in Gaza, it is better that there be a certain period of chaos in the Gaza Strip.

 

 First of all, has Mr.

 

 Gantz said that to American officials?

 

 QUESTION What's your assessment, though, of that contention, that – because the Israelis have made it clear they want the complete elimination of Hamas.

 

 That includes its role in the civilian administration of Gaza.

 

 We're seeing chaos and a complete inability to secure Gaza, which is a disaster for people on the ground.

 

 If that is – and it seems to be stretching by the military activity, the position of the Israeli Government and the military – what's your assessment of that as a tactic and strategy?

 

 So what happens – because this is no longer a day-after issue.

 

 This is a now issue, as we've talked about.

 

 It's happening now.

 

 There's nobody to run Gaza.

 

 So who should do it?

 

 I mean, who's – what are you saying to the Israelis about who's going to – who's securing it?

 

 I mean, without security, you can't do anything else.

 

 There's no security there at the moment.

 

 So the — Who is responsible?

 

 And that's exactly what Israel says it won't accept is a PA-run Gaza Strip.

 

 And is there any reason why he would seem surprised, given that this department and the administration have repeatedly — MR PRICE Again, I just don't want to speak to his impressions.

 

 And on Hamas, a Hamas spokesperson had spoken to the BBC, I think yesterday, and had brought up this issue of not being able to pull together a list of hostages for Israel.

 

 And given that Israel is saying that one of their – that they would – they require a list of hostages as part of a ceasefire agreement, how do you square the two?

 

 It's a chicken-or-egg situation.

 

 Do you have any comment on Hamas saying that that's their sticking point?

 

 We know that Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan will be in Washington tomorrow, and the U.S. Army is building three 155-millimeter projectile metal pipelines in Texas, and the contract was awarded to General Dynamics, whose subcontractors include Turkish defense industry corporations, according to Pentagon.

 

 My question is on a very technical legal angle, actually, and does any agreement with Turks allow the U.S. to pass on these rounds to third-party countries such as Israel?

 

 Did or can Turks place a condition to prevent such a transfer of these artillery once they are in the U.S. stocks?

 

 Is any discussion on this matter expected tomorrow?

 

 Did you get any promising answer from Israel regarding opening more crossing points?

 

 Did you request open all the crossing points or some of them?

 

 I have a question, actually, about a statement from a group of UN experts today.

 

 Among the things that they said are that 15 children have died of starvation at Kamal Adwan Hospital in northern Gaza, appearing to corroborate earlier reporting from the Gaza-based health ministry.

 

 Does the administration hold Israel responsible for these deaths?

 

 And I'll have a follow-up.

 

 Well, those same experts in that statement said, and I'm going to quote here, Israel systematically denies and restricts the entry of humanitarian aid into Gaza by intercepting deliveries at checkpoints, bombing humanitarian convoys, and shooting at civilians seeking humanitarian assistance.

 

 Is that an assessment with which you agree?

 

 The main goal, it seems, like that eliminating Hamas from Gaza and destroying their ability to continue existing there.

 

 And as my colleague indicated, after five months we have famine, starvation, 30,000 killed, most of them kids and women.

 

 Do you believe that is a fair price for eliminating Hamas?

 

 This is my first question.

 

 Have you ever considered to let civilian people move from Gaza to Israel and have citizenship like indigenous people – like same scenario in the U.S.A. – indigenous people move to their former occupied land and have a citizenship like indigenous people in the U.S. historically?

 

 And they have a full citizenship.

 

 They are civilian.

 

 You care about civilian.

 

 You are – you have a very good, kind heart toward these kids and women and other civilian people.

 

 I want to go back to the hostage deal.

 

 You mentioned that the list that Israel is asking for is legitimate, and Hamas should provide that list for hostages.

 

 The question is, is this then the sticking point that is preventing the hostage deal from moving forward and getting finalized?

 

 You agree with Israel that this list has to be provided?

 

 But how can Hamas possibly provide that kind of list without having some sort of a ceasefire?

 

 Because those hostages are not with Hamas, not all of them at least.

 

 Some of them are with other factions, and there is a need for some sort of truce so that Hamas can basically search for them and find them.

 

 And then back to the – unless someone else wants to go on that.

 

 Just back on the aid situation.

 

 So you know that Benny Gantz is in town and meeting with the Vice President and people at the White House today and with Secretary Blinken tomorrow.

 

 How focused are those – are these discussions going to be on the aid situation, which you just said was intolerable?

 

 Okay.

 

 And based on the conversation the Secretary had with former Ambassador Dermer this morning, do you have any indication that the Israelis are willing to allow more aid in?

 

 Especially since you've been pushing for several weeks now on opening a Rez crossing in the north into Gaza, and that has not yet happened.

 

 I just want to go back a little bit to the airdrops because they have raised a lot of questions and some criticism as well.

 

 A lot of people made the point that – why does Washington need to resort to a practice that it would use in battlefields or areas that are controlled by hostile forces, given that this area is controlled by Israel?

 

 Why is the United States forced to use this practice to get aid into an area that its closest ally controls?

 

 I mean, I think a lot of people were pointing out to the fact that it's a very expensive workaround.

 

 So I want to repeat a question that me and my colleagues have repeatedly asked you here over the last four months.

 

 The United States does have a very important and big leverage over Israel, like it does over other countries, and that is the military aid.

 

 And you have repeatedly said that Washington has so far did not feel the need to or does not think it's the best option to use that leverage.

 

 So after the events of last week and as the situation on the ground gets even more dire and there seems to be an obvious inability on the part of U.S. Government to influence Israel in a meaningful way on this particular issue, does the United States – is the United States reconsidering its decision to not use military aid as leverage over Israel?

 

 A couple of other little things on maritime.

 

 You said this is in developmental – development phase, but – so I mean, as much as you can say there is no port in Gaza, where is this going to be offloaded?

 

 Is there any consideration that U.S. military would be involved?

 

 Can I just basically follow up on Humeirah's question, maybe we ask it a slightly different way?

 

 Israel, of course, is a friendly country to the United States, has a very good relationship, but they're actually warning a famine perhaps coming soon in Gaza.

 

 I mean, do you believe that Israel could do more to actually avert this?

 

 Why do you think they haven't done it?

 

 And just one more on that.

 

 The situation in northern Gaza in particular, there's been a security deterioration.

 

 I mean, do you think that everything has been done that could be possible to actually improve the security there, or do you think there are things the Israelis could do to improve the stability there?

 

 It was just to follow up on the security point.

 

 I mean, how much of a factor is the bombing of police forces that were securing these convoys by the Israelis in what has happened since?

 

 Because we know what a problem that has caused.

 

 These police, as far as I understand it, are sometimes unarmed.

 

 They contain remnants that are still held to Fatah, Nod or Hamas, and they have been hit, and that seems to have been a huge factor in them no longer being willing to secure the convoys, which has led to this complete drying up of aid, particularly being able to get to the north, and therefore part of the problem with the terrible event we saw on Thursday.

 

 So how much of a factor was Israel doing that in what's now happened?

 

 But doesn't it go – it goes to the fundamental issue, though, that there is no security in Gaza.

 

 So this is not a day-after problem, some sort of hypothetical in the future.

 

 It's happening now, and it's happening now because there is no plan.

 

 But you don't doubt that the Israeli military fired on those people, that they were gunshot?

 

 But you know, I mean, as wonderful as it is to send in aid by airplanes – I mean, 38,000 meals, that's like .07, one seven to each, one person.

 

 I mean, that's a very small amount.

 

 The best way, obviously, is via ground, and the U.S. can't send in trucks.

 

 I don't think that the Israelis would shoot or would fire on, you know, American-controlled trailer trucks and so on.

 

 First of all, I'm not dismissing the value of that.

 

 In fact, I asked that question last week if the U.S. would do something like this, nor was I interrupting you.

 

 I'm just saying I realize that it's an effort, but it's a very small effort.

 

 There are other ways.

 

 And even by sea – I mean, I understand the U.S. military has these wonderful causeways they can roll things in, but you don't have to have a harbor and so on.

 

 But that is still inefficient.

 

 I mean, the United States and Egypt and so on, if there is a political decision to ensure – I mean, to basically force Israel to allow trucks in, I believe that they will prevail.

 

 You don't think that the U.S. can't prevail if it pressures Israel to allow these trucks in?

 

 A couple more questions.

 

 Of course, I think it was raised that there's something like 15 children that have already died of starvation in Gaza, and there seems to be maybe hundreds more in the coming days and so on.

 

 So the situation is very, very desperate.

 

 Let me ask you about UNRWA.

 

 Have you arrived at a decision on continuing aid or resuming aid to UNRWA?

 

 On the hostage talks, Matt, what do you make of the fact that Israel did not send a delegation to Cairo for these continued working with the Taliban?

 

 And you spoke of the Israeli investigation into what happened last Thursday.

 

 Would the U.S. support an independent investigation?

 

 And then on the Gantz visit, there's been a lot of political furor in Israel from Netanyahu and members of his coalition.

 

 There – does the U.S. – I guess, can you talk us through why you thought it was still appropriate to meet with Gantz this week?

 

 I have a couple in Haiti when they were talking.

 

 Sorry, I don't want to step on anybody, but I would just directly follow on Jenny's question.

 

 I mean, does the fact that senior U.S. officials, including the Secretary, Vice President, National Security Advisor – the fact that they're taking these meetings with Benny Gantz signal that they see in him more of a willing diplomatic partner than Prime Minister Netanyahu?

 

 I mean, he's also a political rival of the sitting prime minister, and Prime Minister Netanyahu made clear that he disapproves of these meetings going forward.

 

 So in taking these meetings, did the U.S. consider that they might fuel political instability within the existing Israeli Government?

 

 Two quick follows on the region.

 

 One is, what can you say about Israel's willingness to make good on the requirements set forth in the National Security Memorandum set forth last month about providing written confirmation that they'll use American military aid in accordance with humanitarian law, absent having already supplied that response?

 

 Is Israel on track to meet that deadline?

 

 Has the U.S. been advised as to whether there's a likely or an imminent ground operation likely to be launched into RAFA?

 

 And you would still expect that to happen before anything happens on the ground?

 

 Two questions on Gaza.

 

 First, on Israeli investigations, at recent briefings you have heard a lot of investigations into a lot of issues.

 

 I wanted to follow up on two of these.

 

 You have urged for investigation into the sexual violence allegations – sexual assault allegations against Palestinian women and the killing of Hind Rajab.

 

 Do you have any update on this?

 

 Have you heard back from any of these?

 

 And the second question on – have you seen the reports of Israeli warplanes bombing a makeshift cemetery in Sunday built near the Jabalia refugee camp in northern Gaza?

 

 Have you seen those reports?

 

 Just to go back to a couple of Israeli-Bazaar-related stuff.

 

 So about Erez or the third border crossing opening, given your comments at the top about the urgency and how severe the situation is, what is the sticking point with the Israeli Government?

 

 And on Benny Gantz, following up from colleagues, do you think, like, given that Prime Minister Netanyahu is not happy with this particular trip – and I know the Secretary has seen Benny Gantz on several occasions in our trips – do you think that dispute with Netanyahu actually reduces his effectiveness in – for U.S. to push, like, on aid situation and – does that under – does that trip undercut his impact, his effectiveness?

 

 A couple of little things on CHIRP.

 

 You have said a few weeks ago that U.S. has begun reviewing reports that Israel may have harmed civilians in this war in Gaza under the CHIRP process specifically.

 

 And I know that you did say that this is not a process that is going to yield results right away, but I still would like to check back in and ask.

 

 We know that there are dozens, if not more, number of – dozens of incidents that are being reviewed.

 

 Has any of them moved to stage two?

 

 Has the – has this building made any determination that, yes, U.S. weapons were used in incidents and that caused civilian harm and Israeli military was at fault in this particular incident?

 

 Right.

 

 And final one, do you have a better understanding – does this building have a better understanding of what it would do when it reaches – when and if it reaches that assessment?

 

 What is the next step of that review?

 

 You should know that, because, I mean, that's the whole point of conducting that review, right?

 

 Good afternoon, by the way.

 

 So on Sunday, yesterday, Pope Francis, he called for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza so the hostages can be freed and civilians can get aid.

 

 He said, quote, enough, please stop.

 

 Does the State Department believe that the pope's urgent plea can help secure a ceasefire in Gaza?

 

 Yes, thanks.

 

 So on that, what is your understanding of what happened?

 

 Understanding that you don't have anyone on the ground and you don't know – all you have to go on right now, I presume, are what you've heard from the Israelis, what you've heard from witnesses, and the footage that you've seen.

 

 Based on all of that, what can you say about what it appears happened?

 

 Well, when you say too many Palestinians died today, does that mean that there is some kind of acceptable number of – The acceptable number is zero.

 

 All right.

 

 And then last one.

 

 So you talked about how it's important to expand aid deliveries, but also to increase the access points.

 

 You've been speaking publicly and privately for weeks now about your push for the Israelis to open a res crossing for aid deliveries.

 

 How is that going?

 

 I have some elements of that.

 

 You're talking about the safe delivery of aid.

 

 The Israeli military being there, I mean, do you have an idea what the situation was?

 

 And is this – are there risks in this in itself, in having the military so closely near aid delivery?

 

 President Biden said that he believes that this will complicate the negotiations to secure that ceasefire and free the hostages.

 

 Can you give us any details about what's underlying his assessment there?

 

 And can you give us any more details on what other measures the U.S. is considering to try to get aid into Gaza?

 

 We've seen reports of potentially airdrops.

 

 And is there any discussion about any other crossings in the north of Gaza beyond Erez being opened?

 

 Coming back to the crossing specifically, could you – I mean, a lot of people will be looking at this and saying, you're the main supporter of Israel, Israel is completely in charge of this crossing, the Erez crossing, and other border crossings that could potentially open up aid to northern Gaza.

 

 We see these images.

 

 As you say, it demonstrates the desperation that people are feeling.

 

 Why is Israel unable to open that border?

 

 So are you telling the Israelis that, you know, you don't think that their security, whatever concerns they have, are enough to justify keeping their border closed?

 

 And there's been this question of the Israelis targeting Palestinian police who, in other instances, are guarding aid.

 

 As Sean was getting at, we seem to have an incident here where the Israelis have ended up involved in securing aid that's being delivered.

 

 Does the U.S. have, like, a vision or a plan for how aid delivery should be secured, given the kind of chaos that we've seen today?

 

 On the principle of it, why is it so difficult for this government to say we condemn the killing of children, Palestinian women and children?

 

 Why can't you say the word condemn?

 

 Yet I have not heard the word condemned.

 

 I mean, you know, this war began way before October 7th.

 

 I mean, you know, in fact, the reason that this administration was so strong on, you know, pursuing a Middle East peace and so on because the war had been going on for a decade before and so on.

 

 We heard this administration when they came into office talking about reopening the consulate, talking about reopening the PLO office here, talking about restarting and reigniting peace talks and so on, simply because that war has been going on for a very long time because Gaza was under siege for a very, very long time.

 

 Fine.

 

 I mean, you know, you guys said this many times before, but in fact, you know, Israel has been waging war on Gaza for a very, very long time.

 

 Let me ask you on the aid issue, on the trucks and the trailers and so on.

 

 Is there anyone other than Israel that is holding the aid from going in?

 

 So this is really the classic catch-22 kind of situation because Hamas governed Gaza for a very long time.

 

 All the police, all the, you know, many of the security forces and so on.

 

 Unless you supply Gaza with police and, you know, other staff, people, whatever, who are from Egypt, from anywhere, to distribute these things, it's going to be the same people to distribute it.

 

 As I said, it is an... So this is really saying, okay, you can't, you know, it's a catch-22 situation.

 

 One last question.

 

 Do you suspect that Mr.

 

 Netanyahu perhaps authorized this raid to scuttle the negotiation?

 

 Thank you, Matt.

 

 You keep saying that you don't want to see any Palestinian civilians dead and the number of civilians killed should be zero, but you saw the numbers.

 

 I'm sure you did today.

 

 They are staggering.

 

 There are 30,000 dead, 70,000 wounded, and 7,000 are missing.

 

 Would you respect, Matt, many people in the Arab and Muslim world do not believe that this administration is sincere when they keep saying the same message that we don't want to see Palestinian dead for many reasons.

 

 Number one, you supply Israel with lethal weapon with no conditions and no reviews as much as we asked about it.

 

 Second is you shelter them in the Security Council and you're still siding with Israel that no ceasefire till now.

 

 You want a short pause and it didn't work out.

 

 So how can you respond to people who criticize this administration that actually you're the one who's supporting the Israelis?

 

 The only difference is we are journalists covering the State Department, so.

 

 Other journalist on Hamas, but one, another question.

 

 Senator Coon said today that if Israel does not present a secure and credible plan to evacuate civilians, one and a half million from Rafah, then he's willing to consider restriction on arms sales to Israel.

 

 And this is an advanced position from a senator that's very close to the Biden administration.

 

 So do you believe now you start losing the argument even among, in Congress?

 

 And do you support that at one stage, that even this administration will impose arms restriction?

 

 Yeah, Matt, CNN reported that the American administration is concerned that Israel is planning to, is planning a ground incursion into Lebanon that could be launched in spring or next summer.

 

 Can you elaborate on that, and to what extent are you concerned?

 

 And do you expect any incursion in the spring or the summer?

 

 Mark Stone from Sky News.

 

 The Defense Secretary, Lloyd Austin, said today that he was asked how many women and children had been killed by Israel since October the 7th.

 

 He said it was 25,000.

 

 If the total number is 30,000, that leaves 5,000 men killed.

 

 If you assume that all those men are combatants, which is an absurd assumption, but some have made that assumption, that means that more than 80% of the people killed since October the 7th are civilians.

 

 How is that anything other than a complete disaster and a total failure of American leadership?

 

 Thank you.

 

 Going back to humanitarian aid into Gaza, the ICJ ordered last month immediate and effective measures to protect Palestinians in Gaza from risk of genocide.

 

 That includes ensuring humanitarian assistance.

 

 So do you think that Israel is complying with this ICJ ruling, and do you believe, do you agree that today's attack near Gaza on starving people waiting for humanitarian assistance violates these ICJs?

 

 Because Anwar's head, Lazar, today said during an interview with CNN that there has been a 50% reduction of humanitarian aid entering Gaza compared to last month, despite the ICJ's ruling.

 

 So it seems that Israel is not taking maybe those steps to allow more humanitarian aid.

 

 Do you think that Israel maybe should face some consequences for not complying with this rule?

 

 I just want to ask a little bit about the settlements Matt.

 

 so after secretaries the announcement last week Israeli finance minister smart rich double down on on those plans and he said You know Israel will continue expanding the settlements in the occupied West Bank.

 

 I mean First of all, do you have a response to that most recent?

 

 announcement.

 

 right this seems to be another topic between Israel and US that you guys are increasingly at odds.

 

 and Diplomacy whatever you're saying to your Israeli counterparts does not seem to be working.

 

 You're unable to convince them and you're also pushing for a two-state solution.

 

 And so how?

 

 What are you going to do differently to Get Israeli counterparts on board?

 

 How are you going to reconcile the expansion of the settlements with two-state solution that you're pushing for?

 

 Thanks, Matt.

 

 Hamas is calling on Palestinians to march on Al-Aqsa Mosque on the first day of Ramadan.

 

 I was wondering if the State Department has any comment on these this call.

 

 Have you received any commitments from the Israeli government that they will allow access to the mosque?

 

 Would there be any repercussions if any of these far-right ministers who have threatened to go actually worship at Al-Aqsa actually go?

 

 My colleagues just completed an investigation that found that indiscriminate Israeli fire killed Scores of members of a family that was sheltering and what they were told was a safe area of Gaza.

 

 Has the State Department like can you update us at all on the investigations and spilling harm?

 

 You won't speak to specific incidents But can you give us an understanding of the universe of how many of these incidents you're looking into?

 

 You know, we yeah, I mean other countries.

 

 they're all sovereign, of course, but you know Not we don't give every country four billion dollars a year at least And aid and so on.

 

 so we should have some leverage and especially when it comes to settlement that you are committed These verbally to have a Palestinian state on on that land.

 

 I mean once that land is made into settlements, there will be no land.

 

 My last one Although, you know, we must admit that the American aid to Israel predates October 7th by decades, you know.

 

 So let me ask you about also the issue that Humayra raised on the you know, you're not seeing eye-to-eye Administration is not seeing eye-to-eye with Mr. Netanyahu.

 

 I mean we said On timetables on many other issues and so on.

 

 now the president has not retracted what he said last Monday About you know, we are looking at hopefully at a ceasefire possibly next Monday and so on.

 

 so but Mr. Netanyahu seems to be in total disagreement with you guys.

 

 Yeah, I know we had a tiny exchange about this yesterday, but you say that the idea of Your respect or u.s. Respect for sovereignty does not extend to the Palestinians, right?

 

 they have no sovereign.

 

 So you have a one China policy as it relates to China and Taiwan Which indicates that Taiwan is not sovereign and yet you treat them as a Sovereign entity maybe not a state but a sovereign entity With the Palestinians.

 

 Do you treat them?

 

 with the same kind of Regard that maybe they're not a sovereign state or you do not recognize them as a sovereign state, but at least they have a right of self-determination, so we Do not treat them as a sovereign state, but we are trying to establish an independent Palestinians.

 

 and we do support self-determination for the Palestinian people Okay, but they do not currently enjoy your the administration's thinking and previous administration as well.

 

 they do not enjoy the rights of sovereignty that say Israel or Jordan or Australia or Madagascar have.

 

 but we are trying to establish us.

 

 Is The Biden administration ever going to reopen the consulate for Palestinians in Jerusalem and if not, why not?

 

 Good secretary.

 

 I'm sorry But the secretary said back in 2021 that this would be done.

 

 It's three years later.

 

 America I'll come to you next And this is not something that I've heard for the first time but I just want to put it on record.

 

 So you talked about wider integration of Israel into the region and talked about secretary's efforts, which Seen first time traveling with him.

 

 but so the what us is hoping is that you would have a broader normalization between You know Israel Saudi Arabia and perhaps like other Arab countries and in return Netanyahu would agree to a two-state solution or some form of form of it that would effectively put a halt to the settlement.

 

 What's the settlement so?

 

 so the settlement element of that is that if you know at the end of this you would have the establishment of an Independent Palestinian state and if you have an establishment of an independent Palestinian state that would necessarily include The inability for Israel to build settlements.

 

 and what is another country at that point?

 

 now the issue of existing settlements as we have always been clear is something that would have to be Discussed in negotiations between all the parties, right and when when you have been holding talks with the Israeli government with Netanyahu and your Counterparts there have they actually privately told you Anything that would make you think that they're open to any of these ideas Especially like putting it putting a lid on the settlement expansion.

 

 I am NOT going to Yeah, I'm not gonna I'm not gonna speak to I'm not gonna speak on behalf of the Israeli government.

 

 I will say what we have made clear and you've seen the secretary speak to this when he's in the region about the case that he has made to them and why we think it's important that there be a coherent plan for the day after this conflict in Gaza that includes reconstruction that includes governance and In our view you have to have the participation of other countries in the region to achieve such a coherent plan And you also have to have the participation of other countries in in the region to achieve real and lasting security for Israel And so that's why we're going to continue to make that case.

 

 Yeah, one last thing on AIDS and I've asked you this earlier this week since the situation is even more and more dire.

 

 We're seeing a lot of reports of now like, you know children sort of starvation malnutrition so There seems to be like almost a complete collapse in the in the distribution of aid inside Gaza.

 

 We've seen Israel blame UN.

 

 I mean does.

 

 does the United States share that view?

 

 Is it up to UN and is it their inability to provide this and what are you guys doing to address?

 

 Two quick question.

 

 There were some reports yesterday claiming that you know us.

 

 demands Israeli government to submit a written letter On using u.s. Weapons in Gaza.

 

 I mean giving some assurances I do.

 

 it will abide by international law.

 

 Yeah, I wanted to just, I guess, try this from another approach, but the President said that the Israelis have agreed to a ceasefire during Ramadan.

 

 It's sort of been said all along from the Hamas side that what they want is a longer-lasting, a permanent ceasefire, right?

 

 So I mean, has there been any movement that's closed the gap between the two sides on that?

 

 But just to sort of understand where this optimism, I guess, is coming from, we're talking about a temporary ceasefire, but you think that that will lead to – or you think – the Secretary has said and you just said, I think, this is the best way to get to an end of the conflict.

 

 But just so we kind of understand, Israel's position is still – they still are seeking to take out leadership – the leadership of Hamas.

 

 There are these battalions in Rafah that they want to get to.

 

 So is there a prospect for a longer-term ceasefire?

 

 Even if you get a temporary ceasefire, the Israelis are still going to have those broader war aims.

 

 Are you going to be able to support – are the Israelis ever going to be able to agree to that before they've sort of achieved those aims?

 

 Finally, I wonder if you had any concern with some comments that the Israeli Defense Minister Golan made, saying if there is a possible ceasefire, then Israel would increase attacks on Hezbollah in the north.

 

 Do you have concern that there would be escalation with – in that sort of separate front in the north?

 

 But time and again, you put the blame squarely on Hamas, and that's your prerogative, but that's fine.

 

 But before October 7th, there was a siege on Gaza for 16 years.

 

 I mean, the suffering has been going on for a very, very long time.

 

 Would there be, as a part of this deal, whenever it comes to pass, would there be a commitment to lift the siege by the Egyptians, by the Israelis, with the influence of the United States of America?

 

 But I mean, let me ask you about the food situation in Gaza.

 

 I mean, we saw that the Jordanian monarch himself went on a plane and was – or so they say, was – basically they were dumping the food stuff and so on from an airplane.

 

 Why couldn't the United States do that?

 

 I mean, you guys have all these C-130s anyway that Jordan is using, Israel's using, everybody's using.

 

 Why not do it?

 

 Every partner – You know, the Palestinians are a great gesture.

 

 The question is will the United States have any kind of its own initiative, so to speak, after – if the ceasefire takes place, if the hostilities cease?

 

 Will there – do you talk in this building, do you discuss in this building ways and means to aid the Palestinians afterwards with possibly tents, with foodstuff, medicine, emergency things?

 

 If I may, I would like to go back to Gaza.

 

 Earlier this month, the Sinai Foundation said that they obtained information that current instructions in eastern Sinai is to create a highly security-gated, isolated area near the Gaza borders to prepare for the reception of Palestinian refugees.

 

 I took note that the Egyptian Government has come out and has denied it.

 

 What is the State Department's assessment, especially at a time when Israel is planning for a military operation around Rafah that would affect about 1.5 million Palestinians?

 

 Thanks, Matt.

 

 I wanted to ask about Aaron Bushnell, the 25-year-old active-duty airman who self-immolated in front of the Israeli embassy on Sunday, especially since it didn't come up during yesterday's briefing.

 

 I know you released a statement extending your condolences to his family, but I wanted to ask if you have any comments beyond that.

 

 Specifically, I want to ask, will U.S. policy in any way be changed or affected by what happened on Sunday?

 

 There have been now at least six documented instances depicting members of the IDF displaying or rifling through women's underwear, and of course, that's just on camera.

 

 Soldiers have, as we've seen, stripped and tortured Palestinians.

 

 There have been a reported history of soldiers abusing children that they've detained even before October 7th.

 

 And of course, investigations need to be pursued, but still given all that we've seen from Israeli forces just up to this point, what's the U.S. Government doing in response now, given the UN experts' alarm at credible allegations of human rights violations and sexual violence committed against Palestinians?

 

 Back to the war in Gaza, you're pursuing the negotiations in Paris and Doha.

 

 Is the government holding off the draft resolution in New York to see if you get to a deal?

 

 And what do you intend to do with that?

 

 Would reaching a deal put – cancel that, presenting the resolution?

 

 Has the U.S. gotten any information or additional answers from the Israeli Government on the deaths of the two 17-year-old Americans who were shot in Gaza?

 

 Have you given them any sort of timeline in which they need to get back to you with answers?

 

 Given the fact that the Palestinian Authority has removed maps of Israel from new Palestinian textbooks, is there any evidence that the Palestinian Authority will accept and – or – and recognize a two-state solution, yes or no?

 

 And I have a follow-up.

 

 The Palestinian Authority and UNRWA have reinserted a text which rephrases a woman terrorist, Mubarabi, who attacked a civilian bus, murdering 38 Israelis, including 13 children.

 

 Will you demand that the Palestinian Authority and UNRWA remove that text, yes or no?

 

 You've called for the unconditional release of hostages.

 

 Why then support a deal where there would be hostages released in exchange for Palestinian prisoners who have committed terrorism against Israel?

 

 And finally, funding for the State Department expires at midnight on March 9th.

 

 Does the department have a contingency plan in the event of a shutdown?

 

 Sorry, just two really brief things.

 

 One, you were just asked if there was any evidence that the Palestinian Authority supports a two-state solution, or any evidence that they do.

 

 Is there any evidence that the current Israeli Government supports a two-state solution?

 

 Sorry, does the current Israeli Government support a two-state solution?

 

 And then secondly, on these questions about Bush and all that, I'm a little bit confused as to why this is coming up in the State Department briefing other than that it is a policy matter, but this guy was not an employee of the State Department.

 

 As it does relate to the State Department, because this happened outside the Israeli embassy, was there any contact between the Israelis and you guys about what actually happened?

 

 Just on the – when the incident happened?

 

 Well, look, I mean, if you're – from an Israeli perspective, you could imagine that this might be a – they might look at this as a security incident in which they might get in touch with you guys about it.

 

 But as far as you know, there hasn't been any.

 

 Okay, and then just one other one, which is kind of way off topic, but I'm sure you've seen the reports about this guy Alexander Smirnoff, Israeli-U.S. dual citizen, who's the guy who was an FBI informant, and he was just been ordered jailed.

 

 The only reason I'm asking about it here is that he is a dual citizen, so I'm just wondering if there's been any contact with – between the Israelis and you about consular access or anything like that.

 

 I have Gaza questions, but if anybody has – If other people want to do Navalny – yeah, yeah, go ahead.

 

 And then — So I'll go to Israel.

 

 I have a couple of questions, Matt.

 

 On what Secretary said in Buenos Aires on Friday, he said the Israeli settlements are inconsistent with international law.

 

 So I'm wondering why the administration – why it took the administration three years to sort of make that point.

 

 Was that something that you guys believed at the beginning of the administration and somehow decided to wait?

 

 You landed at this decision just last week.

 

 Right.

 

 And this is – I mean, I understand what you're saying in terms of – you have said that it is an impediment to peace before, but saying that it is inconsistent with international law is like a step sort of ahead of that, beyond that.

 

 What are you trying to achieve with this?

 

 Are you expecting that this would put some additional pressure on Israel about the settlements?

 

 Because this has been an ongoing conflict, dispute between you and the Israeli Government that you just can't seem to agree.

 

 Would you have not said this the way Secretary said it if you have seen Israeli Government not unveil or, like, not have any plans to sort of add new housing units?

 

 Could this have gone in a different way?

 

 So I don't find anything ambiguous about a statement from the United States that we believe the Israeli Government's settlement program is inconsistent with federal law.

 

 I find that to be a very clear — Not federal.

 

 International law.

 

 International law, of course.

 

 The statement is important because the previous administration basically sought to undo that.

 

 I mean, that's why it is timely and it is important.

 

 I want to ask you a couple of questions.

 

 But also, I want to say for the record, Matt, with all sympathies with Navalny and so on, but Palestinian prisoners die in Israeli jails almost on a weekly basis under torture.

 

 It would be great for the United States of America to say this should be unacceptable as well.

 

 Okay, excellent.

 

 Let me ask you about Samaher Ismail, the Palestinian American woman that was arrested early in February.

 

 Any new development with this case?

 

 Yeah, but she was apparently arrested for a Facebook post, nothing else.

 

 Let me ask you about the humanitarian situation in Gaza.

 

 It seems that Israel is doing everything possible to hinder the entry of humanitarian assistance into Gaza by denying visas to humanitarian workers, by shooting policemen that try to organize these things and so on.

 

 So – so what are you doing to facilitate this human assistance shipment and so on?

 

 I mean, kids are coming out and saying, we want a piece of bread.

 

 I mean, it's really – it's hard to imagine this is happening in the 21st century.

 

 Lastly, yesterday the Israeli prime minister told Face the Nation that any deal or any pause would only delay entry into Rafah.

 

 I'm interested to hear what your take is and your reaction on the government of the Palestinian Authority, which has resigned.

 

 That resignation has been accepted by President Abbas.

 

 How do you see that?

 

 Do you welcome that?

 

 Do you think it's a first step towards a reform?

 

 And who would you support as a future government?

 

 Thank you, Matt.

 

 One to follow up on Said's question.

 

 So you are aware that the UN – humanitarian organizations in Gaza said that 85,000 Gazans could die as a result of starvation, disease, or bombing.

 

 So what practically can the Administration do to alter this reality?

 

 So you want to be seen literally repeating rhetoric when you said we – us Israelis – to allow human aid organization to expedite the visas, to allow trucks to come, et cetera, because these things on the ground does not happen.

 

 So can we make sure that these people won't face this death either by starvation or by disease?

 

 My second question is the Secretary was asked during the trip to comment about the Netanyahu plan for Gaza, and he said he's not going to comment because he hasn't seen it.

 

 So the U.S. Government has not seen it officially.

 

 The White House dismissed it somehow as disagreement among friends.

 

 This plan – I'm sure you've seen it, not officially, but you read about it – fundamentally clashes with everything that the Administration calling, including just now when you talk about two-state solution.

 

 So is really the two-state solution a mirage, considering Netanyahu himself and his government don't believe in it at all?

 

 So who are you going to implement it with?

 

 But you have so many – you have so many tools.

 

 But you have so much leverage over the Israelis, and this is fundamental vision of the President.

 

 So you can use all the religion you want, including weapons that you sell to Israel, to ensure that this plan is on the – at least on the right path for implementation, considering we have, like, short time between now and November.

 

 I know you don't typically comment on hostage negotiations, but any comment on the discussions in Qatar today?

 

 We understand there's been some movement on the Hamas position.

 

 That's positive.

 

 Do you have anything on this?

 

 QUESTION And do you have any updates on the Americans who are believed to be hostages?

 

 Is it still your assessment that there are six?

 

 QUESTION Syrian observatory has reported that there was a missile attack on the U.S. base in the – in Syria's Konako gas field yesterday, and then today there was an attack on a fuel tanker of the Syrian Democratic Forces, and it says likely by ISIS.

 

 Now, the U.S. forces are in Syria in that area to control the resurgence of ISIS.

 

 I was wondering if the Administration has seen any kind of a collaboration between ISIS and the Iranian-backed forces over there, the militia, post-October 7th attack on Israel.

 

 Just to clarify, has the U.S. received any update on the military or humanitarian plan for Rafah from the Israeli Government?

 

 The prime minister mentioned as part of that plan the potential of moving citizens from Rafah north, north of Rafah.

 

 Understanding you haven't seen the plan, even in the abstract, does that sound like a conceivable plan for 1.4 million people?

 

 And sorry, just to revisit something that Said raised, which is the prime minister publicly saying that Rafah – an operation in Rafah will continue whether or not a hostage deal is reached.

 

 Doesn't that disincentivize Hamas from signing on to something that is predicated on a sustained ceasefire?

 

 Last one just on the prime minister's comments.

 

 He said that after the Rafah operation, total victory would be weeks away, not months away.

 

 Based on the military updates that the U.S. has been receiving from the Israeli government, does that seem conceivable?

 

 In light of the – and there's been a denial that there's illegal settlements, but there's a Jerusalem Post article February 24th stating that the Biden administration has declared Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria as illegal.

 

 What is your response to previous Secretary of State Mike Pompeo's comments February 23rd he made on Twitter?

 

 And I quote, Judea and Samaria are rightful parts of the Jewish homeland and Israelis have a right to live there.

 

 President Biden's decision to overturn a policy and call Israeli settlements illegal will not further the cause of peace.

 

 It rewards Hamas for its brutal attacks on October 7th and punishes Israel instead.

 

 These Israeli communities, he said, are not standing in the way of peace.

 

 Militant Palestinian terrorism is in the follow-up.

 

 If President Biden and Secretary Blinken – if they don't – if you don't agree that it's illegal, if you believe that it's a barrier, as you said, to peace, so what's your response for Israelis to live in their own land of Judea and Samaria, where is the justice, the question is, in allowing illegal immigrants coming across our southern border to settle wherever they want, causing havoc here in the United States, murdering our citizens, and robbing the American taxpayer?

 

 So I know a lot of people want to talk about Gaza But I have something else that I just need to get off at the top.

 

 I the Russia sanctions package that the White House President Kirby you everyone has said it's coming on Friday.

 

 What.

 

 What can you tell us about what that is?

 

 Is it related to the two-year anniversary?

 

 Is it related to Navalny's death?

 

 Thank you, Matt.

 

 I just want to give you a couple of comments that Benny Gantz just made about an hour ago.

 

 He basically he said there were promising early signs of progress on a new deal for the hostages.

 

 I'm just wondering what's the latest that you guys are hearing and whether you're picking up the same Promising early signs of progress.

 

 Okay, he's also saying that if no new Were struck the Israeli military would keep fighting in Gaza even into the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.

 

 I'm just wondering if that would be something the United States would be support.

 

 But I think you guys have Made it a bit of a red line.

 

 I mean if I guess one can call it that The the need for a humanitarian plan on top of obviously a military strategy Before Israel goes into Rafah.

 

 so I think what I'm trying to get at is whether Fighting continuing in Ramadan is really offensive Starting or continuing into Ramadan whether that's a similar red line or not.

 

 Okay, I have a few quick ones on.

 

 So Just to follow up on her point.

 

 You said that you you're hoping that a deal will be struck.

 

 What if it doesn't get struck?

 

 I mean we have been there before.

 

 there were these artificial deadlines and calendars and a week here and and the end of October than the end of November.

 

 then You know December the end of the year and all these things.

 

 I mean, you know to be honest Palestinians and Israelis fought in Ramadan many many times and they were struck.

 

 So, you know, what if a deal is done.

 

 What is your vision on?

 

 How this thing will end.

 

 You know you talk about the Palestinian state, although we've heard statements that are really emphatic by the No under no circumstances whatsoever and so on.

 

 I just want to read you what a member of his cabinet You know from the Likud as matter of fact may go on of the glue.

 

 during a Knesset hearing about the motion to expel MK over Cassie she said I am personally proud of the ruins of Gaza and that every baby even 80 years from now Will tell their grandchildren what the Jews did.

 

 unquote.

 

 I mean, this is the kind of it.

 

 This is not someone extreme.

 

 It's not smart rate.

 

 It's not being a fear.

 

 This is and Prime Minister's Benjamin Netanyahu's party site.

 

 I'm sorry, what does that go for a congressman Ogles?

 

 Made a comment and in response to a protester up on the hill about the deaths of Palestinian children And I'm slightly paraphrasing.

 

 Well, they should kill all of them.

 

 Majority of the Israeli Knesset has voted today against a unilateral recognition of Palestinian statehood.

 

 Abram Paley special envoy for Iran Is or was in in Vienna.

 

 he met with IAEA director general Rafah Grossi.

 

 I was wondering if you could tell us anything about the nature of this visit given that Grossi has spoken out a Lot recently about his concerns about Iran's nuclear program.

 

 When will the draft US Resolution calling for a temporary ceasefire be put forth before and voted on by the Security Council?

 

 I don't want to put a timetable on it.

 

 It's something that we continue to discuss with partners on the council And the administration supports Israel's goal to annihilate Hamas.

 

 Yeah, the support does not seem Unconditional as the administration opposes any further Israeli military operation in Rafah.

 

 How do you square the two of Israel's goal of annihilating Hamas requires going into Rafah.

 

 Why would that not be supported by the US?

 

 I'm not aware of any recent case where they have no thank you and so One morning this goes back to something that was raised yesterday about the UN expert panel of experts on the sexual alleged sexual assault of Palestinians You said that you were looking for independent confirmation or an investigation to that.

 

 has that gone anywhere?

 

 I have some Gaza questions, but I'll let – Yeah.

 

 Thank you.

 

 I have a question about a statement by the UN experts from the UN Human Rights Office yesterday expressing alarm over allegations of human rights violations to which Palestinian women and girls in the West Bank in Gaza is subjected to.

 

 They said – the UN experts said that Palestinian women and girls in detention have been subjected to multiple forms of sexual assault by male Israeli army officers.

 

 At least two of them were reportedly threatened with rape and sexual violence.

 

 Have you seen those allegations?

 

 Yeah, yeah, yeah.

 

 I get it.

 

 And who – and if you're willing to take the word of Israeli – and I'm not saying you shouldn't, but if you're willing to take the word of Israeli medical experts on what happened to the people who were abducted on October 7th, whose word are you willing to take, if not the UN, who?

 

 Would it have to be Israeli medical experts?

 

 It would not have to be Israeli.

 

 Just – well, a couple things.

 

 But of course, the Secretary is on his way to Brasilia.

 

 I'm sure you saw the comments by Lula, by President Lula, in Ethiopia this past weekend.

 

 Israel is quite upset with him, likening what's happening there to the Holocaust.

 

 Do you have any comment on – both on – do you have any comment on what Lula said, and do you think the Secretary will raise this with him as well?

 

 And does – do you expect the Secretary to raise this?

 

 Will this affect relations?

 

 Just on Gaza, the mention of temporary ceasefire, the word ceasefire in the UN resolution, does this change in wording come after President Biden used this last week?

 

 Thank you.

 

 Thank you, Matt.

 

 In light of world pressure on Israel to accept a Palestinian state dividing their land with Hamas and Palestinian Authority terrorist organizations, and for Israel not to enter Rafah in Gaza to destroy Hamas there, what is the State Department's response to Prime Minister Netanyahu and the Israeli cabinet, as well as the entire Jewish population, who are defending their right to live free from terrorism?

 

 And then a follow-up.

 

 Are you going to be wanting to prevent Israel from entering Rafah to take out Hamas there?

 

 What are the reasons of the State Department for not demanding Hamas immediately release all remaining hostages unconditionally?

 

 And on Lebanon, how do you view the escalation of military operations between Israel and Hezbollah?

 

 Will the U.S. participate in two conferences that will be held in France and Rome to help increase the Lebanese army capabilities to implement the UN Security Council Resolution 1701?

 

 I have two questions, one for the irregularities in elections.

 

 From the last Monday briefing, you have mentioned that the United States raised privately and publicly the irregularities with Pakistani officials.

 

 But the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Islamabad just in last briefing said they are not aware of any bilateral messaging that has taken place post-elections.

 

 Meanwhile, what we observed that U.S. ambassador in Pakistan just after two days of election held a meeting with former foreign minister of Pakistan.

 

 So do United States directed its mission in Pakistan to have engagements with the officials or the politicians?

 

 Secondly, I want to ask regarding the efforts for United States for the Israel-Saudi normalization.

 

 So the October 7th is considered a big damage for diplomatic efforts by U.S. in Saudi-Israeli normalization process.

 

 So MBS, the Crown Prince, demanded two-state solution, and he also looking for a timeline from U.S. So Netanyahu is not, like, bothering this two-state solution, this condition.

 

 So what is the timeframe after the post-Gaza war?

 

 What will be the damage repair by the U.S. to repair this as number of Arab nations have reservations on this?

 

 I wanted to ask you about – to start off, the talks in Cairo that took place recently that are in some form – I know there's a limit to probably what you're going to say about it, but do you have any assessment right now about how things stand?

 

 Is the U.S. still hopeful that there could be a deal for hostages and a pause in planning?

 

 Not to jump around too quickly, but the – I was wondering if you could comment on today's developments in Lebanon.

 

 There's some strikes there from the Israeli side in particular.

 

 How dangerous is the situation in Lebanon?

 

 Do you have any reaction in particular to the use of force?

 

 I want to ask you a couple questions on Gaza, but first I wanted to ask you about how the Israelis today demolished a house for Fakhri Abu Diab.

 

 He's an activist against demolition to basically make room for a biblical theme park.

 

 Do you have any comment on that?

 

 Well, you know, Silwan is really adjacent to my neighborhood, so I know the area.

 

 I know how many people have lost their homes, how many homes have been demolished.

 

 But the Israelis seem to have a methodical plan going forward.

 

 I know that you condemn, but do you condemn saying – or else, for instance?

 

 So you must stop – listen, you must – they should not demolish anybody's home, not even for – as a form of collective punishment if someone has done something from the household.

 

 Now, on the looming or the expected attack on Rafah, I know that the President, the Secretary of State, you from this podium many times, overwhelmed against such a storming of Rafah.

 

 But on the other hand, I mean, one reads reports and so on that, okay, by not doing anything or by not saying that there will be consequences if you do this, you're basically green-lighting or giving a green light to Israel to go ahead.

 

 I mean, we don't like it, but we're not going to do anything about it.

 

 So you're saying, yeah, you can do this with the caveat that you have to make sure that the population, the civilian population, is not harmed or somehow moves from place to place.

 

 Now, remember, these people have already been moved there.

 

 They've been instructed by the Israelis to go to Rafah.

 

 2 on Hamas?

 

 I want to go back to the Lebanese-Israeli border, if you don't mind.

 

 It's clear now that Hezbollah – Hezbollah announced a few days ago or a couple of days ago that his war activities or military activities or engagement in this conflict is linked to the war and military activities in Gaza.

 

 If there is a humanitarian pause, he will pause.

 

 If there is end of the war, he will end his activities.

 

 During the hostage negotiations, like, we see there is some obstacles.

 

 Like, from your perspectives, which party is, like, more flexible for making these deals happen, like Hamas or Israel?

 

 Because what we see in the media, yeah, that, like, Hamas submitted a full proposal, but, like, we see Netanyahu is kind of a stubborn guy somehow.

 

 How do you assess this?

 

 And, like, last question related to the – related to the Rafah.

 

 We see many protests in, like, Karma-Bus Salim border, like, Israeli people preventing many aides to get in Rafah from their side.

 

 What is the action that you can take to facilitate this?

 

 Like, are we going to put some sanction?

 

 Like, what effort – real effort that you do to convince the Israeli Government to, like, let this protest stop and let this humanitarian aid get in the Rafah?

 

 I have a couple questions on Gaza.

 

 It's been over two weeks since Israeli forces attacked Hina Radov's family, killing her aunt, uncle, and cousins, leaving her trapped alone in her vehicle.

 

 We heard her pleas to the Red Crescent Society.

 

 Two medics were sent, all to be blown up allegedly by Israeli forces.

 

 I wanted to ask about the status of the inquiry into this, just because it seems if the Israeli Government, which seemingly does have a pretty sophisticated operation, is prioritizing this, and they don't already know which soldiers to interview, for instance.

 

 They have Red Crescent calls, timestamps, the location of the Red Crescent staff to question and rely on, plenty of material to figure out who exactly to inquire with and to figure out who to hold accountable.

 

 So I want to first ask about the status of this investigation.

 

 And then a follow-up to that before the second one was just similarly with regards to al-Jazeera cameraman Samir Abu Dhaka being left to bleed out while Israeli forces reportedly stalled medics from reaching him.

 

 I know that previously you have said there's investigations into that.

 

 Is there any updates on that?

 

 Okay, and then the last question.

 

 As you've said repeatedly, the U.S. chose to be cautious as it suspended funding to for allegations that 12 of its 30,000-person staff may have been involved in the atrocities on October 7th.

 

 And as you described yesterday, that's kind of standard U.S. policy to have this type of caution with all sorts of entities.

 

 But as our colleagues have asked you over the past few months, there have been broad and specific human rights violations that we've been concerned about, human – attacks against hospitals and churches, targeting people with white flags, both Israeli hostages and Palestinians, torturing Palestinians, and now, of course, this attack on Henry Jobs' family and then leaving her to die horribly.

 

 And so I'm wondering, on all this, you've said we're looking into it and Israel is investigating.

 

 But in each of these cases, the U.S. doesn't seem to be as cautious with its money and support as it is with UNRWA.

 

 It's to the point that the ICJ and the U.S. court both say Israel may be plausibly committing genocide.

 

 Still, U.S. money is coming, while the U.S. shut off UNRWA funding immediately.

 

 So I'm just wondering if you could explain that sort of difference.

 

 Secretary Antony Blinken yesterday spoke about hostile diplomacy and – as an international security threat and so on.

 

 I want to ask you, the Israelis have arrested roughly 5,000 Palestinians from the West Bank, not in Gaza, from the West Bank.

 

 Almost none of them have been charged with anything since October.

 

 And no charges.

 

 I mean, they come in the middle of the night.

 

 They take young men and women and so on.

 

 Many are children, as a matter of fact, 12, 13, 14 years old and so on.

 

 Isn't this really something that a government in this case, leveraging – leveraging the taking of people, incarcerating them without any charges, or maybe a future kind of a bargaining?

 

 Now, we know that UNRWA is not only in Gaza.

 

 It is in the West Bank.

 

 It is in Jordan.

 

 It is in Lebanon.

 

 It is in Syria.

 

 I mean, it takes care of millions of Palestinians.

 

 I mean, do you see an alternative to UNRWA after so many decades of being there, knowing exactly what to do, making sure that Palestinians in these awful refugee places are able to eat and go to school, get medical care?

 

 As I said, we will explore all available alternatives to deliver humanitarian assistance to the Palestinian people.

 

 We will follow the law, however.

 

 We don't have any choice to do that.

 

 Do you expect a counterproposal to the counterproposal to be able to come in?

 

 There are reports that a shipment of flour from the US is being blocked at Ashdod by some of the more extremist members of the Netanyahu government.

 

 Do you have any confirmation of this?

 

 And then there were a couple cases of Americans being detained by the IDF.

 

 One of the families, Samaher Esmail, says that she was beaten in Israeli custody, has been denied her medications, and has also not been granted consular access.

 

 Can you confirm any of this?

 

 I know there are privacy concerns.

 

 Why were you detained in Gaza last week?

 

 There was another American who was reportedly shot by Israeli forces over the weekend, an American teenager.

 

 Do you have any information about the circumstances of his death?

 

 And are you concerned this is becoming a trend?

 

 We've seen two American teens shot in the past month by Israeli forces.

 

 I have another unrelated to this.

 

 I wanted to follow up on Jenny's question about the talks in Cairo.

 

 I understand you're limited in what you can say and without getting into the details or the tenor of the talks.

 

 Can you confirm that the Israeli delegation arrived with something in hand to discuss?

 

 Did you ever receive an explanation as to why there was a delay in confirming that the Israelis would take part in these talks?

 

 Let me ask you about Rafah.

 

 There was an investigation completed by Amnesty International that evaluated four strikes that took place last year in Rafah and found that those were not legitimate military targets.

 

 So one, do you have a response to the findings of that investigation?

 

 And two, does that alter the United States' thinking as the Israeli government weighs the possibility of an incursion into Rafah?

 

 To confirm, you have not yet heard back on a plan that is credible or executable?

 

 The status of the UN mission that the Secretary of State announced over a month ago now, is it any closer to happening in northern Gaza?

 

 What prospects do Gazans have to return to their homes in the next week?

 

 I mean, from the US's perspective, from what you know about the mission and the circumstances on the ground, there's no near-term prospect for Gazan civilians to return to their homes.

 

 I have two questions, Matt.

 

 First, about protecting journalists in war zones.

 

 Last night, our colleague in Al-Jazeera and Gaza got targeted, our correspondent lost his leg, and our cameraman also suffered severe injuries in Gaza.

 

 Are you still in contact with the Israelis, pressing them to make everything possible to avoid targeting journalists?

 

 And my second question is, just if you have it.

 

 My second question, if you have any comments on what Porel was statements yesterday or the day before yesterday when he said that if the United States wants to see or to minimize civilian casualties in Gaza, they should stop supporting Israel with armed shipments or with armed ammunitions, and he compared that to what the United States did in 2006 in the war in Lebanon when they put a pause on supplying Israel with arms and ammunition.

 

 Circling back to the Gaza hostage negotiations, it's been reported that a major sticking point that's emerged is Hamas's demands that prisoners again be released as part of any deal, this time including individuals who have been convicted of very serious offenses.

 

 Would the U.S. see the release of any convicted terrorists as potentially detrimental to U.S. national security?

 

 So does that to imply that it's something that could be negotiated?

 

 And one follow, does the U.S. still assess that Israel is negotiating in this in good faith and that it shares the administration's interest in reaching a deal?

 

 I just want to go back to Jennifer's question.

 

 I know that you answered on the young Palestinian-American that was shot dead last Saturday, Mohammed Ahmed Khada, but like a month before, or less than a month before, another Palestinian-American was shot dead, Tariq Abed Jabbar.

 

 Anything new on his case?

 

 But do you know, does Israel have a good record in investigating the killing of Palestinian-Americans?

 

 So just a few things on that.

 

 So you said if the investigation yields to some sort of wrongdoing, we will call for accountability measures.

 

 Right, so then it's again going to be the Israelis to take those accountability measures.

 

 I'm just trying to understand like what exactly the accountability measure will be if there would be one.

 

 Because you guys are calling for investigations.

 

 There are now like a lot of different incidents, right?

 

 Some of them are involving American citizens, some of them are Palestinians.

 

 There are like a wide range of video footage showing the detonation of a university, for example.

 

 So assuming that you have flagged many, if not all of these incidents, and asked questions about the conduct here, you have a lot of possible investigations, or at least questions asked to IDF.

 

 I guess what I'm trying to get at is what makes you think, what is the path to accountability here from the U.S. side?

 

 How will you ensure the accountability?

 

 And what makes you think that given the cases of, for example, Shireen Abu Akhla, who was an American-Palestinian journalist, what makes you think that there will be accountability?

 

 And are you satisfied with the answers and the level of response that you're getting from Israeli authorities and IDF when you raise these incidents?

 

 No, I'm just trying to get a sense of like how responsive they are when you raise these issues with them.

 

 Right, and my final thing is Chris Van Hollen, Senator Chris Van Hollen, in his floor speech accused Israel of, quote, textbook war crime, quote, in remarks sort of detailing a lack of access to food in Gaza, which gives me another excuse to ask a previous question from other briefings.

 

 Is there any ongoing atrocity determination process within this building looking at whether there's been breaches in Israel's, breaches of international rules of war in Israel's military conduct?

 

 So you do have CHERG processes looking into Israel's military conduct ongoing?

 

 Thanks, Matt.

 

 As you're working towards release of the Israeli hostages and sending humanitarian aid into Gaza and everything related to that war, Iran today just launched two ballistic missiles, and it seems like they have just converted a container ship into some ship to carry weaponry in.

 

 Do you feel – does the Biden administration feel pressured in expediting, settling, and putting an end, bringing an end to the conflict in the Gaza Strip?

 

 I have a couple questions, one about Egypt.

 

 Have you spoke with Egypt about their rules during the Rafah operation that we are expect, and are you going to, like, support Egypt financially if they have any future rules in Gaza or during the Rafah operation, like during the trip that you traveled with Mr.

 

 Blinken to Egypt?

 

 Have you discussed any rules from Egypt?

 

 Because we see the far right wing in Israel accusing Egypt that they are complicit or, like, they are involved in 7th of October somehow.

 

 Do you agree or disagree with this?

 

 And what is the role of Egypt that you see in the future during the Rafah operation after that?

 

 Like, we have read that USA warned Israel or urged Israel to no conduct any big operation during Ramadan.

 

 You know Ramadan is holy month for Muslims, and it's like now we are less one month to Ramadan.

 

 It's, like, going to start at March 10th.

 

 And do you support, like, this idea that, like, bozing or, like – not permanent, but, like, at least ceasing fire, suspending any operation during the Ramadan?

 

 As you know, it's, like, holy months for Muslims, and, like, we have 1.4 million in Rafah.

 

 Just, could I ask you about the operation in Rafah that the Israelis had?

 

 First of all, if the United States has an opinion on this, I mean, there were quite a few, over 100 civilian casualties apparently.

 

 The President has publicly called for Israel to have a plan for civilians there.

 

 Are you under the impression that this is part of a larger operation?

 

 Was this a specific thing to get hostages?

 

 To what extent are you okay with this going ahead right after the President's conversation with the Prime Minister?

 

 And just – could I just – we say you would not support it.

 

 I mean, this is, of course, the language of the White House as well.

 

 What does that actually mean?

 

 Does that mean say no, don't do it, it's not a good idea?

 

 Or does that mean there are actual repercussions or that the – to the relationship?

 

 On RAFA, you said it's not U.S. assessment that the airstrikes are the start of a full-scale offensive there.

 

 Is it your assessment that they will soon launch the full-scale offensive there?

 

 Right, but did you get any assurances from the Israelis that they're not going to proceed with RAFA offensive unless they get that plan in there?

 

 Because, I mean, the humanitarian plans for everywhere else in RAFA was not very robust and sound either.

 

 It wouldn't have led to this civilian death toll and the humanitarian crisis that the enclave is facing right now.

 

 To push a little bit more on Sean's question, like EU's foreign policy chief Borrell, for example, said the U.S. should consider cutting aid to Israel, and we know that there is growing frustration with Netanyahu's government.

 

 Is that at all a possibility that the administration is considering if it would not have any success in the coming days in terms of moving Israel?

 

 But have you gone to the Israelis and said, look, if you don't do what we think you should do or at least take our position into account, there will be some kind of tangible consequence other than the finger-wagging and the President saying this is over the top?

 

 Is there any real oomph?

 

 With the indulgence of my colleagues.

 

 Now, to Matt's point, the President of the United States of America went out and told the entire world Israel's conduct is over the top.

 

 Israel's conduct is over the top.

 

 So if it's over the top, what are you willing to do to make it go under the top?

 

 What kind of improvement?

 

 I mean, we saw yesterday that they bombed – they killed 120 people, maybe a lot more.

 

 We don't know how many injured and so on, or how many among the injured will end up dying and all these things.

 

 And you're saying that this is – what you said, you said that we have seen them bomb all throughout.

 

 Does that make it okay?

 

 Does that make it okay when everybody, including the executive state, including the President of the United States of America, including many leaders in this country, have said, you know, you should not attack Rafah, period, or you can attack it by air?

 

 I mean, we're talking about billions of dollars that are approved to make this war keep on going while, in fact, we have seen reports from the United Nations that are telling you you are a shake-away, Matt, from starvation in Gaza.

 

 Nothing is going into Rafah.

 

 No aid.

 

 None of this is going on.

 

 I mean, there are so many things that are going on at the same time that the United States can, in fact, use its magic wand.

 

 Do you expect, lastly, do you expect that Director Burns' meeting tomorrow or scheduled meeting tomorrow in Cairo will produce anything?

 

 What is your – the feeling in this building on the ongoing discussions?

 

 Just quickly on that point, I mean, is there any contradiction in that?

 

 I mean, the Israelis taking military action to free hostages, do you think that that affects at all the deal that's on the table or the deal that's being negotiated?

 

 Just one point of clarification because our understanding is that there's not yet a clear commitment from the Israeli Government to have representation at these talks in Cairo.

 

 Understanding you're not their spokesperson, are you relaying to the Israelis the importance of participating in these talks in order to achieve any outcome?

 

 And you believe these activities in Rafah, your view is not that it is not the unspooling of a campaign, but do you believe they're counterproductive to hostage strikes?

 

 But this happens to target a city center where 1.2 million Palestinian civilians are concentrated in Rafah.

 

 Well, with respect, I mean, to the Secretary's line that not forgetting a common humanity here is what I thought was top of mind for the administration.

 

 And the U.S. does concur that there's a legitimate military reason in order to conduct these strikes in Rafah.

 

 Well, I just have two other separate questions.

 

 One is on whether you can tell us anything about the Americans who have been detained by the IDF in both the West Bank and Gaza.

 

 Do you have clarity on the circumstances of their detention?

 

 Have you been requesting and gotten offered consular access?

 

 Is there a preliminary level of concern involved in any of these?

 

 I'm sure you've seen the reports of Hamas having a command center underneath UNRWA's headquarters.

 

 Does that alter the U.S.'s thinking in terms of the potential resumption of funding down the line?

 

 Is it being linked at all to the issue of the 12 employees who are alleged to have involvement in October 7th?

 

 I'm sorry, I was following the call on the UNRWA headquarters.

 

 Are you saying that you believe, you have no reason to doubt, the Israeli claims that there were?

 

 So you're not entirely sure yet?

 

 And then on the Rafah situation, the Egyptians have reportedly threatened to pull out of the Camp David Accords if Israel is to move forward with this full-scale operation in Rafah.

 

 Is this something that's been conveyed to the U.S.? How concerned are you about the collapse of this?

 

 And then I have one on non-Middle East traffic.

 

 There is some reporting that the plan that Israelis are working on for Rafah is to build a tent city by Egypt and funded by the United States and some of your GCC allies.

 

 Are you aware of this reporting, and is this something that you can support?

 

 So just to make a fine point on this, so are you saying that you are not opposed or would not be opposed to paying for whatever Israel's plan is to vet whenever it comes out?

 

 I was commenting – I mean, they're the ones who are doing this.

 

 You can – Is the United States prepared to pay for the plan that Israel may or may not come up with for the evacuation of civilians – That has not been the role of the United States in this conflict.

 

 What is your understanding or, like, do you have a timeline on when you're expecting a response from Israel on the Hamas counterproposal?

 

 But you are expecting them to come back with a response to the Hamas counterproposal so that this would be – so that you can pursue this effort.

 

 If the Israeli side somehow doesn't show up tomorrow, will that meeting go ahead?

 

 Will those conversations still go ahead?

 

 Do you have any updates on U.S. efforts to push forward the two-state solution and the normalization between Saudi Arabia and Israel?

 

 Two questions, one on Gaza and one on Turkey, if I may.

 

 On the killing of a six-year-old in Riyadh after an Israeli tank targeted their family car in Gaza, the Geneva-based nonprofit Euromed Human Rights Monitor determined that the IDF is responsible for the bombing of the ambulance that attempted to rescue Hindi, and it also reported that American-made weapons was found at the bombed ambulance.

 

 Have you seen that report, and do you have any response?

 

 And do you have anything to say on that American-made weapons were found at the site?

 

 Is the U.S. assessing whether or not Israel is using that weapons in accordance with the laws of war?

 

 But are you making an assessment on that?

 

 But – On the investigations, have you heard back from the Israelis yet about the demolition of the university in Gaza?

 

 Or any of the other investigations?

 

 Well, so what about in other cases?

 

 Like, after World War II, the Japanese attacked us, but then the Germans declared war on us.

 

 So we were – went in and we – the Marshall Plan paid for huge amounts of reconstruction in Europe, and we – the United States also paid for the reconstruction of Japan.

 

 After the war.

 

 So does that same – and recognizing that the situations are not exactly similar, but does Israel bear any responsibility for paying for the reconstruction of Gaza?

 

 So the – Or do they get to voice it off on others?

 

 And I realize that World War II is over and the Ukraine war is not over, but neither is the Gaza war.

 

 And you're saying that Russia right now has to pay for the damage that it caused in Ukraine.

 

 So I'm just wondering, would you say the same, that Israel should pay for at least some of the damage that it has caused in Gaza, even though it's fighting for what you say is a completely justifiable – or what is a completely justifiable – So what I would say on that matter is that one of the things that we have heard as – through the Secretary's diplomacy in the region is that there are countries who are ready to step up and help pay for the reconstruction of Gaza.

 

 So recontribute is right because they've already rebuilt Gaza, like, three times, right?

 

 And so – Let me just finish.

 

 Let me – But Israel is not one of those countries.

 

 So you think that path would relieve Israel of that obligation for money?

 

 But certainly – Fine, but the same thing – you could say the same thing about Ukraine.

 

 Yeah, but okay.

 

 But how about Israel?

 

 Same question on Hind Rajab, though, to follow up on, I think, the point Matt was trying to make.

 

 You said you've urged Israel to investigate her killing, respond very quickly, and take accountability if they find something's wrong.

 

 I think Matt's point, though, is that you've urged a lot of accountability, a lot of investigations, and we don't have evidence of them coming back with accountability.

 

 Should there be a second-level investigation into her killing if you're not satisfied with what they come back with?

 

 First of all, there's some reporting about two American citizens in Gaza who appear to have been detained by the Israelis.

 

 Is there anything, you know, beyond just the fact you're aware of reports?

 

 You know, have you been in touch with the family?

 

 Can you tell us anything about that case?

 

 I just wondered, you know, the Israeli defense forces did say today that they have been operating in Khan Yunis and have apprehended dozens of suspected militants.

 

 If you know, have there been any cases where American citizens have been accused by the Israelis of being militants involved with Hamas in Gaza?

 

 And I believe the same family are involved in a lawsuit against the State Department about – regarding this very issue of whether you've done enough to help Palestinian Americans who want to evacuate from Gaza.

 

 Is your understanding that there are still Americans in Gaza who would like to leave who haven't been able to, and what has stopped you from being able to get them out?

 

 There's also a young Palestinian American woman in the West Bank that was arrested by the Israelis.

 

 How do you – what mechanism do you use to follow up on these things?

 

 Do you do it through the embassy, or you go directly to the – how do you do it?

 

 What is the mechanism?

 

 So is it something that is done through the American security coordinator, a military general who is in the West Bank?

 

 Is that how it's done?

 

 I mean, for instance, there was a young man that was shot a couple weeks ago.

 

 We don't know what happens.

 

 He was about to go into some sort of another land.

 

 What happens after?

 

 Saeed, I'm – How are you following up with that particular case?

 

 And our understanding is the Secretary was briefed on the Israeli forces' plans for Rafah.

 

 What can you tell us about their intended military operation there?

 

 Are you confident that they are going to be able to take steps to protect more than the one million people who have now had to flee to Rafah for safety?

 

 Just so I'm understanding your message correctly, the U.S. does not support a military operation?

 

 And so you say there are – you have not heard any plans for a military operation?

 

 Is that what Halevi and other Israeli officials related to the Secretary yesterday, or is this just based on the public?

 

 And then he also mentioned in his press conference the need for Erez to be opened for humanitarian goods.

 

 Is that something the Israelis have indicated they are open to, and when might we see that?

 

 I mean, you've talked about, without a serious undertaking, of how it relates to more than a million people there.

 

 Presumably, if they want to carry out a military operation there, that means those people have to be evacuated and moved.

 

 But where are they supposed to go?

 

 There is nowhere left to go, and they're not allowing them back to the north.

 

 Khan Yunis is another center of military action.

 

 So I just – if you could flesh out what that means.

 

 Sorry, I'm just on the same topic.

 

 It's 1.4 million, and that's the estimate.

 

 It's a lot of people.

 

 And it doesn't seem to have much military value.

 

 So – and I know the Secretary said that October 7th should not be a license to Israel to dehumanize others.

 

 I assume he's talking about this looming catastrophe.

 

 So why can't the administration just issue a very firm statement on Rappah?

 

 Because it – obviously, until most recently, it had no military value, none whatsoever.

 

 The Secretary also – just to follow up, the Secretary also said something akin that we want an irreversible path to Palestinian statehood.

 

 What does that mean?

 

 I mean, can you explain to us and whatever the understanding of this building, what does it mean?

 

 So is it conceivable to go to the UN Security Council and say – talk or maybe recognize a Palestinian state, although it may not be implemented, let's say, in the immediate future?

 

 Is it conceivable that the United States would not veto it if such a resolution is proposed?

 

 Is it fair to assume that if the Israelis described to the U.S. why they needed to go into Rafah, what they would be doing in Rafah, what the targets would be, would the U.S. be in support of such a mission?

 

 And echoing what my colleagues have already raised, where would people go?

 

 Egypt has already indicated it does not want people coming into the Sinai.

 

 It does not want a refugee problem in the Sinai.

 

 So two parts.

 

 They didn't give you a heads up in Gaza.

 

 They've never given you a heads up, really, on the operational planning.

 

 And you've always been very clear that you are obviously not involved.

 

 And now you're saying you want to see those plans before they do what they do in Rafah?

 

 Israeli Prime Minister said yesterday that he directed the army to prepare for an operation in Rafah.

 

 And what's your assessment or the department's assessment for the Secretary's trip?

 

 Was he able to achieve the goals that he set before he went?

 

 A follow-up on this.

 

 You've sort of given this warning of it would be a disaster to go into Raqqa with no planning.

 

 Does the U.S. – the U.S. is the main supporter of Israel in terms of military aid and weapons.

 

 Would you do anything if they go ahead and do something that you've just said would be a disaster?

 

 And just – it's more than two months ago on the same theme, but more than two months ago the administration sort of said – started saying that there had been too many deaths in this conflict.

 

 That was when about 15,000 Palestinians had died.

 

 And there was a warning that Israel faces strategic defeat if they continue down a path of conflict, which was creating so many civilian deaths and kind of – they were basically losing the longer-term fight through this tactic.

 

 Now, like more than two months later, that number of deaths is almost double.

 

 I think we're around 29,000 now.

 

 Can you just continue to give these rhetorical warnings without any actual consequences for Israel, or aren't they just going to continue doing the same thing?

 

 Thank you.

 

 Following being up on the civilian deaths in Gaza, there have been some reports in Israeli media suggesting that during their meeting Blinken told Netanyahu that he will think about thousands of children killed in Gaza all his life.

 

 Can you provide any confirmation or clarification on that?

 

 And what was the nature of the conversation between Blinken and Netanyahu regarding the civilian deaths in Gaza?

 

 So you have been urging Israel to take some steps to minimize civilian harm, and you have been urging them for maybe past four months.

 

 And have you determined that Israel has taken any of these steps?

 

 And if you determine that Israel is not taking those steps, what will be the consequences?

 

 Let me just ask this very plainly.

 

 The U.S., Qatar, Egypt, other interlocutors worked out some kind of deal to try to bring this war to an end.

 

 Hamas came back with its concerns.

 

 Netanyahu yesterday said absolutely no way, no how.

 

 Where is the space to try to negotiate an end to this war?

 

 Is the U.S. trying to temper expectations because as the war continues, it becomes easier for Netanyahu and for his government to maintain a hard line?

 

 Okay, one more question.

 

 This ongoing negotiation, maybe it's direct talk or indirectly, between Israel and Hezbollah, mediated by U.S. and other European countries helping out to find a solution, a diplomatic solution on the border, maybe back up Hezbollah forces on the blue line and maybe applying 1701 in the future.

 

 Can you – some reports came out that soon that we're going to hear a ceasefire at the Lebanese border despite if there is any ceasefire in Gaza.

 

 Is it something that you can give us extra information about the ongoing negotiation?

 

 First, going back to the Hamas response to the hostage deal, what elements of the response makes the U.S. say that there are room for negotiation?

 

 And then is it fair to say that the Hamas ask that it will have a governing role in the aftermath of Gaza as a non-starter?

 

 And then separately on the Pakistan elections, I know you have been asked several times, now that the elections were held, does the United States have a message to people in – not Afghanistan, sorry.

 

 Does the United States have a message to people in Pakistan after the controversial elections?

 

 Supplemental that came out from the Senate.

 

 some senators yesterday Included a line saying that the funding can't go to the UN agency UNRWA.

 

 You've obviously suspended New aid to UNRWA, but does does the administration support sort of?

 

 Putting the language in the legislation so that Funding can't be sent to to this agency.

 

 in terms of the importance of UNRWA itself Yeah, you can.

 

 you can divert aid through other agencies, but you know did do you accept that that you know doing so potentially?

 

 if UNRWA as Officials in UNRWA are saying is really short of money and is potentially unable to continue its operations.

 

 That's going to Reduce the impact of any other money you send to Gaza in other ways.

 

 Yeah You know I mean Let's face it.

 

 UNRWA is a political issue.

 

 It's being pushed by pro-israelis and spring and think-tank that actually sprung for this purpose because they believe that cutting off a Palestinian refugees will simply liquidate the Palestinian issue that The right to return that the Palestinians hang on would just simply disappear.

 

 So I want to ask you is the United States of America committed to continued funding of UNRWA?

 

 and on Rafah.

 

 We you know, we heard that them.

 

 the Israeli Minister of Defense just issued the you know a Threat or whatever you want to call it just like a few minutes ago that they are going into Rafah.

 

 You have any comment on that?

 

 You have any comment on what might happen next and Rafah where you have such a concentration of you know Those who have been displaced so say.

 

 Yeah Well the legislation doesn't look like it's gonna go anywhere but aside for from that The administration has approved language to prohibit funding of UNRWA So, I don't know.

 

 How do you reconcile saying on the one hand that it's doing a critical job, which you have said publicly On the other hand also saying that you're checking with other donors basically washing your hands Financially of it and leaving it to other donors?

 

 How do you reconcile that?

 

 and Accepting the language to prohibit funding when you had announced a month ago or a couple weeks ago that you were Suspending funding.

 

 Thank you Vedant.

 

 Two questions.

 

 Since the ICJ ruling on January 26, which clearly calling Israel to avoid civilian casualties 900 Palestinians have been killed including women and children.

 

 So is Israel heeding the message that you sent to them in terms of the casualties and what kind of like pressure you put in on them trying to avoid?

 

 I mean 900 in 10 days is a huge number.

 

 Okay You were alarmed by the settlers' violence in the West Bank to the degree that you put sanction on them.

 

 Are you equally alarmed and disturbed by the Israeli army torture of Palestinians?

 

 There is emergent pictures.

 

 that's horrifying.

 

 I'm sure you've seen this picture, but one of them is basically an Israeli soldier and this is what we know of through the social media.

 

 You must have seen this picture.

 

 This soldier has been identified as his name is Yossi Gamzo and he is from the Nahal Brigade.

 

 This is a clear violation of international law, the Geneva Convention, etc.

 

 So just equally as much as the violence of the settlers, this is the violence of an Israeli soldier.

 

 This is an Israeli army that's an allied of the United States.

 

 This is acceptable to you.

 

 So if I share this information with you, would you raise it to the Israelis?

 

 You know, you've sanctioned these four individuals.

 

 The ideological leadership of these individuals and of all of those people, Kahanists basically, who want the forcible expulsion of Palestinians, sit at the highest levels of the Israeli government, the finance minister, the national security minister.

 

 There's a fundamental contradiction.

 

 isn't there, in your policy because you're sanctioning the followers, but you're backing the leaders.

 

 But it's not just rhetoric because arms transfers go, for example, to the Israeli Border Police.

 

 That is a department controlled by the national security minister.

 

 Those border forces operate in East Jerusalem in the West Bank.

 

 Often, rights groups will say, hand in glove with these people that are smashing up Palestinian property.

 

 So there is an arms transfer to the very department, you know, funded by the US taxpayer, of one of these leaders in terms of the national security minister who controls the Border Police.

 

 Prime Minister Netanyahu said earlier today that he will not end his offensive in Gaza until the leadership of Hamas is destroyed.

 

 He said this could take months.

 

 We've seen this timeline shift over and over and over again.

 

 I just wonder what the U.S.'s comment is on the prospect of this taking many more months.

 

 You said that you're helping – you believe all the American citizens have reached out already.

 

 At one point, the embassy and the Americans were helping non-U.S. citizen Gazans who worked for U.S. media or U.S. NGOs, et cetera, and you stopped that.

 

 Is there a reason that you stopped that and any chance of restarting it?

 

 You just referenced the two-state solution.

 

 The Secretary has been following that up during his trips.

 

 The Islamic Republic of Iran says that they also want peace and security in the region.

 

 They want a country for the Palestinians.

 

 How do you see this claim by them?

 

 Is there a common ground here?

 

 Every day, the United States emphasizes the necessity of protecting civilians in Gaza and ensuring they receive their necessary stuff.

 

 However, the commitment does not seem to translate in action, especially after United States suspended funding on Iraq based on suspicions only.

 

 This situation raises questions.

 

 Is it a few members?

 

 Is it United States truly, I couldn't imagine, incapable to provide people with their necessary stuff, their essential needs, and to protect them?

 

 Every day till now, a civilian bomb, the majority of them children, yesterday, today, before.

 

 And also, I have friends and cousins in Gaza.

 

 They don't have – there is a huge shortage.

 

 They don't have their essential needs.

 

 I can't imagine that United States incapable to do that.

 

 So – If it seriously or sincerely wants to help civilian people in Gaza.

 

 My second question to you.

 

 What human rights violation will Israel commit before America stop funding the IDF?

 

 Everything is targeting in Gaza, even the dead people.

 

 Recently, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu had an interview with the French TV and he made these two comments.

 

 I see that the U.S. and Israel, of course, are very close partners.

 

 He made these two comments.

 

 One was that this is a battle of civilization.

 

 Doesn't this sound very extremist from a leader?

 

 While this is one of the most significant actions by the administration, I'm wondering – a lot of people point out that many of these settlers do have U.S. citizenship.

 

 So I wonder what tools, if any, does the United States have if it wants to take action against these settlers with U.S. citizenship?

 

 And when you say we're willing to take further action, do you mean against Israeli settlers with dual citizenship or just U.S. citizenship?

 

 And there is also another criticism out there that this reduces the problem just to individuals, whereas there seems to be a targeted institutionalized effort to expand the settlements in the West Bank.

 

 You guys have been raising this issue with the Israelis for a while.

 

 But I mean, how do you go about solving that problem, really?

 

 Because, I mean – and again, attached to that, I want to ask, what exact answer is the Secretary and U.S. officials in this building are getting from Israeli government when they raise this issue?

 

 Because it's clear that you don't seem to be satisfied with the actions that they're taking.

 

 Just to some of the Israeli response to this, you've probably seen Netanyahu's office saying, hey, look, Israel – I mean, I'm paraphrasing – Israel has laws, we punish people who break the law, we don't need the U.S. to do this.

 

 What's – is there a response to that?

 

 I mean, is that – is – why haven't they done it then?

 

 Is that – I mean, is there a – do you think that's a valid argument?

 

 One, have you heard about the HR-6679 that was passed today in the House?

 

 About restricting visas of, you know, Hamas, but also the PLO.

 

 I mean, the PLO is someone that you interlock with.

 

 They have come, you know, they come to New York, they come to other places, and so on.

 

 How is that going to affect them?

 

 Why is that?

 

 Related to the conflict, the Qataris today are saying that they had – I think the phrase they used is initial positive confirmation from Hamas about the proposal that CIA Chief Burns has been involved in regarding a temporary truce for the hostage release.

 

 Do you have any latest assessment about where things are going and whether there's any more optimism about this?

 

 Maybe not a detailed play-by-play, but a general play-by-play.

 

 The Secretary met with some Palestinian Americans today for a roundtable.

 

 A number of people have said they refused the invitation in protest of the administration's policies toward Gaza.

 

 Do you have any comment?

 

 Has it shaped policy, any of these meetings, though?

 

 I just had one follow-up on the line of questioning earlier with Humeyra about the individuals who had been sanctioned earlier today.

 

 Senior administration officials had said some of those individuals had already been prosecuted under the Israeli system.

 

 How many of the four had already been prosecuted?

 

 So the actions that had already been taken are – did you feel that those actions didn't go far enough that the Israelis took?

 

 Go back to Gaza.

 

 The UN Secretary-General Guterres today warned that the humanitarian system in Gaza is collapsing, saying that everyone is hungry and 1.7 million have been displayed.

 

 Do you have anything on that?

 

 And any updates on, you know, your efforts to address the humanitarian situation and hunger in Gaza?

 

 And do you have any updates on the possibility of another pause in Gaza?

 

 Okay.

 

 So second question.

 

 Do you accept any rules for China or Russia, and specifically China, in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict?

 

 As we saw, like, China played rules between Saudi Arabia and Iran.

 

 They looked like a peacemaker in the area, like, they don't have any criticizing toward the bias.

 

 You have a lot of criticizing that you have a bias toward Israel, providing them military aid, supporting their back in the United Nations, et cetera.

 

 So do you accept any rules for China or Russia, like, for playing any peacemaking rules between Palestinian and the Israeli or not?

 

 Last question.

 

 Are we going to see, like, Taliban's scenario, like strong statements about terrorist group, blah, blah, blah, and then see you or Israel sitting on the same table in Qatar — Sure.

 

 Let me — Sign a deal.

 

 Can you shed a little light on the timeline around the UNRWA decision?

 

 The Israeli Government has since shared that intelligence dossier with some members of the press.

 

 They said they shared the dossier, I believe, on that Friday.

 

 And the decision was also announced that Friday, the same day the court ruling came out.

 

 How was State able to – how were you able to make such a fast decision?

 

 Was there any concern internally that releasing the announcement within about an hour or so of the ICJ court ruling, which said – which one thing it did was instruct Israel to make sure that humanitarian aid was flowing, that it would – that announcing it so close together would seem like a repudiation in some ways?

 

 So the message of this EO and these sanctions is to try to say that the Israelis need to take further action against the perpetrators of violence in the West Bank.

 

 If that's the case, why would you sanction people Israel had already taken action against?

 

 Wouldn't it have sent a stronger message to sanction those who had not yet been prosecuted?

 

 Okay.

 

 And then secondly, but related to the Middle East, have you gotten any clarity from your people about this hospital raid in Jenin yesterday, or from the Israelis about the destruction of the university in Gaza?

 

 I mean, you say that they're only going to- they only target facilities or whatever they are- That is what they've reported back to us, correct.

 

 Does that mean what, 75% of Gaza was- So I don't want to make- Buildings in Gaza were like being used to plan, or is that your understanding?

 

 They have told you that all of those that you've asked questions about, all of those buildings, those facilities, were being used, or had been used, to either plot or conduct their operations.

 

 Can you report out a moment ago from Axios that Secretary Blinken has ordered staff to prepare policy plans for a Palestinian state after the war in Gaza and that this signals a policy shift in the administration?

 

 Do you have a comment on that?

 

 But presumably, I guess policy planning would have contingency plans in the works that would include a Palestinian state.

 

 Is there something new?

 

 Can you tell us if the Secretary issued a new directive?

 

 Sorry, can I just put a little context on this?

 

 Hasn't the State Department been looking at what it would take to create a Palestinian state since the Clinton administration?

 

 And is it not correct that all of the diplomatic efforts that are going into, including a potential secretary return to the Middle East, are heavily focused on day after and long-term stability and security for the region, which you believe would include a Palestinian state?

 

 A question about the UN.

 

 So UNRWA and the UN have kind of been giving conflicting guidance as to when they are going to, quote, unquote, run out of funding for Palestinians in Gaza.

 

 You got into this issue a little bit yesterday when you talked about the U.S. funding.

 

 Does the state have any clarity on how long it might be until UNRWA does actually run out of funding?

 

 Do you have any sense that, as the Secretary has now said, the Secretary General has now said that this could be, the U.S.'s pause on funding could be catastrophic for Gazans?

 

 You said that the Secretary is going to meet the UN's secret COG today, and you mentioned yesterday that there would hopefully be some work to lay the ground for this UN assessment mission in northern Gaza.

 

 Is there any update you can give on what's happened?

 

 And in terms of the set-up, the assessment mission was something that the Secretary came back with several weeks ago from the Middle East now.

 

 What is it that's been holding up getting that assessment mission in there?

 

 And given the Axios report about State Department plans to possibly recognize an independent Palestine, what do you say to critics who would say that this is rewarding terrorism?

 

 Okay.

 

 So let me ask you this then.

 

 I mean, you know, look, Israel stands accused of committing genocide, you know.

 

 It's an allegation.

 

 There are certainly, you know, settlers who serve in the Israeli army that you probably, you know, designate as either extremists or things of that nature.

 

 I mean, we can also look at the Israeli government that has maybe 12 members who basically have called for the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.

 

 But they continue to be members of that government in good standing, receiving a great deal of aid.

 

 And finally, it seems that members of Congress yesterday met with an Israeli official and they discussed with him an alternative to UNRWA.

 

 Is the government of the United States looking at alternatives to UNRWA?

 

 How accurate are the reports that the United States will hold a peace conference this fall between Palestinians and Israelis to establish or to discuss establishing the Palestinian state?

 

 Internationally, many consider that the United States is not qualified and unsuitable to mediate this rule between Palestinians and Israelis, especially the rule of the United States in the Gaza war and the strong ties between the United States and Israel.

 

 In the meantime, is there any way, is there any option for getting the $300,000 in suspended assistance into Gaza without going through UNRWA?

 

 Okay, and then my second thing, which is related but not UNRWA, which has to do with this operation that the Israelis launched in Jenin Hospital today.

 

 Do you have any comment on that?

 

 Is this something that you think is problematic, or is it something that you look at with envy, like this is some kind of great mission, impossible mission that we wish that we could also do?

 

 But on this particular one, I mean, Israel occupies the whole West Bank.

 

 They are under their control.

 

 They don't need to disguise themselves as medics and go into a hospital and kill people, which he called non-civilians.

 

 They are actually civilians.

 

 But that's beside the point.

 

 There are civilian members of Hamas.

 

 It's a political organization.

 

 You may disagree with their politics, but that does not make them militant.

 

 But that's an accusation of the occupier, a military occupier.

 

 They are making the accusation.

 

 I want to ask you, is that a conduct befitting a state or a group of gangsters to go in and kill people, assassinate them as they sat in their- So- Is that the conduct of the state?

 

 Will the United States ever do something like this under similar circumstances?

 

 The West Bank.

 

 We're talking about the West Bank, not Gaza.

 

 Let me ask you on the UNRWA thing.

 

 Now, you're cutting off aid at a time when several human rights officials are really warning that Gaza is on the verge of starvation.

 

 It's a real possibility.

 

 These people are facing famine and starvation, and you cut off aid.

 

 Because there is allegedly 12 people that are members of Hamas, who have done this and so on, out of 12,000 employees, you know?

 

 I mean, nobody talks about 158 employees by UNRWA, employed by UNRWA, that were killed by the Israelis.

 

 But, you know, I want to go back to the issue of famine and the likelihood of starvation, famine, and so on.

 

 What is your response to that?

 

 I want to come back to the ICJ ruling last week.

 

 We haven't had a briefing since then.

 

 Before the ruling, your colleague, we were asking what the U.S. view would be on whether Israel is compelled to follow what the court was asking it to do.

 

 You know, you have responded to the – the State Department has responded to the ruling, but on the specific – I guess one specific thing that the ruling requested of Israel is to report within a month on what it's doing to ensure that genocide isn't taking place.

 

 Is that something that the U.S. is calling on Israel to comply with?

 

 When you said that you expect Israel – we expect them to determine what they need to do to comply?

 

 Any expectations for how long the investigation might kind of come to a conclusion?

 

 Are you thinking weeks?

 

 And what mechanisms are you guys looking – meaning, if this investigation finds that these – the firings were rightfully made, that these individuals helped Hamas carry out the October 7th attacks, is – what kind of action – do you guys want to see sort of criminal indictments against these folks?

 

 On the hostage talks, Matt, officials, including the Secretary, have been publicly telegraphing optimism around this latest round of talks.

 

 Can you give us any details on what's underscoring these public pronouncements of hope and a strong proposal on the table?

 

 Does the U.S. have any comment on Prime Minister Netanyahu's comments today sort of doubling down on this maximalist approach, saying they would not pull out troops from Gaza, saying – keeping to these maximalist aims and saying they wouldn't release thousands of terrorists?

 

 And then on the UN assessment mission that the Secretary announced on his last trip to Israel, do you have any updates on when that might happen, the scope of anything?

 

 What sort of paving has to be done for this to take place?

 

 And then last question.

 

 A group of Democratic lawmakers wrote to the Secretary asking for answers about his use of an emergency declaration to send arms to Israel last month twice.

 

 Does the – or the building intend to respond to their questions by February 9th?

 

 The Iranian regime continues to defend its ties with the Taliban in order to integrate them into the axis of resistance.

 

 Would you be worried if the Taliban fighter show up in the Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon to fight alongside Iran's proxy against Israel and the other U.S. allies?

 

 In general when a court Is ruling on something?

 

 you can argue that you don't.

 

 you don't agree with with South Africa's argument, but it sort of undermines the legitimacy of the whole system.

 

 if You know, the u.s. Is not.

 

 Yeah, it's not saying ahead of time whether Whether this bit this ruling is meaningful or whether you would expect countries to follow it.

 

 and just to note Hamas has said that they would follow If the ICJ Demanded a ceasefire.

 

 They would follow it.

 

 I haven't seen that statement from from the Israelis.

 

 Thank you Now, but of course Hamas did release some hostages You know back in the last week of November, correct?

 

 They did release hostages.

 

 Said right and responding to Simon you said that You know, we know that Hamas committed all these atrocities and so on and crimes Which you know qualify as crime by the court.

 

 possibly I don't know.

 

 I'm not a legal expert, but let me ask you this.

 

 I mean Hamas does not get four billion dollars a year.

 

 There's not a state.

 

 There's not that I get endless political cover and Protection and so on from the United States of America.

 

 So are you saying that?

 

 Hamas.

 

 Israel should behave exactly like Hamas.

 

 Well, you know It's the hundred and eleventh day of this war.

 

 There is you know Untold amount of evidence that proves whatever case you want to prove and so on.

 

 You believe that all along all throughout these raids these attacks by whatever weapons Israel has Abided by the laws of war that you that you subscribe to.

 

 Yeah, I have a couple more questions.

 

 but Conversely Israel could also pull out its forces and stop bombing civilian areas.

 

 that that would end the war wouldn't you have been?

 

 I want to ask you about the Palestinian American Taufiq Abdel-Jabbar There was a report in AP lengthy.

 

 It shows that it was unprovoked an unprovoked attack.

 

 He was riding a truck in it in the finest of Louisiana tradition.

 

 He was driving a pickup truck and then was shot.

 

 So do you have any comment on this report?

 

 that is really quite details of what happened.

 

 This is something that just came out.

 

 and Lastly, I want to ask you about the hospital in Khan units.

 

 The Guardian is reporting that There are thousands trapped in the Gaza hospital in Khan units.

 

 I wonder if you have any update on that.

 

 You can tell us what?

 

 what's going on?

 

 What is the United States government is doing to alleviate?

 

 Whatever's you know, this humongous suffering.

 

 Okay, we'll go to go ahead and then I'll pivot back On some of say it's not enough questioning because I mean just big picture.

 

 Humanitarian aid is still at a trickle.

 

 you yourself have called that insufficient since at least October.

 

 civilian casualties Continue unabated.

 

 the destruction of civilian infrastructure continues unabated.

 

 So is it time for this administration to admit that the rhetoric however direct and candid and oft repeated as it is Isn't having a material effect on Israeli behavior when it comes to this conflict?

 

 Is it time to reach for tools other than rhetoric?

 

 Declaring a moral and strategic imperative imperative that the Israelis are clearly not abiding by.

 

 that it's important?

 

 Let me ask it this way Is the u.s. Considering anything other than conversation as a tool to affect change in Israeli?

 

 in written Israel's behavior.

 

 Does the US leave that Prime Minister Netanyahu's comments with regard to the Qatari's involvement in hostage negotiations Set those efforts back?

 

 at the same time There were images this week of it Israeli protesters blocking aid Coming in to Gaza.

 

 to get that far into a military zone There seemed to there must be some kind of coordination with the military there.

 

 Did the u.s. Raise With its Israeli partners this question of Israeli civilians protesting and blocking aid getting into Gaza?

 

 Thanks to that according to January 19th Jewish telegraphic agency article 15 Jewish House Democrats have sent a letter to President Biden condemning Prime Minister Netanyahu for Opposing a Palestinian Arab state.

 

 and my question to you is does such a letter harm or help security Blinken's Diplomacy work in the Middle East and why or why not?

 

 and then follow up.

 

 Oh, you know in light of Israel Prime Minister Netanyahu's statement in an Israeli government press office news release, January 21st this year opposing a Palestinian state a secretary Blinken opened a meeting with and addressing evangelical Christian and Orthodox Jewish leaders.

 

 religious concerns about a Palestinian state.

 

 Yeah negotiations there's.

 

 Secretary Blinken has said straight out that there can't be business as normal with Hamas after this crisis is resolved.

 

 There's been reports that cutter might move away from having these ties to Hamas But we've been of course in the middle of negotiations.

 

 There hasn't been progress in really in freeing hostages in about two months now.

 

 Is there a timeline for when those ties might be re-evaluated or when the US might call for Qatar to turn away from Hamas?

 

 Switching gears to the Palestinian issue.

 

 First of all, do you have anything, any update on the Palestinian-American killed by the Israelis a couple days ago?

 

 Will there be an investigation by the American security coordinator?

 

 Do you believe there is any other way other than direct negotiations or third-way negotiations between Hamas and Israel to release those hostages and the prisoners?

 

 And I'm just saying that the Israelis said all along that they want to do this, they want to free them by force.

 

 Do you think that this is still feasible?

 

 Do you think that the Israeli army can free those hostages forcibly, as they have said at the beginning?

 

 A couple more, if you indulge me.

 

 There are about half a million Gazans are suffering from acute hunger.

 

 Do you have anything on that?

 

 I mean, it seems that one out of four trucks is allowed to go in after a very tedious kind of inspection and so on.

 

 So you believe that there are enough steps that are being taken to prevent a looming famine?

 

 And finally, I asked you on the artifacts on Monday that the Israeli soldiers stole from the Israel University for blowing it up.

 

 It seems that they are showing it in warehouses and so on.

 

 Do you have any comment on that?

 

 Should there be some sort of a commission that can ensure the retrieval of those artifacts stolen by the Israelis?

 

 You may have had the chance to see some of the footage shot by our cameraman in the Gaza Strip, widely shared online, showing a group of men waving a white flag, representing no threat whatsoever, unarmed and moving south to try and reach some relatives.

 

 The IDF opened fire, as you can see on that video, and killed one of them, Abu Salool.

 

 I wonder what your response to that is and whether you think from watching that video, whether that potentially represents a war crime.

 

 Beyond that comment about it being heartbreaking, which is a platitude we often hear, would you urge, given that you broadly support the IDF operations in the Gaza Strip, would you support a Israeli investigation of what happened in that video?

 

 That is for- Given that they're waving a white flag and they represented no threat.

 

 Just on this, Vedam, you said that we don't have the full facts or something like that in a minute.

 

 Did you actually reach out specifically to Israel about this footage and try to get whatever the facts that you guys are seeking?

 

 How about the footage that arose last week and the week before and the week before and the week before and the week before, where there have been, if not similar, awfully close instances?

 

 Have you ever gotten an explanation from the Israelis?

 

 Have you ever gotten a finding from the Israelis of what their investigation, if they promised one?

 

 Okay, well, have you ever gotten an answer from the Israelis?

 

 That's fine, that's fine that you say that, but then when you are asked specific questions like this relating to specific footage, and this is not the first time that this has happened, you've been asked repeatedly about this, and then you come back and say, well, we've raised questions with you, we've asked the Israelis questions.

 

 Have you ever gotten a response to any of those?

 

 These conversations are- I'm not asking you for the details, I just wanted to know if you've gotten a response.

 

 In any case, are you aware of what the Israelis say, we screwed up here?

 

 And so, have you asked the Israelis to look into this?

 

 Look, Matt, I think you need to go back to NEA, or whoever is in charge of this, and get a definitive answer about whether you're asking about specific incidents.

 

 Well then, if the Israelis respond to you, you need to come back and tell us what they say.

 

 And if they don't respond to you, which it sounds like may very well be the case, you should say that.

 

 Well then, assurance doesn't mean a whole hell of a lot if you're not able to say that you've gotten any response.

 

 I mean, you are the biggest supporter of the Israeli government.

 

 Not you personally, but the United States is.

 

 And if you can't, if you ask questions about troubling incidents, which you just said that this one on Khan Younis was incredibly concerning, and we deplore the attack, if you can't get an answer from them on this, what does that say about what the US?

 

 Thank you.

 

 And in New York, Russia and Iranian foreign ministers met, and they called for ceasefire in Gaza.

 

 What do you make of the fact that Iran angle is one angle, but Russia keeps murdering Ukrainians, civilians, even as we speak, calls for ceasefire in the Middle East?

 

 I have two questions related to Egypt.

 

 Like today, the Egyptian president, Mr.

 

 Sisi, like he said officially, he swore in conference that Egypt is not principled for preventing aid to get from Rafah to Gaza.

 

 And Israel, in international court, like they blamed Egypt that, or like implicitly that they are not responsible for, like they are not preventing any aid coming from Rafah to Gaza.

 

 So what is your perspective as a country, as USA in this agreement?

 

 Like who is responsible for letting the aid, like not just 200 trucks, like appropriate number of trucks for aid, humanitarian aid to get in Gaza?

 

 Is it Egypt or is it Israel?

 

 Both are blaming each other now officially about who is responsible for preventing this aid.

 

 And you as a country keep saying that you care about humanitarian, you need like more aid coming in and stuff like that.

 

 But both are blaming each other and both are aligned with USA.

 

 So who is responsible about this aid?

 

 The second thing, officially Egypt as well, like warned or urged Israel to not occupy the Philadelphia axis.

 

 While the Israeli perspective is to occupy the Philadelphia axis, which is like the border between Gaza and Rafah.

 

 And the US perspective, what do you think is better for solving this conflict?

 

 Is like Israel occupying the Philadelphia axis, or like no, like stay away of this?

 

 Yeah, so you are blaming Israel that they are not letting the humanitarian aid- That's not what I said.

 

 So how we solve this problem of letting the appropriate humanitarian aid to get in Gaza?

 

 Like two of your allies are blaming each other.

 

 Palestinian issue?

 

 Are you aware of a Palestinian-American teen that was killed by the Israelis, 17-year-old Tawfiq Abdul-Jabbar?

 

 And if you are, are you doing anything about that?

 

 But you don't know under which circumstances he was killed?

 

 A couple of other things.

 

 The US News and World Report is reporting that 16,000 women and children have been killed in Gaza.

 

 Does that have anything to say about that?

 

 Does that really hold you back and stagger your perceptions of what's going on in this war?

 

 Well, you know, Israel has been using dumb bombs, 2,000 pounds that were supplied by the United States of America.

 

 That is not exactly being surgical and so on.

 

 As long as they use this kind of munition, civilians will die, day in and day out.

 

 Are you going to reconcile to the fact that 150 or more Palestinian civilians, men, women, and children die every day now?

 

 Although it's the Israeli forces that are really now occupying Hamas, and inside, I mean, occupying Gaza and inside the territory, correct?

 

 So, yeah, I mean, they could call this off too.

 

 They could probably pursue a much more, a course that might be much more successful, like negotiating with Hamas to release the hostages.

 

 One, my last question.

 

 Palestinians are reporting that the Israeli army executed 19 civilians in a summary execution.

 

 I wonder if you are aware of the report and if you have any comment on that.

 

 Last week, we were discussing the destruction of the university in Gaza.

 

 Matt said that the U.S. is always troubled by, or is troubled by the degradation of civilian infrastructure in Gaza.

 

 He also said that you guys had asked Israel questions about this specific incident.

 

 I'm wondering if you've heard back from them if the Israelis are saying that this building, which appeared to be empty and appeared to be occupied by, or at least had been occupied by the IDF so that they could get the explosives in to do a controlled demolition, if the Israelis have come back to you and said that that's a threat, or it was a threat, and that's why it was destroyed.

 

 Okay, in your experience, does it generally take them longer than four or five days to get back to you?

 

 So right now, you're no more or less concerned than you were last week?

 

 Is it your opinion or your position, or is the administration's position that this constituted a quote-unquote degradation of civilian infrastructure?

 

 I mean, whether it was justified or not, it is understanding that the Israelis haven't come back to you yet with the answers to your no-doubt probing questions.

 

 This, you believe that, rightly or wrongly, this was degradation, so degradation of civilian.

 

 And then I just wanted to ask you about this word degradation, because this wasn't degradation.

 

 This was complete destruction.

 

 No, he referred to this, that you were troubled by incidents of the degradation of civilian infrastructure in Gaza.

 

 And this counts as degradation?

 

 It doesn't count as complete destruction?

 

 This was a case of steps were, not only were steps not taken to protect civilian infrastructure, steps were taken to completely demolish civilian infrastructure.

 

 And if you look at pictures from other parts of Gaza, and I won't get into that, because we're talking about this one specific case, this one specific instance, it wasn't that the Israelis didn't take steps to avoid damage to this building.

 

 It was that they intentionally took steps to completely destroy it.

 

 They also, the Israeli army apparently stole 3,000 artifacts from the university's museum.

 

 You have any information on that?

 

 Is that something that the United States would ask the Israelis, whether they did?

 

 And if they did, could they return them?

 

 Going back to the death of the Palestinian American teenager, on what level has the U.S. communicated with Israel regarding the urgent need for investigation?

 

 Has the Secretary spoken with his?

 

 And I have a separate question.

 

 Could you have any update on the amount of Americans who have, number of Americans who have been killed in Gaza and the number who have been injured?

 

 And in the course of Americans who have left Gaza and gone into Egypt, can you say how many of them have you've seen be injured as a result of what's taking place in Gaza?

 

 Are you aware of any Americans who are on, or any Americans who are on the list trying to get across into Egypt who are injured and awaiting hospital treatment?

 

 Thanks, Vedan.

 

 Just going to what President Biden told reporters last week after this conversation with the Israeli Prime Minister, he said that there are a number of types of two state solutions.

 

 There's a number of countries that are members of the UN that don't have their own militaries.

 

 I'm just seeking clarification on whether this is the US like saying that it is willing to accept a Palestinian state that doesn't have sovereign control over its own military, de facto its own security and its own borders.

 

 Is that the case?

 

 And also just to follow on that, the Israeli prime minister put out a statement this weekend after the president's comments saying, and this is translated from the Hebrew, my insistence is what has prevented over the years the establishment of a Palestinian state that would have constituted an existential danger to Israel.

 

 As long as I'm prime minister, I will continue to strongly insist on this.

 

 Would you agree that that sounds a lot like an Israeli leader who is not willing to work with anyone not on the establishment of a Palestinian state?

 

 There are allegations Senator Menendez took bribes from Qatar.

 

 Over the weekend separately, new reports the Qataris led a campaign to discredit Republican senators trying to designate the Muslim Brotherhood.

 

 Does state have any concerns about these allegations against the Qataris?

 

 Have they been related to the Qataris in any way?

 

 Do these allegations in any way cause state to question the reliability of Qatar as an ally considering they're playing such a key role in the hostage crisis in Israel?

 

 Thank you, Vedant.

 

 I'll go back on the two-state solution.

 

 The EU's foreign policy chief, Joseph Borrell, today said that Israel's plan to destroy Hamas is not working and the European Union must pursue efforts to create a two-state solution despite Israeli opposition.

 

 And there were also some reports that the EU is seeking to impose consequences on Israel for its opposition to Palestinian statehood.

 

 What is your response to that?

 

 Do you believe that there should be consequences on Israel's opposition to a two-state solution?

 

 Do you have anything to share on your engagements with Israelis in this regard, on the two-state solution?

 

 The first question regarding to the Qatar, like we have been reading and listening comments from Israeli leaders that Qatar's are involved with, like Qatar's leaders and Qatar's state is involved with Hamas, allies with Hamas, and they must be punished.

 

 How much US agree or disagree that is Qatar involved with Hamas, not just like in October 7th, but in the, like all the process of Hamas operations?

 

 This is first question.

 

 Second question, why the USA disagree with this international court trail?

 

 Like if you are assured that Israeli are like very innocent, like they are very moral, they don't do something wrong, over like 10 hundreds days, like they are amazing, like they don't do anything wrong.

 

 So why you are afraid that you go to this trail if you are assured that they are innocent?

 

 Like, can you justify or explain like why you are worried or afraid that Israel subject to the trail?

 

 The last question is related to the Houthi.

 

 Do we expect that USA could escalate like their operation against the Houthi until like invading Yemen or like do like an escalation in terms of bombing Yemen or like they are just going to do some small operation, even the Houthi like doesn't care about what they're doing?

 

 United States daily expresses its regret for the killing of the civilian in Gaza.

 

 And they still killed now more than 24 and killed civilians.

 

 And there's under the rubber.

 

 At the same time, United States refused the ceasefire in Gaza.

 

 So, and also the only state who used last time vetoes to ceasefire.

 

 You don't think this is a conflict of the position?

 

 Okay.

 

 And then off this topic and before I'll let other people go on to Gaza and the situation there, but I just wanted to ask you really quickly about what your read is, what the administration thinks of the situation between Iran and Pakistan right now, and how concerned are you that this could escalate into potentially at least on one side and maybe on both sides, a nuclear conflict?

 

 So, just to pick at that a little bit, are you sort of treating the Iran-Pakistan tensions as part of the spillover from Gaza?

 

 Do you see this as connected to that?

 

 Do you assess that Iran's, the initial strike is, was somehow, you know, somehow is inspired by or related to what's been happening elsewhere, further west?

 

 I have more on Gaza, but if we're sticking on this.

 

 Can I go to Gaza?

 

 Thank you, Matt.

 

 Israel yesterday, the Israeli military, occupied and destroyed the Israel University in Gaza.

 

 I mean, this is probably number 10 of all 10 universities that they have destroyed.

 

 Is it the assessment of this department, or this government, that this was a legitimate target?

 

 But there seems to be no evidence that there were any fighters, in fact, any presence of, any kind of military presence in the university itself.

 

 But that, I mean, we've seen, I mean, you keep saying that you want Israel not to destroy the infrastructure.

 

 Yet, we have seen almost the total destruction of all infrastructure, including schools, hospitals, roads, you know, cemeteries.

 

 You know, they just, you know, they excavated a cemetery, for instance, and took bodies, whatever.

 

 I mean, this is not exactly, tell us in any way that the government of Israel is really paying heed to what you tell them, you know, in any way, by any measure.

 

 They're not listening to you.

 

 The West Bank is, basically, the situation is just getting completely out of control.

 

 The Israelis are doing their excursions on nightly basis.

 

 They killed 10 yesterday.

 

 They keep going into these refugee camps on the West Bank and so on.

 

 They have been struck by unmanned aerial vehicle, you know, by drones and so on.

 

 They have been struck even by fixed-wing a couple times at the beginning of the month.

 

 So, I just want, what are you doing to sort of calm the situation down and the West Bank?

 

 In a territory that they have occupied for over 56 years, right?

 

 I mean, they go in, they know everything about this area.

 

 Just on the ongoing diplomatic efforts, the conversations, it's been 27 days since the leaders of Israel and the U.S. have spoken.

 

 Did the Secretary hear any indication while in Israel that the Prime Minister thought it would be productive to have another conversation soon?

 

 Sure, but isn't the tempo of leadership exchanges something that you pay close attention to?

 

 So, you know, with China, so does that lack of leader-to-leader engagement of late suggest that a diplomacy between the U.S. is faltering or at an impasse, or simply that there's nothing for the leaders to exchange views about?

 

 Before we leave this topic, can I just say, so have you seen Prime Minister Netanyahu's latest comments about, you know, that he's rejected your guys' assertion that the only way that Israel is going to achieve long-term security and peace is with the creation of a Palestinian state?

 

 This is obviously not new.

 

 This is something that he has said for some time and told you all directly last week, even.

 

 But I'm just wondering if you have any new, particularly new reaction to him being, apparently, in this situation, the roadblock, your ally, your partner, all the Arab states are on board, at least according to what you guys say, with post-conflict Gaza future planning, but Israel is not, so.

 

 You think that Netanyahu is basically squandering an opportunity for real, lasting peace for his country?

 

 All right, and then the, what makes you, you said at some point, at the beginning of your answer, you said at some point the war in Gaza is gonna come to an end.

 

 Why are you so confident of that?

 

 The situation right now appears to be one in which this is going to be never-ending, and the youth who survive in Gaza, the Palestinian youth, have been radicalized to the point where, or seem to have been radicalized to the point where there isn't gonna be an end anytime soon, even with the creation of an independent Palestinian state.

 

 Are you convinced that the Israelis do see an end to this conflict?

 

 Matt, thank you.

 

 I want just to follow up on the Israeli prime minister remarks.

 

 I know he didn't say something new, but he said that he informed you that he doesn't support a Palestinian state.

 

 Did he inform you?

 

 Because it explains a lot.

 

 He didn't speak with the president since December 23rd.

 

 Okay, you said also, during the secretary trip in the region, he heard from the leaders, and they are willing to engage with Israel.

 

 Do you characterize Prime Minister Netanyahu as a willing partner to engage for peace in the region?

 

 One more question.

 

 On Lebanon, I know that that risk has been high for a second front, or bigger front.

 

 There's a front going, but given the new statements by the Israeli leaders and also the threat from Hezbollah, do you see that risk is higher on the northern border?

 

 Yeah, just to come back onto the Prime Minister Netanyahu's comments, so your response seems to be, and what you were saying in the region is, you've outlined very clearly for the Israelis why there's, how there's an opportunity here, right, to, at, but what they need, they need to make these tough choices, but clearly with these comments, it's kind of drawing a line under that and saying the current prime minister is not willing to make those tough choices, so as well as offering an opportunity and saying here's a great solution to all your problems, are you also offering some kind of, some kind of pressure, or what is it that you're actually saying to the Israelis we will do if you don't accept, or are you just gonna hold your hands up and say, well, we gave them an opportunity and they didn't take it?

 

 So if there's, you're basically saying that their current position is only gonna, is not gonna lead to any solution, there's no way that this will be solved, does that mean cutting, do you continue to supply weapons and other support to an ally that is not listening to the warnings that you're giving?

 

 But the message is, I guess that you could read from that, is that US support for Israel is not at risk, no matter what choices they make.

 

 Matt, in light of an NBC News report yesterday that describes President Biden and Saudi Prince Salman's frustrations with Prime Minister Netanyahu refuses to accept a Palestinian state as a required pathway to peace.

 

 What is your response to Prime Minister Netanyahu and evangelical Christians who oppose the establishment of a Palestinian state to divide Israel?

 

 Okay, then follow up.

 

 Do you expect Iran to cease their hostilities against Israel if Israel agreed to a Palestinian state given that Iran's Ayatollah has called for the total annihilation of Israel?

 

 About Iran also, since the head of the snake is Iran that is fueling unrest in the Middle East, what do you see the U.S. and its allies can do to stop their aggression?

 

 Do you get any indication that Iran is taking these messages that are being conveyed to them to heart?

 

 Do you sense that they are ever going to try to de-escalate?

 

 And then last question.

 

 The Secretary announced that the U.S. and Israel had agreed on a plan for a UN assessment team to go into northern Gaza.

 

 Do you have any details on when this might take place, the scope of that assessment team?

 

 Today, Thomas Friedman of the New York Times asked the Secretary of State whether do Jewish lives matter more than Palestinian and Muslim lives, Muslim and Christian, Palestinian-Christian lives given the incredible asymmetry and casualties and so on, to which the Secretary said with an emphatic no.

 

 Now tell us how does that square with the fact that both the President and the Secretary of State said in statements marking the 100th day, talked about the ordeal of the hostages and so on, and not a single mention of 100,000 Palestinians dead, missing, or injured.

 

 So let's have that square with that.

 

 Today, the WFP program, the World Food Program, said that there's actually a possible famine.

 

 The Palestinians face a possible famine, you know, at a time when there are trucks laden with food and so on.

 

 And they're not getting in, simply because Israel makes it so.

 

 So what is your position on this?

 

 And finally, in the same interview, the Secretary said he was wondering what's to be done about Gaza.

 

 How about a ceasefire?

 

 I think that would resolve immediately, would probably resolve this tragedy.

 

 Oh, I said I would go to Livia next, and then I'll... I'm sorry on the specific question about the WFP warehouse that we went to in Amman.

 

 Because there the WFP staff was saying to us and to the Secretary that it would be helpful, you talked about people in the north of Gaza, you know, we're not talking about people returning to the north, which this UN mission is about, but the people who are still stuck in the north are, you know, without aid, have been without aid for a really long time because none of the trucks can get there.

 

 They had a very simple request, which was there are border crossings between northern Gaza and Israel.

 

 Could the Israelis allow aid to cross those?

 

 Is that something the Secretary raised with the Israelis?

 

 And you know, what was their response?

 

 The aid officials were also saying that people in the south of Gaza are so hungry that if you send a food truck from the south to the north, it's not going to get there.

 

 So perhaps opening those border crossings.

 

 But aside from that, just to clarify from Jennifer... Can I say something?

 

 No, I just wanted to clarify in answer to Jenny's question that you went to a food warehouse in Amman, you came to Israel to talk to Israelis with quite a few requests about humanitarian aid.

 

 What we seem to be the only thing that you came out with was this promise to allow a aid mission with no timeline, right?

 

 Does that sort of seem like a satisfactory sort of concession from the Israelis given all of the dramatic language being used about aid and the risk of famine?

 

 We get the promise of UN access at some point with no specific timeline.

 

 As one point of clarification on northern Gaza, was it ever communicated to the Secretary or anyone else on the American side that it's Israel's policy not to permit people to return to the north unless and until a new hostage deal is struck?

 

 Okay, so that was never said.

 

 So it's neither the spoken nor unspoken policy of the Israeli government to make that kind of link?

 

 I think I had said earlier that we want to see it happen as soon as possible, so— There isn't— There isn't— No meaningful change in that has happened.

 

 I think the number of trucks going in is still stuck at fewer than 200 on average daily, right?

 

 So for the U.S. to want this to happen as soon as possible, what does that mean?

 

 So— The Israelis are not fully on board.

 

 Did you receive any assurances—did the secretary secure any assurances from the Israeli government that they would move, you know, with alacrity on this issue?

 

 After today's discussion, I have other issues to cover later.

 

 Is it still your assessment that Iran's proxies are acting alone?

 

 They're making solely independent decisions, even after what we heard from Iranian Foreign Minister at Davos today?

 

 And that makes perfect sense.

 

 But just to be clear about that, Iran's foreign minister today linked the security of the Red Sea to the Gaza events, and he said everyone will suffer if it doesn't stop.

 

 He said all the fronts will remain active.

 

 What do you make of these statements?

 

 Going back to access to Gaza, the Israeli government still hasn't given any independent journalistic access for foreign journalists to Gaza over 100 days in, on top of the number of Palestinian journalists killed in Gaza.

 

 Is this something you're putting pressure on the Israelis about, allowing foreign journalists in?

 

 And what does it say, in your view, about people's ability to really know what's going on in Gaza?

 

 But are you saying to the Israeli government it is one of the issues that access should be allowed for journalists?

 

 In light of a January 9 Israel Knesset member-led meeting in the Knesset condemning the UN agency for fostering a welfare-dependent Palestinian population that breeds dissent and teaches children in their textbooks that the land is Palestine and Israel is the illegal occupier, with other instruction to hate and kill Jews, plus their association with terrorist groups like Hamas and Palestinian Authority, what is Secretary Blinken's response to Knesset members Sharon Haskell and Simcha Rotman, who are calling for the funding of UNRWA to stop?

 

 And I have a follow-up.

 

 The follow-up is, how can you expect Israel and other nations to believe that the UN agency, is a credible humanitarian agency, since, according to Jerusalem Post reports, teachers and students celebrated Hamas' brutal attack on Israel October 7, and over half of the Hamas terrorists behind that massacre were graduates of UNRWA schools in Gaza, and weapons were found in UNRWA schools.

 

 You speak of the Iranian attacks on its neighbors, and I have a question on the Iranian attacks on Erbil specifically.

 

 The Iranian government is trying to distort the very facts of their attacks on Erbil, as they say that we are, we took this action against an Israeli base in Erbil.

 

 And the Iraqi government and the Kurdistan Region government says that this action were took against a civilian house where four civilian people were killed, including one-year-old infant.

 

 What's your assessment on that?

 

 And do you support the Iraqi government to take this action, this issue, to the United Nations to hold Iranians accountable for that?

 

 A couple things on that.

 

 You said you didn't want to react to the arguments made today.

 

 The Israeli foreign ministry said that, described South Africa as being the legal arm of, forget the exact phrase, the legal arm of Hamas.

 

 Do you agree with statements like that?

 

 Do you agree about the South African motivations on this?

 

 You said that the allegations are unfounded.

 

 How confident are you about this statement saying that the allegations are unfounded?

 

 And if the U.S. is so confident that it is unfounded, why not just let the courts investigate them?

 

 I have one that, you know, allegations about intentional killing of civilians.

 

 You said previously that there are steps Israel can take to minimize civilian harm, and the Secretary this week said the civilian toll in Gaza is far too high.

 

 If there are steps that Israel can take to minimize civilian harm, and they choose not to take them, does it imply an intentional killing of civilians?

 

 Just one more on that.

 

 Since the US is the biggest supplier of military aid to Israel, is there any concern that, you know, you might be involved in any possible war crimes by Israel?

 

 A follow-up on Gaza, a follow-up on Gaza?

 

 Secretary Blinken from Cairo said this morning that one of the main takeaways from this trip was Israel agreeing to the UN assessment of northern Gaza to establish the conditions for when Palestinian citizens could return there.

 

 When is that assessment supposed to begin?

 

 How long is it expected to run?

 

 And what assurances has the US received that Israel will agree to abide by any recommendations that the UN makes there?

 

 There's been some reporting that Israeli officials won't permit Palestinians to return north unless and until more hostages are released.

 

 Has that been formally communicated to the US as Israel's policy, and how does the US view that kind of condition if it exists?

 

 Okay, staying on the region and the UN, there's now a warning that the people of Gaza could be experiencing famine by as soon as early February.

 

 Were there any concrete commitments secured by the Secretary during this trip to significantly boost the amount of humanitarian aid, the consistency with which it gets in, the volume with which it gets in, the deconfliction zones that seems to be a persistent sticking point in aids delivery?

 

 Any breakthroughs on that front?

 

 I mean, the 7,000 number notwithstanding, I mean, health officials are saying that it's an average of 127 trucks getting in, down from an average of 500 that were going in daily before this conflict erupted.

 

 So this is a three-month-long effort that seems not to be bearing much fruit.

 

 Okay, well, thank you, Vedant.

 

 Since the Associated Press and CNN questioned the legitimacy and accuracy of the Hamas-controlled health ministry Gaza death statistics, and CNN stating that they cannot independently verify the number of Gaza deaths, how can Secretary Blinken justify trusting in these unverifiable death statistics since this Hamas-controlled health ministry never distinguishes between civilians and combatants, nor how Palestinians were killed, whether from Israeli airstrikes and artillery barrages or other means like errant Palestinian rocket fire?

 

 It describes all casualties as victims of Israeli aggression.

 

 On the Gaza issue, in 2022, the U.S. filed a brief of intervention in Ukraine's case against Russia in the ICJ.

 

 Why are the circumstances different that the U.S. would not file such a brief or support South Africa in its action against Israel?

 

 What are the points of difference that the U.S. has decided on to adopt these very different positions?

 

 The claim is not exactly genocide is happening.

 

 The claim in the brief is that the potential for genocide is in place.

 

 The bar for genocide is exceedingly high, as you know, but also remembering that President Biden in 2022 described Russia's invasion of Ukraine as genocide.

 

 So he was very quick to make a determination, which something like the ICJ still has not made on that particular case.

 

 Isn't this all a bit too early to be saying that there are no grounds for the potential to genocide?

 

 Secretary Blinken has specifically accused China of genocide for its treatment of the Uyghurs, but Blinken didn't point to any mass killing there.

 

 According to Euromed Monitor, 4% of the entire population of the Gaza Strip is now dead or injured.

 

 In just 90 days, 65,000 tons of munitions have been dropped on the Gaza Strip, three times what was dropped on Hiroshima.

 

 You have evidence of industrial-style killing.

 

 The South African legal team presented 20 minutes straight of statements on the record by Israeli leadership expressing the intent to commit genocide, for example, referring to the Palestinian population as Amalek.

 

 So how can you explain this discrepancy between Secretary Blinken accusing China explicitly of genocide with no mass killing, presenting no evidence of the mass killing of Uyghurs, and then dismissing out of hand the potential that Israel could be committing genocide in the Gaza Strip, calling it unfounded?

 

 How do you explain this discrepancy?

 

 And given that you fast-tracked a sale of 14,000 tank shells to Israel, bypassing Congress, given Secretary Blinken's participation in War Academy meetings- We didn't bypass, we didn't bypass.

 

 Okay, more and more members of Congress are demanding oversight because they're not getting adequate oversight.

 

 But no one disputes that the U.S. is isolated in protecting Israel as it conducts this operation, as it calls it, in Gaza.

 

 No one disputes the direct U.S. role.

 

 So the question is, the Secretary Blinken, who went to Israel first, declaring he was there as a Jew, identifying with the ethno-religious character of this state, which is now standing accused of the potential to commit genocide, is Secretary Blinken concerned that ruling in favor of South Africa in this case could set the stage for his own prosecution or that of your colleagues?

 

 Just to head back to the Middle East, if I may, I wanted to ask how far the parameters of normalization with Saudi Arabia have shifted since October the 7th and the war in Gaza.

 

 Prince Khalid bin Bandar, the Saudi ambassador to London, gave an interview with the BBC this week where there was a very clear shift in tone and emphasis.

 

 He talked about, we've been willing to accept Israel for a long time, a reality that's there that we have to live with, but we can't live with Israel without a Palestinian state.

 

 He said that nothing else matters other than a sovereign, stable, independent Palestinian state.

 

 It wasn't being talked about in these very clear terms at the time that normalization was being discussed more later last year.

 

 So I just wondered what you made of those comments and if you think this is really a change in the parameters for a deal.

 

 But do you think what Hamas did has effectively rewritten the Arab position in a much more clear sense?

 

 They weren't speaking with the use of that kind of language a few months ago.

 

 What are the tough parts that you're expecting?

 

 Okay, just one thing.

 

 When you talk about the immediate and substantial increase in humanitarian aid, is there a specific wish list that you have going in in terms of things that you'd like to see, particularly the Israelis, let into Gaza?

 

 On the Houthis, you said he'll discuss the need to take action.

 

 Do you expect any deliverables to come out of that or any announcements of actions to be taken?

 

 And then on what happens after the conflict, there's some reporting that Israeli defense officials want to initially hand local management of Gaza over to clans who are traditionally connected to specific cities and sectors, replacing Hamas with family groups.

 

 What's the U.S. view on this, and is that a plan you'd support?

 

 Matt, do you expect the conversations to be substantively different with the Israeli Government on this trip versus the last three times, given these priorities seem to be rather in line with the priorities?

 

 Do you expect allies to be more receptive to these conversations now, given it's been several months?

 

 I mean, most of the Arab allies have said we don't want to discuss this until there's a path to it.

 

 In past trips, the Secretary has come out of it saying Israel has agreed to certain steps that he wouldn't elaborate.

 

 Do you feel that Israel has upheld its agreement to fulfill those steps on curbing civilian casualties, for example?

 

 I mean, from the outside it looks like that has not come to pass.

 

 And then last one, on the Houthis, how concerned are you that these ongoing attacks are going to undermine the truce between Saudi and the Houthis in Yemen?

 

 What kind of discussions are being had to try to preserve that?

 

 But just broadly, I mean, you know, how, as you were discussing, how does this bolster these consistent American appeals for containing the conflict to Gaza and preventing that broader regionalization?

 

 One more question related but different.

 

 appears to have now taken responsibility for these explosions in Iran.

 

 Does the U.S. have any comment on that, any reason to disbelieve that?

 

 Does it track with assessments by the U.S. government?

 

 I mean, the Iranians, the Islamic Republic is saying it's the worst terrorist attack since 1979 under the Islamic Republic.

 

 Since October 7th, the U.S. has often said Israel has a right to defend itself, etc.

 

 In terms of the policy options for Iran, is there any message?

 

 Is the United States supportive of Iran taking action against ISIS, greater action against ISIS, if that's the case?

 

 And just briefly, obviously there are no diplomatic relations between the U.S. and Iran, but do you know if there's been any sort of dialogue indirectly between the two countries regarding this?

 

 I have two questions.

 

 You said that the Secretary will focus on humanitarian aid in Gaza.

 

 Some aid organizations are saying that by February Gazans will face a famine.

 

 So do you believe that the U.S. can do anything to stop this happening?

 

 I mean, we're talking about a famine in the 21st century.

 

 Some believe that without U.S. assistance, support diplomatically and militarily, Israel cannot conduct this war.

 

 So we're not talking just about allowing 200 trucks to go through Rafah border.

 

 We're talking about a serious famine like we have seen in Africa and other parts of the world.

 

 I have another question.

 

 In the 12 weeks of fighting, 1% of Gazans have been killed.

 

 We're talking about 22,000 people.

 

 70% are women and children.

 

 We saw yesterday that Israel was able to go after Hamas leaders with precision, a surgical attack in Lebanon that killed Saleh al-Aruri.

 

 Do you think this war could have been conducted differently to spare the lives of women and children who have been considered collateral damage?

 

 Thank you, Matt.

 

 Just a quick follow-up on that, and I have Ukraine-related questions.

 

 At what percentage does the Secretary believe that Hamas has already been defeated by now and is ready or willing to surrender?

 

 I wanted to circle back to Gaza the day after, and you mentioned that a lot of your conversations were going to be focused on that.

 

 Can you give us any sort of elaboration on what you hope to see?

 

 Obviously, the Israelis have been pretty adamant that they want a security buffer.

 

 Is that something you're willing to entertain?

 

 Would you like to see a multinational transitional kind of governance?

 

 And does the department have any reaction to a House report that the Chinese spent $5.5 million at Trump properties during President Trump's tenure?

 

 And also, and the administration has talked about Israel needing to avoid civilian deaths.

 

 So using that standard, has the U.S. told Ukraine to do the same thing amid Putin's illegal invasion?

 

 Otherwise, how is this not a double standard?

 

 If I could just go back to what we spoke about yesterday on genocide a bit.

 

 You said that there's a determination by the State Department that you have not seen Israel commit acts that constitute genocide at this point.

 

 So has the formal process on determining whether Israel has committed atrocities been launched?

 

 we have seen the multiple accusations related to.

 

 potent supposed Fictional United States involvement.

 

 And as I said, we have no reason to believe is What about on on Beirut?

 

 I don't have an assessment to make about who was responsible for That incident.

 

 I'll leave it to the government of Israel to speak to their actions.

 

 okay But so more broadly though, are you concerned at all that both either or both of these are going to?

 

 You know turn this into the regional confrontation the regional conflict that you had been Publicly saying you wanted to avoid.

 

 we remain incredibly concerned as we have been from the outset of this conflict about the risk of the conflict spreading into other fronts Both inside Israel, whether it be in the north or whether it be In the West Bank and or outside of Israel in other other countries in the region Which is why you've seen the secretary engage in intensive diplomacy to try to urge all the relevant parties not to escalate the conflict and other Countries and other groups in the region not to escalate as well.

 

 I wouldn't say that our concern is any higher today than it has been from the beginning.

 

 It's been something that we've been intensely focused on Just because it's the obvious question.

 

 you said it's ridiculous to say that Israel the US were behind the Iran blasts.

 

 What?

 

 who could be behind it?

 

 Just on the killing of the Hamas deputy leader The head of Hezbollah said today that it was a major dangerous crime about which we cannot be silent.

 

 Do you have any reactions those comments and how concerned are you about any reaction from Hezbollah?

 

 and then were you given any advance notice about this action?

 

 and then on the explosions today You said you both don't have any independent information, but also you have no information that Israel's involved.

 

 So, are you entertaining the fact that Israel could have been involved?

 

 have you spoken with Israeli officials?

 

 and then on the hostages last week There was a confirmation that one of the American hostages had died in Hamas custody.

 

 Are there any updates on the other?

 

 American hostages are still being held.

 

 sorry You said that Salah Aghori was a brutal terrorist and so on.

 

 So you think that Israel did the right thing by Assassinating a leader of Hamas?

 

 I'm just asking you.

 

 All right So so Israel was.

 

 Okay, that's fine.

 

 Since our last briefing, you know two weeks ago, I believe, you know There's been many Palestinian or many thousands of Palestinians, you know killed injured displaced and so on.

 

 How do you see this thing ending?

 

 I mean, do you see that Israel is achieving its goals that or its stated goals?

 

 Which is to decapitate Hamas.

 

 you know change the leadership go after them and so on.

 

 Do you see them achieving those goals?

 

 Are we closer to an endgame in your view?

 

 So we are let's say two weeks ago.

 

 So you're saying that Israel should prosecute this war until these goals are achieved?

 

 Can I have a couple questions on the West Bank?

 

 Now you issued a statement yesterday On both Minister Smotrych and Ben-Gvir on their statements and so on.

 

 you denounce what they said and so on.

 

 Well there are we likely to see any kind of consequences or any kind of sanctions?

 

 as a you know I'll follow up on your statement.

 

 But you know with Gaza becoming an unliberal place in many ways this this is a heightened likelihood.

 

 And lastly on the West Bank we have seen a great many incursions in the last few days.

 

 almost every night There's some sort of a an Israeli army raid in some town.

 

 yesterday They were like six or seven times and so on.

 

 What is?

 

 what is your position on this?

 

 What is your take?

 

 Are you counseling the Israelis?

 

 Not to say to raid places like the Jenin camp or Naples or Hebron The many places that they have done over the past few days.

 

 What is a u.s. assessment on the proposal by Egypt for the release of the remaining hostages after the Hamas leaders?

 

 that Those hostages can only be released on their term and separately?

 

 if I may How do you?

 

 What is the US read on Hamas saying that it is open to one Palestinian government for Gaza and West Bank?

 

 Can I also ask about the POWs swap between Russia and Ukraine?

 

 The US assessed that a willingness to strike Hamas officials outside of Gaza might have a chilling effect on those talks or on Hamas's ability to communicate with important interlocutors like Qatar.

 

 So it's Qatar Egypt.

 

 You don't think the strikes in Beirut will have any kind of effect?

 

 okay, and Finally does the u.s. Have any reaction to Israel Supreme Court striking down Israel's judicial reform given the administration's opposed Excuse me opposition to that law?

 

 Thank you.

 

 Few months ago at the United Nations Security Council Secretary Antony Blinken called on Russia to stop using food as a weapon of war in Ukraine.

 

 however Today he didn't make the same demand of Israel regarding the use of water food and foil.

 

 It's war against Gaza, which impact the civilian.

 

 Isn't that considered as double standard?

 

 So my question is what would be the US response if Iran directly attacked on Israel?

 

 in view of the recent attack on Hezbollah and to the explosion on Iran that Iranian government believes are Associated with Israel.

 

 Yeah Pick up on your response to Smotrich and Ben-Gvir.

 

 yesterday You and Linda Thomas Greenfield both, you know had similar statements.

 

 you both said in your statements Well, there should be no mass displacement of Palestinians from Gaza.

 

 Given that you both had the same word for word statement seems like there was thought put into that.

 

 why use the word should there?

 

 there should be no mass displacement.

 

 Would you be willing to make a more definitive comment?

 

 Okay, there must there must not be.

 

 Yeah And then to get to bend to Gavir's response, that's which I'm sure you saw He posted on Twitter.

 

 with all due respect.

 

 We are not another star on the American flag.

 

 United States is our best friend But first of all, we will do what is best for the state of Israel.

 

 the emigration of hundreds of thousands from Gaza will allow the residents of the enclave or the envelope to return home and live in safety And protect and to protect the IDF soldiers.

 

 any response to Ben-Gvir's public response to you?

 

 and to follow up on Turkey I'm sure you've seen Turkey has joined South Africa in its Charging Israel with genocide before the International Court of Justice.

 

 Is there any concern within the State Department that State Department officials could be roped in to this this prosecution?

 

 and finally over the break Top authorities in the Armenian quarter expressed deep concern That the Israeli government was using the conflict in Gaza To push out a lot of Armenian Christians from the Armenian court quarter.

 

 according to Financial Times Israel is putting more pressure on Egypt to accept refugees from Gaza.

 

 Since you're against any displacement of Palestinian in Egypt is your partner?

 

 Do you encourage or support Egypt not to accept?

 

 Refugee from From Gaza.

 

 You don't want to see any Displacement of Palestinians from Israel.

 

 they have made it clear for for I think very understandable reasons of history that it's a non-starter Yeah, a little bit and you might have answered this in response to say it's one of say it's first questions.

 

 But is it what's going on in Gaza now in terms of the Israeli offensive in terms of the Israeli operation?

 

 Isn't that displacing thousands?

 

 Are you making a distinction between?

 

 Internal displacement Even though it's not a state.

 

 So I know they can't be technically IDPs there's or or them leaving the border and Going into another country or a and going into a country since they don't have one of their own.

 

 Why what?

 

 why is it?

 

 Why is What is happening now?

 

 Not the forcible displacement tens of thousands hundreds of thousands.

 

 So it's okay with you that of the you know Hundreds of thousands of people have been pushed into the south and into Rafah out of their homes.

 

 That's not we doesn't count as we do not.

 

 bad We do not.

 

 A question on What the secretary said.

 

 what?

 

 during his press briefing a couple weeks ago?

 

 He noted that this has been a very difficult year for journalists.

 

 you know the loss of journalists, but he said Ukraine and the Middle East.

 

 I mean there's been a hundred Palestinian journalists killed.

 

 Why not say why not say that a hundred Palestinian journalists have been killed and we know Basically who killed those journalists?

 

 Why not say that?

 

 Do you know that there are a hundred Palestinian journalists killed by Israel and during this operation?

 

 Right.

 

 Before I get to my question, I want to clear up something that I said yesterday, which was an error.

 

 I asked you at the very end of yesterday's briefing about your phraseology in talking about Israel as technically an ally of the United States.

 

 I had forgotten that Israel was, in fact, designated a major non-NATO ally back in the 80s, I think.

 

 So I was wrong, and I apologize for it.

 

 Israel is technically able to be referred to as an ally of the United States, as is Pakistan and Brazil.

 

 Anyway, on to a question.

 

 What would it take to get you to vote in favor of or abstain from this Security Council resolution that still appears to be being debated, despite the plan for a vote several hours ago?

 

 well, are you still – do you think there could be a vote today, or is it going to be?

 

 Has Israel asked the U.S. to veto this?

 

 What exactly is your objection in the text, as it is currently?

 

 Matt, we're not likely to have another briefing until the 2nd of January, probably.

 

 That's my understanding.

 

 And my question to you, will we have a ceasefire between now and then?

 

 All right, well, Hamas announced that they would only accept a total ceasefire.

 

 So your expectation that this killing could go on for another 15 days?

 

 Or even beyond, right?

 

 So let me ask you about the other front, which is the West Bank.

 

 There has been 300 Palestinians killed since October 7th.

 

 The occupation army just runs them up anywhere it wants.

 

 It goes into homes, throws people out, uses the facilities and so on.

 

 They tie them up and so on.

 

 So how long will this go on?

 

 Will you ever confront Israel on what it's doing in the West Bank?

 

 But you are fully aware that Israel, under the pretext of protecting security, they can go into any home, as we have seen them do, like maybe 10 times in the last 24 hours and so on, in Hebron, in Jenin, anywhere they want to.

 

 So they can continue to do this under the pretext of security.

 

 Again, unarmed civilians.

 

 I mean, we're not talking about Hamas presence.

 

 So you think that it is legitimate for them to go into any home, as we have seen in Hebron a couple of days ago?

 

 I mean, I can send you the article, but it's not my claim.

 

 Okay, my last question on the Palestinian Authority.

 

 Now, you said from this podium that you want to see the PA revamped or re-energized, whatever that means.

 

 What does that mean, really?

 

 How would you like to see this revamping being effectuated?

 

 I know, it's good to be here.

 

 I have a Pakistan question, but first on Gaza.

 

 Pope Francis said recently, he said, quote, unarmed civilians are subjected to bombings and shootings.

 

 And this even happened inside the parish complex of the Holy Family, where there are no terrorists, but families, children, sick and disabled people, nuns.

 

 Someone says it's terrorism, it's war.

 

 Yes, it's war, it's terrorism, unquote.

 

 So first, is the Pope wrong about this?

 

 And is the US concerned about its standing among the international community if the Pope is willing to describe what Israel is doing as terrorism?

 

 According to a Jerusalem Post report dated December 17th this year, Turkey and President Erdogan have hosted Hamas leaders.

 

 Is America demanding that NATO partner Turkey extradite them to America since they murdered our citizens?

 

 And if not, why not?

 

 And I have a follow-up question.

 

 Okay, the Palestinian Authority continues to depict all of Israel as Palestine, as do so many Palestinians, as we see on social media in chances from the river to the sea, clearly in deeds rather than words, and they reject Israel's existence.

 

 After October 7th and the continuing rocket attacks, not only from Hamas, how could Israel and Israelis trust and depend upon Palestinians to be peaceful neighbors for at least a generation?

 

 Thank you.

 

 Well, wouldn't you say that opening Karam Shalom improves the lives of the Palestinians in Gaza?

 

 But wouldn't not killing them improve the lives of the Palestinians in Gaza?

 

 Can I just ask you a little bit more about the commercial trucks that you mentioned?

 

 Is that because of the entryway of the second point, Karam Shalom, or is that through RAFA?

 

 Through RAFA.

 

 Matt, just on CIA Chief Bill Burns has met with Qatari Prime Minister on the hostages.

 

 I'm wondering if there is anything you can offer on that.

 

 Is there any renewed optimism for a new deal on the hostages?

 

 Right, and on what Matt was saying, U.S. has put in a lot of diplomacy on trying to get the Israelis to put in more protections for civilians.

 

 And Secretary was there and he departed from Israel December the 1st and then after Southern Gaza offensive has started.

 

 And you guys have been sort of reluctant to weigh in on how Israel has conducted the Southern Gaza offensive.

 

 You said it's too early to make an assessment.

 

 So, would you like to make an assessment right now?

 

 Right, so that was what I was getting at.

 

 Have you seen over the past couple of days, because I mean, Jake Sullivan was there and Secretary Austin is there as well, and they're sort of making this a priority.

 

 Have you seen over the past couple of days any assurance, anything new, any new plan from the Israelis to suggest that there is gonna be much more concrete steps in place to ensure civilian protection?

 

 Do you see any substantive difference between the UK and German call for a sustainable ceasefire and the US position, which my understanding is that the war should not end until Hamas's military capability and leadership have been destroyed?

 

 So, it sounds like you're saying you basically, there's more that you agree on than disagree on in terms of the calling for a ceasefire, the UK and German.

 

 It sounds like you think you're on the same page.

 

 And one more question.

 

 Have you seen anything more from the Israelis about their claims of a major command and control center under Sheba Hospital?

 

 It was one of the things that they were putting forward in terms of explaining why so many civilians were being killed and why the hospitals were being targeted or being caught in the line of crossfire.

 

 They did end up coming out with, I think, a bunker and a tunnel and a couple of guns, but it didn't really add up to what they had been advertising in terms of Hamas directing its operations from underneath hospitals.

 

 Obviously, they have a huge, sophisticated tunnel system.

 

 We saw some of that at Erez at the weekend, but the fact that Hamas is directing its operations from under hospitals and therefore, they become part of the war.

 

 So have you seen anything more convincing from the Israelis than what they put out?

 

 Well, but the Israelis released that video, didn't they?

 

 Right, I would just add that as you know, the Israelis did release these videos beforehand showing how sophisticated it all was and it wasn't quite what they came up with.

 

 Thank you.

 

 Now, we know that because the Israeli, former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak said that we built this tunnel way back in the 80s.

 

 Do you have any evidence at all that any of the supplies that the US put into Gaza pre-October 7th were used, or this administration, previous administrations, were used?

 

 Well, construction material, that kind of thing.

 

 May I just follow up on my questions?

 

 Now, you said that Israel's goal, a legitimate goal, as you called it, is to make sure that Hamas is unable to conduct anything similar to October.

 

 But I thought the stated goals early on were to decapitate Hamas, hunt its leaders, and basically free the hostages, and have a new regime.

 

 Have they achieved that?

 

 All right, I wanted to ask you also, you said that nothing short of Hamas surrender, that's the suggestion, would end this conflict.

 

 All right, let me rephrase.

 

 In response to Matt, you said that, when he said that stopping the bombing could also save Palestinian life, or something to that effect, and you said Hamas could surrender and end it, right?

 

 So, nothing short of Hamas total surrender could end the bombing, that's what I, I just wanted you to clarify this point.

 

 Okay, well, first of all, the 1,200 include 311 soldiers, as Israel suggested, so they're not all civilians, but anyway, that's what they said.

 

 But let me ask you something.

 

 How would this surrender, you know, take shape?

 

 Because Hamas is not an army, it's not like, we're not gonna see what we saw, let's say, the Iraqis do in that famous tent and so on, or what the Japanese did on board of an American ship.

 

 So how would this surrender take shape?

 

 Would all fighters need to come out and lay their arms, you know, all of them?

 

 We don't know how many of them, maybe 10,000, whatever.

 

 So they come and they say, now we surrender.

 

 Is that the form of surrender that you are asking?

 

 And my last question on the number of journalists.

 

 A lot of journalists have been killed, maybe 90 and so on.

 

 Do you have any doubt that Israel intentionally targets journalists?

 

 You mentioned Samer Abu Dhakra.

 

 I mean, he was bleeding there for like six hours, and they sent in a crew to retrieve him.

 

 They were all shot dead.

 

 So they knew exactly where he was and what he was bleeding right there.

 

 People are trying to reach and retrieve him, and the Israeli army disallowed them from doing that.

 

 So wouldn't that be intentional?

 

 So a video of an Israeli soldier attacking and beating an Amadolu photographer, Mustafa Al-Harouf, in East Jerusalem while he was covering Friday prayers, while he was doing his job went viral last week on social media.

 

 First of all, have you seen that video?

 

 And do you have any reactions to that?

 

 And after that video showing that an Israeli soldier attacking a journalist with a camera doing his job, isn't it a sign that Israel is knowingly and deliberately attacking journalists?

 

 Just one more follow-up on that.

 

 Israeli National Security Minister Ben-Gurion in a Twitter post on Saturday expressed support for the officer in the beating of my colleague, Mustafa Al-Harouf, and promised to return the officer to work as soon as possible.

 

 Have you seen that comment, and do you have any?

 

 On the intent of Israelis to minimize civilian casualties.

 

 A few days ago, a mother and a daughter were sheltering inside Gaza's only Catholic church and they were, and they died.

 

 And also three Israeli hostages were killed even though they were shirtless and they were waving like a white cloth.

 

 How is it possible that this is like mistakenly shot even though they were like just holding a white cloth?

 

 Like with Ukraine, will the U.S. support Israel for however long it needs?

 

 With the latest in Yemen, is the administration considering re-designating the Houthis as a terrorist group?

 

 One, as far as U.S.-India relations are concerned, how would you review the 2023 between the two countries' diplomatic relations and other relations also?

 

 How are the relations between Secretary Blinken and the Indian Foreign Minister Jaishankar?

 

 Second, sir, Prime Minister Modi is very famous among global leaders, including here in the U.S., President Biden, among others, and also in the Middle East, Arab nations, and, of course, with Russia.

 

 What I'm asking is, what India or Prime Minister Modi can do more to bring an end to these two wars, Israel's war against terrorist Hamas and Russia's war against Ukraine?

 

 Thank you, Matt.

 

 Given that Secretary Blinken expects the peaceful Palestinian Authority to coexist with Israel, despite the fact that the Emirate Center, in its review of more than 1,000 Palestinian Authority textbooks, does not find one book that even mentions one word about peace, does the U.S. approve of the fact that UNRWA takes, that's the U.N. agency, UNRWA, takes its textbooks directly from the Palestinian Authority without any supervision?

 

 And if so, where does Secretary Blinken get his optimism?

 

 And I had a follow-up.

 

 Okay, in light of our federal law, the Taylor Force Act that prohibits the government from sending American taxpayer dollars to the Palestinian Authority until it stops supporting terrorism, what is Secretary Blinken's response to continued U.S. funding the Palestinian Authority that continues their pay-to-slave program that encourages terrorist attacks against persons living in and visiting the State of Israel in direct violation of our Taylor Force Act?

 

 Two questions for Gaza.

 

 First of all, the Biden administration repeatedly made it clear that the United States opposes Gaza controlled by Hamas, and says Gaza should be governed by the revitalized Palestinian Authority.

 

 So, the United States is in contact with Ramallah, and last week, Mr.

 

 Jake Sullivan was in Ramallah, and Secretary Blinken visited Ramallah and talked with the Palestinian Authority leadership there.

 

 So, is there a plan for Palestinian Authority ruling Gaza Strip, like, for example, sending a representative to Gaza Strip after the war?

 

 Follow up, please.

 

 The United States is also against the Israel reoccupation of Gaza.

 

 You made it clear from that podium, and the Biden administration made it clear from different levels.

 

 And the United States expects Israel to leave Gaza after the conflict ends.

 

 So, beyond the wishes and expectations, the United States is the first country on earth who is able to convince Israel what to do or what not to do.

 

 I'm not suggesting that you are telling Israel what to do or what not to do, but you are able to do so.

 

 So, can the United States give assurances to the world that Israel will leave Gaza after the conflict and Israel will not decide to determine the future of Gaza unilaterally?

 

 I just wanted two things, I'll be very brief on your choice of words, one regarding Israel and one regarding the Palestinian Authority.

 

 You said in an answer to an earlier question that Israel is a quote-unquote long-standing ally of the United States.

 

 Now, Israel is many things, friend, it's a strategic partner, but there is no alliance between it, so you haven't changed, you haven't slipped ally in officially, capital A.

 

 And then for the PA, you said in response to two questions that the Palestinian Authority is the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people.

 

 How do you come to that assessment?

 

 When was the last time that PA was elected?

 

 As you know, the Palestinian Authority, particular President Abbas, is deeply unpopular.

 

 And we believe that we should see- But you still think that they are the legitimate- They are.

 

 That they speak for all Palestinians.

 

 But they are the legitimate representative, but you do believe that they are the ones who can act or who should be acting on behalf of the Palestinian people.

 

 Okay, well, what about the current one?

 

 Yeah, but what now?

 

 Who represents the Palestinian people?

 

 I mean, obviously- The Palestinian Authority does.

 

 So I just want to go back to the President's comments the other day about indiscriminate bombing and then reports that have been coming out since the weekend about U.S. assessments of what the Israelis are doing with U.S.-supplied munitions.

 

 The State Department clearly has a stake in this whole thing as part of the rest of the administration.

 

 And I'm still finding it hard to understand how it is that you guys have not at least come to some kind of preliminary conclusion as to whether you think these weapons are being used in the correct way or if there are questions about that.

 

 So you think it is still possible – or it – not still possible.

 

 You think that it is possible that everything that Israel is doing with the weapons that you supply it is not?

 

 Well, I get that you haven't made a determination, but what I'm asking you right now is that because you haven't made one, is it still possible in the minds – the eyes of the administration that everything that Israel is doing is perfectly legit?

 

 There's legislation that's been being – if it hasn't already been, it's being introduced on the Hill today that would require you to make such a determination.

 

 Is that something that you think is necessary, or is it something that you will make at some point, whenever you find it appropriate, that you will make a determination either yes, they are complying, or no, they're not complying, or somewhere in the middle?

 

 Are you looking at sort of how Israel is carrying out the airstrikes, the ground offensive?

 

 Is it only the military conduct, or does it include things like, for example, these Gazan men who were stripped down to their underwear?

 

 Does that include those kinds of incidents as well?

 

 With our Israeli Government.

 

 Thanks, Matt.

 

 I wanted to ask about my colleagues reporting on the use of dumb bombs in this conflict.

 

 How does that square with the repeated statements we've heard from this building that Israel is taking steps to protect civilians, that they do have the intent to protect civilians?

 

 And the Israelis said that Golan told Jake Sullivan today that they intend for this offensive to carry on for several more months.

 

 Is that something the U.S. sees as acceptable?

 

 Is it the U.S. assessment that it would be necessary for this to carry on for many more months?

 

 And last one.

 

 Given the President's comments the other day about the waning support for Israel given this indiscriminate bombing, is the U.S. position that it would be tenable to support Israel at the same pace that you are right now for several more months?

 

 Couple more questions.

 

 Now, there were reports that apparently the Israeli soldiers were executing in an UNRWA school some people that they arrested or whatever last week.

 

 Do you have any comment on that?

 

 And lastly, I promise, you said that you understand Israel's goal at the end to disallow Hamas from committing whatever.

 

 Do you believe that it is getting close to that goal?

 

 I mean, do you have, like, any kind of – do you envision a timetable that this is happening?

 

 UNESCO's director general today asked for a full and transparent investigation to determine the circumstances behind the killing of Anadolu cameraman Muntazer Sabaf in Gaza.

 

 Does the U.S. support an independent investigation into the killing of journalists?

 

 But what would you say about an independent investigation?

 

 And have you seen the video of Israeli soldiers recording themselves reciting Jewish prayers inside the mosque in Jenin, and do you have any reactions to that?

 

 Can I also have just a quick one on Azerbaijan?

 

 Today the Iraqi Government announced the results of their investigation about those who were responsible for attacking the U.S. embassy.

 

 So what he mentioned that in the investigation, they said that these people they arrested, there were some connections between the Iraqi security forces and those who were attacking the U.S. embassy.

 

 Are you satisfied with these results?

 

 And to what extent are you concerned about the links between these groups who are attacking you with the Iraqi security forces?

 

 QUESTION And the last question, today you and the UK jointly announced some sanctions on the Iranian Kurdish force and also Hamas.

 

 Does that meaning that Iranian Revolutionary Guards are trying to get involved in the war between Hamas and Israel?

 

 I have two questions, one on Bangladesh and another on Israel and Palestine.

 

 A web of arson attacks on buses full of passengers and trucks displacing rail tracks, petrol bombing train coaches during blockades, witnessed bus helpers burnt alive with scorched injured to derail the election.

 

 Does U.S. consider such action undermine the prelude to free and fair election in Bangladesh?

 

 QUESTION Thank you so much.

 

 QUESTION Regarding the future of Gaza, during the transition period, PA is not ready to manage the situation in Gaza.

 

 Why don't elections be held and the Palestinian people decide by themselves who will represent them and who will control – rule them?

 

 Mark Stone from Sky News.

 

 Following on from what my colleague said just now about the two-state solution, the Israeli ambassador to the UK made quite clear yesterday to Sky News when we spoke to her that the answer is absolutely no to a two-state solution.

 

 She echoed remarks the day before by I think the Israeli communications minister, who said, we live here, this is our country, there will be no Palestinian state here, we will never allow another state to be established between the Jordan and the sea.

 

 It seems pretty clear to me, and I'm keen for your view, that the ambassador's remarks now put Israel in open defiance of American president's policies going back 40 years.

 

 How do you square what you are – what you just said there at the podium with what the current Israeli government is making quite clear, no two states?

 

 If I may follow up briefly.

 

 The logical conclusion to what we're seeing unfold at the moment seems to be that you are backing Israel militarily with weapons, with funding, despite two starkly different endpoints.

 

 Are you talking to the Lebanese and the Israeli governments regarding the situation on the border?

 

 And what's your assessment of the situation there?

 

 So yesterday, there was a vote in the General Assembly.

 

 It was pretty overwhelming.

 

 The President came out and made his remarks, saying that Israel is losing international support.

 

 Specifically, one of the reasons for indiscriminate bombing.

 

 So I want to know, one, what does the administration think about the overwhelming nature of this vote yesterday?

 

 And two, does the State Department, in particular, share the President's view that Israel has been indiscriminately bombing?

 

 You're continuing to monitor the situation.

 

 But as you continue to monitor the situation, is that something that you're looking at?

 

 My last one is because you said that October 7th showed that the status quo in Gaza was not sustainable.

 

 But yet over the last, like, almost decade, you and Israel have done virtually nothing to change the status quo.

 

 What was the Gaza aspect of the – that was planned for the discussions with the Saudis and the Israelis?

 

 Well, yeah, I know, but when you say that it made clear – October 7th made clear that the status quo in Gaza was not acceptable, what did this plan that you had with the Saudis envision for Gaza?

 

 Does the fact that you're collecting information mean that you have seen potential signs of violations of international law that prompted you to start this?

 

 And then just on the UN resolution, it got more votes in favor than any of the General Assembly resolutions on Ukraine that denounced Moscow and demanded it withdraw all its troops.

 

 Does that concern you at all, and does the United States feel diplomatically isolated at all over its support for Israel?

 

 Matt, I wanted to follow up on what I asked you about the other day about the images of the men who were detained and stripped in Gaza.

 

 Have you gotten any answers from the Israelis about these images?

 

 Did they say they would seek accountability for who took and distributed these images?

 

 And then more broadly, does the U.S. believe that Hamas can be militarily eliminated in the way that Israel is seeking?

 

 And do you believe that the Palestinian Authority can still be revitalized in a way that you guys have spoken to in the past to lead a unified Palestinian state?

 

 There was an AP poll today saying that 90% want Abbas to step down.

 

 Can I just, sorry, on the photos really quick.

 

 Is it okay if I follow up?

 

 So it sounds like from what you said that Israel said the images wouldn't happen again, but that the practice of strip searching would continue.

 

 Is that something you're okay with?

 

 Just to follow up on the points being raised by my colleague, if it is determined that there were crimes committed in Gaza, by either side again, is the U.S. committed to seeing accountability for the perpetrators of those crimes?

 

 Two other separate topics on Israel.

 

 So where do conversations stand on whether aid can be not only inspected but admitted through Karim Shalom crossing?

 

 And how much aid do you estimate or do you know is going in today?

 

 Somewhat separately, does the U.S. share the Israeli assessment that Yair Asenwar is in Gaza?

 

 Sorry, say that again.

 

 U.S. officials have said publicly that the U.S. is helping Israel develop Hamas leadership targets.

 

 Just, you know, as we discuss timelines and the urgency of Israel's military objectives, it would seem that the U.S. would have a stake in knowing that that military objective of decapitating Hamas leadership is achievable, that they are in Gaza.

 

 Okay, I have one other question on Afghanistan.

 

 Maybe you have touched upon it.

 

 If you have, indulge me.

 

 Well, the president said that Israel is doing indiscriminate shilling of the Palestinians.

 

 Now, wouldn't that be sort of in violation of the Leahy Law?

 

 Yeah, if the president's terminology is accurate, that it was used indiscriminately, would that be in violation of the Leahy Law?

 

 But, you know, as far as the Leahy Law is very clear, right?

 

 So it would actually determine whether that whatever Israel did is in violation of that particular law.

 

 Coming back to wiping out Hamas, what about the prospect of getting rid of its weapons?

 

 How is that done?

 

 Is there any way to verify that that could be done?

 

 Because it's one thing to take out people, but if weapons still exist, someone could still take them off.

 

 And then to come back to this localized four-hour pause to try to move in humanitarian aid, bigger picture, are there talks on trying to get four-hour pauses or four-day pauses to trade hostages for people held in Israeli prisons?

 

 Is there any progress on that?

 

 Are you seeing any indication that either party is willing to come back to the table, or are you sticking with the U.S.'s position that Hamas is holding up a resumption of these talks?

 

 Mac, I have two or three questions, a small question.

 

 Israel is the best equipped army in the world, and they have the support of mighty USA, and they're not fighting another country.

 

 They're fighting a small group of people in Gaza Strip.

 

 How come they're taking more than two months to win their goal?

 

 How come it still seems like they're struggling?

 

 The second question I have, three-time Prime Minister of Bangladesh, Begum Khaleda Zia, there's a media report that she was being poisoned and ill-treated while she was in government custody.

 

 Now, they're not allowing her to go abroad to have adequate treatment, and she's dying.

 

 already made a request for her treatment in abroad.

 

 Does America have any plan to make the same request?

 

 Thank you.

 

 I have two questions.

 

 First one, Israel has a serious plan to flood the tunnels in Gaza with seawater.

 

 This action will threaten the lives of hostages and cause environmental disaster.

 

 Do you agree with this military plan?

 

 And what are you going to do to stop Israel from this madness plan?

 

 The other question, the American administration consistently expressed its concern about the safety of civilians in Gaza.

 

 But in fact, the weapons supplied by the United States are responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of civilians, most of them children, women, and elderly people.

 

 So why doesn't the United States administration put strict conditions on the use of these weapons to protect the Palestinian civilians?

 

 I'll just follow up Biden's remarks yesterday.

 

 In the same remarks, Biden said Netanyahu has to change, and this came hours after Netanyahu said that there is a disagreement with Biden regarding the post-Hamas Gaza.

 

 I know you don't comment on White House, Biden's remarks, but has there been— Who's got a radio in the room or walkie-talkie?

 

 Has there been any contacts with the Israelis regarding this after Biden's remarks yesterday?

 

 And what was the reaction from the Israelis?

 

 How does the U.S. plan to overcome this disagreement with Netanyahu government?

 

 Thank you, Matthew.

 

 Yesterday the Iranian foreign minister said that, and he confirmed that, his government is receiving messages from Washington weekly.

 

 But he said that this has nothing to do with Iran and these groups who are attacking the U.S. forces in Iraq and Syria.

 

 They are defending the people in Gaza.

 

 Do you think that the Iranian government is derailing your messages and they are not taking care of your messages, and they have no will to rein their groups in Iraq and Syria from attacking your forces?

 

 Yesterday there were a call between Secretary Blinken and Prime Minister Sadani.

 

 Well, so after the events of – I'm sorry, let me turn my recorder on.

 

 After the events of Friday, particularly the veto at the Security Council, the Secretary's meeting with the Arab and Islamic foreign ministers, and then the emergency determination on the tank munitions to Israel.

 

 I'm just wondering, are you guys aware of how isolated you are?

 

 And you think that you are demonstrating American leadership now?

 

 So the bottom line is you're not concerned that you're – that it appears the rest of the world, with the exception of Israel – I would say – Is angry at you and is not – is unhappy with the position that the administration has taken and that that is American leadership.

 

 Last one.

 

 You're very fond of saying, you and every previous administration I've covered, very fond of saying in terms of numerous conflicts, almost every conflict around the world, that there is no military solution to this.

 

 And yet your actions over the course of the last five days suggest that you think that there is, or that the only solution to this conflict is military.

 

 Is that an accurate reading?

 

 So this administration earlier this year unveiled an overhauled arms export policy with increased emphasis on human rights.

 

 Let me read your policy back to you.

 

 Quote, no arms transfer will be authorized where the United States assesses that it is more likely than not that the arms to be transferred will be used by the recipient to commit, facilitate recipient's commission of, or to aggravate risks that the recipient will commit genocide, crimes against humanity, grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 1949, including attacks intentionally directed against civilian objects or civilians protected as such, or other serious violations of international humanitarian or human rights law, end quote.

 

 So just want to understand, given the flow of weapons transfers to Israel, is it the U.S. assessment that its weapons provided to Israel are not being used in any of the situations that I've just read out loud and are described in this policy?

 

 And just a couple of more things, sorry.

 

 Could you say that U.S. has a full understanding of where exactly the weapons and the ammunition that it has sent to Israel are being used, like locations and specific offensives, specific fighting and all of that?

 

 You're keeping track of it.

 

 And the final thing is, like, the Secretary talked about the gap, and you're referring to his comments yesterday.

 

 He sort of laid out, like, more pauses and specific humanitarian corridors for people to, assistance, for assistance to find its way.

 

 But right now, we're basically looking at a bit of a, like, societal breakdown inside Gaza, in Khan Yunis, where even if the, even if there is an increase in the number of A-trucks going in, it's simply not going to the people.

 

 Have you, has this administration had conversations with the Israelis over the weekend on this specific challenge, and what assurances have they given you?

 

 Matt, can I follow up?

 

 You and the Secretary have laid out these additional steps you'd like to see Israel take, but have you given them any ultimatum to actually take those steps?

 

 Will there be any punitive measures if they continue to refuse to do so?

 

 But Matt, I mean, international humanitarian groups, these ministers he met with on Friday are saying there's not time for this incremental approach.

 

 There's not time for this to take weeks and weeks to play out.

 

 So are you putting additional pressure on them to say like this needs to be done in the coming days, the coming hours, as the situation on the ground is completely collapsed?

 

 I have one more on Israel and one on a separate topic.

 

 Photos emerged.

 

 I don't think you've been asked about this, but the podium photos emerged last week of Israeli forces detaining, blindfolding, and having stripped down men in Gaza.

 

 Does the State Department have any comment on this?

 

 Do you think it's appropriate for such images to be taken?

 

 Do you agree with the Israeli assessment that these were Hamas fighters, given there are people who are saying these are normal civilians, family members?

 

 Have you gotten any responses from the Israeli government?

 

 And can I ask on a separate topic?

 

 I wanted to ask a slightly different version of what Humayra has been asking about, and to specify that this is without regard to internal deliberations, specific attacks, any formal determinations the U.S. may have made.

 

 Is the U.S. collecting any information about whether war crimes have been committed in Gaza by either side?

 

 I just want to follow up very quickly on the issue raised by Jennifer on the picture of the men stripped down and so on.

 

 You agree with the spokesman for the Israeli government who said, you know, this is the Middle East, and it gets a bit warm?

 

 I have a couple more questions.

 

 The Saudi foreign minister suggested that the Palestinian foreign minister, Riyad Maliki, was basically given a gag order that he could not speak in Washington.

 

 Could you clarify this?

 

 Okay, just a couple more questions.

 

 Now you said that the stated goals, Israel's stated goals, which you agree with, which is to end Hamas, you know, defeat Hamas, change the regime in Gaza, however that, whatever that means and so on, you know, and free the hostages.

 

 Now it has been 65 days.

 

 We have not seen any Hamas leaders brought out or killed or named as such and so on.

 

 So you expect this thing to go for another 65 days?

 

 Before they achieve their goal?

 

 Okay, so I mean, looking at the situation, this could go on for conceivably, conceivably another 65.

 

 Okay, now, you also said that you want to see a resolution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, where there's a two state solution, and so on, all that stuff that the US has always been stating all along for 30 years, at least, and so on.

 

 Now, today, the Israeli Prime Minister spoke to the Defense and Foreign Relations Committee in the Knesset, and he said two things.

 

 He said no Palestinian state, no Palestinian state, under any circumstances, no Palestinian authority in Gaza, no Hamas, and so on.

 

 So do you have any comment on what the Prime Minister of Israel, who obviously wields a great deal of power, I mean, you know, he's destroying the Palestinians to smithereens.

 

 Do you have any comment on what he said?

 

 So why not say this is the Palestinian state that we recognize?

 

 Its borders are this, it is this, this, and so on.

 

 Its characteristics are such and such.

 

 Why not do that?

 

 I'm just asking you a question because I'm sure you saw the Times report that the Israeli intelligence, with the approval of Netanyahu, has carried suitcases full of cash to Hamas.

 

 And the purpose was declared, and this is quotes, that basically this is the only way to prevent a two-state solution if we can only prop up the extremist Hamas in Gaza.

 

 So in this case, won't the Israeli government will be liable for persecution because they given financial aid to a terrorist organization that you list on your own State Department website as a terrorist organization?

 

 You saw the UN report that half of Gazans actually are facing starvation.

 

 Apart from Hamas, who you blame normally, who else is bearing responsibility for half of the population that actually can be starving?

 

 Okay, and finally, you described these images as disturbing, and you said you're seeking more information from the Israelis on this.

 

 But actually, by definition, according to the Geneva Convention, if an army, which in this case, these videos were released by the Israeli army, filming a civilian population – we know some of them are civilians because some of our colleagues, including journalists, were among them – you take pictures of them and you put them publicly, that's already a violation of the Geneva Convention.

 

 And how do you treat prisoners of war?

 

 So why do you need to seek more information where you can actually condemn them as a violation of international law?

 

 I have a couple of questions, if you don't mind.

 

 Did the U.S. first warn the Iraqi Prime Minister al-Sudani of harsh consequences if Iraq does not act to stop the attacks on American and American facilities in Iraq?

 

 And second, on Lebanon, Israeli Defense Minister said today that Israel is open to the possibility of reaching an agreement with Hezbollah if it includes a safe zone on the border and guarantees.

 

 Do you have any comment on that?

 

 Will the U.S. mediate between Israel and Lebanon to reach such agreement?

 

 And are you aware of any ultimatum that the Israeli Government issued to Lebanon or to the Lebanese Government?

 

 Thank you, Matt.

 

 In light of a recent Jerusalem Post report about a UN agency UNRWA schoolteacher in Gaza holding a hostage captive in an UNRWA school, as well as teachers at UNRWA schools in Gaza praising the attacks on social media with ties between Hamas terrorists and the agency's schools, is President Biden now willing to defund this terrorist UN organization, UNRWA?

 

 And I have a follow-up.

 

 Okay, Eli, that Jerusalem Post report of 100 Hamas terrorists confirmed to have graduated from UNRWA schools.

 

 What level of terrorist involvement with UNRWA will it take to motivate President Biden to condemn the UNRWA terrorist organization?

 

 Matt, just on the white phosphorus, I mean, this report today is not the first of its kind to allege that Israel has used white phosphorus in this conflict.

 

 They go back to, like, I think October 13th.

 

 You've never expressed concern about them before, which suggests to me that you didn't believe them.

 

 Why now all of a sudden are you saying you're concerned by this report?

 

 So you don't – that's – So back in October, in the first week of this war, when there were allegations that – from Amnesty and others that white phosphorus had been used by Israel in Gaza, that you have no problem with because – So white phosphorus – there are legitimate military uses for white phosphorus.

 

 So the – Are you saying that there was no – that there was no civilian impact when these were used allegedly in Gaza?

 

 Can I ask a clarification on what you said about Assam?

 

 Because I just checked Secretary Blinken's comments from Thursday.

 

 He says it's my understanding that the Israelis are carrying out an investigation.

 

 But I think you said that United States Government has actually sought information about the incident after our story has come out.

 

 Can I go back for an update on aid coming in and Americans coming out?

 

 Can you just give us, since it's been a few days, the latest figure of Americans who have gotten out of Gaza and are still waiting to leave?

 

 And to circle back on those reports of a potential American casualty, somebody who is waiting to leave Gaza, have you verified that?

 

 Have you enlisted the Israelis in helping verify that?

 

 No, I just want to go back to this white phosphorus thing, because I pulled it up, right?

 

 This is the – I'm just going to read you the first sentences.

 

 Amnesty International's crisis response program gathered compelling evidence documenting the use of white phosphorus artillery shells by the Israeli army in densely populated civilian areas in Gaza.

 

 Sorry, can I ask a clarification on your clarification?

 

 Because engaged – Clarification of my clarification.

 

 Yeah, because engaged in conversations is like diplo-speak, and it's just – when you – when the U.S. Government – when you guys saw the Reuters investigation about the killing of Islam Abdullah by an Israeli – by Israeli tank fire, did you ask a question to the Israelis?

 

 Like, what is engaged in conversations?

 

 And did they give you a timeframe on when their investigation about them and all of the other journalists that were wounded would be completed?

 

 Matt, thank you.

 

 Mark Stone from Sky News.

 

 Can I just return to the images of the Palestinians stripped and in the back of vehicles and seemingly handing in weapons?

 

 Why not just condemn the images now?

 

 Why wait for an investigation, as you've asked for?

 

 The reason I ask is because on many different moments over the course of the past however many weeks it has been, we've heard the American administration say we've asked for – we're concerned or we've asked for clarification, we've asked for more detail, and yet the moments keep coming.

 

 And I wonder, is it actually the case that you are behind the scenes actually not that worried about Israel's tactics, its military tactics on the ground?

 

 Or have you lost all leverage with a close ally?

 

 Other people might have more on this, but I want to go to the Middle East real quick.

 

 And I have one question, but it's about three separate things.

 

 One is that the Israelis are continuing to talk about this idea of a buffer zone that they would like to create either in or potentially near Gaza.

 

 What is, can you clarify what the US position is on that?

 

 Can you clarify what the US position is on the idea of there being a, quote unquote, transition period during which Israel would retain or would keep security control of Gaza after the conflict is over, if the conflict ever is over?

 

 And then lastly, what is the US position on the idea of an international security or peacekeeping force that might be deployed, that some have called or to be deployed?

 

 Okay, a couple of other issues.

 

 There was a report that Israel's assault forced the nurse to leave babies behind.

 

 They were found decomposing.

 

 Are you aware of the story?

 

 And do you take it as it happened, or if it did happen, is that a war crime?

 

 Okay, I understand, but would the U.S. consider sending a fact-finding mission like you did?

 

 And lastly, my last question, on Monday, when I asked you about where should the Palestinians go, and you said there are designated UN centers to go to, where apparently the spokesperson for the United Nations, Stefan de Jure, whom you know, repudiated that, or refuted that.

 

 He said, let's be clear, there are no UN-designated safe zones in Gaza.

 

 I think all my senior colleagues have been very clear, including the Secretary General, saying there are no safe places in Gaza.

 

 There are shelters that fly the UN flag that are sheltering thousands and thousands and thousands of people, men, women, and children who are trying to stay alive and get some food, get some water.

 

 We have seen since the beginning of this conflict that those places that fly the UN flag have not been safe either.

 

 Matt, UN Secretary General made a really rare move today to formally warn the Security Council of the global threats from the Gaza War, invoking this Article 99.

 

 He himself has done it for the first time.

 

 I'm wondering if the United States agree with his warning that, you know, this is a threat for the entire, like, global.

 

 And we understand that Arab states basically seek to leverage that to renew a push for the council to call for a ceasefire.

 

 We do know U.S. position on the ceasefire, but I just want to ask you again, whether there is any change on that, if they go for a resolution calling for that.

 

 A couple of more.

 

 So you said yesterday, you guys have been in touch with the Israeli government to allow more aid in, to allow more fuel.

 

 But I mean, when we look at what's happening today, it looks like the public order is completely breaking down.

 

 There is like full chaos, and UN is warning that its operation is in no shape to be able to deliver this aid to the people.

 

 So do you guys have like a solution for that, or how are you trying to overcome that?

 

 Is that something that you're discussing with the Israeli government?

 

 I saw that there is reporting about Kerem Shalom opening.

 

 Just want to give you an opportunity to clarify that.

 

 Is the United States pushing Israel to get Kerem Shalom opening for the trucks or for inspections?

 

 Like, can you give us the latest?

 

 Matt, Amnesty International put out an investigation saying that US-made weapons were used by Israel in strikes that killed nearly four dozen civilians.

 

 Do you have a comment on this investigation?

 

 Have they given you any commitment to investigate?

 

 And is the U.S. undertaking its own investigation or inquiry into whether U.S.-made weapons have been used in a disproportionate way?

 

 And then can I get your assessment?

 

 I mean, we're several days into the renewed offensive in southern Gaza, and the Secretary said last week that it cannot be prosecuted in the same way it was in the north.

 

 Do you feel that the Israelis are fulfilling this?

 

 Yesterday, Matt, I had asked you about if State was aware of any reports or emerging evidence of Americans being sexually assaulted by Hamas on October 7th, as there are claims that multiple, many Israeli women were.

 

 You said you weren't aware of reports.

 

 Can you say anything about, we heard from the Attorney General a few minutes ago that they're now investigating Hamas war crimes.

 

 Do you know if that will include, like, you know, looking at potential sexual crimes as well, or is State still following that?

 

 I know that you don't comment on university campus level goings on, but yesterday, a group of Ivy League presidents on Capitol Hill, in sworn testimony, declined to condemn calls by their own students for the killing of Jews.

 

 I'm wondering if, more broadly speaking, outside of college campuses and universities, if the State Department has a position on calling for the murder of Jews.

 

 Is that something that the department considers antisemitic?

 

 One last question, if I may.

 

 Quite a few localized menorah lighting celebrations ahead of the start of Hanukkah tomorrow have been canceled by local officials citing threats from pro-Palestinian protesters that are scheduled for the area.

 

 Now, in California, Gavin Newsom has canceled some kind of a Christmas tree lighting ceremony as well.

 

 I'm wondering if the State Department has concerns about the impact of the war in Gaza and the political fallings out on religious freedom for Americans ahead of the holidays.

 

 The Israeli defense minister has said today to mayors and heads of councils located in the border with Lebanon that their communities will not be returned home until Hezbollah is driven north of the Litani River.

 

 He added that the best option for Israel is to reach a diplomatic solution or arrangement.

 

 If it doesn't succeed, Israel will act with all the means at its disposal to push Hezbollah by military actions.

 

 What's your comment and do you support such a move?

 

 What's the diplomatic solution?

 

 Thank you.

 

 There's a lawsuit filed in federal court alleging that the State Department has treated Israeli-Americans and Palestinian-Americans inequitably when it comes to evacuations from around the conflict zone.

 

 Do you have a response to that broad statement, that broad claim?

 

 And is it still the case that the State Department is aware of more than 1,000 individuals, including around 350 American citizens who are still waiting to evacuate from Gaza?

 

 And is it doing anything to speed up that kind of trickling pace?

 

 But any efforts to speed that up?

 

 And just finally, has the State Department confirmed any deaths of American citizens in Gaza, or is it investigating any reports of deaths at this point?

 

 I have a question about the post-war Gaza option.

 

 Both the Secretary and yourself have mentioned a revitalized Palestinian Authority.

 

 What's expected of the PA in that context?

 

 Okay, I have a question on Iran as well, if there's no other- Go ahead, go ahead.

 

 Going back to the Iranian sanctions, Russia and Iran signed a declaration to counter the Western and also the US sanctions.

 

 Does that declaration concern you?

 

 Do you believe that this would have any impact on your sanctions on both countries when we are talking about both conflicts in Gaza and Ukraine?

 

 And today, Iranian IRGC announced that they sized two vessels with 34 foreign crew members in the Persian Gulf.

 

 Do you have any reaction and comments on that?

 

 One question about the Abraham Accord and the normalization between Saudi Arabia and Israel.

 

 Do you think, or the State Department thinks that diplomatic relationship is almost dead, there is no any possibility that Saudi Arabia normalizes its relationship with Israel, or there is a possibility?

 

 I'm a first question, then if you allow me, I will ask another.

 

 The second one is, there are some reports and concerns that since the war broke between Israel and Hamas, so some terrorist groups that belong to Al-Qaeda and some other groups moved out to some safe place that they think it's safe, like Afghanistan, to launch potentially some attacks against the U.S. interest in the region.

 

 I just wanted to put a fine point to some of my previous questions and questions from my colleagues.

 

 Just looking at what the Secretary has discussed in Israel last week and looking at the situation inside Gaza today, he had asked Israelis for specific actions, and we talked about deconfliction zones and all of that.

 

 There are a lot of people who say nowhere isn't safe in Gaza.

 

 Does the United States believe there is anywhere safe in Gaza?

 

 Okay, but that sounds a lot like the difference between the intent and the results that the Secretary has mentioned, right?

 

 Like, those are the plans, but the result right now does not seem to be matching the intent.

 

 So I'm wondering if there has been any high-level intervention from this building to the Israeli government since we left the region on these issues and what was communicated, and whether Ambassador Satterfield or you guys have a specific plan to remedy this urgently.

 

 And then just to put a fine point on this, you say it will also affect Palestinians who are implicated in violence against Israelis in the West Bank or elsewhere, I presume.

 

 But Palestinians are not included under the visa waiver program.

 

 So what's the impact?

 

 So what's the impact on an Israeli settler who you implicate in violence in terms of them being able to come to the US under the visa waiver program?

 

 Not any Israeli.

 

 Any Israeli implicated and targeted – In this program, yes.

 

 And does this have broader implications for the visa – Israel's membership in BWP?

 

 So the Israeli law enforcement officials now claim that they have more than 1,500 pieces of evidence that Hamas committed sexual abuse, sexual atrocities on October 7th.

 

 Are you aware of any evidence or claims that Hamas sexually abused any American citizens on or since that day?

 

 Does the U.S. have any reason to think it possible that Hamas could have continued or at any time sexually abused hostages in its custody, whether they're American or not?

 

 Yesterday, you told us that the Biden administration state supports the Israeli ongoing investigation into this.

 

 Can you share any more detail or clarity about, like, does the U.S. support that effort in spirit, or are you sort of materially helping in the investigation?

 

 Last question.

 

 The parents of Evan Gerskovich told our channel this morning that the president promised them to do whatever it takes to bring him home, and they are, I can send you the verbates, but they are essentially disappointed at this point because it appears the administration has not done so.

 

 Can you share anything about the state's efforts?

 

 Just to go back to these sanctions, visa sanctions, there's been an uptick in violence in the West Bank, significantly so in the past few months leading up to this war.

 

 Granted, there's been settler violence for years in the West Bank.

 

 Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is the first time the U.S. is sanctioning extremist settlers in many years.

 

 Was there a determining factor as to why now?

 

 Why is this only just happening given that there was a significant surge in violence in the months leading up to this war?

 

 Why is the U.S. only doing this now?

 

 And just one follow-up.

 

 And this, again, may be an old figure, but some 15% worth of Israeli settlers have American citizenship.

 

 I know you've been asked about this before.

 

 Is there going to be a way to hold American Israelis to account who may have committed violence?

 

 I have a feeling you're going to say state doesn't comment on this.

 

 Who do we need to ask about this?

 

 I have like three quick follow-up on something that you said yesterday.

 

 You said yesterday that you assume that Hamas does not want to release these women for fear that they're gonna talk about sexual violence or rape.

 

 So, if we follow this logic, that means Hamas will never release them because they never want the story to be told.

 

 Is this something we can go through?

 

 Okay, and also you said yesterday that Hamas has weapons in churches.

 

 Is this an evidence you talk about, or you just like when you talk about hospitals and schools and you lumped up churches as well?

 

 And lastly, is there any evidence that U.S. funding of UNRWA contributed to the October 7 attacks by Hamas?

 

 Thank you.

 

 I have two questions, please.

 

 Defense Secretary said that Israel will only win in Gaza if civilians are protected.

 

 In fact, the most who killed are civilians, children and women.

 

 So that means Israel is losing and when this war will end?

 

 Today or yesterday late today, I talked with my cousins.

 

 He in Gaza, he lives in Gaza.

 

 He's not related to Hamas.

 

 He told me we are hungry, we don't have food, no water for my children, for my grandchildren.

 

 He told me everything is targeting human, unhuman, green.

 

 He told me this is, you talk about future in Gaza, they will remove Gaza from the map.

 

 What are you talking about?

 

 So please consider for a while, or think if you put yourself on their place, what do you think, what you are going to do?

 

 And when this war will end, please?

 

 This tragic war?

 

 Staying on the south of Gaza, the Wall Street Journal had a report on Israel sharing plans with the US about possibly flooding the Hamas tunnels with seawater.

 

 There's concern about the environmental impact that would have as well as on the structure of buildings above the tunnels, which is, as you know, a vast network.

 

 Do you have any comment on that?

 

 You said there's not enough being done right now in terms of humanitarian aid and fuel into Gaza.

 

 You mean that Israeli government is not doing enough?

 

 Okay, so the onus is on the Israeli government.

 

 And in terms of going back to the civilians question, Secretary Blinken was there, we were with him, and he made it very clear he doesn't want the southern Gaza offensive to look like northern Gaza.

 

 You're saying it's too early, but when do you think it won't be too early to make an assessment?

 

 How long the U.S. is going to wait to make that assessment?

 

 You said it's too early to make a definitive decision on, but what about an interim decision?

 

 I mean, surely you've seen enough in the last four days to come to a conclusion about whether the Israelis are following through on what they committed to you, not just on the intent, but also on the result.

 

 And I'm not asking for a final grade here, and not even maybe a midterm grade, but it's, you know, it's been going on for several days.

 

 So surely you're in a position to be able to judge whether what you think, what you've seen so far, you think meets their commitments.

 

 Okay, so on both of those points.

 

 That's one point.

 

 So, but you're, so you're, okay.

 

 But you're able to, you're able to make a judgment that you don't think that they're doing enough on that, on that side.

 

 But when you talk about the airstrikes, you say you're not ready to make a determination.

 

 And yet the entire message that the Secretary and the Vice President gave to the Israelis over the last week and over the weekend was that we do not want to see a repeat of what happened in the North and the South.

 

 And a repeat of what happened in the North would be airstrikes.

 

 Did the U.S. ask Egypt to open Rafah crossing for the Palestinian civilians who want to flee?

 

 And second, does the administration still believe or think that Iran doesn't want to expand the war in the Middle East?

 

 Is the U.S. aware of any Americans who are among the 16,000 who have been killed in Gaza?

 

 And do you have any information on how this person was reportedly killed?

 

 Matthew, good afternoon.

 

 The American hostages held by Hamas, does the U.S. believe that they're all alive?

 

 It's been reported that member of Congress reviewed a plan to facilitate the displacement of Gazan, so to settle in several Mideastern countries like Turkey, Egypt, Iraq, and Jordan.

 

 Have you heard about this report, and what's your comment?

 

 Let's start with Gaza and Middle East.

 

 Last week, several U.S. officials, including the Secretary and the Vice President, others, talked about the importance of Israel not repeating what it did in the north, in the south.

 

 And I'm wondering now that the operations in the south have begun, if you think that they are doing or following your advice.

 

 Okay.

 

 The Israeli Government is conducting this investigation to look at Hamas using rape as a weapon of war against Israeli women and girls on the 7th.

 

 They say they've now collected more than 1,500 eyewitness accounts of sexual assault, sexual violence, including rape against women and girls that day.

 

 Is that something that the Biden administration condemns?

 

 And also, have the Israelis shared any of that evidence with U.S. officials?

 

 On Friday, the UN Secretary General said – I'm paraphrasing, but seemed to say that every – all this evidence should be investigated.

 

 As far as I'm aware, the UN has not confirmed that they will take up a separate independent investigation.

 

 Just to come back to the Israeli offensive, I wondered if you could sort of talk to us a little bit about what's behind this messaging at the end of last week and over the weekend.

 

 Is there an assessment – for example, the Vice President calling the death toll devastating, and Defense Secretary Austin talking about driving the population into the arms of the enemy.

 

 This suggests that the administration has come to some kind of conclusion that the way that the Israelis have been conducting these operations has not protected civilians.

 

 Is that – like, is there a finding, or has there been some kind of assessment that has come out with that?

 

 And it's been noted that – yeah, you've had these warnings to civilians, but at some points people have been told to go to certain areas or these areas will be safe, and then those areas have then been bombarded.

 

 QUESTION So I understand you correctly.

 

 You're saying that the killing of 700 Palestinians over a period of 24 – I always like when I use my own words, not when you try to put words in my mouth.

 

 QUESTION I want to understand what you said properly.

 

 You said that we have seen improvement.

 

 I'm asking you directly, you think that the killing of 700 people in a 24-hour period is an improvement.

 

 I'm just asking you to say yes or no in accordance to what you said.

 

 What have you done to really minimize that?

 

 Remember, Washington – Gaza is the size of Washington, D.C. When you tell people to move, like now, and they have nowhere to go, nowhere to go.

 

 They're striking in Khan Yunis.

 

 They're saying, actually, we're hitting every place in Gaza.

 

 So where should people go?

 

 Okay, but you know – we know that they bombed UN facilities and so on.

 

 Let me ask a couple of other questions.

 

 You said that Hamas committed atrocities, right?

 

 Do you call the killing of 20,000 Palestinians an atrocity?

 

 QUESTION And you don't think that Israel intentionally killed civilians?

 

 QUESTION So you are asking Hamas to surrender.

 

 Is that what you're asking?

 

 QUESTION Hamas is not an army.

 

 They don't have air force.

 

 They don't have a navy.

 

 They don't have artillery.

 

 They have none of these things.

 

 They don't really have any kind of regular kind of structure that they can conduct their You know, Said, they may not have a navy.

 

 My last question to you, the UN – a former official of the UN, Mr.

 

 Mukaiber, said that the most clear-cut case of genocide, the Israeli bombardment and the killing of 20,000 people thus far, is the most clear-cut case of genocide.

 

 Going back to your answer to the question about the reports of a rape of Israeli women by Hamas and use of sexual violence as a war crime – as a weapon of war, you said, we've seen Hamas commit atrocities, we obviously condemn atrocities, but you didn't use the words rape or sexual violence.

 

 And I'm wondering if there's a reason for that or not a more explicit condemnation of rape.

 

 I do want to talk about the aid, but I just want to highlight the fact that – I mean, you've highlighted that one important step the Israelis are taking is to point to these de-confliction zones.

 

 But again, it is not clear that those are going to be a viable option for many or even most of the people who need to use them.

 

 That is – to be safe from attack.

 

 Sorry, last one, and then I promise to see the floor.

 

 As part of that verification process, is it going to be determined whether the casualty was the result of an action taken by Hamas or an action taken by the Israeli military?

 

 I thought it was on the West Bank, but we'll defer to colleagues for now.

 

 Okay, thank you.

 

 So on Friday, an Israeli airstrike killed my colleague Montezer Al-Sawwaf, who is a Gaza-based journalist reporting for Anadolu.

 

 This came one week after his 45 members of his extended family, including his parents and brothers, were killed in a previous Israeli airstrike.

 

 First of all, do you have anything to say on that specific attack as a comment?

 

 And secondly, considering that nearly 70 journalists were killed since the start of the war in Gaza, do you think Israel might be deliberately targeting those journalists to control the flow of information from Gaza?

 

 But the Secretary also said last week that Israel has one of the most sophisticated militaries in the world and is capable of minimizing harm to civilians.

 

 I mean, more than 15,000 Palestinians, including women, children, and journalists were killed since October 7th.

 

 Does that mean that killing of thousands of civilians, including journalists like my colleague, could have been prevented?

 

 Does the United States support the Israel proposal for establishing a buffer zone between Gaza and Israel?

 

 And if so, do you have any idea what's the nature of this buffer zone?

 

 And – well, one more question.

 

 Yesterday, there were an attack on the Iranian-backed groups in Iraq, and there's some Iraqi sources, they suspected the United States in this attack.

 

 And do you confirm that have the – has the United States conducted or were there any counter-battery attacks to these Iraqi forces?

 

 And also, if I may add this, do you believe that the Iraqi Government could stop these militia groups from attacking the United States, as the Secretary Blinken spoke with Prime Minister Sudani Friday?

 

 Matt, can I go back to something you said in response to one of the questions about sexual violence?

 

 I'm just interested because the phrasing you used was curious to me, at least.

 

 You said you have no reason to doubt any reports that rape was used as – sexual violence was used by Hamas.

 

 You said the fact that they, meaning Hamas, continue to hold women hostages, okay, that is a fact.

 

 The fact that they continue to hold children hostages, that is also a fact.

 

 But then you said the fact that it seems one of the reasons they don't want to turn women over that they've been holding hostage and the reason that the paws fell apart is that they don't want those women to be able to talk about what happened to them during their time in captivity.

 

 The fact that it seems – why do you – is this a conjecture on your part or do you know – do you have very good reason to believe, evidence to believe that Hamas is deliberately continuing to hold on to female hostages because they're concerned that they will speak about atrocities that were – that they were subjected to?

 

 West Bank — Yeah.

 

 Well, the Secretary last week said that he had made clear to his Israeli interlocutors that the U.S. had expectations for Israel addressing extremist violence in the West Bank.

 

 Has any of that moved forward from the U.S. perspective?

 

 Have the Israelis taken concrete steps in giving you evidence that they have?

 

 So some of those actions are said to be visa restrictions on some of the extremists at hand.

 

 Are those set to be rolled out in the near term?

 

 And what options do you have in the case of American extremists who are perpetrating violence in the West Bank?

 

 Russia, can you provide any information on reports that a U.S. citizen was reportedly found dead in a temporary detention center?

 

 Can I have one quick follow-up on a previous subject?

 

 There are people who are accusing the UN of slow-rolling the probe into alleged sexual violence committed by Hamas.

 

 Do you have any specific comment on that?

 

 All right.

 

 Well, so when you made reference to the Israeli cabinet meeting right now, is that the last thing that needs to be done?

 

 Is your understanding that the first tranche of hostages to be released would include Americans?

 

 And have you received any updates on their conditions, whereabouts, if they're being held together, if they are all, in fact, being held by Hamas?

 

 Is it your understanding that if and when a deal is reached, that would then trigger more aid being able to get into Gaza, as the Secretary had suggested would happen?

 

 But the Israelis seem to have linked it, it seems.

 

 And just one last question.

 

 The Israelis beginning their southern offensive, and you've talked about wanting to make sure there's better arrangements in place for protection of civilians.

 

 Have you been asking them to delay their southern offensive until that's ready?

 

 I mean, they've already kind of started anyway, but where are things at?

 

 I just want to follow up on a couple of things that Barbara raised.

 

 But before that, I want to state for the record that the poet Musab al-Butoha, whom I raised yesterday, he was actually released today by the Israelis, and I like to think that you guys had something to do with that, and he will be on his way to Egypt so he can come back to the United States with his family.

 

 On the issue of the deal itself, now, we're talking about — The issue of what itself?

 

 The potential deal.

 

 The potential deal that could or may not happen.

 

 Is it your understanding that there is a split in the Israeli cabinet as to who may agree or disagree, and will that hold the going forward with the deal?

 

 Right.

 

 But let's say – I mean, if the old cabinet agrees and the larger cabinet did not agree or the Supreme Court and so on, then we're back to square one.

 

 Are you urging the Israelis to go forward with the deal?

 

 Let me just ask you on something that you always state, that you want the Israelis to abide by the laws of war, you want to minimize civilian casualties among Palestinians and so on.

 

 Yesterday or the day before was Children's World Day or whatever.

 

 Fifty-five hundred Palestinian children have died thus far.

 

 You think the Israelis are abiding by the laws of war?

 

 And on that very point, now, the Israelis seem to be obsessed with the Palestinian hospitals.

 

 I wonder if you've seen the interview done on CNN with the former Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak, who acknowledged that it was actually Israel that built these basements or tunnels and so on.

 

 Matt, just to follow up on a couple of things from colleagues' questions, so this might be a little bit down the line, but is there at all an understanding in these hostage negotiations for what comes next after this deal?

 

 And I'm asking because there are 240 people who are taken hostage by Hamas.

 

 So while Israel, Hamas, Qatar, and you were in – somehow in these conversations about this number of people, was there any understanding for what happens with the rest of the people?

 

 But surely you're talking for everybody.

 

 And just to push you a little bit more on Barbara's question about possible Israeli offensive in the south, John Finer also talked about this as well, but what is the very latest in the sense that – are you getting a timeline from them on when they are planning to start this?

 

 And are you telling them specifically here are the things, here are the objectives, here are the safe zones you have to create or whatever you think appropriate to call them before you start this?

 

 And if you can't get them without these, you should not be starting it.

 

 There seems to be a bit of a discrepancy b