(AGENPARL) - Roma, 16 Agosto 2023 - (AGENPARL) – mer 16 agosto 2023 You are subscribed to Department Press Briefings for U.S. Department of State. This information has recently been updated, and is now available.
Department Press Briefing – August 16, 2023 [ https://www.state.gov/briefings/department-press-briefing-august-16-2023/ ] 08/16/2023 05:30 PM EDT
Vedant Patel, Principal Deputy Spokesperson
1:20 p.m. EDT
*MR PATEL: *Good afternoon, everybody.
*QUESTION: *Good afternoon.
*MR PATEL: *I have one brief thing at the top, and then I’m happy to dive right into your questions.
The United States condemns Russia’s continued attacks on Ukrainian grain infrastructure and calls for Russia to immediately return to the Black Sea Grain Initiative.
Today, we are learning that multiple Russian drone attacks damaged warehouses and granaries in a Ukrainian port on the Danube, near the Romanian border. This is in addition to previous Russian attacks on Ukrainian port infrastructure in Odesa, Reni, and Izmail.
This escalation demonstrates Moscow continues to prevent grain and foodstuffs from reaching those who need it most throughout the world. It is unacceptable. Putin simply does not care about global food security.
Such actions by the Kremlin negatively affect Ukrainian farmers and all those around the world who are most vulnerable to food insecurity. Russia’s attacks on Ukrainian port infrastructure facilities have destroyed hundreds of thousands of Ukraine’s grain, grain bound for global markets. This further escalates global – the global food crisis, and it keeps food prices high. These attacks are in addition to the loss of a quarter of the arable land in Ukraine, a vital global breadbasket, as a result of Russia’s illegal war. The contrast here is quite sharp. Our Ukrainians are inspiring the world, while Russia starves it by weaponizing food.
So with that, Matt, please.
*QUESTION: *Well, I mean, just on that. I suppose this is kind of self-evident, but, I mean, do you have any indication that the Russians are willing to go back or at least even start talking about going back into the BSGI?
*MR PATEL: *I’m not aware of any indication. Obviously, this is something that we’re continuing to press for. We know that the Black Sea Grain Initiative worked. It worked —
*QUESTION: *Right.
*MR PATEL: *— to the tune of nearly 33 million metric tons. In the meantime, though, we’re working with partners in Europe to —
*QUESTION: *But —
*MR PATEL: *— identify other potential options to possibly find ways and corridors in which we can continue to get grain to the places it needs to go.
*QUESTION: *Right. But would it be accurate to say that you calling – you condemning the attacks today and then again calling on Russia to immediately return to the BSGI, would it be accurate to say that you don’t really think that those calls are going to go anywhere?
*MR PATEL: *Well, you have seen the Russian Federation kind of flail its arms about the Black Sea Grain Initiative, complain about it, threaten to pull out and remain in. I think the truth is in the numbers and in the metrics about how beneficial this has been to global markets. And when I say that global prices are impacted by this, that also means for consumers in Russia itself. So it is in the self-interest of the Russian Federation to rejoin this initiative. We know it works.
*QUESTION: *Okay. On a different topic —
*MR PATEL: *Yeah.
*QUESTION: *— can I just ask you if you have – and I don’t expect that you do, but if you have anything new you can update us on on the status of Private King in North Korea?
*MR PATEL: *I have no updates. If you’re referring to some of the comments that have been in public reporting overnight and this morning, what I can say is that we cannot verify the comments attributed to Private King. What I will say is, though, that we remain focused on his safe return. And our priority is to bring Private King home, and we are working through all available channels to achieve that outcome. And his well-being continues to be a top priority for us as well as his safety.
*QUESTION: *And since this morning there hasn’t – you’re – are you aware of any contact that there’s been between —
*MR PATEL: *No. There has not been.
*QUESTION: *Can I follow up on that one?
*MR PATEL: *Sure.
*QUESTION: *You say that you remain focused on his safe return and pursuing all available channels. Can you be any more specific as to what those channels that you’re sending these messages through actually are?
*MR PATEL: *So these are sensitive diplomatic conversations, Kylie, so I’m not going to get into the specifics of them. But what I will just say – and you’ve heard us say this before – is that we retain a number of channels through which we’re able to send messages and communicate to the DPRK. As is widely known, Sweden serves as the protecting power for the United States in the DPRK, and we’re working in close contact with our Swedish counterparts on this regarding this case. But I’m just not going to get more specific or into the details beyond that.
*QUESTION: *And then just one more question. As the U.S. is trying to engage North Korea on this, are you guys offering North Korea anything to partake in these engagements or are you just saying that you really would like to have these conversations without any —
*MR PATEL: *Right now our top priority as it relates to Private King is the same that it has been for a number of weeks now: wanting to get assertation on his safety, on his well-being, and on his status. And that continues to be what we’re trying to pursue.
*QUESTION: *Not in return for anything, right?
*MR PATEL: *That is correct.
*QUESTION: *Just a couple of follow-ups on that, Vedant.
*MR PATEL: *Yeah.
*QUESTION: *Just so I’m clear, are you trying to say through various channels you are – you guys are trying to communicate to the North Koreans, and so far they have not responded?
*MR PATEL: *That is correct.
*QUESTION: *Great. And there is an active effort going on as well as we speak?
*MR PATEL: *We have raised this case through the appropriate channels that exist to send messages and communicate to the DPRK. We have done so over the course of this process and have not gotten – aside from that one confirmation message to UN officials, have not received any communication from the DPRK on this.
*QUESTION: *Okay. I have a follow-up on the grain deal, a quick one. You said you’re – U.S. is working with partners to identify other potential options to find corridors. Can you talk a little bit about those? What exactly are those?
*MR PATEL:* Again, I just – I don’t have specifics to lay out for you. Obviously the Danube is a potential option, and we’re working in close concert with our European partners, with our Ukrainian partners, to find avenues to get the Ukrainian grain to the places it needs to go. I don’t have a new avenue or mechanism to announce today.
*QUESTION:* Right.
*MR PATEL:* What I will reiterate, though, just again is that we know that the Black Sea Grain Initiative worked, and we would call on Russia to rejoin it. But also as equally important is ensuring that this grain can get to the places that it needs to go. Food insecurity is something that is quite important to this Secretary – addressing it – and so we’ll continue to work through channels to see what other avenues and options are out there.
*QUESTION:* How mature or promising is the Danube, the river? And like, I reckon through the national – through the coast and —
*MR PATEL:* Yeah, what I would say, Humeyra, is that unfortunately for you, I’m not a shipping or a grain expert, so I can’t put a metric on it today.
*QUESTION:* Me neither.
*QUESTION:* But you are a geographic expert. (Laughter.)
*QUESTION:* Me neither. Just looking at the map —
*MR PATEL:* But what I will say is that it’s obviously one that many of our partners and we’re talking about or having coordination, but I just – I don’t have anything to announce. What I will say is that we share a commitment to find an avenue, whether it is re-entry into the Black Sea Grain Initiative, whether it be other avenues to make sure that the Ukrainian grain can get to the places it needs to go.
*QUESTION:* Do all the people – all the countries involved in that, are the sympathetic to this idea?
*MR PATEL:* I think the – what I will just say, and I won’t speak for other countries, but what I will say is that the withdrawal of Russia from the Black Sea Grain Initiative has left some clear markers on the world, and one of the biggest of those being that according to the IMF, Russia’s withdrawal from the BSGI will drive up global grain prices 10 to 15 percent. It’s not – that’s not something that just impacts the United States; it impacts countries around the world.
So any country that is – that cares about food security, that cares about feeding its people, which I would hope is every country on the planet, should be deeply concerned about this and be working to get Russia in – back into the Black Sea Grain Initiative or work with us to find other avenues to ensure that the grain can get to the places it needs to go.
*QUESTION:* Follow-up?
*MR PATEL:* Sure.
*QUESTION:* Thanks, Vedant. Damaging grain infrastructure intentionally – is that a war crime?
*MR PATEL:* Alex, what I will just say is that throughout the entirety of this conflict, we have seen Russian security forces commit atrocities. I am not going to assign a label to the activities that I described in my topper. What I will just say, though, is Russia’s continued disregard for food security, whether it be through the withdrawal of the Black Sea Grain Initiative, whether it be through its continued strikes on grain infrastructure, just continues to make clear that food security and making sure that food and grain are not weaponized – it’s clear that that’s not something that the Russian Federation or President Putin care about. And so —
*QUESTION:* Have you —
*MR PATEL:* — we’ll continue to – we’ll continue to work – work towards that.
*QUESTION:* Have you conveyed this concern to the Turkish partners given the fact that Erdogan is expected to meet with Putin in Ankara?
*MR PATEL:* So as you know better than a lot, Alex, our Turkish partners have been integral to getting the Black Sea Grain Initiative turned on in the first place, and they, of course, are important partners in the region, and we think that any country that can play a role in getting the Russian Federation back into the Black Sea Grain Initiative would be a good thing.
*QUESTION:* Should they roll a red – let me take it back. Should they call Putin, even invite him to Ankara, if he continues doing it between now and —
*MR PATEL:* That is for our Turkish partners to decide.
*QUESTION:* One more question on that, Vedant. We heard from Ambassador Beth Van Schaack yesterday; she gave an interview to Ukrainian media saying that we are preparing for Putin’s day in court and of course following other pathways as well. Can you just cue us in on where you’re standing in terms of, first of all, sharing your knowledge with the ICC? And secondly, can you expand – elaborate a little bit on that statement?
*MR PATEL:* What I will just say broadly, Alex, is that we have been clear about the need for accountability for the perpetrators of war crimes. President Biden has also noted that the warrant issued against President Putin by the ICC is justified, and so we’re going to continue to work with Ukraine and other partners to expose what Russia is doing in Ukraine.
Barbara, you had your hand up.
*QUESTION:* Yeah, thank you. Can you confirm that the new U.S. ambassador to Niger will be arriving there by the end of the week, and if so, why you are sending an ambassador when there’s been – just been a coup in the country and you haven’t had one there for the past two years?
*MR PATEL:* So first let me just say we are pleased to see that Ambassador FitzGibbon was confirmed in late July after what was a yearlong confirmation process, and we do look forward to Ambassador FitzGibbon’s arrival in Niamey. She is going there to lead the mission during a critical time and to support the American community and to coordinate on the U.S. Government’s efforts. What I will also be very clear about, Barbara, is her arrival does not reflect a change in our position, and we continue to advocate for a diplomatic solution that respects the constitutional order in Niger, and for the immediate release of President Bazoum and his family. And we remain committed to working with African partners to promote security, stability, and democratic governance in the Sahel, and Ambassador FitzGibbon will be an integral piece of that when she gets to post in Niamey.
*QUESTION:* But it is suggesting, perhaps, a direction of travel, given that the French have pulled out but you’re sending an ambassador there. So is it sort of like a signal of – not confidence but of continued engagement over the longer term?
*MR PATEL:* It is a signal of the United States continued engagement in this situation. It is not a signal of any change in U.S. policy as it relates to the circumstances in Niger. We have been quite clear of what we want to see happen. We want to see President Bazoum and his family released. We want to see the constitutional order in Niger respected. That was the case this whole time, and that will be the case whenever Ambassador FitzGibbon gets to Niamey as well. And so I just want to be very clear about that, that this is not a change in policy or posture.
*QUESTION:* And do you expect – finally, do you expect her to present her credentials to the new military leader of Niger? And also, do you expect her to be able to meet with the imprisoned former president?
*MR PATEL:* So I’m just not going to speak to any immediate tasks that she has on hand. Of course, when Acting Deputy Secretary Nuland was in Niamey, she made an effort to try to meet with President Bazoum. I imagine we will continue to make efforts to have contact with him; the Secretary has had the opportunity to speak with him, of course.
As it relates to any provision of credentials, at this time there’s no plans for that. What I will say is that the provision of credentials does not – is not a necessary requirement for any of the work that happens at embassies to take place. And we look forward to Ambassador FitzGibbon getting there and doing – and taking part in some of this very important work that we have ongoing to respect the constitutional order in Niger.
*QUESTION:* Can I —
*MR PATEL:* Yeah.
*QUESTION:* I presume – but please correct me if I’m wrong – that agrément for her job was given by President Bazoum’s government.
*MR PATEL:* That would be my understanding, given the time she was nominated.
*QUESTION:* And this has not – and that it has not been withdrawn —
*MR PATEL:* That would be correct.
*QUESTION:* — by the new – well, by the —
*MR PATEL:* Yeah. I’m not going to speak to any —
*QUESTION:* So there’s no issue in terms of her actually getting in there? Whether or not she presents her credentials in a day or three months from now, there’s no issue with her actually entering the country and taking up the – taking up the job?
*MR PATEL:* Correct. But again, I want to be very clear that her arrival does not reflect any change —
*QUESTION:* I’m not suggesting that —
*MR PATEL:* No. I know you’re not. I just —
*QUESTION:* I just wanted to know. But, I mean —
*MR PATEL:* People like to clip certain parts of —
*QUESTION:* Well, but there has been a potential change in government, right? So if it was President Bazoum’s government that formally accepted – gave agrément for her, then I just wanted to know if it was still valid and – at least as to what —
*MR PATEL:* Well, in our view, the democratically elected government of Niger is still the democratically elected government of Niger. Yeah.
*QUESTION:* That’s – I know, in your view. But the military leaders might have a different view, so – but they haven’t told you?
*MR PATEL:* Correct.
*QUESTION:* Okay, thank you.
*MR PATEL:* Said, go ahead.
*QUESTION:* Thank you, Vedant. Two quick questions on the – on Israel.
*MR PATEL:* Yeah.
*QUESTION:* The Israeli press is reporting that Israel may uproot ancient Christian mosaic near Megiddo. It’s a site that – bearing an early reference to Jesus, peace be upon him, as God. So are you aware of this report, and do you have any comment on that?
*MR PATEL:* I’m aware of the report. What I would say, Said, is that the U.S. Government is not involved in this at all.
*QUESTION:* Right, right.
*MR PATEL:* And I would refer you to the Museum of the Bible, which is a privately-run museum, as well as the Israeli Antiquities Authority, to discuss any exchange of artifacts or things of that nature. This is not something that the United States is party to. Yeah.
*QUESTION:* Okay. But – and there are no regulations against bringing – this presumably is some art that is being mutilated, uprooted, and relocated?
*MR PATEL:* To my knowledge, there is not some sort of restriction. But again, this agreement is not one that the federal government is party to, so —
*QUESTION:* Okay. And very quickly, they are – also, the Israeli press is reporting that some Democrats are, like, dumbfounded that the administration, or the Biden administration, is willing to hand what they call a major gift to Netanyahu, and that the timing is bad. And in particular, they’re talking about the visa waiver and this relentless pursuit of normalization between Israel and Saudi Arabia. Do you have a comment on that? Do you think that the timing is proper now to pursue those two issues?
*MR PATEL:* Said, the foreign policy that we pursue and the policies that we pursue bilaterally with any country are because they’re in the interest of the United States. The United States isn’t Santa Claus, handing around things like Visa Waiver Program or something else. We are pursuing these things and engaging on these things because they are in our interest —
*QUESTION:* (Inaudible) Santa Claus (inaudible). (Laughter.)
*MR PATEL:* We are pursuing these things because they are —
*QUESTION:* (Inaudible) give you access to the North Pole and the elves?
*MR PATEL:* Sure.
*QUESTION:* You mentioned it, not me.
*MR PATEL:* I perhaps should not have been so glib. What I would just say, though, Said, is that we pursue these things because they are in the U.S.’s national interest to do so, all of these things. First, as you’ve heard me say before, entry into the Visa Waiver Program for Israel is not going to happen until and unless we see reciprocity and the many prerequisites that myself and Matt and Ned and others have spent a lot of time up here talking about. Things like normalization and integration into the region we view as a good thing, as a good thing for the important opportunity to further collaborate on a number of areas, including trade and people-to-people and the flow of goods and ideas. And we also remain equally committed to a negotiated two-state solution between our Israeli partners and the Palestinians. And that’s something that we’re going to continue to pursue as well because we think it is an important step that is good for the region, and good for national security interests in the region.
*QUESTION:* On the other hand, the administration has also expressed clear displeasure with the judicial reform, which passed the Knesset on the 24th of last month and so on. And you would like to see those reforms either thrown out or frozen, or as the President said, garner consensus among Israelis and so on – none of which are happening. So why not use this kind of – you refuse to call them gifts, but that’s kind of benefits for Israel, until such time where these expressed also American goals are achieved?
*MR PATEL:* Look, Said, we continue to engage our Israeli counterparts to strengthen the special bond between the United States and Israel, and to advance democratic values that have long formed – been the basis of this relationship. And you quoted the President aptly and accurately, and that continues to be what we’re going to pursue here as well.
Diyar, go ahead.
*QUESTION:* Thank you, Vedant. Iran has said (inaudible) security in Iraq and Iran, which demands disarming the Kurdish opposition, the Iranian Kurdish opposition groups, and also moving out the refugees in their current camps. And I’ve learned that during the past months, you met the Kurdish Iranian opposition here at the State Department. My question is that: What’s your position on that, and how do you see the disarming the Kurdish opposition in Kurdistan region, and moving out the civil refugees in their camps?
*MR PATEL:* So first, I would just say we urge respect for human rights and for Iraq to protect all refugees and asylum-seekers on its territory, and to refrain from forcible relocation. Beyond that, though, I would refer you to the Government of Iraq to speak to any understandings that they might have.
*QUESTION:* Thank you.
*MR PATEL:* Go ahead, Julia.
*QUESTION:* I wanted to ask about – following up on the Iranian prisoner exchange, and the family of Shahab Dalili. His son said to NBC News yesterday: Secretary Blinken, you are purposefully inflicting pain upon my family by not making a wrongful designation. What’s the State Department’s reaction to that statement?
*MR PATEL:* So you heard the Secretary address a question about this case yesterday. You heard me address a question about this case the day before that. I will just reiterate again that this is not a case that has been determined to be wrongfully detained. But as you know, the State Department regularly reviews cases uses a number of criteria to determine if a detention of a U.S. national is wrongful, and we do so in a way that’s consistent with the Levinson Act.
Again, we’re just not going to get into the specifics of specific cases from here. But as you have seen, we assess the circumstances of detentions and look for indicators of wrongful detention, and when appropriate, we will make a determination if the indicators meet as such.