Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
MS. NULAND: Happy Wednesday, everybody. I have one little thing at the top, then we'll
go to what's on your minds. This is with regard to our Human Rights Dialogue in Burma. Our
first Human Rights Dialogue with the Government of Burma concluded earlier today in Nay Pyi
Taw. Assistant Secretary for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, Michael Posner, led a 22-member
interagency delegation from the U.S. to discuss the full range of human rights issues affecting
the country. The delegation included senior representatives from the White House National
Security staff, the Office of the Vice President, the Department of Homeland Security, the U.S.
Agency for International Development, and the Department of Defense.
The talks reflected our whole-of-government approach for engagement with Burma to address
outstanding concerns of the international community in the area of human rights. The
results of the dialogue were assessed to be very positive and we look forward to continuing
these discussions with Burmese authorities.
Let's go to what's on your minds.
QUESTION: Sorry, I don't really have anything. But on that, when you say the results of the
talk were assessed to be very positive --
MS. NULAND: By the participants.
QUESTION: Yeah.
MS. NULAND: I knew you were going to say that.
QUESTION: What does that mean?
MS. NULAND: That the tone was very good, that we were able to talk about a broad cross-section
of human rights issues. You saw that the delegation reflected experts in different aspects of
how our government addresses human rights, and we weren't sure whether the Burmese would
be open to addressing all of those issues, and they were.
QUESTION: And they did.
MS. NULAND: Yes.
QUESTION: So you're pretty confident that there's not going to be a human rights problem
in Burma in the coming days, weeks, months?
MS. NULAND: We are confident that we have now an open channel with the Government of
Burma to discuss human rights and to continue to work on bringing them where they want to
be in terms of human rights standards for their government.
QUESTION: Did the U.S. team get a - sort of a count from them on the number of political
prisoners that still remain, and any sense of how that is progressing?
MS. NULAND: I didn't get a chance to talk to Assistant Secretary Posner. I'm sure those
issues came up, but let me get a little more for you when he comes home.
QUESTION: Also, we'd be interested in what they said on Rakhine.
MS. NULAND: Yes.
QUESTION: New topic?
MS. NULAND: New topic. Yeah, let's go to Elise.
QUESTION: On Syria?
MS. NULAND: Everybody's in black today, is there something I'm --
QUESTION: This is navy.
MS. NULAND: Oh, it's navy. All right, it's navy. (Laughter.)
QUESTION: I'd like to follow up on your discussion yesterday on Syria and on arming the opposition.
I understand that you've decided to focus your aid on kind of nonlethal, but do you
think that the U.S. decision not to provide weapons to the Syrian opposition makes it
more difficult to find out and ensure where these weapons are going, and that they're
not going into the hands of extremists, but more secular people that you want to have
them?
MS. NULAND: Well, as you know, we have talked quite extensively here about the fact that
our own decision is to provide only nonlethal assistance to the opposition; other countries
are making other choices. And we do have very close coordination in looking at all of the
needs of the opposition and also looking at who's who within the opposition. This is a
very, very important issue now as we see an increasing trend of extremists trying to take
advantage of the violence and the lack of government authority, et cetera, all of over
Syria, to try to make inroads, to try to hijack what the Syrian people want and deserve, which
is a more democratic Syria and an opportunity to have a real transition.
So we are working very closely with lots of other countries. You saw that the Secretary
had a meeting when we were in New York with some of the key countries we work with to
try to compare notes not only on how we increase the pressure on the regime through sanctions
and other measures, not only on how we support the UN's humanitarian needs and the Syrian
people's humanitarian needs, but also very much on who the emerging leaders are in Syria,
what we can do to ensure that we are supporting those who want a democratic Syria, and we
are doing what we can to encourage them as they begin to take more control in parts of
Syria where the regime has seeded the field, that they are leading in a manner that reflects
the kind of Syria we all want to have, one that's pluralistic, one that's inclusive,
et cetera.
QUESTION: But specifically on the weapons. Are you saying that you're working with - closely
with other countries to make sure that the weapons are going - who are making those choices
to make sure that the weapons are going to the right type of people?
MS. NULAND: I think I'm not going to get too deeply into the details of the conversations
that we are having, but I would say that we are very, very conscious and we are very active
in working with our partners to assess the situation and to encourage that all support
going to the opposition, whether it's to the nonlethal that we're providing or other support,
that there be good vetting of who it's going to and that we compare notes on what we are
seeing. Because it's not just a matter of individual leaders, it's also a matter of
ensuring that the groups that are working there are not becoming infiltrated.
QUESTION: But just admittedly though, you not doing it yourself does make it less - a
little bit more difficult for you to control that, would you say?
MS. NULAND: We have very good and close coordination with the countries that you saw meet with
the Secretary in New York when we were there a couple of weeks ago. This is very much a
focus to ensure that we are doing what we can to strengthen those in the opposition
who support a democratic Syria and to help them resist the efforts of the extremists
to hijack their efforts.
QUESTION: Toria, seeing that three close allies, namely Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar are
the major providers of these weapons, do you caution them against dumping weapons like
they did in Libya, for instance? I mean, we have been down that road before.
MS. NULAND: Again, I'm not going to go any further than I just went in response to Elise's
question, but we are very much working to ensure that the groups that any of us is are
supporting are focused on the right kind of the Syria and discouraging extremism, et cetera.
QUESTION: Just following on that, and I apologize if you touched on this yesterday, but there
are reports now that the various elements of the opposition are trying to yet again
forge a new leadership structure that would include the FSA. Has that - are you aware
of this? Is Ambassador Ford in touch with them? Do you think this is a sort of viable
vehicle now?
MS. NULAND: Ambassador Ford is very much in touch on a daily basis, on an hourly basis,
with opposition groups, both inside Syria, those who've recently left, and some of the
longtime external opposition figures. We are, as the Secretary said in New York and as we've
said since, working very hard to support them in their effort to unify. We are encouraged
by some of these efforts at unity that we're seeing, particularly inside Syria.
We talk about providing communications gear as part of our nonlethal support. This not
only is designed to help the opposition resist the regime's aggression; it's also designed
to help them to communicate with each other and to work on things like a real transitional
strategy that will be broadly supported within Syria, that'll protect the rights of all Syrians.
So we're encouraged, but there is more work to do, quite a bit more work to do. There's
a conference that is getting underway now in Doha. They're doing some preliminary work
this week. We expect that effort will accelerate, that Ambassador Ford will eventually join
that group when they get to the right level, but this is part and parcel of trying to encourage
more unity and to try to encourage a leadership group to emerge that is committed to democratic
principles and can really engage on a transition strategy going forward --
QUESTION: So do you think that - it sounds as though you don't think this new grouping,
however it sort of ends up being constituted, is going to be ready to make its debut in
Doha, that it's going to take more time than that? Or is that where you're expecting to
sort of see the lineup?
QUESTION: Or is that the plan of the conference?
MS. NULAND: My understanding is - I assume you're talking about this group of fighters
--
QUESTION: Yeah.
MS. NULAND: -- that have announced some - well, obviously, there's that group, but as you
know, most of our efforts are focused on the political opposition, whether it's in the
individual towns or whether it's the emerging effort to form a unified national political
opposition, ensuring that they are connected to others within Syria. But it's early days,
I would say.
QUESTION: Victoria, on the issue of the ceasefire that has been called for for Eid al-Adha,
which is a week from tomorrow - if you have any comment on that. Also, I don't know if
you read or heard statements made by the Syrian Government that they are actually flexible
on this issue and they will consider it. Do you take them seriously? And do you feel that
the onus is on the regime to stop the violence on its part before the opposition groups do?
MS. NULAND: Well, we've talked about this over the last week or so here, Said. I will
say again that we support any efforts to end the bloodshed in Syria. However, as Joint
Special Envoy Brahimi himself has said, it's up to the government to take the first step.
I'm not sure what press reporting you're reading on what the regime is saying, but what I have
is that even today the regime rejected the Brahimi proposal and called a ceasefire, quote,
"pointless," unquote.
Please, Michel.
QUESTION: Toria, you've said that we are ready to look at the needs of the opposition. Did
you mean that you are ready to look at their needs for specific type of arms, too?
MS. NULAND: Michel, our position with regard to nonlethal hasn't changed. We are supporting
nonlethal assistance to the regime.
QUESTION: Is it --
MS. NULAND: To the opposition. Goodness.
QUESTION: A follow-up: Do you agree on all the types of arms that the Arab states are
providing to the opposition?
MS. NULAND: Again, I'm not going to go any further than I did in response to Elise's
question with regard to our specific conversations with our allies and partners who are supporting
the opposition, but we are very conscious of concerns about extremist infiltration and
we're very focused on it.
QUESTION: I'm sorry if you went over this yesterday, but have you discussed reports
by Human Rights Watch that the Syrians are using cluster munitions against the people?
MS. NULAND: We are very concerned about these kinds of reports. The security situation on
the ground in general is continuing to deteriorate as the conflict escalates, not only in Aleppo
and Damascus but also in Idlib, in Al Raqqa, in Homs. We've seen horrific reports of barrel
bombs, of cluster munitions used against civilians, and we, as you know, have consistently condemned
targeting of civilians by any group. We're not in a position ourselves to confirm the
use of clusters, but there are quite broad spread - widespread reports now from the ground
to that effect.
QUESTION: But I mean, if these reports are true - and obviously, you're very concerned
about them - doesn't this take this conflict to another level? I mean, cluster munitions?
You've said from this podium that this is mostly a ground - when we've talked about
a no-fly zone, for instance, that this is mostly a kind of ground game and that even
a no-fly zone, even if you were to consider it, wouldn't necessarily be the most prudent
thing. But now that the regime is largely now using an air campaign, doesn't this heighten
the necessity for some kind of no-fly zone or something?
MS. NULAND: Well, we have said consistently that we see regime forces ratcheting up the
brutality of their tactics - I mean, horrific enough to use fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters
to strafe your own cities. We are seeing an escalating pattern of regime forces targeting
civilians who are not at all involved in the conflict, so this is obviously extremely concerning
as we go forward.
You know that we - as the Secretary has said on a number of occasions, we continue to look
at all of the ideas out there for trying to end the violence. She has said very clearly
that we continue to talk to partners about how, what, why, exactly the elements that
might go into some of these things that people have proposed, including no-fly zone, but
we haven't made any decisions at this stage.
QUESTION: Is there a redline for the type of weapons they start using that you've drawn?
MS. NULAND: It's not - I don't want to put things in those terms that you've put them,
Justin. We are continuing to look at the ground situation. We are, at the same time, continuing
to do everything we can to squeeze this regime. I would note that not only have we continued
to expand the number of countries that are sanctioning the Syrian regime, but also the
kinds of things that they are sanctioning so that the effect is now being felt quite
strongly on the streets of Syria, including in terms of the inflation of the currency,
other kinds of things. So we're going to continue to look at all of these options and work with
our partners.
QUESTION: Toria, a couple things. One, the President said that the use of chemical weapons
would be a redline. Are you saying - are you walking that back?
MS. NULAND: Well, obviously - no. Obviously not. Obviously not.
QUESTION: Okay. Is it still your understanding based on what you've heard from the Turks
that that plane that was coming from Russia to - Moscow to Damascus - was carrying military
equipment - I think you said "very military" --
MS. NULAND: Yes, yes.
QUESTION: It is?
MS. NULAND: Yes.
QUESTION: So you are convinced that the Russians are continuing to supply the regime with military
equipment and materiel to carry - so that they can continue their repression of the
people. Is that correct?
MS. NULAND: We don't have any question, based on what we've heard from our Turkish allies,
that there was dangerous military cargo on that aircraft, which obviously speaks to what
you're talking about.
QUESTION: Right. Okay, but even aside from just this one aircraft, you are certain that
the Russians are continuing to supply weaponry?
MS. NULAND: The Russians - the Russian Government has itself said that it is not concluding
any new contracts, but it is fulfilling old contracts. I don't have anything particular
to brief other than with regard to this instance.
QUESTION: Okay, but I mean does this ship - okay, so if that is in fact the case, and
if it is in fact the case that the Russians are supplying this stuff, and if it is in
fact the case, as you're alluding to or you're saying, that some countries have decided that
arming the opposition is a good way to go and that they're doing that, is this now a
proxy war between the Russians and the Iranians - the supporters of the regime, and your friends
in Gulf, particularly in Turkey, who are supplying weapons to the other side?
MS. NULAND: We've made no secret of our concerns that the longer this goes on, the more there
is a prospect of the thing devolving not only into a civil war, but into a proxy war, and
into a larger war that spills beyond borders. Those concerns remain. The Iranians --
QUESTION: Doesn't it already meet the definition of a proxy war?
MS. NULAND: I'm not going to be giving new definitions right here from this podium, but
our concerns remain, and we've been clear with the Russians. But it's - if you want
to look for who's doing the most to prop up the Assad regime, you should address your
concerns primarily to Tehran, which is not only aiding them rhetorically, aiding them
financially, but is sending fighters, is advising them on tactics and technique, and also providing
materiel, as we've said --
QUESTION: But why, but --
QUESTION: Okay, but you're - just because it's not --
MS. NULAND: Guys? Can you guys decide which one of you is going to yell at me? (Laughter.)
Go ahead.
QUESTION: I'm not - I'm trying not to yell.
MS. NULAND: Good. (Laughter.)
QUESTION: The - but I - you're an intelligent woman. Just because it's --
MS. NULAND: Thank you, Matt. I return the compliment to you.
QUESTION: Just because it's not in the guidance in front of you --
MS. NULAND: My father will be pleased to hear it.
QUESTION: Just because it's not in the guidance in front of you doesn't mean you can't call
it like - call it what it is. If you have the Russians and the Iranians - okay, the
Iranians for the most part - on one side supplying the regime with weaponry, enabling it to stay
in power longer and enabling it to kill more of its people, and you have on the other side
your good friends and allies in the Gulf, and a NATO ally included in that, supplying
the opposition with weaponry that you yourself just said you're helping to vet who gets it,
how does this not meet the definition of a proxy war?
MS. NULAND: Again, I'm not going to go beyond what I've said, which is that our concerns
remain about where this is going, which is why we all have to work together to hasten
the day that the violence ends. And I would also remind that it is the regime that has
it in its hands to end this any day that it chooses to, and they are the ones who bear
the brunt of the burden of the violence that's going on.
QUESTION: Can I - but why are you making a moral distinction between what the Iranians
are doing and what the Russians are doing?
MS. NULAND: I'm not making any moral distinctions.
QUESTION: I mean, you're placing more of an onus and a burden on the Iranians when the
Russians actually have more influence because they're the ones holding up a UN Security
Council resolution, they're the ones feasibly presenting - preventing the international
community from doing anything, and they're arming the Syrians. So why is --
MS. NULAND: I think we've been very clear about our concerns about the Russian posture
vis-a-vis Syria. I myself was quite clear last week from this podium.
Go ahead.
QUESTION: Yeah --
MS. NULAND: Poor Jo has been trying to get a word in edgewise all morning - all afternoon.
Go ahead, Jo.
QUESTION: Yes. Going back to Iran's influence and whether or not this is a proxy war, how
concerned is the United States about the numbers of Hezbollah fighters inside Syria? And do
you have any kind of figures on whether these are growing, and how - yeah? I mean, Hezbollah's
obviously backed by Iran.
MS. NULAND: Yeah.
QUESTION: You mentioned just now they're sending in new fighters. Are we talking about Hezbollah?
Are we talking about Iranian people?
MS. NULAND: Well, we're certainly very concerned about growing Hezbollah influence. We're very
concerned about Iran's use of Hezbollah to achieve its ends in supporting up - supporting
the Assad regime. I don't think we've made any bones about that. And back to where Elise
was, in our conversations with the Russians, we have said very clearly and repeatedly at
all levels that if Moscow is concerned about these kinds of things - they have expressed
concern about what could come after Assad, and our point is, what is coming now with
Assad still in power - increasing efforts by extremists of all kinds and by Iran to
make trouble that could spread even beyond borders.
Please.
QUESTION: So you dismiss Nasrallah's claim last - three days ago that there are no Hezbollah
fighters whatsoever in Syria?
MS. NULAND: Yes. We would reject that completely. We are quite confident of nefarious activity
by Hezbollah.
QUESTION: Do you have a notion of how many Hezbollah fighters are inside country?
MS. NULAND: I'm not going to get into our intelligence assessments, but it's a matter
of quite serious concern.
QUESTION: Going back to Burma?
QUESTION: One more on --
MS. NULAND: Let's stay on Syria until we're - yeah.
QUESTION: The shelling into Turkey has continued today.
MS. NULAND: Yeah.
QUESTION: Do you expect an escalation in tension between the two countries?
MS. NULAND: Well, I'm obviously not going to be predictive here, but the Turks have
been very consistent that they are striking back strongly and proportionally every time
they take an attack across border. This is extremely dangerous and goes to the point
that we've been making about the danger of this conflict spilling beyond borders.
Please.
QUESTION: Sorry. How concerned are you about whether it's - whether perceived or truthful
- of growing resentment from Syrians on the ground that blame the United States for not
doing enough, for not providing weapons, for not providing a no-fly zone, and whether that
would fuel some of - sympathy with some of the extremists?
MS. NULAND: Well, we're working very hard through Ambassador Ford's contacts, through
all of our contacts with the Syrian opposition, not only to advertise and reach out through
the programs that we have on the nonlethal side. I think I mentioned that in addition
to the 1,200-plus sets of communications gear that we've handed out, we've now trained hundreds
and hundreds and hundreds of Syrian oppositionists in all kinds of things from human rights training
to civil administration training to supporting the rights of women and students, et cetera.
So - but not everybody in Syria understands those programs or has been touched by them,
so we are trying to make it better known what the opportunities are to work with us. We
are trying to ensure that those who have benefitted from our training go back into Syria and become
trainers themselves so that we can deepen and spread the impact and the effect of these
programs. But we have made a policy decision that we are not going to - that our support
will be nonlethal. But we do think it is having an impact, and we think that the alumni of
our programs are beginning to spread that word inside Syria as well.
Please.
QUESTION: There are news stories saying that the U.S. has agreed or has allowed Libya to
provide the opposition with stinger missiles. Can you confirm that?
MS. NULAND: Has allowed Libya to provide the Syrian --
QUESTION: The Syrian opposition with stingers.
MS. NULAND: I don't have any comment on that one way or the other. As you know, the Libyan
Government is working *** its own business now. They've just formed a government. They
are working on dealing with the internal security problems inside Libya, and that's the focus
of our conversation with them.
QUESTION: Can we revisit --
MS. NULAND: Please.
QUESTION: Toria - hi, sorry - do you have any information on the attack in Afghanistan
over the weekend that killed a female soldier and a CIA operative? Do you know anything
more about this attack? Was it targeting U.S. intelligence assets, to your knowledge?
MS. NULAND: Obviously, I'm not going to talk about intelligence of any kind. I think you're
talking about the attack in Kandahar Province --
QUESTION: Yes.
MS. NULAND: -- which killed a U.S. soldier and another U.S. official. Our understanding
of that - and I will refer you to ISAF because I think they've already spoken to this - is
that this was, in fact, a green-on-green attack where some of our folk got caught in the middle.
QUESTION: So you're not - does it fall under insider attack?
MS. NULAND: Again, I think I'm just going to send you back to ISAF because they spoke
on this quite extensively at the time.
QUESTION: Okay. Also on Afghanistan, where are we on the post-2014 negotiations for keeping
a U.S. presence in Afghanistan? Have those talks begun? Are they progressing?
MS. NULAND: I think we announced when we saw the - when the Secretary saw President Karzai
in New York, that we had named our negotiating teams for the Bilateral Security Agreement,
but I don't think we've announced a start date yet for those talks.
Please.
QUESTION: Afghanistan?
QUESTION: Yes.
MS. NULAND: Yeah.
QUESTION: Afghanistan?
MS. NULAND: Afghanistan; go ahead.
QUESTION: Is Ambassador Grossman traveling to Afghanistan for this trip?
MS. NULAND: I don't have anything to announce. I know he was planning some travel, but let
me get the details. I don't have the details in front of me --
QUESTION: And there was another --
MS. NULAND: -- and I don't think he's left yet.
QUESTION: There was another suicide attack in Afghanistan today and in the last few months
there have been increase in number of attacks inside Afghanistan. When the withdrawal of
troops was announced, was it - it is - it will be conditions-based. The conditions hasn't
improved yet, so do you think that that policy needs to be reviewed?
MS. NULAND: You're talking about the attack in Paktia? Is that the one that you're talking
about?
QUESTION: Yeah.
MS. NULAND: Yeah. ISAF has also spoken today to this one, so I'm going to send you to them
for any more details.
Said.
QUESTION: Israel?
QUESTION: The --
MS. NULAND: Sorry, still Afghanistan?
QUESTION: Still Afghanistan, please.
MS. NULAND: Yeah.
QUESTION: There was a young woman who was killed in Herat Province. She was beheaded
because she refused to become a *** for her in-law family. I just wondered generally
if you had a reaction to that, if you knew about the case, and then more generally if
- what measures are being put in place that, post-2014, the rights of women can be ensured
in Afghanistan once the international - the eyes of the international community are somewhat
away from the country?
MS. NULAND: Yeah. We are looking into this incident. We don't have any independent information
besides what we've seen in the news reports. Obviously, we condemn violence against women
wherever it happens, including in Afghanistan, and we reiterate our own deep commitment to
the rights of Afghan women.
I think you know that for the past decade, we and the international community have worked
intensively with the Government of Afghanistan to advance women and girls' rights not only
in the constitution, but in our education programs, in all of the support that we give
to the Afghans' own National Action Plan for the Women of Afghanistan, which does things
like establishing shelters, referral centers, transit houses for women under threat, for
women who've suffered abuse.
We are continuing to work on that. We also think that these shelters play a vital role
in the implementation of Afghanistan's own 2009 law to eliminate violence against women
when they face women in their own - violence in their own families. But again, we have
extensive programs. I can give you a separate brief or put you in touch with all of our
people who work on this. We are training prosecutors who specialize in violence against women.
We are working to help women who are incarcerated, perhaps falsely or on charges brought under
inappropriate circumstances. We're working with refugees and IDPs and all of those kinds
of things.
So all of our international efforts are designed to create the structures and institutions
of the Afghan state to help protect these rights going forward. It's something that
we are all committed to, that the Afghan Government and President Karzai is committed to. But
it's a long road, and we're going to have to keep working on it. And as we've said,
even as we wind down the combat mission, our civilian programs are going to continue in
Afghanistan.
QUESTION: Thank you.
MS. NULAND: Please.
QUESTION: One more?
MS. NULAND: Still on Afghanistan?
QUESTION: Afghanistan.
MS. NULAND: Yeah.
QUESTION: According to the reports, of course, many trainings are going on and Afghanistan
is maybe ready by next year to take over their own security. You think U.S. is planning to
withdraw earlier than, I mean, next year, earlier than 2014?
MS. NULAND: I think we have all confirmed from the President on down that we are committed
to the Lisbon timetable which speaks about full transfer at the end of 2014. Please.
QUESTION: Rwanda?
MS. NULAND: Mm-hmm.
QUESTION: There's a report out of the UN panel of experts which, again, is very clear in
saying that the Rwandan Government, specifically the Rwandan Defense Minister, is sort of operationally
in control of M23 in Congo and also says the Ugandans have a heavier hand than we've heard
about before. I'm just wondering if you have any reaction to this report and what the current
status is of your talks with the Rwandans on trying to get them to back off on the M23.
MS. NULAND: Well, first of all, I think you're talking about the group of experts report
for the DRC sanctions?
QUESTION: Yeah.
MS. NULAND: Yeah. That report has not yet been officially released. I think you're working
off a leak, so I'm not going to comment on it until it's been formally released. I think
you know that we've obviously been engaged at the high levels with the Government of
Rwanda. The Secretary, as you know, when we were in New York hosted a meeting with both
Kabila and Kagame to try to encourage them to work together on these problems, and we're
going to remain very much engaged.
Please, Justin.
QUESTION: On Benghazi, one question on Benghazi. There's been sort of an almost constant criticism
coming mainly from conservatives that the State Department was wrong when it initially
linked the attack to the anti-Muslim video. Now, obviously you all have walked back the
idea that it was premeditated, but has the State Department ruled out that the attackers
may have been motivated in some way by that video?
MS. NULAND: Justin, I don't have anything to add to what the Secretary said when she
was standing next to Italian Foreign Minister Terzi last Friday. She was asked a version
of this question. This is exactly why we have an Accountability Review Board, why we have
an FBI investigation, and we really are not going to have any more details on these things
or be able to give a final or definitive account until it's done.
QUESTION: I'm not asking for detail or final or definitive --
MS. NULAND: Yeah.
QUESTION: I'm just asking to - for you to - I'm giving you the opportunity to sort of
address some of this constant criticism that it is totally wrong to associate this with
the anti-Muslim video. And I'm giving you the opportunity to say maybe that constant
criticism is too much and is not accurate.
MS. NULAND: While I very much appreciate any opportunities that you're giving me here,
Justin; I just really don't have any further information to share. As the Secretary said,
we just don't have a full picture, even now.
QUESTION: Is that because the - you're - you've been given the opportunity to - you have already
been given the opportunity to present incomplete and perhaps part - only partial information,
and it's come back to haunt you?
MS. NULAND: I think the Secretary spoke for all of us, spoke for this building not only
on Friday but also in Peru yesterday. I just don't have anything further on Benghazi here.
QUESTION: Toria, do you have a timetable --
QUESTION: Could we go to Israel?
QUESTION: -- for when you will have the information, when this will be done, or an update at least?
MS. NULAND: Well, I think the Secretary said herself that - the day that she announced
the ARB, that when she impaneled them and they began working, that she very much hoped
that they'd be able to wrap up their work in 60 days. Those were the instructions that
she gave them. I think they've been at work now for a calendar week maybe, something like
that. So - but traditionally, these kinds of reports have taken 60- 65 days, so we just
have to see.
QUESTION: Do you think the President was clear in asserting that this was a terrorist attack
on September - what was it, the day after?
MS. NULAND: I'm not going to try to improve on anything the President has said here. I'm
sorry.
Please.
QUESTION: Yes. Victoria, according to Israeli radio, the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu is getting ready to enact a recommendation report by Edmond Levy, or parts thereof, declaring
the West Bank not occupied and legalizing outposts. Are you aware of the report and
do you have any comment on it?
MS. NULAND: I haven't seen any of that, but I, in any case, wouldn't comment on something
prospectively that another government might do.
QUESTION: Okay. But you do have a position on the status of the West Bank and on the
status of these outposts as being illegal, correct?
MS. NULAND: Our position on settlements has not changed at all.
QUESTION: And you consider the West Bank to be under Israeli military occupation, correct?
MS. NULAND: Said, as I said, our position on settlements, on any of these things, hasn't
changed.
Scott. Can we go to --
QUESTION: Can we stay on --
MS. NULAND: Scott's been patient. You want to stay on this part of the world?
QUESTION: Yeah. Well, it's not Israel. It's the Palestinians. Is that all right?
MS. NULAND: Yes, it is all right.
QUESTION: I have your blessing?
MS. NULAND: Scott's blessing you.
QUESTION: Do you know - this is a very strange story about a Palestinian --
MS. NULAND: What a day. Compliments from Matt, blessings between Scott and Matt. I think
we send him to Peru more often. (Laughter.)
QUESTION: Do you know anything about this situation with Palestinian students being
unable to take SATs, Palestinian students in the West Bank, because of some problem
with the SAT booklets being held up in Israeli customs?
MS. NULAND: I do, and I'm happy to say that we have learned that this issue has now been
resolved and more than a hundred - or about a hundred West Bank students will be blessed
to get to take the SAT this coming Saturday. So they should sharpen their number two pencils.
QUESTION: Well, I'm not sure they're blessed.
MS. NULAND: I was just trying to pick up the theme here.
QUESTION: But blessed? What was the issue? What was the problem?
MS. NULAND: My understanding is there was some issue having to do with customs procedures.
I would refer you to the Israelis.
QUESTION: But do you know if the U.S. Government got involved with the Israelis to help fix
this, or is it just something that it was --
MS. NULAND: My understanding is that we were engaged to try to ensure that the West Bank
students could sit their SATs.
QUESTION: Okay. And then also on the Palestinians - there's a report that the Palestinian Ambassador
to the United Nations has said - this is regarding seeking recognition, unilaterally seeking
recognition from the Security Council - the Palestinian Ambassador to the UN says that
the only two countries that have come out and said - really expressed firm opposition
to this are Israel and Canada, and that the United States, along with Colombia and Guatemala,
who are your traditional allies, I think, along with Palau and all the --
QUESTION: Micronesia. (Laughter.)
QUESTION: -- South Pacific islands, have not said firmly that they are opposed to that,
and that --
MS. NULAND: Opposed to what, exactly?
QUESTION: To the seeking recognition, to the - asking the General Assembly to recognize
them as a non member state. So they say that they have not heard firm opposition from the
United States on this or any warning that that kind of a move might draw some penalties
from the U.S., whether it's from the Administration or whether it's from Congress; is that correct,
to your knowledge?
MS. NULAND: I haven't seen his comments. If in fact it is correct, it's easy to rectify.
Let me start right now by saying we have consistently opposed a Palestinian attempt to upgrade their
status at the UN outside the framework of a negotiated settlement, and we will continue
to do so.
QUESTION: Okay. And does that mean that you have also told them that, "Hey, if you go
ahead and do this, there are certain - we have their laws in the United States that
would require action against you," correct?
MS. NULAND: As you know, the Secretary has met regularly with President Abbas. He should
be in no doubt about our position on this --
QUESTION: Okay.
MS. NULAND: -- and concerns about the potential ramifications.
QUESTION: Okay, and then just --
QUESTION: Can we go to Benghazi?
QUESTION: Hold on. And then just on that, so you're telling me right now that you have
gone to the Palestinians and told them that they shouldn't do something. And yet when
you're asked about Israel, you say "We wouldn't comment prospectively on what another government
might do."
Can you square that for me?
MS. NULAND: Well, I was being --
QUESTION: Is this not a prospective thing that the Palestinian Government might do,
and you're telling them not to do it?
MS. NULAND: I was being - Matt?
QUESTION: And yet, if it's an Israeli prospective thing, you're not going to tell them one way
or the other?
MS. NULAND: I was being asked about something that I hadn't seen, that purportedly the Israelis
are going to do internally. It wasn't even clear to me what they were going to do. This
goes to a position that the Palestinians may take in the UN where we sit, where obviously
we are Security Council members and we are going to talk to them about our concerns about
it.
QUESTION: Yes, but "may" take being the operative word. So you're perfectly willing to tell
the Palestinians what they can and can't do --
MS. NULAND: Well we've had - we had measures --
QUESTION: -- but the Israelis don't get that same treatment?
MS. NULAND: Matt, we had measures taken last year and we are continuing that conversation.
QUESTION: Well, but can I just follow up? I mean, obviously you're opposed to the attempt
for them to get recognition unilaterally at the UN, but can you really expect them to
just wait indefinitely to - through - there is no chance of negotiations restarting anytime
soon. And, I mean, are they supposed to wait like another 30 years to see if negotiations
go through? I mean, is there any other remedy to help them get some kind of recognition,
some kind of middle ground or something?
MS. NULAND: Elise, you know where we are on this very well, which is --
QUESTION: Nowhere.
MS. NULAND: -- that all of our efforts are focused on trying to get the two parties to
talk to each other, to communicate with each other, to set the conditions so that they
can have direct negotiations. That's the only way we're going to get through this, and we're
not going to give up on that and we're going to keep working on it.
Scott, who has been patient.
QUESTION: Colombia --
MS. NULAND: Yes.
QUESTION: -- opening talks with FARC. It seems that the Venezuelans are playing a more productive
role than they have in the past. Any thoughts about that?
MS. NULAND: I frankly don't have anything on a role that the Venezuelans may or may
not be playing. We are obviously focused on the process that President Santos has set
in place and we are supportive of it and we'll be watching closely.
QUESTION: Can you take that question, though? I think that - I mean, you don't have anything
on what the Venezuelans - maybe not in your guidance book, but you don't have anything
on what the Venezuelans are doing as far as these - as the FARC --
MS. NULAND: I'm happy to look into whether our folks --
QUESTION: Could you? Thank you.
MS. NULAND: -- have any issues that they are interested in with regard to a Venezuelan
role.
Goyal.
QUESTION: And what about - how you are supporting the Colombia FARC talks?
MS. NULAND: Well, this is - these are direct talks. We're obviously not involved, we're
not in the middle of it. But we are being briefed regularly by the Colombians, and we're
very - we're supportive of their effort to get to the peace that they deserve.
QUESTION: Just staying in that region, you spoke yesterday about the Cuban exit visa
thing, correct?
MS. NULAND: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm.
QUESTION: Yeah. Never mind, then.
MS. NULAND: I did, yeah, quite extensively, in fact, making clear that while this may
look like a good move on paper, there are other restrictions in place that will allow
the Cuban Government to continue to have controls.
QUESTION: Going back to Burma?
MS. NULAND: Yes.
QUESTION: This - as far as this multi-talented organization --
MS. NULAND: Multi-talented, yeah.
QUESTION: -- navigation to Burma is concerned, are they - one, are they meeting with the
- Aung San Suu Kyi? And two, are they talking about only human rights or also as far as
opening, I mean, investment? And also, finally, the release of political prisoners and also
end of emergency rules and regulation imposed by the military rule for 20 years?
MS. NULAND: Well, this was a human rights delegation, the first of what we hope will
be many. As you know, we have human rights dialogues with many countries around the world,
so this was focused on those issues. Andy asked the political prisoners question. I'm
sure that issue came up, but I don't have any details. When Assistant Secretary Posner
gets back, we'll do what we can to get you some more details on that issue.
QUESTION: How long you think Burmese will wait for - this change will come out?
MS. NULAND: Will wait for what change?
QUESTION: As far as political prisoners and other emergency rules and regulations to be
uplifted.
MS. NULAND: Well, again, I'm not going to predict the patience of the Burmese people,
but we have all spoken out about the need to get to zero in terms of political prisoners,
and we're continuing to work with the Government of Burma on that.
QUESTION: Can we go back to Libya, please --
MS. NULAND: Yep.
QUESTION: -- and human rights as well? I don't know if you had the opportunity to see yesterday
a report from Human Rights Watch on - actually, it came out this morning, sorry - about the
executions that they've catalogued that happened in the days surrounding the death of Muammar
Qadhafi. I just wondered what the United States's comment was on the fact there seems to have
been a lot of summary executions and that these people weren't brought to trial as perhaps
the international community would've liked.
MS. NULAND: Well, first, with regard to the findings outlined in Human Rights Watch report,
which allege that war crimes took place last year in Libya, we are urging the Government
of Libya to genuinely investigate all these claims and to prosecute any perpetrators in
a manner consistent with Libya's international obligations.
Similarly, with regard to Qadhafi's death, we have regularly urged the Government of
Libya to continue to investigate the circumstances, and it's very important to hold those responsible
to account. This is part of the - not only the judicial maturation of Libya, but also
part of the ground that they need to plow for national reconciliation.
QUESTION: But are you confident they're doing that? I mean, it would seem a year on, Human
Rights Watch has been out to come out with something which they say they believe to be
true. Have you heard back from the Libyan Government on your requests for further investigation?
MS. NULAND: We have an extensive dialogue with the Libyans on all aspects of their justice
system moving forward. I would note that, as the Secretary said in her speech last Friday,
one of the things that we've been doing with the Government of Libya is training lawyers,
judges, civil society to strengthen the underpinnings. Remember that they not too long ago were a
authoritarian regime. But it's no secret that this is a fragile and very new democracy.
They've only just elected a new Libyan Prime Minister. So they were operating within a
transitional governing structure for a very long time, and we need to now support them
as they take the next steps on all of these issues.
QUESTION: And I wondered, on Benghazi, if you're aware of reporting that the authorities
have apparently singled out a leader of Ansa al-Sharia, Ahmed Abu Khattala, as the commander
of the attack on Benghazi on September 11, if you had any information about that.
MS. NULAND: I am not, from this podium, going to get into any of these details of arrests
or prosecutions or any of it. We're going to leave all of that to the FBI as they work
with the Libyans to both investigate and - but obviously, we are committed to ensuring that
those who did this are going to come to justice.
QUESTION: Thank you.
MS. NULAND: Thank you.
QUESTION: (Inaudible.)
MS. NULAND: Oh. Sorry. We got Lalit in the back.
QUESTION: Yeah. India and Australia today announced that they would be starting negotiations
on a civilian nuclear pact. You know U.S. are the first country to have similar agreement
with India, a couple of years ago. How do you see this development, the announcement
by the two governments?
MS. NULAND: I hadn't seen that Australia and India are moving forward but, as you know,
we work very closely on these issues with Australia around the world. So I'm sure that
we were - we'll be in touch as we go forward.
Thank you very much.
QUESTION: Thank you.