(AGENPARL) – ven 04 ottobre 2024 You are subscribed to Press Releases for U.S. Department of State. This information has recently been updated, and is now available.
Department Press Briefing – October 3, 2024 [ https://www.state.gov/briefings/department-press-briefing-october-3-2024/ ] 10/03/2024 08:58 PM EDT
Matthew Miller, Department Spokesperson
Home [ https://www.state.gov ]Department Press Briefing – October 3, 2024 hide
Department Press Briefing – October 3, 2024
October 3, 2024
1:31 p.m. EDT
*MR MILLER:* Let me start with some opening comments before we turn to questions. First, the United States welcomes today’s historic agreement between the Republic of Mauritius and the United Kingdom on the status of the Chagos Archipelago. The United States has strongly supported negotiations every step of the way as the two countries have negotiated over the past two years. It’s a win for diplomacy to see a successful outcome of this effort between two U.S. partners after more than a dozen rounds of talks.
The agreement will secure the future of our joint U.S./UK military facility on Diego Garcia, which plays a vital role in U.S. efforts to establish regional and global security, respond to crises, and counter some of the most challenging security threats of our time. The treaty between Mauritius and the UK also addresses wrongs of the past and demonstrates the commitment of both parties to support the welfare of Chagosians. Mauritius will now be free to implement a resettlement program on the islands of the Chagos Archipelago, other than Diego Garcia, and the UK will capitalize a new trust fund as well as separately provide other support for the benefit of Chagosians.
The agreement also will open up expanded cooperation between the two commonwealth partners who will partner on infrastructure and economic development; environmental protection; maritime security; combatting illegal fishing, irregular migration, and drug and people trafficking within the Chagos Archipelago – with the shared objective of securing and protecting one of the world’s most important marine environments. By settling all outstanding issues between Mauritius and the United Kingdom, today’s agreement reflects the power of diplomacy to solve longstanding challenges and further invigorates our shared commitment to a free and open Indo-Pacific region.
And I would just note that Secretary Blinken discussed this a number of times in recent weeks with officials from both Mauritius and the United Kingdom, including on our trip to the United Kingdom three weeks ago, including in conversations with Foreign Secretary Lammy last week in New York, and another conversation this week, as well as a conversation with the prime minister of Mauritius last week while – a phone conversation while the Secretary was in New York at the UN General Assembly. So especially welcomes this agreement.
Next, turning to our efforts to provide assistance to U.S. citizens who wish to depart Lebanon. As I said yesterday, we are working 24/7 to help provide U.S. citizens in Lebanon with as many options as possible to depart. We know that not all of them wish to leave, but our goal is to provide as many options as we can to make sure all of them are safe. First, we are working with U.S. airlines to block seats for U.S. citizens. We are also working to —
*QUESTION:* Sorry, with U.S. airlines?
*MR MILLER:* For – I’m sorry, no, with airlines. Sorry, we are working with airlines to block seats for U.S. citizens. Excuse me.
*QUESTION:* Okay.
*MR MILLER:* We are also working to increase the commercial capacity by organizing additional flights. In the past week we have made over 1,400 seats available on flights out of Lebanon, and many seats do remain available. In addition, as I announced yesterday, we are organizing additional flights to allow more U.S. citizens and their eligible family members to depart Lebanon now. A second flight departed Beirut this morning with 134 passengers on it, bringing the total number of American citizens and their immediate family members who have departed on these flights to 250. And while we don’t know the total number of U.S. citizens who have left via the seats we have made available on commercial flights, we do know that a high percentage of those seats have been filled.
As I’ve said – or as I said at the top – we do recognize that a number of American citizens do not wish to leave. They have family members in Lebanon and many of them are dual citizens, have lived there for a number of years. So we are also offering loans to U.S. citizens who may wish to stay in Lebanon but want to, instead, relocate to a safer destination inside Lebanon. Americans in Lebanon should visit the embassy website at – or travel.state.gov to fill out our intake form so we can ensure that they are aware of all of the options available to them. And we urge Americans to take advantage of these options now while it is still safe to do so.
With that, Matt.
*QUESTION: * Yes. Well, I have a question on Diego Garcia, but I’ll let that wait until the end because I want to start with Lebanon.
*MR MILLER:* Sure.
*QUESTION:* So, first of all, when you say that 250 total have – Americans have – or I just want to make sure, those are all American citizens and not – and their —
*MR MILLER*: And immediate family members. And immediate family members.
*QUESTION:* Who may or may not be Americans. Is that right?
*MR MILLER:* Yes, correct. May or may not be American citizens.
*QUESTION:* So —
*MR MILLER:* It’s 250. Of that 250, some of them are American citizens; some of their immediate family members who are also eligible for departure.
*QUESTION:* Okay. And there is no distinction between – they can – even if they are not a citizen, if they’re a parent or a child —
*MR MILLER:* If they’re an eligible immediate family member they can – they can depart on those flights.
*QUESTION:* — they can get on – and these are the flights that you guys have organized —
*MR MILLER:* Correct.
*QUESTION:* — that are not on Middle East Airlines?
*MR MILLER:* Correct.
*QUESTION:* Okay. So you’re probably aware that later this afternoon there’s going to be a news conference in Michigan with – an Arab American group is organizing it. They say, at least, that they’re going to announce a class action lawsuit against the U.S. Government, but in particular the State Department, for not – for not doing enough.
Now, the suit hasn’t been filed and – yet, at least that I know of, and even after it’s filed I know that you are just going to defer to the Justice Department. But in terms of the complaint, the broader complaint that appears to be being raised, do you think that you’ve done enough to help?
*MR MILLER:* So you’re right. First of all, let me say that I wouldn’t comment on a lawsuit, but I’m happy to talk about the efforts that we have provided to help American citizens get out of the country. First, I do want to note that we have been advising American citizens to leave for months now. Lebanon has been a Level 4 travel country for months. We have been telling Americans that the security situation was unstable and that they should leave via commercial options while it is safe to do so. We know that American – a number of American citizens did leave over the past few months. But of course, there are thousands and thousands who didn’t leave and decided to stay, and some for very good reasons. Some, we know, have family members, and as I said, aren’t going to want to depart Lebanon under any circumstances. But we were – we have been advising people to leave via commercial options while they still could.
Over the past week, as the security situation got more tense and as a number of commercial airlines that were flying out of Beirut as recently as the last 10 days or so started to cancel their flights, we then started identifying these other options to get American citizens out. The first thing we did, as I said, was to make seats available on Middle East Airlines, which is the only remaining commercial carrier flying out of Lebanon. And a number of American citizens have left via those flights.
*QUESTION:* Do you have – do you know —
*MR MILLER:* I don’t have a number. We – as I said, there were – we don’t ever have perfect fidelity on the Americans that actually show up for those flights, because it’s via a commercial carrier. But we’ve been told by the carrier that a high percentage of the seats that they’ve set aside are being filled. But we just don’t have an exact number. But it is – it is in the hundreds.
In addition, to supplement the seats available on Middle East airways, we started yesterday organizing our own flights. And we had a flight with 300 seats available yesterday, and around 120 people went out on it. We had another flight with 300 seats available today, and a little over 130 people went out on it. We’re going to continue to organize those flights as long as the security situation is challenging, as long as there aren’t sufficient commercial options available, and as long as there’s demand.
So what we have tried to do is be responsive to the situation as it changes. So when there were ample commercial flights available, we were urging American citizens to take them. When the number of commercial flights shrunk, we first worked with the remaining carrier to make seats available, and when we found that there were still more American citizens that wanted to leave, we organized our own flights. And we’ll continue to do everything that we can to help American citizens who want to leave get out safely.
*QUESTION:* Okay. One of the other complaints that’s been raised is that the cost of a seat on one of these planes – particularly on Middle East Airlines – is just exorbitant. People can’t afford it. So one, if you are an American citizen who wants to leave Lebanon on one of these MEA flights and can’t afford it, can you go to the embassy and get an emergency loan to pay for that seat and for the seats of your immediate eligible family members?
*MR MILLER:* So I don’t know if you can get a loan from the embassy for a seat on the Middle East airways flight. I can – I’m happy to check on that. But what I – and any individuals who have that question, if they register with our website, either the one I outlined before, or the embassy people will be able to answer that question directly for them, look at their exact circumstances.
I will say yes, the – we know that the price of the flights on Middle East airways have been extremely high. It’s what you would expect in a situation where they’re the only carrier that remains flying, and we know that’s very difficult for some people. But I will tell you that’s one of the reasons why we organized our own flights, because we do recognize that a number of people just can’t afford to pay those flights. And I’ll say —
*QUESTION:* Okay.
*MR MILLER:* — and while the cost varies on the flights that we have organized, the most that any American will pay for a seat on those flights is $283. And if they can’t afford $283, if they don’t have $283, we will provide them a loan from the U.S. Government for the cost of that ticket on board one of the flights that we have organized. So we would urge any American citizen who wants to leave to take the advice that we are offering to register with our website, and we will reach out to them about flights that are available and work with them to try to get them on a flight they can afford.
*QUESTION:* And those flights that you’ve organized are to where, do you know?
*MR MILLER:* The two flights that have left so far are to Türkiye. The flight that left yesterday, the flight that left earlier today are to Türkiye. If we have additional —
*QUESTION:* Türkiye meaning Istanbul.
*MR MILLER:* Istanbul, and people can always obviously move onward from there. If we make flights available to additional destinations, I will be – I will update you after those flights have taken place.
*QUESTION:* Okay. Last one, extremely briefly, just on – you said at the very top you’ve made 1,400 or arranged for 1,400 seats available. Those are on MEA, right?
*MR MILLER:* Correct.
*QUESTION:* The 14 and then – on top, okay. Thank you.
*MR MILLER:* Yeah. Hi.
*QUESTION:* Thanks, Matt. 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?
*MR MILLER:* No, it certainly hasn’t changed. I mean, if you look at the – our assessment was, I will say, a little more complex than that. It was not just that they would have a tough time sustaining a major military operation in Gaza and a major military operation in the north. It’s also that additional – additional escalation in the north was potentially destabilizing on the West Bank, and they would ultimately find themselves in a number of different confrontations. So that continues to be our assessment, that the longer conflict goes on, the risk you have of additional conflicts breaking out. And that is – puts the Israeli security services in an extremely stretched situation.
*QUESTION:* Without betraying a 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?
*MR MILLER:* We have discussed those goals with them, but obviously it’s, I think, appropriate for them to speak to them publicly, not us.
*QUESTION:* Okay. And vis-à-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?
*MR MILLER:* We – sorry. We are having ongoing conversations with them about the options that they are considering, but I’m going to keep everything about those conversations private.
*QUESTION:* But you have clarity on their planning?
*MR MILLER:* We have ongoing conversations with them. I just don’t think it’s appropriate for me to get into any level of detail, even about the types of things they’re considering or the types of consultations that we are having.
*QUESTION:* Have they taken nuclear sites off the table following the President’s —
*MR MILLER:* I’m just not going to go beyond what I’ve said.
*QUESTION:* Okay. Does the U.S. believe that Israel striking nuclear sites would lead to a broader war?
*MR MILLER:* So the President spoke to this yesterday, made clear that we do not believe they should strike nuclear sites. I don’t want to deal with a hypothetical question beyond that.
*QUESTION:* I mean, it’s not much – it’s not really a hypothetical. It’s like does it —
*MR MILLER:* It’s an event that has not happened, so I don’t want to —
*QUESTION:* Like is a consequence of that —
*MR MILLER:* I just – it is an event that has not happened. I don’t want to talk about potential outcomes.
*QUESTION:* Okay. But if there is a chance for Israel to lesson Iran’s breakout time from a matter weeks to a matter of months or years, does that not make them a less potent foe and lesson the likelihood of a regional war? It’s just —
*MR MILLER:* Again, we are well into the realm of hypotheticals and playing out scenarios that have not occurred. I don’t think it’s appropriate for me to get into that level of speculation from this podium.
*QUESTION:* Okay. 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?
*MR MILLER:* So we have made clear from the start that we are committed to the defense of Israel and that we will remain committed to the defense of Israel. Our security partnership with them dates back decades, and we expect it to continue well into the future. We are also having conversations with them about the shape of that campaign, the scope of that campaign, what their targets are going to be, but I don’t want to get into it beyond that.
*QUESTION:* Thank you.
*QUESTION:* Just a follow-up —
*MR MILLER:* Yeah.
*QUESTION:* — 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?
*MR MILLER:* So that’s a little bit different question than the Olivia – than the one Olivia asked me, but only because it’s about a different target. It still asks me to speculate about the outcome of an event that has not yet happened, and I’m just going to decline to do that.
*QUESTION:* 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?
*MR MILLER:* So I’m not going – it would require me to get into a number of conversations that we have been having over the past 48 hours with our Israeli counterparts and that we continue to have, and I’m not going to do that from here.
*QUESTION:* Okay. Same area, slightly different topic. Lebanese foreign minister told CNN today or yesterday that Hassan Nasrallah, before he was killed, had actually agreed to the 21-day ceasefire that the U.S. had been putting together last week. Is that accurate?
*MR MILLER:* So I can’t speak to whether he ever agreed to it and told somebody inside Lebanon. Obviously that could be something that happened that we wouldn’t be aware of. I can tell you that if that’s true, it was never communicated to us in any way, shape, or form.
*QUESTION:* And you guys met with – Secretary Blinken met with Lebanese officials.
*MR MILLER:* He did.
*QUESTION:* In New York.
*MR MILLER:* We were having a number of —
*QUESTION:* And specifically discussed this 21-day ceasefire.
*MR MILLER:* We were having a number of conversations with Lebanese officials, as well as with others in the region. And I can tell you at no time was it ever communicated to us that Hizballah had accepted a ceasefire.
*QUESTION:* But they were giving you confidence that they might, but it wasn’t necessarily from Nasrallah?
*MR MILLER:* So we were having a number of diplomatic engagements to talk about the proposals that we were going to put forward.
*QUESTION:* Right.
*MR MILLER:* I think all the parties were well aware of the proposals that we were going to put forward, but at no time in those conversations did we get a message that Hizballah was – Hizballah had agreed or was going to agree to it.
*QUESTION:* Or Nasrallah himself.
*MR MILLER:* Yeah, or Nasrallah – well, I mean that – one and the same.
*QUESTION:* Can I —
*QUESTION:* Thank you.
*QUESTION:* I wanted to come back to the – to 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 though? It seems to be broader than just these limited incursions and targeted bombings to take out Hizballah leaders.
*MR MILLER:* So they continue to target Hizballah leaders and target Hizballah officials and Hizballah militants. And the – all of their strikes – at least as far as we are aware – and if there are strikes targeting other officials inside Lebanon, we’d certainly welcome that information. But nothing that we have seen as of yet leads us to include that they are doing anything other than targeting a terrorist organization, Hizballah, that had launched strikes and was continuing to launch strikes against Israel, including in the last few days.
*QUESTION:* 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 greenlight from the U.S., like we’re okay with this? This doesn’t go beyond – redlines is not a word you like to use.
*MR MILLER:* So that’s – it’s not to speak to any one individual strike, because it is not like we are sitting and approving individual strikes. But we do approve of the Israeli Government defending itself and defending its people from a terrorist organization that has continued to – that began this conflict with them on October 8th, forced tens of thousands of people to flee their homes, also has been a destabilizing force in Lebanon. We do support them taking military action to bring those terrorists to justice.
*QUESTION:* But the position last week when you were calling for a three-week ceasefire, is that – there’s no longer a call for a ceasefire?
*MR MILLER:* We do ultimately want to see a ceasefire and a diplomatic resolution, but we do think it’s appropriate that Israel, at this point, is bringing terrorists to justice and trying to push – trying – and launching these limited incursions, what at least at this point are limited incursions, trying to push Hizballah back from the border.
*QUESTION:* But this is having the impact of sending civilians, who have no connection to Hizballah, Americans, to leave. So don’t you have a little more concern that this is the escalatory action that you were warning against?
*MR MILLER:* We are, of course, absolutely concerned about the humanitarian effects of this conflict. We are concerned about the effects on American citizens, thousands of whom live in Lebanon. We are concerned about the effects on innocent Lebanese civilians who live in Lebanon and are now caught in the middle of a conflict that they had nothing to do with. It’s why we are ultimately working for a diplomatic resolution, something that we had been working to for some time. It’s why we’re continuing to support humanitarian assistance for the Lebanese people. It’s why we are organizing the ways to depart Lebanon that I spoke to at the beginning of this briefing.
But ultimately, you do have a security situation that was untenable for Israel. And it – by the way, it’s a security situation that was untenable for Lebanese civilians in southern Lebanon, who had been forced to flee their homes, too. So Israel at this point is – has launched what they have described – and we’re going to watch and see, but what they have described – as limited incursions across the border to try and push Hizballah back so 1701 can ultimately be implemented. We’re going to see how that unfolds over the coming days.
Ultimately our goal is a diplomatic resolution. And where we want to see this go is UN Security Council 1701, which was adopted some years ago and has never been fully implemented, implemented, so you have security on both sides of the border and the ability for Lebanese and Israeli civilians to return to their homes.
*QUESTION:* Right. And – but you talk about a diplomatic solution, but what’s going on at the moment is a war, right? How long can it – how long is Israel sort of – does Israel need to continue those operations? Or how long is it okay for them to keep this kind of level of attacks up?
*MR MILLER:* So a conflict is, by its nature, dynamic.
*QUESTION:* Right.
*MR MILLER:* And I think it’s impossible to know and it’s impossible to predict what the outcome of the fighting that’s going on in southern Lebanon is going to be over the next few days. I can tell you that all of us here are very cognizant of the long history of Israel launching what at the time were described as limited operations —
*QUESTION:* Yeah.
*MR MILLER:* — across the Lebanese border that have turned into something much different, that have turned into full-scale wars, and then at times occupation.
*QUESTION:* Right.
*MR MILLER:* And we are going to continue to – we’re going to watch what happens over the next few days. And ultimately, our position has not changed, which we want to see a diplomatic resolution, but we do want to see Hizballah’s capabilities degraded.
*QUESTION:* Do they have an endgame? Do the Israelis have an endgame, in your view?
*MR MILLER:* You’ll – the Israelis will have to speak to that question, not me.
*QUESTION:* When you say the next few days though, Matt —
*MR MILLER:* Go ahead.
*QUESTION:* — do you indicate that the U.S. believes that these incursions into southern Lebanon will be finished in the next few days? Or are you saying —
*MR MILLER:* No, I’m not speaking – I’m not speaking to that at all. My next briefing is on Monday. I’m happy to come back and take the question on the Monday. But look, we’re watching this – we’re watching this – it goes to the point I was making in answer to Simon’s question, which is they have described these as limited incursions across the border with very targeted objectives, which is to clear out Hizballah infrastructure. But we – and so that’s how they’ve described it; that’s what we’re watching happening right now. But we’re also very aware of the long history of limited operations turning into something else. I’m not going to prejudge what’s going to happen. I don’t know what’s going to happen. Daresay the Israelis probably don’t know what’s going to happen at this point. We’re going to take – we’re going to – Said.
*QUESTION:* Sorry.
*MR MILLER:* Hold on. Relax. We’re going to watch as this unfolds, and we’ll make our assessments as – in real time, as they occur.
*QUESTION:* And the U.S. doesn’t know how long this’ll take, the limited incursions?
*MR MILLER:* I don’t think if you asked Israel they could tell you how long. It is the nature of a conflict that it is dynamic, right? The —
*QUESTION:* But in the case —
*MR MILLER:* No, hold on. Listen to me. The – it is – unpredictable things happen in conflicts. The enemy responds in a way oftentimes that you don’t expect. This isn’t to prejudge any possible outcome. It’s just to say it’s a fluid and dynamic situation, and I think all of us ought to be cautious in pretending to say that we know exactly how it’s going to roll out.
*QUESTION:* So —
*QUESTION:* But in the case of Gaza, which was not that long ago, Matt, you were pressing the Israelis to articulate a plan or a vision for governance, for what comes next. Are you doing that the same in the north or not?
*MR MILLER:* We are having very detailed conversations with them about that. I would never read my unwillingness to talk about those conversations publicly to mean that we are not having them privately.
*QUESTION:* Okay. Well —
*QUESTION:* It’s just before you said it may be – the Israelis don’t know what’s going to happen. Is it okay for a country with U.S. —
*MR MILLER:* No.
*QUESTION:* — using U.S. weapons to go into a conflict with no way out?
*MR MILLER:* So you are completely misinterpreting what I’m saying. When I say that they cannot know what’s going to happen, the point is that oftentimes when you begin a conflict you do not know how it’s going to go.
*QUESTION:* Right. You should at least have —
*MR MILLER:* It’s not to say they don’t have a plan. It’s not to say that they don’t have objectives. It’s to say that conflicts are unpredictable, and the enemy does things that you don’t predict. It is impossible to predict with any – with a complete degree of uncertainty – or a complete degree of certainty how it will unfold. That’s what I meant.
*QUESTION:* Okay.
*QUESTION:* So let me – a brief follow-up.
*MR MILLER:* Yeah, Hiba, go ahead. Go – Hiba, go ahead. Guys. I know, but, like, all of you have your hands up. I’m going to call on you one at a time. Go ahead, Hiba.
*QUESTION:* Yes, Matt. So till now, you still see it as a limited operation in the south?
*MR MILLER:* That’s what they’re conducting at this time. And again, as I said, that’s not to make any predictions about what will happen, but that’s what we assess is happening as it stands.
*QUESTION:* Okay. I want to follow up to your response to Simon on the targeting. If this targeting is systematic, the – the manner in which it’s conducted suggests that there is no safe place. Because how do you expect the people to know who’s living around them, what’s happening in these buildings? Can this be justified?
*MR MILLER:* So obviously attacks, targeted attacks on civilians, could not be justified, but Israel does have the right to go after terrorists. I mean, that’s – that is just a fact under international humanitarian law, that every country has a right to defend itself against terrorists, but their strikes have to take into account civilian harm, and they need to take into account where civilians are. They need to take actions to mitigate civilian harm. They’re required to do that under international humanitarian law, in Lebanon as they are anywhere else.
*QUESTION:* There’s 1 million – one half – 1 million and a half person in the streets now. They don’t have a place to go. And the way it’s conducted now, you may have more people in the streets. Because how do you expect the people to know who’s living in this building and what’s happening? It’s not only some places, some – I don’t know. It’s – how do you expect that people can predict who is living beside them?
*MR MILLER:* So the – there are horrific, horrific consequences of this conflict. It’s why we ultimately want to get to a diplomatic resolution. It is – this is a security situation that has plagued Lebanon for years. And you obviously know the long history well, which is Hizballah has been a destabilizing force that has attacked not just Israel but has attacked Lebanese civilians, and has put the entire region in this untenable situation where, after October 7th, they began launching attacks on Israel that forced tens of thousands of Israeli civilians to move, and then Israel responded and they had this tit-for-tat escalation back and forth that forced tens of thousands of Lebanese to move.
So we are absolutely cognizant of the people who have been forced to move over the past week or so. We’re also cognizant of the tens of thousands of people on the – on both sides of the border who have had to move over the past year. And so it’s why ultimately we want to see a resolution of this conflict where Hizballah doesn’t have the ability to keep sending the region into this spiraling, deteriorating security situation.
*QUESTION:* So you’re confident that they are targeting only Hizballah?
*MR MILLER:* So that is what they have said. We will make our assessments, as we always do in these types of conflicts, as we look at them, as we look at individual strikes, and we go through the formal procedures that we have to undertake.
*QUESTION:* Okay. 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, there has no communication with them since the assassination of the secretary general of Hizballah. 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?
*MR MILLER:* What do you mean any decisions?
*QUESTION:* I mean, who you are in contact with? Because the —
*MR MILLER:* We have been in contact with a number of Lebanese officials, not just at the State Department but from across the government. I won’t – I can’t speak to individual conversations here, but that’s not accurate to say that we’ve not been in contact with Lebanese officials. We have been.
*QUESTION:* In the last few days?
*MR MILLER:* Yes.
*QUESTION:* Okay. One final question. One – today Qatar Hizballah, after the – after what – the President response to the question on the possibility on attacking the oil sites in Iran, Qatar Hizballah put out a statement: If the energy war starts, the world will lose around 12 billions barrel of oil. And as Qatar Hizballah said before, either everyone enjoys the oil or everyone is deprived. Does that concern you?
*MR MILLER:* Again, I’m not going to speak to hypothetical scenarios. We are consulting with Israel about their response, and we’re going to keep those consultations private.
*QUESTION:* Thank you.
*MR MILLER:* Said.
*QUESTION:* Thank you.
*MR MILLER:* Thank you for being patient.
*QUESTION:* Yeah. Just to follow up on what Kylie said about the Lebanese foreign minister saying that Hizballah agreed and so on. But I want to ask you about the proposal itself, because we were all there and we thought that something was coming. There was never a – some sort of a formalized version for the 21 days, correct?
*MR MILLER:* What do you mean a formalized – what do you mean?
*QUESTION:* Well, I mean, like planned out and so on that this is a ceasefire that —
*MR MILLER:* No. We made the proposal public —
*QUESTION:* Public, right.
*MR MILLER:* — and neither of the parties had accepted it when we made it public.
*QUESTION:* But you did not —
*MR MILLER:* We were surfacing it in consultation with our allies, the allies that joined the statement. Now, both of the parties were aware that we were going to make the proposal, but neither of them had accepted it when we did and neither of them did.
*QUESTION:* So – all right. And my question is also on what you said. You say that you support Israel’s limited incursion 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 proportion, citing what happened in 1982, an incursion that 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?
*MR MILLER:* So we do ultimately want to see a diplomatic resolution, but we also think it’s appropriate that Israel take steps to try and deal with what has been an untenable security situation both for them and for the Lebanese people.
*QUESTION:* Okay. So let me ask you, do you – now that we are really on the brink of a – maybe a major war, do you think that this administration, the Biden administration, missed an opportunity by not rejoining the JCOP – POA?
*MR MILLER:* So if you recall, Said, and I assume you were here in 2021 —
*QUESTION:* Yes, of course, I was here.
*MR MILLER:* — 2020 – I wasn’t, but I think you were here during the —
*QUESTION:* I was. I was here. We were all here.
*MR MILLER:* — during the – and probably heard from Ned a number of times about this situation.
*QUESTION:* Right.
*MR MILLER:* We made clear from day one of this administration that we believe diplomacy is the best way to achieve a solution to Iran’s nuclear program. And in 2021 and 2022, there were multiple efforts to return to the JCPOA after the previous administration’s catastrophic decision to withdraw from it. We approached that process in good faith, we worked with our allies and partners on it, and ultimately Iran wasn’t serious about the process, and they demonstrated that by walking away from it in 2022.
*QUESTION:* Now, on the issue of the war in Gaza, I mean, you always say Israel has a 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 MILLER:* I just missed – the pretext of what?
*QUESTION:* On the pretext of continuing its attacks, and so on, on populated neighborhoods and many places, saying that there are militants in these areas, and so on. But these not being regular forces – that there will always be militants. So are you suggesting or are you – I don’t know, I mean, is it possible that Israel could really go on with this slaughter for – endlessly, for days, for weeks to come, for months to come, for years to come, and so on? I mean, only yesterday they killed 55 Palestinian civilians, and so on, so this conceivably can go on.
*MR MILLER:* So we – I answered a similar question from you yesterday. And we obviously – obviously – support Israel’s right to defend itself – as you said in the run-up to your question, as would be the case for any nation facing an ongoing terrorist threat. But also, ultimately, we want to see the establishment of an independent Palestinian state, which I’m going to be perfectly blunt: The absence of a Palestinian state in no way justifies terrorism against the state of Israel and Israeli civilians. It absolutely does not. We’re also aware that the absence of a Palestinian state is one of the major drivers of insecurity and instability in the region, and we continue to believe that the best way for Israel to achieve its long-term security, in addition to all the benefits it would bring to the Palestinian people and all the benefits it would bring to the region, is the establishment of a Palestinian state.
The current Government of Israel has made clear that they have a very different view of that question. We will continue to make clear on behalf of the United States what we believe is in their interests and what we believe is in the broader region’s interests.
*QUESTION:* Thank you.
*MR MILLER:* Nadia.
*QUESTION:* Thank you. First, any reason why these flights that evacuating civilians are not made free? Because I’m sure taxpayers’ money —
*MR MILLER:* Yeah, so there’s a —
*QUESTION:* — would be happy to evacuate people in —