Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
MS. NULAND: Happy Monday, everyone. We are celebrating St. Patrick's Day in Washington
one day late here. As you know, there are events at the White House, and the Secretary
has some events today as well. I have nothing at the top, so let's go to what's on your
minds.
QUESTION: Two things, please. One, if you're celebrating St. Patrick's Day, why are you
not wearing anything green?
MS. NULAND: It's - I would call this green. Maybe you --
QUESTION: Looks yellow to me.
MS. NULAND: I'm sorry. It must be our lighting, our extreme lighting. It is green.
QUESTION: Okay. More importantly, there are reports that a Rwandan-born, former Congolese
general, Bosco Ntaganda, has turned himself in to the U.S. Embassy in Kigali. Is there
any truth to that?
MS. NULAND: I can confirm that this morning Bosco Ntaganda, an ICC indictee and leader
of one of the M23 factions walked into U.S. Embassy Kigali. He specifically asked to be
transferred to the ICC in The Hague. We're currently consulting with a number of governments,
including the Rwandan government, in order to facilitate his request.
Please.
QUESTION: Did --
QUESTION: Another --
MS. NULAND: Sorry. Still on this?
QUESTION: Whoa, slow down.
MS. NULAND: Yeah. Still on this?
QUESTION: Did you have contact with General Ntaganda before this? I mean, can you explain
in any manner how this process came about, or was it just a complete surprise to you
that he showed up at the Embassy today?
MS. NULAND: I don't think that we had any advance notice that he would plan to walk
in. It sounds like it was something that happened this morning, and we are endeavoring to meet
his request.
QUESTION: And had you been in discussions with this general?
MS. NULAND: To my knowledge, no.
QUESTION: And why is he - did he say he went to the U.S. - I mean, to me that's not the
natural place to go, the U.S. Embassy in Kigali. Why didn't he go to the Rwandan government
or anyone else? I mean, the United States is not even an ICC member?
MS. NULAND: I'm not in a position to speak for him as to why he chose us to facilitate
his passage to The Hague. Presumably, when we complete this process, he'll be in a position
to speak for himself.
QUESTION: Is it your anticipation then, following his request, that he will, indeed, be transferred
to the ICC?
MS. NULAND: Again, that's what he's asked for. We want to facilitate that request. As
you know, we strongly support the work that the ICC is doing to investigate the atrocities
committed in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and we are going to continue to work
with the ICC in this matter.
QUESTION: There'd be no obstacle from your side then to transferring him to the ICC?
MS. NULAND: As I said, we're working to facilitate the request that he has made.
QUESTION: Any idea how long that might take?
MS. NULAND: We're working on it in real-time here. We'll let you know what we can as things
go.
Scott, still on this?
QUESTION: Has the government in Kinshasa asked for him to be transferred to their authority?
MS. NULAND: To my knowledge, no.
QUESTION: Another subject?
MS. NULAND: Goyal, yeah.
QUESTION: Pakistan.
MS. NULAND: Mm-hmm.
QUESTION: Tomorrow, Pakistan government completes five full years in government, and this may
be the first time ever in the Pakistan history. But somehow, many Pakistanis are not happy
the way that five years completes this government because of poverty and a lot of terrorism
attacks and not much development for the people, and so much money had been coming there, and
so much a rift going on in the country. So Secretary John Kerry had been in the region
and also in Pakistan numerous times and he knows and has the knowledge of the country
and the region. What do you think the Secretary feels now after five years of this government
and still they do not have the government now, which will be over soon, the election,
they're still waiting for the government to form?
MS. NULAND: Well, first of all, let me just say again, as we said on Friday in anticipation
of this move, the United States congratulates the Pakistani parliament on the completion
of its term. This is truly historic. As you know, there's a period of time now where a
transitional government will be formed in order to take the elections forward.
I think, in response to your question, what's most important is that the Pakistani people
are now going to be afforded an opportunity, we all hope, through free, fair, and transparent
elections, to express their will about the political future that they want to have. That's
what's most important, is that we get to elections in Pakistan.
QUESTION: Just a quick follow-up, madam. In the future, whoever, whatever government comes
in Pakistan, and I wish them all the best for I'm sure there will be another democracy
not military anymore. My question, madam, again, to follow that, you think U.S. will,
under Secretary John Kerry, will change policy that more development for the people or people
to people rather than government money or the help to the government, but focus more
on the people's development in Pakistan?
MS. NULAND: Well, Goyal, I'm going to take issue with the premise of your question. As
you know, about a year and a half ago, the U.S. did some work with the Congress to restructure
the support that we provide to Pakistan to enable us to do more support at the grassroots
level for economic empowerment, for the nongovernmental sector, for energy needs of Pakistan. We still,
obviously, work with the government on their development needs, but we also work extensively
directly with the people of Pakistan, and we can get you more information about that
going forward.
QUESTION: All I said was this talking to many Pakistanis here in this area. What they said
if U.S. shift its position of policy in Pakistan, focus more on the people, then U.S. will gain
much respect from the people of Pakistan in the future.
MS. NULAND: I think one of the difficulties we have - and we've talked about this before
here, and we talked about it when former Secretary Clinton was in Pakistan, and I'm sure Secretary
Kerry will talk about it when he is able to make a trip - is that the Pakistani people
don't have good information about how much we are doing at the people-to-people level
and the grassroots level, and we need to work harder to get that message out.
Brad, you wanted to go to Syria?
QUESTION: Yes, please. Can we --
QUESTION: Can we go back to Pakistan?
MS. NULAND: You want to let Lalit finish here on Pakistan? Go ahead, Lalit.
QUESTION: Given that Pakistan has a history of army's coup several times in the past,
do you think over the past five years the development that has taken place, the democratic
system, is irreversible? Or do you still fear that there might be some chance in the future
that Pakistan army could - there be coup also.
MS. NULAND: Well, none of us have a crystal ball, and I certainly wouldn't answer a hypothetical.
I think what we consider extremely positive is that we have, for the first time in history,
a democratic government able to complete its term. And now we look forward to the next
step, which is free, fair elections.
Please.
QUESTION: And since U.S. has a very important relationship with Pakistan and with 2014 drawdown
line looming, what kind of relationship are you looking to have with Pakistan in the next
coming years?
MS. NULAND: Well, obviously we need to have the transitional government formed. We then
need to have elections and have a permanent government. But I think our expectation is
that we will be able to work well with whomever the Pakistani people elect on the full range
of things that we work on, security and counterterrorism, economic development, regional integration,
strong support for the development of democracy, the NGO sector, human rights, all of those
things. So that's what we would hope to be able to continue and to grow even stronger
in the future.
Brad.
QUESTION: Syria. How do you feel about this interim government that's taking shape in
Turkey? And is it something that the United States would be willing to recognize?
MS. NULAND: Well, the Syrian Opposition Coalition's conversations are still going on about precisely
what they want to have come out of these meetings in Istanbul. So I don't think we want to get
ahead of that, Brad. I think you know what we've been focused on, which is, in ensuring
that the opposition maintains unity, that it maintains a pluralistic, open approach,
and is inclusive of all of the major groups in Syria, that it maintains its democratic
trajectory, that it is supporting the best standards of justice, human rights, democracy
for a future Syria.
So we are obviously watching the proceedings with care, but we are most interested in ensuring
that the opposition remains unified, that they remain effective in representing the
best of a future Syria and in providing services increasingly to Syrians in the liberated areas.
QUESTION: But on the actual step of creating an interim government, you don't have a position,
per se? It's not something you support or caution against at this point?
MS. NULAND: Again, I think we're interested in the principles of unity and a democratic
trajectory. We need to see where this goes going forward.
QUESTION: And then just one more. I noticed in the last week - I think you last week and
Secretary Kerry today both stressed the point that the Russians haven't put forward people
for the Geneva plan to kind of go forward. Is this --
MS. NULAND: Brad, I think that's a misreading of both what I said and what Secretary Kerry
said. It's not for any outside power to put forward names for the Geneva process. What
we've been trying to encourage is that countries like Russia, who have influence with Assad,
would encourage him to allow the Geneva process to go forward. And that would mean to allow
some participation by those in the regime without blood on their hands to sit with the
opposition and look at how one could implement this transitional government.
QUESTION: Sorry if I said Russia. I meant to say that you both pointed out that the
Assad regime hasn't put forward people to represent them in these talks, which has sort
of prevented this plan from really getting off the ground. Is that why this interim government,
kind of on the opposition side, is not provoking stronger objections from your part?
MS. NULAND: Again, we need to see what the Syrian opposition chooses to do in Istanbul
before we prejudge it. What the Secretary made clear today is that we still, despite
all of our best efforts, have not seen the Assad regime prepared to really engage in
allowing a political page to be turned in supporting this concept of a transitional
government with Assad getting out of the way. Instead, they've responded with more violence
against the Syrian people.
QUESTION: But this interim government that the opposition coalition is setting up, that
doesn't act as a replacement to the transitional government that you still maintain is your
goal, correct?
MS. NULAND: Again, I'm not going to get ahead of what the opposition chooses to do. The
issue would be whether any group of people who comes forward from the opposition can
play an appropriate role in the implementation of a transitional government.
QUESTION: So you still - just - sorry, to make the question a lot easier, you still
hold out hope of a transitional government that the opposition and the regime, elements
within the regime, agree to as part of it?
MS. NULAND: The first-order issue here, Brad, is that the violence needs to stop. The violence
is not going to stop unless and until Assad understands that he can't shoot his way out
of this, that the better course of action, if he wants to save his country, is to allow
a real negotiation about a transitional government. He hasn't gotten that message yet, so we're
going to continue to up the pressure by supporting the opposition militarily and politically,
even as we leave the door open, as the Secretary made clear today, if he chooses to allow a
political path forward.
QUESTION: Support militarily?
MS. NULAND: Materially. Materially. Materially. Good effort.
QUESTION: No. I think you did say that.
MS. NULAND: Materially was what I meant. Apologies.
QUESTION: Okay. Follow-up on --
MS. NULAND: But the Secretary did say today that we don't have objections if others make
a different choice, right.
QUESTION: Got that message.
MS. NULAND: Yeah.
QUESTION: A follow-up on Brad's questions. Do you prefer an interim government for the
opposition, or the implementation of Geneva communiqué?
MS. NULAND: Again, you guys are making this sound like it's an either-or. It doesn't work
that way in our view. But again, we're not going to get ahead of what the opposition
chooses to do.
QUESTION: One more on Syria. Two Syrian warplanes hit targets at Lebanon border for the first
time today. Do you have any reaction to that?
MS. NULAND: Let me say that we can confirm what you are seeing in the press, that regime
jets and helicopters did fire rockets into northern Lebanon, impacting Wadi al-Khayel,
near the border town of Arsal. This constitutes a significant escalation in the violations
of Lebanese sovereignty that the Syrian regime has been guilty of. These kinds of violations
of sovereignty are absolutely unacceptable.
Unfortunately, this is not an isolated incident, as we discussed on Friday, and we stand by
our own longstanding commitment to UN Security Council Resolution 1559, which calls for the
very strictest respect for the sovereignty, territorial integrity, unity, and political
independence of Lebanon. I'd also note that the Lebanese government has taken a strong
stand of disassociation from the Syrian crisis, and that also needs to be respected.
QUESTION: Anybody - any official in the building has talked to the Prime Minister, Lebanese
Prime Minister, or to the Lebanese government?
MS. NULAND: Our Ambassador in the ground, Maura Connelly, has obviously been in close
contact with the Lebanese government. I don't know whether there have been any calls from
this building. I'll take a check on that.
QUESTION: Can you also confirm that there are about dozens - a dozen Scud-type missiles
launch to the north of Syria over the weekend?
MS. NULAND: I don't have anything specific on new Scuds over the weekend. But you know
we have on and off seen use of Scuds as well as aerial bombardment by the regime for many
months now, and particularly in the Aleppo region.
QUESTION: Turkish officials have basically confirmed over the last two months they - there
have been about hundred Scud-type missiles launched from Damascus. And as we all know,
there are - Patriot missiles are situated in south of Turkey. Have you ever considered
intercepting these rockets from these Patriots in Turkey?
MS. NULAND: Ilhan, as we made clear at the time that NATO and the United States deployed
those assets in Turkey, they are designed for the defense of Turkey. They are now programmed
only to intercept if missiles fly into Turkish territory, and we don't have any plans to
change that.
QUESTION: But it shouldn't be so difficult to change all those designs to intercept a
Scud within Syria that basically wipe out half of villages sometime. And we all know
there is no military target on these rockets; they just hit the civilians mostly.
MS. NULAND: Again, the NATO decision was to defend our ally, Turkey, with those assets
and not to go further.
Please.
QUESTION: I have one more on Turkey.
MS. NULAND: Yeah.
QUESTION: I mean on Syria. Sorry. Secretary Kerry said today that al-Qaida-related elements
are supporting Assad.
MS. NULAND: I think what happened in that exchange was that he - a bunch of things got
put together. As you know, our concern has been about Iranian support, Hezbollah support,
and continuing Russian support for the Assad regime. We also separately are concerned about
al-Qaida-affiliated entities infiltrating the Syrian opposition. We've talked about
that. So I think he was speaking quickly what --
QUESTION: He misspoke. Okay, fine.
MS. NULAND: Yeah.
Please.
QUESTION: Venezuela.
MS. NULAND: Yeah.
QUESTION: The Maduro government has made claims that the U.S. is plotting to assassinate the
opposition leader Capriles in order to blame it on the Maduro government. Your reaction
to that? And secondly, has there been a request, as President Maduro said, for the U.S. to
investigate this? And third, has there been any contact between State and former ambassadors
Otto Reich and Roger Noriega in terms of working with the opposition?
MS. NULAND: Let me say it here extremely clearly, looking right at you: The United States categorically
rejects allegations of any U.S. government involvement in any plots to destabilize the
Venezuelan government or to harm anyone in Venezuela. With regard to our former ambassadors,
they have spoken for themselves quite clearly.
Please, Lalit.
QUESTION: If I can check with you on Sri Lanka. The U.S. delegation which is going to - in
Geneva right now, the kind of talks you're having with the Sri Lankan government and
also the Indian government on this issue, do you have something to say on that?
MS. NULAND: Well, you know when we've spoken about it here that we are sponsoring a new
resolution in the Human Rights Council and we're working with a lot of governments who
share our concerns about the lack of progress in Sri Lanka. It is not a surprise to the
Government of Sri Lanka that we are doing this. We made clear publicly and privately
that this was a response to the fact that we just didn't see the kind of movement that
was necessary. We didn't see promises fulfilled. So we're being very transparent with the Government
of Sri Lanka, and we're expecting strong support for the resolution that we've put forward.
QUESTION: But there are sections from the pro-LTT groups which are coming up very strongly
in support of the resolutions in Geneva. Do you think that this - there are some critics
who say the passing of this resolution will give boost to LTT activities not only in Sri
Lanka but world over.
MS. NULAND: Well, the best thing that the Government of Sri Lanka could do for its own
people and to undercut the claims of these groups would be to fulfill the obligations
that it made to the international community to take the process forward. So that hasn't
happened, and we are taking more measures in the Human Rights Council to make clear
that progress has been insufficient.
QUESTION: And then lastly, has the Indian government approached you for any change in
the draft resolution?
MS. NULAND: I don't have any details about the discussions that are ongoing. I'll send
you to our mission out there.
Michel.
QUESTION: Quick follow-up?
MS. NULAND: Michel.
QUESTION: On Yemen. The National Dialogue has started today. What are your expectations?
MS. NULAND: Let me get a little bit more for you on that. I know that we are very pleased
that the National Dialogue has begun. This is something that we have long supported as
a way of healing the wounds of the past, taking the country forward, ensuring that the best
democratic traditions are upheld in the new Yemen and that grievances and frustrations
are addressed through dialogue. But let me see if we have any more specific messages
with regard to the dialogue today.
QUESTION: Toria, just briefly - pardon me - the Maduro government has not made any requests,
right, to investigate this one?
MS. NULAND: To my knowledge, there haven't been any requests that are viable in the - within
the context of what I said earlier.
Please.
QUESTION: Iraq. Iraq government recently authorized its Oil Minister Abdul-Karem Luaibito sign
framework agreement with oil ministers of Iran and Syria to build the gas pipeline.
And recently, oil minister of Iran spokesman said that next summer, they should be able
to start at least the first leg to Iraq, export gas from Iran to Iraq, and then later on is
going to be the other parts to Syria. Are you concerned with this, or do you have any
stance with the - your Iraqi ally getting this gas project with Iran?
MS. NULAND: Ilhan, I hadn't seen the comments from today. Let me take that and see if we
have anything to share tomorrow. You know as a general matter how concerned we are about
any country increasing its energy dependence on Iran. That's the wrong direction to go,
not only because we are all seeking to increase the pressure on the Iranian regime, but also
because they're an unreliable partner.
Anything else? Goyal.
QUESTION: Thank you.
QUESTION: Quickly on Sri Lanka?
MS. NULAND: Mm-hmm.
QUESTION: As far as the human rights in Sri Lanka are concerned, especially for the minorities
and this new and old resolution at the United Nations, and Sri Lankan Ambassador also had
been talking about this - these resolutions and progress in Sri Lanka. My question is
that - have you been talking with the Sri Lankan government or their Ambassador here
about these issues before the resolution or during this resolution? And what was their
action or reaction?
MS. NULAND: I think I said in response to Lalit's question that this - the fact that
we were going to move forward in Geneva again was no surprise to the Government of Sri Lanka.
I remember when the Foreign Minister was here last year and met with Secretary Clinton,
she made clear that if we didn't have progress, we would go forward. And that's what we've
done.
Thanks very much, everybody.