(AGENPARL) - Roma, 26 Luglio 2023 - (AGENPARL) – mar 25 luglio 2023 You are subscribed to Department Press Briefings for U.S. Department of State. This information has recently been updated, and is now available.
07/25/2023 05:45 PM EDT
Vedant Patel, Principal Deputy Spokesperson
1:16 p.m. EDT
[]MR PATEL: Good afternoon, everybody. I have one very brief thing, and then happy to dive right into your questions.
Last Friday, President Biden released the first-ever voluntary commitments on artificial intelligence, which were agreed to by several leading companies, including Amazon, Anthropic, Google, Inflection, Meta, Microsoft, and OpenAI.
These commitments are focused on safety, security, and trust and represent an important step forward to ensure that powerful AI foundational – “foundation models” maximize the benefits for all people in line with our democratic values.
As home to leading AI companies in the world, the U.S. is uniquely positioned to lead the way in creating an AI future that we all can benefit from.
The voluntary commitments serve as an important first step and contribution to the international AI conversation around safety, security, and risk.
As Secretary Blinken and Secretary Raimondo wrote in yesterday’s Financial Times, to shape the future of AI, we must act quickly and collectively.
No country or company can shape the future of AI alone. The U.S. has taken an important step, but only with the combined focus, ingenuity, and cooperation of the international community will we be able to fully and safely harness the potential of AI.
With that, Matt.
QUESTION: That’s it?
MR PATEL: That’s it. The floor is yours.
QUESTION: Gosh. Oh well, I don’t know if it’s mine or not. Hold on. Let me get my —
MR PATEL: I think it’s —
[]QUESTION: — recorder going. Thanks. Let’s just start – I just want to make sure that it’s still correct that you have not heard anything back from the North Koreans about Private King.
MR PATEL: That is correct. As Matt indicated yesterday, the – getting an assertation of his well?being continues to be a high priority, and we continue to be in close coordination with the White House and the Department of Defense and throughout the interagency, but I don’t have any new updates beyond what Matt shared yesterday.
QUESTION: Okay. And just to make sure that everyone understands, that means you don’t know if he’s in custody, you don’t know if he’s alive, you don’t know what – and if he is alive, if he’s – what his condition is?
MR PATEL: That is correct. Those are among the litany of things that we do not know.
QUESTION: Okay. I guess I won’t ask what else you don’t know because that could be anything. All right, I’ll let it go at that. I’m sure you’ll be asked about Qin Gang and say the same thing, that you don’t know anything, so I’ll let others – I’ll let others do that asking.
MR PATEL: Matt, all right.
Simon, how about the other side of the table?
QUESTION: Just to stay on North Korea.
MR PATEL: Sure.
QUESTION: The Russian defense minister is planning to visit. I think some Chinese will go to mark Victory Day. Do you have any, like, specific – any concerns about those countries at a time like this kind of showing some support for Pyongyang?
MR PATEL: Well, this – it goes back to an issue that we have raised a number of times before. Both Russia and the PRC have a potential role they can play, including through the auspices of the UN Security Council, in which they can use their influence over the DPRK to encourage them to refrain from threatening, unlawful behavior, behavior that will not just incite tensions in the immediate region but also the region broadly. And they also have a potential role to play in encouraging the DPRK to return to the negotiating table. The United States’ point of view on this has been quite consistent, which is that we are open to meeting with Pyongyang without preconditions, and we continue to have a commitment for the complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.
QUESTION: And now could – if we can move on to Qin Gang if – and this – and maybe we can come back to North Korea? But just on —
MR PATEL: Sure.
QUESTION: — the Chinese foreign minister, they’ve announced that he’s been replaced by his predecessor Wang Yi. There was supposed to be a visit of Qin Gang to Washington that was in the works. Could you tell us about those discussions? Did they get anywhere? And I guess to put a final point on it, does the U.S. consider that the visit that was being discussed is a visit of the Chinese foreign minister no matter who that is?
MR PATEL: So, Simon, let me say a couple things. First, it is up to China to decide who their foreign minister is. As you know, Secretary Blinken has met with Wang Yi on multiple occasions, including on his most recent trip to Jakarta as well as while he visited Beijing prior to that. We will continue to engage with Foreign Minister Wang Yi and other Chinese officials, and we continue to believe that keeping lines of communications are incredibly important. And it’s an important avenue to manage this relationship responsibly, which is something that the international community expects of us.
As it relates to any potential travel, Simon, I am not going to get specific – get into specifics. What I will just reiterate is that at the conclusion of almost every U.S. official’s visit to the PRC, they have reiterated that there is an expectation that we will continue to see high-level engagement with travel from both sides of the Pacific, and we continue to expect that to be the case. I don’t have any finite travel to announce, and it would – ultimately would be for the PRC to announce any travel to the United States. But I just – I’m not going to get ahead of the process on who it might be and what their title or titles may not be.
QUESTION: And just finally, sorry.
MR PATEL: Yes.
QUESTION: Have there been any specific communications, say, for the Chinese informing you of this change? And where did that – what level did that happen at?
MR PATEL: I don’t have any other further information on this beyond what – what’s been publicly reported.
QUESTION: Just to follow up on that.
MR PATEL: Sure.
QUESTION: What is your take of the events in China and why he’s been incommunicado for so many weeks and months? And you asked about – Simon asked about communications, but has the Secretary been in contact? Before we knew that he was being removed, has he been in contact with his counterpart in the recent weeks, Vedant?
MR PATEL: I have no calls on behalf of the Secretary to read out. As you know, Leon, he had the opportunity to have a bilateral engagement with Wang Yi on the margins of ASEAN in Jakarta. I have no other engagements to read out. Obviously, we continue to think it’s incredibly important that we maintain open lines of communications with the PRC.
As it relates to our personal take, again, it is up to the PRC to determine who their foreign minister is, and I will just leave it at that.
Anything else on the PRC before we move away? Jenny, go ahead.
[]QUESTION: Switching topics. Trevor Reed was reportedly injured in Ukraine fighting there. Do you have any comment on this? Was the State Department aware that he had gone to fight there? Are you concerned this will have negative implications on ongoing discussions to free the American detainees who are still in Russia, Paul Whelan and Evan Gershkovich?
MR PATEL: I will say a couple of things, Jenny. We are aware that Trevor Reed was injured while participating in fighting in Ukraine. Since the beginning of this war, we have warned that U.S. citizens who travel to Ukraine, especially with the purpose of participating in fighting there, that they face significant risks, including the risk of capture or death or physical harm as well.
And so I want to be explicitly clear about something. Mr. Reed was not engaged in any activities on behalf of the U.S. Government. And as I indicated, we have been incredibly clear warning American citizens, American nationals, not to travel to Ukraine, let alone participate in fighting there. And as you know, Jenny, we are not in a place to provide assistance to evacuate private U.S. citizens from Ukraine, including those Americans who may decide to travel to Ukraine to participate in that ongoing war.
Now, we are aware that through the support of an NGO, Mr. Reed has been transported to Germany and he is receiving medical care. Beyond that, I would just reiterate again to anyone listening to this briefing and the entirety of this room that Ukraine continues to be categorized as a Level 4 country per the State Department’s Travel Advisory warnings, which indicates Do Not Travel. And that continues to be our posture.
As it relates to the other American citizens who continue to be wrongfully detained in Russia, as I, as the Secretary, as Matt, as Ambassador Carstens and others have said, we will continue to engage directly with the Russian Federation calling for their release. You’ve seen us do so in the case of Paul Whelan, Evan Gershkovich, and we’ll continue to remain deeply engaged on those issues.
QUESTION: But are you concerned the Russians will weaponize this as a way to say (inaudible) —
MR PATEL: I’m just not gonna – gonna speculate on something like that.
Anything else on this?
QUESTION: On Ukraine?
MR PATEL: Go ahead, Alex.
QUESTION: Thanks, Vedant. The report from DIA officials that Russia is building a drone manufacturing facility with Iran’s help that will have significant impacts on the war once it is completed, is this something new to you? And if it isn’t, a new reaction to that?
MR PATEL: Alex, I don’t have anything on this specific report, but what I will say is something you’ve heard us speak quite clearly about before, which is that Iran remains Russia’s top military backer, and we can say that – you heard us speak about this earlier this year – that Russia received hundreds of one-way attack UAVs as well as UAV production-related equipment from Iran. Russia has been using Iranian UAVs to strike Kyiv, to terrorize Ukrainian populations, and this partnership, this military partnership between Russia and Iran, continues to be deepening.
QUESTION: Thank you. And separately, is the U.S. aware of the U.S. intel over Russia laying additional Black Sea mines that then may attack civilian shipping – a strategy Ukrainians understood (inaudible)?
MR PATEL: I certainly wouldn’t get into any – any intelligence assessments from up here, and I also don’t want to get ahead of things. But Alex, the important thing to remember is that there are flagged ships that operate in the Black Sea that have participated in the Black Sea Grain Initiative when it was in place from every corner of the world. And I certainly don’t think that these respective countries would take kindly to Russia attacking their flagged ships, especially because they were there participating in the Black Sea Grain Initiative for the very reason of ensuring that Ukrainian grain and food products are able to be transported to other parts of the world, to parts of the world that need it.
QUESTION: And final on this line, if I may, IAEA today has confirmed the presence of anti-person mines at the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant. May I have your reaction, please, to this?
MR PATEL: Alex, you’ve heard me say this probably seven different ways over the past many, many months, but we have been very clear that such violent and volatile type of activity under – near, in such close proximity to a nuclear power plant – in this case, ZNPP – is incredibly unsafe. It puts the immediate region in harm’s way. And so we continue to call on such activity so close to ZNPP to stop.
Michel.
[]QUESTION: Yeah, I have a couple of questions, Vedant.
MR PATEL: Sure.
QUESTION: First, on Russia and Syria, how do you view the encounters between Russia fighter jets and U.S. drones operating over Syria, and how will the U.S. react on that?
MR PATEL: So the U.S. and the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS continue to work with our local partners in Syria to maintain constant pressure on ISIS remnants and ensure ISIS’s lasting defeat. I would reiterate what comments were made by our colleagues at the Department of Defense, that we strongly urge Russian forces in Syria to immediately stop reckless and threatening behavior that could result in the loss of life and adhere to standards of behavior expected of a professional force.
For any specifics on this particular incident, though, Michel, I would refer you to our colleagues at the Pentagon.
QUESTION: But you made the – made the same request in the past, and Russia didn’t stop doing what it has done, lately, especially on Sunday. Will there be any consequences?
MR PATEL: I certainly am not going to preview any actions or consequences from here. What I will just reiterate, though, Michel, is that we’ve been clear that Russia needs to stop these reckless and threatening types of behavior that could result in the loss of life and put people in harm’s way.
QUESTION: And on Syria, House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Michael McCaul and Representative Joe Wilson sent a letter to President Biden opposing potential extension of Syria sanctions exemption. Are you planning to extend the exemption?
MR PATEL: Well, Michel, firstly I’m not going to preview any sanctions or any sanctions-related actions that we might take. I certainly don’t have anything to announce from here at this moment. We are aware of that letter and continue to be in close coordination with our colleagues across the interagency as well as the Department of Treasury, who of course can speak more to questions regarding GL 23.
But let me just say that we have been clear and have been clear about this numerous times, that we strongly support humanitarian access to all Syrians in need through all appropriate modalities. There obviously has been immense benefit of the provision of aid for this earthquake. Michel, I think you were on that trip with the Secretary where we saw some of these aid efforts, at least from the Turkish side, and we had the opportunity to observe them. And our viewpoint continues to be that we support these endeavors.
QUESTION: And finally, on —
QUESTION: Can I just follow-up on this?
MR PATEL: Can – I think he had a follow-up. Let me – and then I’ll come right back to you, Said. I don’t want to – I don’t want to interrupt Michel.
QUESTION: I have a final one on Jordan.
MR PATEL: Okay. Let me come to him, and then I’ll come back to – go ahead.
QUESTION: I mean, the United States is in Syria to defeat ISIS, correct? I mean, that is an enterprise that has been largely accomplished. So how long will the United States stay in Syria, controlling, like, one third of the country, disallowing the country access to its own oil? So could this go on forever? Because ISIS, as much as an organization, it is also an ideology. I mean, this thing could be there forever and ever, right?
MR PATEL: Said, let me say a couple things. It is not just about a pinpoint moment in time and effort – what it is about are our continued efforts to maintain the degraded position of ISIS in the region. And that continues to be a priority. And as I said, we continue to operate in efforts to maintain constant pressure on ISIS remnants and to ensure ISIS’s lasting defeat. Obviously our colleagues at the Pentagon and the global coalition can speak further about any specific parameters, but this has been a key priority for this administration and this department for some time.
QUESTION: Can I follow up on Michel’s question?
MR PATEL: Sure, go ahead.
QUESTION: Okay. In response to his question, you said that these incidents could result in a loss of life and put people in harm’s way.
MR PATEL: Yeah.
QUESTION: To my knowledge, this incident and a couple preceding involved unmanned American drones. The loss of life that you’re referring to here, is that Russian pilots?
MR PATEL: So we are – we’re being incredibly speculative about what this incident could have been taking over of, certainly. Still, this kind of reckless activity could certainly result in the loss of life, whether it be civilians or others in this case. I’m certainly not going to get specific. But what I would focus on is that this kind of activity is reckless, and threatening, and out of conduct of the kind of behavior that’s expected of a professional force.
QUESTION: Thank you.
[]MR PATEL: You had a follow-up on Jordan.
QUESTION: Yeah. On Jordan —
MR PATEL: Go ahead.
QUESTION: — do you have any comments on the proposed cyber crime law there?
MR PATEL: So the proposed cyber crime law that was submitted to the Jordanian parliament limits freedom of expression online and offline, and could inhibit future investment in the technology sector. This type of law, with vague definitions and concepts, could undermine Jordan’s homegrown economic and political reform efforts and further shrink the civic space that journalists, bloggers, and other members of civil society operate in in Jordan. And so we reiterate that for countries to thrive there must be protections for freedom of expression, open debate, vibrant discourse, and information sharing, including online via press and social media platforms as well.
QUESTION: Thanks.
[]MR PATEL: Said, go ahead.
QUESTION: (Off-mike.)
QUESTION: May I switch topics to the Palestinian issue?
MR PATEL: Sure.
QUESTION: Very quickly, on the visa waiver, there’s still a great deal of confusion, because people tried to cross the Erez Crossing and they were turned back. So we know that the statutory requirement on reciprocity says all Americans should be treated equally and so on. But in this case – and I heard what Matt said yesterday in his response to a question that was raised —
MR PATEL: Yeah.
QUESTION: — that you understand or you see that Israel has certain concerns, security concerns with Gaza. So – and this, if you factor this in, then reciprocity is not a full thing extended to all Americans, is it?
MR PATEL: So Said, again, what I – what I’ll reiterate is that this – that is 100 percent our expectation. You’ve heard me and Matt be very clear about this, is that our expectation is that any American citizen is treated equally in any attempts to transit to and through the region. I will note, though, Said, to your question, that we continue and we will analyze data that Israel has committed to provide. And I’ll also note that the embassy has established a portal, accessible via U.S. Embassy Israel’s website, where U.S. citizens may report any travel difficulties. And it is important for us to receive that feedback, to collect that data, and to analyze it so that, come the deadline, the Secretary and this department can make the most appropriate recommendation to the Department of Homeland Security.
QUESTION: (Off-mike.)
MR PATEL: So this is still an ongoing process, Said. And we’ll continue to assess and work directly with the Israeli Government towards fulfilling our very clear requirements for entry into the Visa Waiver Program.
QUESTION: Okay. So if I understand you correctly, you’re saying that you will have some sort of a yardstick by which to measure when and where Israel has real legitimate security concern or where it may be abusing that, whatever margin —
MR PATEL: Said, those yardsticks exist. There are very clear —
QUESTION: All right.
MR PATEL: — requirements and prerequisites as it relates to the Visa Waiver Program for any country that is intending to be part of that program.
QUESTION: Let me ask you on the judicial reforms, if I may. Now, the President said yesterday that – or the White House said that they were disappointed or they regret the passage of the reforms. But now that this – the ship has sailed. So what’s next? What will the United States do, and can we – do we – can we expect sort of any hiccups in the special relationship with Israel? Does that in any way impact the thinking or the stuff that is ongoing? There’s been calls, for instance, by former ambassadors to basically cut off military aid to Israel and so on. So what is your response to all these things?
MR PATEL: Well, what I will say on that is that is not going to happen. But what I can say is that our decades —
QUESTION: What’s not going to happen?
MR PATEL: There’s not going to be any cut or stoppage —
QUESTION: (Off-mike.)
MR PATEL: — of military aid, and that is because our commitment to Israel and our commitment to Israel’s security is ironclad. Our decades-long partnership with Israel is ironclad. And the President – and you saw the White House be very clear about this over the past couple of days – has expressed his views in this scenario, that major changes in a democracy need to be enduring, they need to have as broad consensus as possible. We also understand that talks are ongoing and likely to continue over the coming weeks and months to forge a broader compromise.
And we will continue to support efforts of Israeli leaders as they continue to work to seek a broader consensus and create a consensus through political dialogue. We also will continue to engage with our Israeli counterparts and Israeli officials to strengthen the bond between the United States and Israel and to advance our shared democratic values, cooperating on a full range of issues while working through our differences and concerns, like our – most relationships where we have bilateral relations with a country, Said.
QUESTION: So you expect these negotiations in the coming weeks to yield any sort of pullback by the government and saying, we were wrong, let’s not – let’s not implement these judicial reforms, et cetera?
MR PATEL: Said, it’s not for me to preview or hypothesize or speculate from up here. What I’m simply saying is a matter of fact, which is that we understand that talks continue to be ongoing, likely over the coming weeks and months, as internally within Israel this process moves forward to continue to a broader – a compromise.
QUESTION: Okay. But I’ll tell you what, because – I’m sorry, I just want to talk about this issue for a bit further. Because these judicial reforms, they impact lives on a daily basis. People that go in and then the ministry of defense decides that this person —
MR PATEL: We agree with you, Said.
QUESTION: — cannot enter and so on. Then the supreme court says no, this is —
MR PATEL: No —
QUESTION: That’s a first. (Laughter.)
QUESTION: — if you’ll allow me – because that’s what they mean by the unreasonableness. This is unreasonable, and they have done that.
MR PATEL: No one is disputing that —
QUESTION: And they’ve done it again. Now we can see probably now a multitude of —
MR PATEL: Said, no one is disputing that.
QUESTION: — (inaudible) persons held by the Israeli Government in the occupied territories on Palestinians who hold Israeli citizenship and so on. I mean, this is really a very critical issue.
MR PATEL: Said, to your point that this is – affects everyday people, no, we agree with that point. That is exactly why this is something that the Secretary, the President, and others have been deeply engaged on and incredibly clear that it’s our viewpoint that such changes in democracy, where the expectation is that they are going to be enduring, must have as broad of a consensus as possible.
[]QUESTION: So can I go back to Trevor Reed just for one second?
MR PATEL: Sure.
QUESTION: I want to make sure that I heard you correctly.
MR PATEL: Yeah.
QUESTION: You said, “as you know … we are not in a place to provide assistance to evacuate private U.S. citizens from Ukraine, including those Americans who may decide to travel to Ukraine to participate in” fighting. Then you said that, “Mr. Reed has been transported to Germany and he is receiving medical care.” Are you saying that he got there on his own?
MR PATEL: I – if you check the transcript, my – what I —
QUESTION: Well, I did. I’m looking at it right now.
MR PATEL: — should have said is it was through the support of an NGO that Trevor Reed was transported to Germany. It was not through U.S. Government efforts.
QUESTION: And – okay. But there’s another part to the question —
MR PATEL: Sure.
QUESTION: — which is: Where is he receiving care in Germany? In a private hospital or is he at Landstuhl or is he at some U.S. military installation?