Department Press Briefing – July 29, 2024

MR PATEL: So I’m certainly not going to get into the specifics of the diplomatic engagements, Daphne. But first, let me just say we strongly condemn Lebanese Hizballah’s rocket attack that struck a soccer field in Majdal Shams area of Golan Heights over the weekend, killing 12 children. Secretary Blinken spoke with Israeli President Isaac Herzog today; he expressed condolences for those killed. And the United States prioritizes the protection of civilians in any conflict, and we mourn every loss of civilian life.

The conflict along the Blue Line, along Israel and Hizballah, has gone on for long enough, and it’s in everyone’s interest for it to resolve quickly. We continue to believe a diplomatic resolution is both achievable and urgent, and we continue to be engaged in diplomatic talks because our ultimate goal here is for civilians on both sides of the border to be able to safely return to their home. And so those conversations are ongoing, and we’ll continue to coordinate closely with the – with the relevant parties.

QUESTION: Have you urged Israel to exercise restraint in their retaliation at all?

MR PATEL: So look, first and foremost, Israel has a right to defend itself from terrorism, and we’re continuing to engage in ongoing conversations with all parties.

QUESTION: And just on Gaza ceasefire talks, Kirby said there’s no indication that the strike is going to negatively affect those discussions. How confident are you that this won’t affect those Gaza ceasefire talks? If this turns into a few days of fighting as Israeli officials have said they are preparing for, could this derail talks at all?

MR PATEL: Well, certainly we believe that a ceasefire in Gaza could also help bring – help relieve the tensions along the Blue Line, could help relieve those tensions and creating the conditions, as I’ve said, for displaced Lebanese civilians to go home in the south and for Israeli civilians to go home in the north.

As it relates to broader ceasefire efforts, we are continuing to engage in the process. We are hopeful about the developments as they progress; the negotiations are ongoing. We continue to believe that a deal is both achievable – but not only is it achievable, we think that it is necessary and urgent. And so those conversations are going to continue ongoing. Obviously, as Matt and the Secretary and others have said when they’ve been asked similar questions, it’s not helpful to negotiate on the inner workings of those publicly, but we’re going to continue to engage in the process.

QUESTION: And Hamas has accused Israel of blocking a ceasefire, saying Netanyahu’s government has inserted new conditions into the proposal at the latest talks. Is that your assessment as well? And this comes after Netanyahu’s visit to D.C., where U.S. officials emphasized the importance of a ceasefire. So are you concerned about the timing here?

MR PATEL: So I’m not going to – again, I’m not going to get into the specifics of the negotiating process and certainly not going to negotiate from up here. There are a number of complicated details that need to be worked out, and I’m not going to outline those publicly. But again, we think a deal is both achievable and we think it’s urgent. And as we have said previously and consistently, there has been a deal that was on the table, and Hamas needs to accept that deal. And we expect these conversations to keep on going.

QUESTION: Has Israel inserted new conditions?

MR PATEL: Again, I am just not going to speak to the negotiation process from here.

Jenny.

QUESTION: Following up on Daphne’s questions on Lebanon, has the U.S. specifically warned Israel against striking Beirut as part of its response?

MR PATEL: I am not going to speak to specific diplomatic engagements, Jenny. First and foremost, let me just reiterate what I’ve said previously, is that Israel has a right to defend itself against terrorism. We are continuing to engage, and we’re continuing to seek a durable diplomatic solution that ends all types of cross-border fire and it makes it possible for those who are displaced on both sides to return home. That is our priority.

QUESTION: Does the U.S. consider striking Beirut within the right to defend itself, given the potential for escalation?

MR PATEL: This is – that’s just a hypothetical, Jenny. We’re not going to get ahead of that process. What we’re focused on right now is engaging in a diplomatic conversation with both sides. Our priority is creating the conditions so that civilians on both sides of the borders can safely return home.

QUESTION: A number of carriers have cancelled flights to Lebanon. How is the State Department preparing to help U.S. citizens who might want to leave there?

MR PATEL: So we have no higher priority than the safety and security of U.S. citizens overseas. Our message to American citizens in Lebanon continues to be that they should enroll in the Smart Traveler program so that they can receive important messages about the safety conditions on the ground and other considerations and factors that they may have. We don’t have any plans for or an announcement as it relates to an evacuation or efforts for private U.S. citizens from Lebanon. I will also use this opportunity to remind folks that as it relates to the Travel Advisory warning for the entire country, that continues to be at a Level Three, and specifically Southern Lebanon is at a Level Four.

Commercial flights, some of them continue to remain available, and so we encourage American citizens to look into those options. But in addition to enrolling in Smart Travel, there’s a number of other steps that we think that they can take. They should make sure to have a plan in place. They should also make sure that their U.S. passport is valid. All of these things, if they enroll in Smart Traveler and engage with our consular team, those are things that we can assist with.

QUESTION: And has there been any change in the posture at the embassy in terms of staffing or security?

MR PATEL: There is not. There is not.

Olivia.

QUESTION: Let me call on these themes generally.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: I mean, what is the department’s understanding, including through the Secretary’s engagements, of how much of Israel’s retaliatory response we’ve already seen? Were the strikes this weekend the beginning, the middle, the end?

MR PATEL: I’m just not going to speculate on that, Olivia, and that’s something I will leave it to our Israeli partners and the IDF to speak to. What I can say is that – what the United States is squarely focused on, which is, one, ensuring that we come to some kind of durable diplomatic solution that is – that will allow civilians in both Israel and Lebanon to be able to safely return home. That’s what our priority is. We’ll also continue to remain engaged with officials of Lebanon as well as officials in Israel as well.

QUESTION: I mean, the prime minister has

said that a response is coming and it will be severe, indicating that there may be more to come. Is the U.S. preparing for that kind of a scenario?

MR PATEL: We are engaging with the relevant entities continuously as well continuing to remain focused on a durable diplomatic solution. I’m not going to get ahead of what’s going to happen here or try to speculate or preview. First and foremost, again, we strongly condemn this attack that struck the soccer field. But beyond that, we’re continuing to engage to ensure that there is some kind of durable diplomatic solution; and I am just not going to get ahead of that.

QUESTION: Okay. And so on hostage talks —

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: Just to circle back because, I mean, they took place in Rome. We know – it was publicly reported – they broke up within a matter of hours, with the Mossad director returning to Israel without an apparent breakthrough. I know you don’t want to get into the nitty-gritty, but Hamas said that new conditions have been placed on the table by Israel. Is that inaccurate in your view?

MR PATEL: You are exactly right that I am not going to get into the nitty-gritty and outline the details of these negotiations publicly. I’ll echo what I just said to Daphne and what you’ve heard Matt say as recently as last week, that we are hopeful about the developments and the progress that is being made. These are processes that are ongoing. We believe a deal is both achievable and urgent.

There are, of course, a number of complicated details that continue to need to be worked out, but I am not going to get into them specifically from up here. That would be unhelpful for the process. What I can say is that there has been too much suffering for far too long, and we believe that it’s time for this war to end. We think that a ceasefire can unlock a great deal. We think it creates the ability for hostages, the remaining hostages, to be returned home, including the remaining Americans. We believe that it creates the conditions so that an additional influx of humanitarian aid can make its way into Gaza to help address the dire circumstances in Gaza. And perhaps most importantly, it creates the conditions that will allow the relevant actors to have serious diplomatic conversations about the region’s future and get us out of these endless cycles of violence. That’s what we think is at stake, and that’s what we’re going to continue to work towards. But I know that there is a lot of interest in the details and the negotiations and the back-and- forth, and I am just not going to get into those publicly.

QUESTION: Sure, it’s just for consistency because —

MR PATEL: Sure.

QUESTION: You and Matt and other U.S. officials have not hesitated to say when the ball is in Hamas’s court, so I’m just wondering whose court the ball is in now. I mean, U.S. officials last week made a – went to great lengths to stress how much they were dialing up the pressure on Prime Minister Netanyahu: The deal was closeable; it needs to be closed, subject to some implementation issues. So who is causing the hangup now?

MR PATEL: I’m not going to get into – again, I’m not going to get into the specifics of the negotiations. But let’s look at this from a little bit of a wider lens and take a step back here. Consistently, since when – I believe it was about a month and a half ago when President Biden went into the Roosevelt Room and laid out the contours of this proposal that had been on the table, this proposal that Israel had agreed to, that Arab partners had agreed to, that the United Nations had supported, that the UN Security Council had supported, time and time again it continued to be Hamas that changed pieces of the deal and changed pieces of the proposal. So this is a process that is ongoing, and we are going to continue to work with – work this process, and I’m not going to get into the specifics.

QUESTION: Okay. I mean, you just said Hamas changed the conditions without saying what – who is changing the conditions now. But I understand we may not get an answer on this.

One more just on the Vice President’s comments last week because some far-right officials in Israel took issue with those comments, saying she was calling for a truce or a surrender. Do you have any response to – I think it was Ben Gvir and Smotrich who —

MR PATEL: Well, look, I think it’s – it’s pretty clear that those are characterizations that very much takes the Vice President’s comments out of context. The Vice President was clearly stating what has been this administration’s position, that a ceasefire is at – of utmost importance and that it can unlock a great deal – some of the things that I just spoke about – the release of American hostages, the influx of humanitarian aid. And that’s why we think this is something that is timely, it needs to be urgent, and it’s something that needs to be prioritized.

Said.

QUESTION: A follow-up?

MR PATEL: Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. Sorry for walking in late. But just to follow up on Olivia’s point, I mean, you in the past, you or Matt, did not hesitate in saying that the ball was in Hamas’s court. Why this time around you are unwilling to say who is standing in the way of arriving at a deal? Because there are all kinds of reports that Mr. Netanyahu has had a change of heart; he actually agreed to something, then he changed his mind.

MR PATEL: So I’m not going to just – I’m not going to get into a back-and-forth on hearsay and what may or may not be true when it comes to public reporting or not.

QUESTION: Right.

MR PATEL: What I can say is this, Said, is that these are negotiations. These are processes that are ongoing. We’re going to continue to be engaged in those efforts. There continue to be a number of details and issues that need to be worked out, but we continue to believe that a deal is achievable – not only is it achievable, but for all the reasons that I laid out, coming to a deal should be of utmost importance. And it is true that at various times throughout this process, Said, Hamas has changed the goalposts, it has changed conditions. That has been true without us getting into the specifics of the negotiation process, which I’m not going to get into now.

QUESTION: So you’re saying that the Israeli Government or Mr. Netanyahu has not changed position from the original proposal that was —

MR PATEL: I’m just not speaking to the specifics – I’m not —

QUESTION: That was announced by the President of the United States on May 31?

MR PATEL: I’m not speaking to the specifics of the negotiations, Said.

QUESTION: Okay, just a couple more things, if you’ll allow me. And I know on Majdal Shams, I’m sure that – I walked in late – you spoke about that.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: But does that in any way – I mean, it’s a tragic incident, of course. But does that anyway spotlight the fact that the Golan Heights is occupied Syrian territory – that Majdal Shams is a Syrian town, that the people that were killed were actually Syrian citizens? Does that spotlight the fact that this occupation – it’s time for this occupation to end?

MR PATEL: Said, our U.S. policy on the Golan Heights has not changed under this administration.

QUESTION: Right. Okay.

MR PATEL: That should be no surprise to you. I will echo what you’ve heard the Secretary say a number of times that Golan is very important and vital to Israel’s security. And as long as the Assad regime is in power in Syria, as long as Iran and its proxies continue to be present in Syria, by – as long as militia groups backed by Iran continue to be in Syria and the Assad regime itself poses a significant security threat to Israel, as a practical matter the control of the Golan, it remains of real importance to Israel’s security.

QUESTION: So you’re saying that the designation of the Golan Heights, according to 242 and 338, as occupied territory, is contingent on who is leading Syria, on who is the ruler of Syria? Or is that – or that speaks for itself?

MR PATEL: Said, what I’m saying is saying that our policy – our policy as it relates to the Golan Heights hasn’t changed.

QUESTION: All right. Okay, let me ask you a couple more questions.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: The IDF just destroyed a key Rafah water facility. Do you have any comment on that? Are you aware of the report and do you have any comment on it?

MR PATEL: We have seen those reports, Said, and we have been in touch with our partners in Israel and the IDF as it relates to seeking out additional information. Over the course of this conflict, you have seen myself, Matt, and others speak clearly about the importance of not targeting civilian infrastructure – things like water, sewage, treatment, plants, things like that. Of course, such a facility like this one would be inconsistent with that. But again, I don’t have any additional information beyond what’s out there publicly. And we have sought out additional information as to what happened.

QUESTION: And lastly, the Netanyahu government postponed the evacuation of 156 Palestinian wounded children from Gaza because of what happened in Majdal Shams. Do you think these two issues ought to be tied?

MR PATEL: Certainly not. I don’t know the circumstances around that, Said. I don’t know the underlying circumstances. What I can say is that every effort possible should be taken to protect and minimize civilian casualties, including and especially children. But I don’t want to just assume that these issues are related or not, Said. So we’ll see if there’s additional information there.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR PATEL: Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you, Vedant.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: I just want to go back to your answer to Said about the Golan Heights.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: You mentioned that the control, the Israeli control, is a security necessity for Israel as long as Assad and other villains are operating in Syria. But are you – is this a walk-back from the recognition of Trump administration of Golan Heights as a sovereign territory of Israel?

MR PATEL: Our position on our policy has not changed. So —

QUESTION: So it is a sovereign territory of Israel?

MR PATEL: The – our policy as it relates to the Golan Heights has not changed. The Secretary has spoken about this since the beginning of this administration, and we have consistently talked about it in the same way, and our position has not changed.

QUESTION: Okay. And my second question is about the Hizballah incidents, Hizballah denying this, and Israel and the United States accused them of it. Do you have any independent verification that it was Hizballah, or you’re relying on Israeli information?

MR PATEL: So I’m not going to get into the underlying data that supports this assessment. But what I can say is that this attack was conducted by Hizballah. It was their rocket and it was launched from an area they control, and any assertation to the contrary would be denial of reality.

QUESTION: This your – U.S. assessment? It’s U.S. assessment?

MR PATEL: I’m not going to get into the underlying – underlying circumstances of this assessment, but it is the – it is our assessment that this was an attack by Hizballah, again, because it was their rocket and it was launched from a region and area they control.

QUESTION: The U.S. embassy issued a warning to U.S. citizens in Lebanon, asking them to leave as soon as possible. Is this – a lot of people in the region taken this as a warning of a looming war. Is that – is that what you – is it your assessment of what’s coming up?

MR PATEL: The – you have to – the important thing to remember is that when it comes to our consular efforts, we take the safety and security of American citizens – it is of utmost importance to the Secretary of State. We do not think that any kind of all-out war is inevitable. That’s certainly not what we believe. And we continue to believe that through diplomacy, it’s possible to continue to create conditions in which civilians are able to safely return to their homes both in Israel and Lebanon.

But when we’re talking about the safety and security of the American citizens, and especially American citizens living in the region, living in Lebanon, we have a responsibility to make sure that they have the most up to date and relevant information as it relates to safety conditions to countries where they travel. And as it relates to Lebanon, as it relates to the whole country, that continues to be a Level 3 for Reconsider Travel, and for southern Lebanon, that continues to be a Level 4 for Do Not Travel. And that is because what we’re talking about is safety, and right now, yes, the safe thing for American citizens to do would be to make appropriate plans, something which I laid out to Jenny when she asked her question earlier.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR PATEL: Yeah, Michel, go ahead.

QUESTION: Vedant, I want to repeat the question on your confidence. To what extent are you confident as Kirby is that there will be no all-out war between Israel and Hizballah when Israel reacts? And where is this confidence coming from?

QUESTION: Did you talk to Iran about the escalation in Lebanon and Israel?

MR PATEL: I’m not aware of any conversations.

QUESTION: Directly or indirectly?

MR PATEL: I’m not aware of any conversations, Michel.

QUESTION: Through Oman or Qatar?

MR PATEL: Like I said, I’m not aware of any conversations with Iran.

Diyar, go ahead.

QUESTION: Yeah, staying on Iran.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

MR PATEL: Let me say a couple things. So first, we have no expectation that the – that – the new president’s election, that it’s going to lead to any fundamental change in Iran’s direction or that it’s going to lead to any additional or more respect for the basic human rights of its citizens. We are going to judge, just as we always have, Iran’s leadership by their actions, not by their words or even claims of moderation or claims of wanting better ties. The proof is in the pudding, and the proof is going to be reflected in the actions that they take.

And as it relates to your question about the nuclear program, look, our approach is unchanged. We have long said that ultimately we view diplomacy as the best way to achieve an effective, sustainable solution with regard to Iran’s nuclear program. Nothing about this election has changed that. But still, as we’ve also said, we are far away from anything like that right now happening given Iran’s numerous escalations across the board, including its nuclear escalation as well as its failure to cooperate with the IAEA. I just said that we will judge Iran’s leadership by its actions, not their words. If there is a desire to show seriousness or a new approach, certainly there are some immediate actions that they could take, which would be meaningfully cooperating with the IAEA.

QUESTION: And just staying on that – diplomacy.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: It’s been a long that you say that we see diplomacy as the best way for dealing with Iran and the Iranian nuclear program. Has the diplomacy worked with the Iranian Government so far?

MR PATEL: Sorry, I’m not —

QUESTION: Has the diplomacy – has diplomacy talks worked with Iran to bring Iran to the table and to make Iran to not enrich uranium and to not pursue the dreams of getting nuclear weapon?

MR PATEL: That is something that we’re going to continue to remain deeply focused on. I will say that diplomacy has sought out results that certainly the United States is interested – if you recall just last fall or late last summer, you saw through our engagement we were able to successfully release American citizens who were being detained by the Iranian regime. So certainly there are conditions in which the end result of diplomacy has a desired outcome for the United States.

Guita.

QUESTION: Yeah, thank you. I want to go back to the Israel-Hizballah topic on this. Earlier you said that you were engaged with relevant entities. I was wondering if the U.S. has communicated with the Islamic Republic of Iran about —

QUESTION: Just —

QUESTION: — what’s —

QUESTION: Just asked that.

QUESTION: Just asked? Sorry about that.

MR PATEL: Michel just asked that question.

QUESTION: (Laughter.) I just walked in.

MR PATEL: All good.

QUESTION: Today, Pezeshkia – the president-elect —

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: — threatened – if you’ve already answered, I’ll —

MR PATEL: I spoke to it a little bit, but I will – I’ll give you the cliff notes version that I – when answering Diyar. This new inauguration, this new election – certainly, we are aware, we are tracking. We are also tracking the potential formation of a cabinet. But none of that gives us the expectation or the thinking that there is going to be a fundamental change in the direction that the Iranian regime is going in or that we are going to see a – more respect for basic human rights from the Iranian regime. And as I said to Diyar, the proof is going to be in actions, in the actions that they take, not empty words.

QUESTION: And that’s domestic wise. What about his threat that if Israel attacks Hizballah that it will have to face serious consequences?

MR PATEL: Well, first, let me just say that Israel has every right to defend itself, not only from terrorism but also defend itself from malign actors like the Iranian regime. And certainly this is something that the United States is continuing to pay close attention to as well.

Go ahead.

MR PATEL: So as it relates to Bangladesh, both in public and private we continue to call for a lasting and peaceful resolution to the current situation, and we reiterate our unwavering support for the freedom of peaceful assembly. We’re aware of some restoration of telecommunications across Bangladesh, but we are calling for a full and undisrupted public access to internet and social media services. This will enable people in Bangladesh – including our very own American citizens – to be able to access critical information.

QUESTION: I have seen numerous member of the House of Representatives and senators expressing concern in solidarity with the student protest Bangladesh. Congressman Lloyd Doggett described PM Hasina in Bangladesh “scorned student [protests] as ‘militants’ who deserved deadly force. The only ‘militant’ is Hasina, who ordered troops in… peacekeeping vehicles to attack and kill students. The Biden Administration [must] act boldly against this repression.” What is your response?

MR PATEL: So we – we of course support all efforts for those who want to peacefully protest. And as it relates to engagement with Congress, I’m not going to speak to specific correspondence, but we of course continue to be deeply responsive to any questions our colleagues in the Congress may have.

QUESTION: A follow-up?

Go ahead, in the back.

QUESTION: A follow-up?

MR PATEL: In the white. Yeah, you. Yeah.

QUESTION: Oh, sorry.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: Thank you. Celia from VOA Latin America.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

MR PATEL: Sure. So first, I don’t have anything to preview as it relates to a potential OAS meeting. Of course, again, OAS is a vital partner, especially as it relates to our foreign policy in the Western Hemisphere, and we’ll continue to engage with them as appropriately.

I will – to your first question, let me just echo what the Secretary said in Tokyo, in that first we applaud the Venezuelan people for their participation in the presidential election, and we commend their courageous and commitment to democracy in the face of repression and adversity. We’ve seen the announcement from overnight by the Venezuelan electoral representatives, and we have serious concerns that this result does not reflect the will and the votes of the Venezuelan people. And it’s critical that every vote is counted fairly and transparently, and that election officials immediately share information with the opposition and independent observers without delay, and that electoral representatives publish the detailed tabulation of votes. That’s what the United States is watching for, it’s what the international community is watching for, and we’re – we’ll respond accordingly.

I’m not going to speculate on any particular action that might take place in Venezuela. I will also just so note that this is something that, as I said, countries around the world are watching very closely, too. I believe within the hour before I come – came down you saw a number of seven or eight countries across Latin America also express serious concern and wanting to see these published detailed tabulation of votes. So that’s something that we’ll continue to focus on.

QUESTION: Just a last follow-up.

MR PATEL: Mm-hmm.

QUESTION: So right now we’ve seen protests in the streets. Just by the cemetery in Caracas is a line with fire, and then the government is sending now tanks. Some of the military has refrained from actually engage with the protesters. María Corina Machado, which is the leader of the opposition, has called for peace and not to protest. She is actually launching a plan during today – events that she’s holding. Is it a concern that this could escalate to a confrontation and that the government will double down into arrests and violence?

MR PATEL: I am not going to speculate. Look, we certainly would support anybody’s right to peacefully protest and to peacefully make their opinions and their point of view heard, and certainly we would take issue with any kind of violence, especially violence against those who are peacefully protesting. But I’m not going to speculate.

Go ahead, in the back. Yeah, you. Yeah, you.

QUESTION: Thank you. As you mentioned, Secretary Blinken was clear that U.S. has concerns that the results announced yesterday might not —

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: — reflect the will of the voters in the poll. But as of today, does the U.S. recognize the result announced yesterday by the Venezuelan electoral authority, yes or no?

MR PATEL: Sorry, who? Can you repeat your question?

QUESTION: If today the United States recognize the result announced yesterday, yes or no?

MR PATEL: So I don’t have – we don’t have any announcement to make as it relates to that. What we are calling for is the immediate publication of detailed polling results to ensure transparency and accountability. It’s something that we are looking for, as well as other international and regional partners.

QUESTION: Has there been any recent contact among U.S. officials from here, the State Department, and international observers sent to Caracas —

MR PATEL: It’s —

QUESTION: — as the Brazilian diplomat Celso Amarim or others?

MR PATEL: It’s certainly something that we’re paying attention closely to. I don’t have any specific calls to read out for you, though.

Go ahead, in the back.

QUESTION: Thank you, Vedant.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

MR PATEL: I’m sorry, I didn’t hear the first part of your question. Could you —

QUESTION: Yeah, the Syrian Democratic Forces, SDF, in Syria —

MR PATEL: SDF, uh-huh.

QUESTION: Yeah. So they declared a general amnesty for ISIS members to be released in their prisons. How do you look at this?

MR PATEL: So I’m happy to check back on that. I’m not tracking that issue. Broadly, when we have talked about the issues relating to the FDF, we – SDF, sorry – we’ve spoken about the importance of prisoners being able to successfully be repatriated to their host countries. But I’m happy to check on this specifically.

MR PATEL: So I’m certainly not going to speak to any threat assessment or get into the details around that, but this is something you’ve heard us talk about before in that groups, proxies, malign actors in Iraq who seek to bring harm on American forces or on American installations certainly need to be held accountable and brought to justice. It’s something that we believe is important. It’s also something that we know that Iraqi officials believe as well.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR PATEL: Alex, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you, Vedant.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: A couple topics. Please bear with me. But before that, let me go back to the Venezuela election.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

MR PATEL: Alex, that is exactly what we are working closely and in close coordination with partners and allies to unearth, and that is why you saw the Secretary call for a publication of the detailed tabulation of votes, and that’s what us and other regional partners are looking for as well.

QUESTION: Yeah, also, since some of the likeminded authoritarian leaders of Maduro – say, his allies – are congratulating him – the Putin of the world, Aliyev, others – do you think they have compelling information before they jumped to their conclusion or –

MR PATEL: As you know, Alex, I am not a spokesperson for those governments, so I will leave it to them. But echoing the Secretary, we have serious concern about these results and have concerns that they don’t reflect the will and the votes of the Venezuelan people. That is why it is of great importance that every vote is counted fairly and transparently and that election officials immediately share information with opposition and independent observers, and on top of that, electoral representatives should publish the detailed tabulation of the votes. And that’s what we’re looking for.

QUESTION: Thank you. Let me move to my region.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

MR PATEL: I’m not going to put a timeline on it, Alex. Of course, this is something that both the Secretary and Coordinator Bono continue to be deeply engaged on, but I’m not going to – I don’t have any specific updates for you or a timeline to offer. This is something we’re going to continue to work towards.

QUESTION: And any comment on tomorrow’s upcoming meeting between Turkish and Armenian diplomats as part of the efforts to reconcile?

MR PATEL: No, I don’t have anything to preview, Alex. Again, just saying that this is something that the Secretary has been focused on, and we’ll continue to be deeply engaged on it.

Daphne, you’ve had your hand up.

QUESTION: Thank you. Just on Sudan —

MR PATEL: Yeah.

MR PATEL: We have not.

QUESTION: Thanks.

MR PATEL: Yeah. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you very much. Did the U.S. launch any protest with the French Government over the Olympics starting when they did the whole insult of Jesus? Christians and Muslims —

MR PATEL: Sorry, did the United States do what?

QUESTION: Lodge any protest with France over the insult of Jesus, what they did during the starting of Olympics? Many Christians and Muslims – because Jesus is a Muslim prophet as well – any condemnation?

MR PATEL: Yeah, I have – not tracking that there was an insult to Jesus at the beginning of the Olympics, and certainly not something that we would raise as it relates to the Olympics. So —

QUESTION: Okay.

MR PATEL: — I don’t have anything for you there.

QUESTION: Congresswoman Nancy Mace has introduced a bill where she has asked that the Taliban regime in Afghanistan be designated as terrorist organization. I don’t know if you’re aware or not, but TTP on Pakistan side under the U.S. Justice Department is a terrorist organization, but Taliban over there are not, so she has asked this bill. Do you agree, or do you support such a bill, or not?

MR PATEL: I’m fairly certain the Taliban is a designated terrorist organization, Jalil.

QUESTION: In Afghanistan? No, no, they are not, sir. But just so you know, the Taliban in Afghanistan are not designated terrorists. Yeah.

MR PATEL: I think you – I don’t think that’s – that’s accurate.

QUESTION: That is the case. Just last one. Just last one.

MR PATEL: We – okay. Okay.

MR PATEL: So look, Jalil, as it relates to Pakistani domestic politics, that is certainly not for us to determine. That is for the Pakistani people to decide. What the United States is always going to do, we’re going to partner with the government that is in the – serving in the interest of the Pakistani people and the United States’ interest, and that has historically been our approach to Pakistan.

Goyal.

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: Thank you, sir. Two questions.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

MR PATEL: So I’m not going to try and get in the mind of what those – message those protesters were trying to send. Matt spoke to this a great deal last week. We of course respect and welcome everyone’s right to peacefully protest, to make their points of view heard. We certainly would not support or condone the – not just the burning of the American flag but the replacing it of – replacing it with paraphernalia and flags that are evocative of Hamas, which is what we saw happen last week. But again, we support and welcome people’s right to peacefully protest, but the scenes that we saw at Union Station last week, that was certainly not that.

Doc, go ahead.

QUESTION: Sir, before – my second question —

MR PATEL: No, I’m going to work the room a little bit. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Vedant – thank you, Vedant.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

MR PATEL: So I will let the United Nations speak to any efforts or any role that they’re playing in Lebanon. What I can say from the United States perspective is that we are again focused on coming to a durable diplomatic solution that will allow for citizens on both sides of the border to be able to safely return home.

QUESTION: Okay. And then, once again, Hizballah has fired thousands of rockets at Israelis, and yet now, when Israel is forced to issue a reprisal, there are calls for restraint against Israel. Why? And why isn’t the U.S. holding Lebanon scot-free in all of this, and where is Lebanon’s army to step Hizballah?

MR PATEL: So let me just be very clear about this. At the beginning of this briefing, we clearly condemned Lebanese Hizballah for this attack on a soccer field, and simultaneously we continue to believe that Israel has every right to defend itself, especially from terrorism.

All right. Thanks, everybody.

QUESTION: On this? On the —

MR PATEL: Yeah, go ahead.

QUESTION: — UNIFIL question.

MR PATEL: Yeah.

QUESTION: The UN should renew the UN UNIFIL mandate by the end of this – of next month, August. Will the U.S. ask for changes in the mandate or —

MR PATEL: I’m happy to check on that, Michel. I’m happy to check with the team. I’m not sure the details behind that, but I’ll look and get back to you.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR PATEL: All right. Thanks, everybody.

QUESTION: Thank you.

(The briefing was concluded at 1:58 p.m.)

# # #