On-the-Record Press Gaggle by White House National Security Communications Advisor John Kirby
10:15 A.M. EDT
MODERATOR: Hey, everyone. Thanks for joining. Kirby has a few words here at the top, and then we’ll get through as many questions as we can. Thanks.
MR. KIRBY: Hey, folks. Good morning. Talks are moving forward today in Doha. President Biden directed Director Burns and Brett McGurk to participate for the United States. They’re on the ground right now working with representatives from Israel, Qatar, and Egypt. Qatar and Egypt are, in turn, mediating with Hamas. The resumption of these talks is an important step.
And in the lead-up to this meeting, we’d already narrowed some gaps. Today, we are focused on the details of the implementation of the agreement. There remains a lot of work to do, given the complexity of the agreement. We do not anticipate coming out of these talks today with a deal. In fact, I’d expect the talks to continue into tomorrow. This is vital work. The remaining obstacles can be overcome, and we must bring this process to a close. We need to see the hostages released, relief for Palestinian civilians in Gaza, security for Israel, and lower tensions in the region. And we need to see those things as soon as possible.
So today is a promising start, and we’ll have more to say over the course of the day and into tomorrow as things move forward.
And with that, we can take some questions.
MODERATOR: Thank you. Our first question will go to Aamer with the AP.
Q Hey, yeah, thank you for that. One just follow-up on the talks in Doha. Can you detail how long the talks went on today? Are they still ongoing today?
And then secondly, on Ukraine: Are there any signs that Russia is shifting troops from Ukraine? I’m sorry — yeah, shifting troops from Ukraine to deal with the Ukraine operation in Kursk? And if so, is there any sense of how significant the troop movements are? Thanks.
MR. KIRBY: Yeah, Aamer, I don’t know for sure whether the talks are ongoing as we speak now. You know, with the time difference, they could be — they could — well, actually, I take that back. They are just starting. I was just passed a note that, in fact, they are just starting. So the talks are just starting there in Doha. So, I apologize for my stammer.
And on the second question about Russia shifting, we have seen some Russian units being redirected from operations in and around Ukraine to the Kursk area. But these are just early reports that we’re seeing. I can’t say with certainty how many or how many more may go or what their intentions would be, but we have begun to see some Russian units being reapplied to the Kursk area.
MODERATOR: Thank you. Our next question will go to Steve with Reuters.
Q John, what is the main obstacle to getting a hostage ceasefire deal?
MR. KIRBY: I don’t know that I could identify just one, Steve. I think it’s important to remember what we’re doing right now. And the details we’re working out are details of implementation. It’s not that we’re having a debate over the framework of the deal. We’re at a point now where the framework is generally accepted. And where the gaps are are in the execution of the deal, the individual muscle movements that go with putting the deal in place.
And I know I’m talking around it, and I know that’s not helpful. I know what you want to know is what are the hang-ups, what are the details of implementation that are still being hashed out. And I’m just not going to get into that. But I do think it’s important to put this into some context. Look, we’re talking about specific implementing measures of the deal that still need to be agreed to.
So, what — our team is hoping for some constructive talks here today. And as I said earlier in my opening statement, we expect that those talks will continue into tomorrow.
Q And just to follow up on Aamer’s second question, will Ukraine have the capability to hold Russian territory?
MR. KIRBY: I simply am not qualified to answer that question. I can’t and won’t speak for Ukrainian military operations. And I certainly am in no position to — since I’m not going to speak for what their intent ultimately is, I can’t speak to their ability to achieve whatever objective they’re trying to achieve. So I really just need to leave it at that.
MODERATOR: Thank you. Our next question will go to Molly with ABC.
Q Hey. Thanks so much for holding the call. Does the administration have any response to the dual American — Russian-American citizen who was sentenced to 12 years in prison for her donation to a Ukrainian charity?
MR. KIRBY: I think the way we would describe this sentence of 12 years is vindictive cruelty. I mean, we’ve spoken out about her case before, when she was charged and arrested. The sentence just proves all the more that there’s no real system of justice coming out of Moscow.
So we’re going to continue to seek consular access to her, of course. And we’re going to continue, as we have been, trying to work for her release.
But to your answer to your question, it’s nothing less than just vindictive cruelty. We’re talking about 50 bucks to try to alleviate the suffering of the people of Ukraine. And to call that treason is just absolutely ludicrous.
MODERATOR: Thank you. Our next question will go to Nick with PBS.
Nick, you should be —
Q Thanks, Sam. Thanks, John. Oops, sorry. I guess — thank you.
John, I know you don’t want to go into detail, so let me just give you some variables and ask you to comment in general. You know, the Israelis have been focusing on control of the Philadelphi Corridor. They’ve been focusing on movement from the south to the north, the nature of, you know, who gets released in the first round and how many Palestinians they get to (inaudible). Do you believe that the Israelis have added new conditions over the last month?
And just to put a point on your opening statement: Given Hamas’s public statements, do you believe that Hamas’s engagement with today’s negotiation is any different at all from its previous engagements — previous engagements with previous negotiation dates? Thanks.
MR. KIRBY: I’m just not going to get into the details of what’s being negotiated, and I will just say a couple of things.
The way negotiations work is that you start with some text on a piece of paper, and both sides work on that text. Usually both sides make amendments to that text. You cycle it back around again, you have some more discussions about the amendments, and that leads to even more discussions, and on and on you go.
And both sides have had the opportunity to look at the texts that either side recommended and make amendments and changes and suggestions as negotiations pursued. And here we are today, with the central framework being agreed to and negotiating on the details.
So, I’m just not going to get into the business of saying, “On this date, this person or this side added this or took that out or wanted to change that.” This is the business of negotiating, and the last thing I’m going to do is prejudice that process by getting into the details.
I hear what you’re saying, and I’ve seen the press reports about who wants this and who wants that, and I’m just not going to play in that game right now, not when we’re as close as we certainly hope to be today.
And then, your second question on Hamas’s participation: So, in the past, it has worked very similar to how it’s working in Doha today, where mediators will sit and discuss, work things out, and then those mediators will be in touch with Hamas, and then the Hamas leaders in Doha then communicate directly with Mr. Sinwar for final answers.
So the process that is playing out in Doha is very much in keeping with the process that has played out in the past.
MODERATOR: Thank you. Our next question will go to Andrea Mitchell with NBC.
Q Hi there. Thank you very much. John, can you comment on criticism from Defense Minister Gallant and many in the Israeli war cabinet, as well as other Israeli officials in the military, that they have accomplished their goals, their obtainable goals in Gaza, and that the stated position of the Prime Minister is both not realistic and, you know, counterproductive, echoed by many U.S. officials, as we talk about these negotiations? And on some of the recent civilian attacks, which have hit civilians, widely criticized, where Israel has still not justified some of the deaths that we’ve seen recently.
And in terms of — let me just ask you also on Ukraine, if you don’t mind. Do you think that Vladimir Putin is going to, you know, react and retaliate? Do you have any sense from the movement of troops that there is going to be some massive attack in response to what is clearly a huge embarrassment to him? Thank you.
MR. KIRBY: Okay, there’s a lot there. Let me take them in turn.
The last thing that I’m going to do, and the last thing I want to do, is insert myself into internal Israeli politics or the machinations of the war cabinet over there. That’s not my place. It would be inappropriate for me to go there.
I’ll just say a couple of things.
Number one, it is without doubt that the Israeli Defense Forces have brought down significant blows on Hamas and their military capability. They have killed, I mean, thousands of Hamas fighters. They have decimated their leadership ranks at all levels, from tactical to operational to strategic, where senior leaders have been taken off the battlefield. And Hamas is a military organization as well as a terrorist network, and what has given them purchase in the past was their ability to move and act and plan and organize and resource like an army. And the Israelis have done an effective job at dramatically reducing their military capacity and capability.
I won’t go so far as to say that they’ve eliminated the military threat that Hamas poses to the safety and security of Israel. There are still fighters alive and fighting. There are still tunnels that they use to move about and to store arms and ammunition, and they still have resources available to them. But there has been a tremendous amount of pressure put on Hamas. And from a military perspective, they have definitely achieved the vast majority of their objectives.
Hamas is not, however, just a military organization. It is also an ideology, an ideology which still does not believe in the existence of the State of Israel; an ideology which continues to persist in the warped idea that what happened on the 7th of October ought to be able to happen again.
So we’re going to continue again to make sure that Israel has what it needs to defend itself against that threat, at the same time doing everything we can, as I alluded to in my opening statement, to get this ceasefire in place, which can give us six weeks of calm, at least in phase one, to get hostages home, to get the fighting to stop so that there are no innocent civilians put in the crossfire anymore, and that humanitarian assistance can get to so many people that are still desperately in need of it.
And it doesn’t mean we’re going to stop talking to the Israelis about what more they need to do to limit civilian casualties, to better deconflict with aid organizations, and to be more precise and discriminate as they continue to go after the military targets that they’re going after.
Q Do you expect, John, that, as they did last time in November, Hezbollah and even the Houthis would observe a six-week ceasefire — or a ceasefire, let’s just say — if one were negotiated for Gaza?
MR. KIRBY: The ceasefire would be between Hamas and Israel. I can’t speak for what other groups might do or not do as a result of that. I would — I’d go back on — in terms of Hezbollah, you know, we still haven’t seen signs that Hezbollah wants to jump in with both feet here and start a new war on a second front at this time. Now, that doesn’t mean that there’s not still a threat from Hezbollah. Of course, there is. They continue to fire rockets into northern Israel, and certainly we’re monitoring and watching for any participation they might want to partake in should Iran decide to attack Israel in retaliation. But I can’t speak for what either group might or might not do.
They have both said — I would remind, though, the leaders of Hezbollah and the leaders of Houthis have said they want to see a ceasefire. And they have, in their own ways, said that — or tried to justify the attacks that they have perpetrated on Israel as tied to a ceasefire; you know, that that’s why they’re doing it, to try to force a ceasefire. So one would conclude from that that, should there be a ceasefire in Gaza, that given their public pronouncements of that being a goal and an objective, that they would likewise observe it. But, you know, we’d have to see.
And on Putin: Difficult to say. All I can tell you is that we have seen some units being reapplied and sent to that area. But it’s not clear right now how many are eventually going to go and what their military mission is going to be. So, I just — I know it’s not a very satisfactory answer, but it’s an honest one. We’re watching this closely, but we can’t say with certainty exactly what Mr. Putin is going to do.
MODERATOR: Thank you. Our next question will go to David Sanger with the New York Times.
Q Thanks. John, you alluded to the other factor in here, which is whether Iran goes ahead with some kind of an attack, either directly or indirectly. So, can you bring us up on your thinking? It’s now been, what, nearly three weeks since the killing of the Hamas leader in Tehran. We haven’t seen a reaction. Obviously, you’ve been sending lots of messages to the Iranians. Are you getting any kind of response back? Do you have any sense of whether they’ve made a political decision to go ahead; whether they are considering the effects on the talks underway in Doha here? What’s your read?
And then I have a Ukraine question for you when you’re done.
MR. KIRBY: Yeah, hey. I want to be careful that I don’t get into intelligence assessments in too great of detail, David. We obviously are watching this very, very closely, as you might expect. As you also rightly noted, we have been messaging Iran through our counterparts and people that have direct diplomatic relations with Iran. And of course, we have our own ways of doing that, through other vehicles, as you know.
And our messages have been consistent: We don’t want to see an escalation here, and we would like to prevent the outcome of them attacking — Iran.
In addition to all that intense diplomacy, as you know, we’ve also made moves with defense capabilities, ships, aircraft, other military capabilities to make sure that should Iran choose to go forward with some sort of an attack on Iran [Israel], that we’re ready for it — to defend ourselves, our facilities, and our people, but also to defend Israel. And we are constantly looking at that posture as well to make sure that it matches up to what the potential attack could be.
We have to take seriously the rhetoric coming out of Tehran, and the rhetoric coming out of Tehran has been pretty aggressive in terms of what their intent is. We have to take that seriously.
So I can’t sit here and tell you for sure that there’s been a decision to change their mind. And I can’t tell you for sure, if they attack, what that is going to look like or even when it would occur. As I said earlier, a few days ago we had information, which we continue to have that information, that an attack could come with little or no warning, and certainly could come in coming days. And we have to be ready for it.
But the messaging effort continues and will continue, because what we’re really after is de-escalation and trying to prevent this.
Q My Ukraine question is this: At other moments in time when Putin has been embarrassed or performing badly, we’ve seen him make nuclear threats. And you remember October 2022 and that whole period of time when there was concern about that. Are you hearing, seeing anything that indicates similar distress on his part?
MR. KIRBY: Well, I reckon that if he’s moving troops over there, he’s got some level of concern about what’s going on. I don’t know whether that qualifies as distress or not, but he certainly is reacting, at least in some way, to what’s happening in the Kursk Oblast. But we haven’t seen or heard any escalatory rhetoric, particularly around nuclear weapons, in recent days. So I think —
Q None of the signs that you saw in October 2022?
MR. KIRBY: No, sir. And the other thing I’d say is that not only have we not seen or heard that kind of rhetoric, we haven’t seen or heard anything that would cause us to change our own strategic deterrent posture or calculus.
MODERATOR: Thank you. Our next question will go to Aurelia with AFP.
Q Hi, and thank you so much for doing this. John, I was wondering whether you could elaborate on something the President said. He said that this Ukrainian offensive in Russia was causing a dilemma for Putin. So if you could, like, expand on that.
And a second question: Can you comment on this report in the Wall Street Journal saying that senior Ukrainian officials approved the sabotage operation against the Nord Stream pipeline? Thank you so much.
MR. KIRBY: I’m not going to comment on the Wall Street Journal reporting on this.
On your first question, I’ve kind of already addressed it. I mean, look, Mr. Putin and the Russians have had to make adjustments, and we see signs that they are trying to reinforce themselves in and around the Kursk area as a result of Ukrainian operations there. And doing that means you’re taking assets that were in one place doing one thing, and now they have to go do another. And that’s — you know, that certainly presents a dilemma in the decision-making process.
MODERATOR: Thank you. Our next question will go to Alex Ward with the Wall Street Journal.
Q Yeah, thanks, John. I have two quick questions. One is, do you have any — I know we talked about Iran a little bit. Do you have any indications about this attack still? I mean, I know, you know, officials keep saying, you know, “We don’t know” or anything like that, but maybe there’s some more clarity in recent hours.
And relatedly, if there was — if you have any indication that maybe Iran is waiting to see how these ceasefire talks would go.
And then second, the other ceasefire talks, the ones in Sudan, where it looked like neither party — warring party — showed up, I’m wondering if the administration is planning any moves to make sure that those sides actually get chatting to stop that civil war. Thank you.
MR. KIRBY: We’re still very focused on getting both sides in Sudan back to the table and to come to meaningful agreements about laying their arms down and doing the right thing for the people of Sudan. So, diplomatically, we are very much engaged in that and have every interest in trying to get those talks back on — or getting them started, I should say.
On your first question, I kind of already answered it, Alex. I don’t know that I can say anything — or would say anything differently about — you know, about what we anticipate.
I mean, as I said earlier, even this morning, we have to take the rhetoric seriously. We know that Iran has made some preparations. We believe that, should they choose to attack, that they could do it with little or no notice and that it could come — it could come soon.
But we obviously would like to prevent that outcome, which is why, in my answer to David’s questions, you know, we’re involved in — continue to be involved in some pretty intensive diplomacy to try to keep this situation from escalating. We don’t want it to come to that. If it does come to that, we got to be ready, and we believe we are, but we’re going to try as hard as we can through diplomacy to try to prevent it.
MODERATOR: Thank you. Our next question will go to Juan with La W.
Q Thank you, John. Given that it’s clear for the U.S. that Edmundo Gonzalez won the election — I’m talking about Venezuela — when will the U.S. formally recognize him as the victor? And is it true that the U.S. has offered Nicolas Maduro something like amnesty to facilitate that transition of power in Venezuela? Thank you.
MR. KIRBY: Nope, it is not true that there’s been amnesty offered to Mr. Maduro. And what we want to see is we want to see the actual vote tallies, the data, and we haven’t seen that yet. So we still need to see that.
We do believe that Mr. Gonzalez won the majority of votes. We believe that through a number of ways and a number of sources. What’s really definitive is the actual voting data. And the fact that Mr. Maduro won’t release that data, certainly, I think, speaks to what must be his concern about the transparency that that would — the results that that would transparently display.
So I’ve got nothing on — nothing more in terms of recognition to talk about. We want to see the data.
MODERATOR: Thank you. Our next question will go to Neria with Channel 13 Israel.
Q Hi, Kirby. Thank you so much for doing this. And thank you, Sam. I’m wondering if you have any new information about the possible Iranian attack to tell us. We’ve been talking in the past few days about the possibility of an attack in the next few days. What does the U.S. do in order to try to deter Iran today from this attack? Because we’ve seen the submarine and the Raptors that were sent to the Middle East. Are you doing anything more?
And do you still have that same exact assessment of a few days ago, or do you feel like Iran is more deterred than before?
MR. KIRBY: Yeah, I mean, again, I’ve kind of already answered this one. We’re still working very hard diplomatically to prevent that outcome, to prevent there being an attack, but we also have to be ready for one. And I would tell you that we believe we are.
We have devoted more capability to the region — air and sea, particularly. And Secretary Austin even modified that posture over the weekend by speeding up the Lincoln and announcing a guided missile submarine to the region. Force posture is a pretty dynamic thing, and we’ll adjust it as necessary. I don’t have any changes to speak to today, and if there were to be any, that would come from the Pentagon, rightly.
But we’re constantly looking at the situation and making sure that, you know, that we’ve got what we need in place should there be an attack.
I want to stress again that, you know, we don’t have a lot of certainty here, so it’s not exactly clear whether there’ll be one. We hope there won’t be. It’s not clear, if there is one, when it would come. It could come, as I said earlier, with little or no notice. Certainly, we have to be ready for that in the coming days.
And I’ll tell you something else. It’s not exactly clear, if there’s going to be one, what it’s going to look like, what scope is it going to entail. Is it going to be the same size as what they threw at Israel in April? Smaller? Bigger? We don’t have a firm sense of it — which is why, again, we’re working so hard on the diplomatic front to see if we can forestall it. And if we can’t, working so hard on the military front to make sure we’re ready for it and that Israel is ready for it.
So, I don’t know that I can say much more than that.
MODERATOR: Thank you. We have time for one more question, which will go to Jihan with The National.
Q Thank you. Thank you, Kirby. Thank you, Sam. I wanted to ask about — does this administration have a position on Israel maintaining control on Gaza’s southern border, or within Gaza, in the short or long term, post war?
MR. KIRBY: We’ve talked about this before. Look, we all recognize that, you know, whenever the war actually ends, permanently ends, that there’s probably going to be some sort of a transition period here, or IDF may have some security responsibilities. But what that looks like, I can’t speak to in any great clarity.
What we’re focused on right now is getting a ceasefire deal in place, getting those hostages home, getting six weeks of calm, and all the parameters that the ceasefire deal lays out in terms of military activity and military presence. That’s really what our goal is right now.
Q And another question on — President Mahmoud Abbas said that he plans on visiting Gaza. Has this visit been coordinated in any way with this administration? And is this part of — I mean, is the Palestinian Authority involved in the talks at this stage?
MR. KIRBY: You mean the ceasefire talks?
Q Yes.
MR. KIRBY: No. The Palestinian Authority is not involved in the ceasefire talks. And I’m going to have to get back to you on this trip to Gaza. This is the first I’m hearing of that. So, I —
Q Yeah, he said it earlier today, and I was wondering if that was part of — I mean, how would this be (inaudible).
MR. KIRBY: No, I wouldn’t read into that as being part of the ceasefire talks. I’m pretty comfortable with that, but — saying that.
But in terms of whether we were aware of it or in any way coordinated it, I’d have to get back to you on that. This is the first I’m hearing of it, and I don’t want to speculate.
MODERATOR: Thank you. That is all the time we have today. As always, if we weren’t able to get to you, feel free to reach out to our distro and we’ll try to get back as soon as we can. Thanks.
10:50 A.M. EDT
