2:26 p.m. EDT

MS BRUCE: Thank you, ma’am. Thank you. Hi, everybody. I know it was – oh, good, we’re still getting some seats here. We’re good? Welcome aboard everybody. Thank you very much for being here. Nice and air conditioned – not like outside.

So I do have a few announcements, of course, as you might imagine, and then we will – the imperial “we” – we’ll take your questions. Thank you all for being here. I do appreciate it.

Under the leadership of President Trump and Secretary Marco Rubio, the United States continues to pursue a clear-eyed foreign policy that prioritizes the safety, prosperity, and global standing of the American people. Last week, the department welcomed delegations from the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda to Washington to support implementation of the June 27th peace agreement. Led by Senior Advisor Boulos, these discussions focused on regional security, cooperation, and economic development – critical pillars for achieving lasting peace and prosperity in the Great Lakes region.

And today, Denmark, Norway, and Sweden announced they would fund an additional $500 million package of U.S.-made equipment for Ukraine. In addition, yesterday, the Netherlands announced it will fund the first package of U.S.-made weapons and munitions, including Patriot missiles, worth over $500 million. Together, these deliveries total over 1 billion of lifesaving, top-of-the-line American equipment that, as noted by Ambassador Whitaker, will allow Ukraine to, quote, “protect critical infrastructure and civilian lives while also staying in the fight until a lasting ceasefire happens.” These commitments deliver on President Trump’s initiative to facilitate billions of dollars in investment to the United States defense industry and create American jobs while ensuring Europe can ultimately defend itself long term.

Additionally today, the State Department published a temporary final rule in the Federal Register. I know that sounds kind of bureaucratic-like for everyone watching at home. This is to implement a visa bond pilot program under the Immigration and Nationality Act consistent with Executive Order 14159. Beginning August 20th, nationals of Malawi and Zambia applying for B1, B2 business and tourist visas will be required to post a bond of up to $15,000. This targeted, common-sense measure reinforces the administration’s commitment to U.S. immigration law while deterring visa overstays.

Now, turning to our disaster response for the Philippines, with $250,000 in funding from the Department of State, the World Food Program is transporting family food packs to flood-affected people across Central and Northern Luzon with nearly 14,000 delivered to date. The department is providing an additional $250,000 to provide emergency shelter assistance to meet the needs of over 15,000 disaster-affected individuals.

Finally, President Trump is signing an executive order today establishing a White House task force on the 2028 Summer Olympic and Paralympic Games. With Los Angeles set to host the world, the task force will coordinate across federal, state, and local agencies to ensure streamlined visa processes, robust security, and efficient transportation. This action highlights America’s enduring role as a global leader and premier destination for international engagement, tourism, and sports diplomacy.

All right. So a bunch of stuff there. I am looking forward now to taking your questions. And we’ll start here. Yes, ma’am.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MS BRUCE: Nice to see you up here as opposed to further back. Welcome aboard.

QUESTION: Very revolutionary for us foreign journalists.

MS BRUCE: And let me – before you begin, I do want to announce everyone who is in the front row today. As we know, we have guests as well as regular attendees here in the room for our front row. First, we have Mal McIver-Sheridan with Kyodo. We have Serra Karaçam with Halk TV, Türkiye; Shawn Fleetwood with The Federalist; Adam Kredo with the Washington Free Beacon. I know your avatar on social media. Now, everyone is going to be able to see your face. John Lyons, or – is it John or Kamin?

QUESTION: Kamin.

MS BRUCE: Kamin. Kamin, welcome aboard. Kamin Gock with ABC Australia. And Jacob with The Times of Isreal. Welcome aboard. Nice to see you again. Saw you this morning.

All right, everyone. So now again, Serra, let’s start with you.

QUESTION: Thank you very much. I want to start with Syria. SDF military leader Mazloum Abdi recently stated that Syria should adopt a decentralized structure where all groups have the right to self-governance. He added that a centralized system has already failed. He also said that during his meeting with U.S. Ambassador to Türkiye and Special Envoy Thomas Barrack that Mr. Barrack came to understand that Syria cannot be governed from a single center.

Given that, and considering Türkiye’s strong opposition to any form of Kurdish autonomy in the northeast due to SDF’s ties to PKK – an organization that is reportedly now engaged in a disarmament or integration process in Türkiye, albeit with no formal outcome yet – does the U.S. support SDF’s apparent push to establish a parallel or federal governing structure rather than reintegrating into the central Syrian regime? Has the U.S. position on Syria’s territorial integrity shifted or softened in any way?

MS BRUCE: So in general about Syria, I think this is important. What – first thing I want to do is read a tweet from Ambassador Barrack, our ambassador to Türkiye as well as, of course, our Special Envoy there in the Middle East as well – Syria and Lebanon. He tweeted: “Disturbing violence erupted yesterday” – this was on October – on August 4th, I should say – “in Suwayda, and in Manbij.

Diplomacy is the best way to stop violence and build a peaceful, lasting solution. is proud to have helped mediate a solution in Suwayda and to be co-mediating with the reintegration of the northeast into a unified Syria. The path ahead belongs to Syrians – urging all sides to uphold calm and resolve differences through dialogue, not bloodshed. Syria deserves stability. Syrians deserve peace.”

When it comes to – I guess you’re asking about Türkiye and the —

QUESTION: A single central governance – did you change your stance on that?

MS BRUCE: Well, no. We – first of all, Ambassador Barrack continues to engage all parties to ensure security and calm for all Syrians. But we are continuing to support dialogue with the Syrian Government and the Syrian Democratic Forces aimed at integrating the SDF into the Syrian military. Of course, we welcome all productive meetings between the SDF and President al-Sharaa. We also support the SDF’s intent to transform the current ceasefire in northeast Syria into a comprehensive and lasting peace. And of course, it will be up to Syria and the new government to move the country toward peace and prosperity.

I can say that when we look at the notion of a comprehensive, inclusive government, of course that is the way that it has to work. And I think as we’ve talked before about places that have been unstable, that’s been the point, is that we’re working for stability, and I think our position previously still stands certainly, and we continue with democracy being vitally important as well as diplomacy when it comes to the nature of how we solve the problems there.

QUESTION: A short follow-up, please. Is the U.S. following Türkiye’s newly formed parliamentary commission that is reportedly working to end PKK’s armed campaign potentially through reforms and in counterterrorism criminal legislation change for a peaceful transition? If so, how might that effort affect your approach to northern Syria and your ongoing partnerships on the ground?

MS BRUCE: Right. Well, first of all, we won’t comment on actions that governments are taking internally when it comes to legislation or moves that they seek to make. Nor will I discuss the impact on what our negotiations might be or our relationship with other governments that are affected by something like that.

At the same time, I’ll take that back to a degree to see if there has been any remarks or elements that might be helpful. And again, for those watching at home, when we say we’re going to take back a question, it means that we’re going to get an answer to that question in some form and get it back directly to the reporter as well. So I think we’ve got a good track record in that regard.

All right, yes. Leon.

QUESTION: Yes, hi. Thanks, Tammy. I’d like you to speak a little bit about Gaza. The Israeli prime minister is – had a cabinet meeting earlier. They’re settling on a new plan for Gaza, which, according to certain reports, would mean reoccupying all of Gaza. What is the State Department’s position on that? Would you support an occupation of all of Gaza?

MS BRUCE: Well, of course, you know what we’re focused on still: getting the hostages out, after what we saw with videos over the last couple of days. It is a reminder to people about the evil that has been running this terror operation in Gaza via, of course, through Hamas. What I can tell you is that we would refer you in that instance, regarding Israel’s plans, to the Government of Israel. And regarding that reporting, again, reporting is one thing; real plans might be another. We are not in the business of interpreting statements from foreign governments when and if they’re made. We do remain focused on freeing the hostages, including the remains of two Americans and ensuring that Hamas never rules Gaza again.

All right. Yes, sir, from Australia.

QUESTION: Thank you, Tammy. For a country like Australia, even though we have a free trade agreement, we’re now being hit with tariffs. The U.S. is reviewing the AUKUS submarine agreement, and it seems our prime minister can’t even get a meeting with your president. What does this say about the way the United States now views some of its relationships with its traditional allies?

MS BRUCE: Well, I don’t speak for President Trump, right. He’s made clear his intentions and his efforts around the world. Here at the State Department, of course, we speak for the view and approach of Secretary Rubio. What I can say, though, is what President Trump has said publicly, which is that in the beginning of the tariff framework, it was to even the playing field; and then, yes, move into negotiations with countries around the world. So for more details about the timing and plans and conversations, I’d refer you to the White House.

What I do know, of course, is that we enjoy a terrific relationship with Australia. We always have, and I think we expect to have that continue. I can say that our alliance has never been stronger or more important. We share the same values, beliefs, and goals. We have fought, of course, side by side in battles over the last 100 years.

But I think that for President Trump’s approach and attitude, it really is about America being as strong as she could be, which matters to the rest of the world and informs all the rest of our alliances and partnerships; for our nation to be as strong and as secure as we can be. Certainly Australia and all of our partners around the world recognize this.

It’s been, I think, a very long time, which is why many people have been surprised that we’re going to have conversations like this. We’ve seen his success, the money that has come into America as a tremendous supplier and supplier of goods around the world. So I think that that’s what we can expect for Australia, as we do a number of other countries of which will have the pleasure of being able to speak with the President and make their own arrangements as well in that regard.

All right. Thank you, sir. All right. Yes, sir?

QUESTION: Thank you, Ms. Bruce. So in recent weeks we’ve seen the release of previously classified documents showing that then-President Obama and his intel chiefs weaponized a 2017 intel community assessment to push the lie that Trump colluded with Russia in the 2016 election. And this ICA – showed at the behest of Obama’s intel chiefs – included weak and misinterpreted intel to push the notion that Russia wanted Trump to win the election. Meanwhile, the ICA did not include evidence showing the opposite. Many media and the Democrats have since clung to the Senate Intel Committee report and then-Senator Rubio’s work in drafting that report that said the ICA was fine and that they agreed with Obama’s intel chiefs that Russia intervened to help Trump.

So my question is: Does Secretary Rubio agree with the media and other Democrats that there was nothing improper about the creation of the ICA? Or do the recent documents that have been released change his views about the assessment?

MS BRUCE: Well, I put out a statement myself responding to this when it first came up, and I’ve found that for you. But I would say that this, in some ways, explains, of course, the vehemence of the effort to try to keep President Trump from winning the last election because of the nature now of what investigations are occurring or may occur. And for – this is what the American people voted for. We saw a great deal going on that was improper, and so we look forward, of course, to what these investigations reveal.

Regarding Secretary Rubio as then-Senator Rubio, my statement was this – oh gosh, I think maybe over a week ago – if the legacy media were at all curious about the facts of the matter they would have found from then-Senator Rubio’s own statement from 2020 concurrence with DNI Gabbard’s consequential findings. Then-Senator Rubio determined that the use of the Steele dossier was quote, “very troubling.” But even more so, he was alarmed by the behavior and the actions of the FBI in pursuit of what has now been confirmed as a dangerous hoax. His statement revealed serious wrongdoing, leading to one of the most infamous political scandals in American history. And of course, I think that at that time was appropriate, and as all of us who are here and grateful to be here and blessed to be here, we are also grateful for the American people seeing through that and putting President Trump back in office.

QUESTION: A quick follow-up, if I may.

MS BRUCE: All right. Sure.

QUESTION: So you’re saying that Secretary Rubio disagrees with the assessment from Democrats and the media that the drafting of the ICA was on the up and up?

MS BRUCE: Well, what I can say and what I always caution people in this room to not do is to not draw an extended conclusion about something that I presented. What I presented is what I presented. So I’m not going to expand more on that regarding what the Secretary thinks or might be considering. I won’t get ahead of the Secretary in that regard. But I think it’s pretty clear what his position is.

All right. Daphne.

QUESTION: Thank you so much. Just to follow up on my colleague’s question on Gaza —

MS BRUCE: Yes.

QUESTION: — have U.S. officials spoken with Netanyahu about this potential plan for a complete military takeover of Gaza?

MS BRUCE: I won’t remark on any conversations, whether or not they have occurred.

QUESTION: Okay. And then Axios is reporting that Witkoff and President Trump discussed plans for the U.S. to increase its role in providing humanitarian aid to Gaza. What will this look like and how quickly will the U.S. act? I know Trump has mentioned food centers. Where does that stand now?

MS BRUCE: Well, as we all know, every few minutes things change. When we say something’s fluid on the ground, this couldn’t be a better example of the nature of how things are moving. I can tell you that after the visit from Special Envoy Witkoff and Ambassador Huckabee – they went at the behest of the President, who wanted people on the ground to be able to report back to him exactly what was happening. Most of us, of course, are relying on reports from various areas. They have reported back to the President. What I won’t do is get ahead of what the President will decide about what he’s heard and the actions that he will decide to take. He will – obviously, he’ll make that known to everyone.

But what we do know of course from the beginning is that humanitarian aid has been at the heart of our action, not just for Gaza but around the world. In my topper, as we call it, I mentioned, of course, our current standing with the Philippines and assistance there. But we do know, of course, just as a reminder for people who might not know, Special Envoy Witkoff spent over five hours inside Gaza this last weekend to assess the situation and to begin planning the best way to deliver urgent food and medical care to Gaza. And while we don’t have anything to announce at this point – obviously it’s rather early – regarding the end result of that, that still remains our priority.

All right. Yes, sir?

QUESTION: Thank you. Also on Gaza —

MS BRUCE: Yes.

QUESTION: — the Free Beacon reported last night about mounting concerns about the Red Cross and its failure to assess the Israeli hostages that are still being held there, especially after Hamas’s latest videos came out. Folks I spoke to said to me that you’re actually looking at reassessing the U.S. relationship with the Red Cross because of this. So I wanted to ask you, once, about that. Is that an option with Congress to reassess the Red Cross’s position over there? And two, what’s your assessment of the job they’ve been doing, in terms of accessing the Israeli hostages and providing them what appears to be much needed medical care?

MS BRUCE: Well, I won’t speak about the Red Cross or Israel’s reaction to that. There are certainly many moving parts. We know that that is part of the nature of what Hamas tends to do. I believe that there was some requirements for them to allow that, but I won’t get into those particular details.

Obviously, though, with what we’ve seen with those videos – I’ve referred to Hamas as monsters in this room. They are clearly a terrorist group. Their main support has been Iran, and they are on their heels now. Clearly the Middle East is changing, and it is a change that President Trump has asked to be one that is a reflection of new ideas, of having this be a durable peace, not this vicious circle of it happening every – several times during each generation, as though this was some new normal. We reject that. It is clear that the time is now to make the difference for – it is about, of course, the Israeli people. But the nationalities involved in October 7th, the way that this affects the world as they continue to contribute to try to make a difference, it is – it’s a world – we all deserve better.

So at this point, I would say that when it comes to what Israel is planning, we will have to wait and see. And again, what the decisions that President Trump will announce when it comes to how – what the way is forward will – based on his pattern will come up very quickly, perhaps sooner than most of us can imagine.

But there is – on the hostages, what we saw, it is an astoundingly evil reminder of who they are. In the midst of the conversation around the world, for them to feel comfortable then putting on full display their barbarity and their inhumanity tells you that their – they seem to feel pretty comfortable at the moment. I – all of us – the world was appalled. I mean, there’s just no other way to describe it. But our leadership clearly is involved in looking to the future, and that is one that the Gazan people deserve and that everyone in the world deserve.

Andrea Mitchell.

QUESTION: Thank you so much, Tammy. Wanted to ask you what the State Department or Secretary Rubio’s position is on what to do with warehoused excess food from USAID, some of which has not spoiled – biscuits in Dubai, peanut paste – and whether that should be distributed. It’s all been paid for by the taxpayers, so is there a view toward whether it should be incinerated or distributed or some combination? Is there a plan afoot?

MS BRUCE: Well, there – it is – there’s many moving parts. I can say there is a dynamic involving various different considerations regarding expired food, regarding our Mexico City policy when it comes to certain items as well, and food – we discussed this before, but it’s worth repeating. We have food that is purchased, meant to be distributed to specific locations, and then there is food in various locations around the world that is for global emergencies that sits. And it is – it’s food that is meant not to be moved. It’s food to be there if there is an emergency where people have to be fed in a quick way with food that is sustainable and with – and that can be maintained for an extended period of time. But that is food —

QUESTION: So sorry.

MS BRUCE: It’s all right. That’s the electronic world.

It’s food that is meant to not be moved. But then there is food, of course, that is there, that is stored in certain places, that is meant for a location, and that moves out and it gets distributed where it should be. But if food is spoiled, it will be destroyed. We are not going to distribute food that is expired. And if there is food that is meant for emergencies that has expired, we’ll deal with that also accordingly.

QUESTION: But is there any circumstance under which the State Department would countenance destroying unspoiled food for some reason?

MS BRUCE: Well, I, again, don’t know of all the circumstances. I can say that there could be a reason of all the things that exist around the world, whether it is the inability for us to move it, refusal of a government to allow us access or to move it to another – I can’t speak – there are many, many different fronts about why certain decisions are made.

What I can tell you is what I’ve watched over the last six months are people who’ve been here for years, sometimes decades – I see you, sir. Keep your hand down. Thank you very much – of people who’ve worked here on these issues for a very long time, others of us who are new because of the election.

And the focus has been on: how can we make these things work? How can we save enough of whatever the issue is – if it’s about funding, if it’s about food, if it’s about what do we need – how can we make it work – but within the smartest, fastest, most nimble way to be able to help as many people as possible? No one is sitting in a room thinking: how can we destroy as much stuff as possible? That’s not our goal.

We – it is – I’ve spoken in this room many times about the impact of the people who are Foreign Service Officers and who are civil servants, who’ve dedicated their lives, their professions to making a difference for people around the world. They are still here; they still care deeply. And we are here to try to manage, right, the largest, the most amazing government in the world, and what we can do for the people around the world while still paying the respect and the deference to the American people and what they deserve, first, so that we can remain the powerhouse and the helper and the friend that we are around the world.

So I – each situation is different, but our goal is to make sure that we – of course, we do remain in the foreign aid business, we remain a facilitator of things that the world needs. Many people probably didn’t know that we have these food stores around the world waiting in case something happens. But we need to be able to facilitate that, and we’re doing so transparently, we discussed this with you, and that’s what I know about the people who work here.

All right. Yes, sir.

QUESTION: Thanks, Tammy. Over the weekend, the State Department confirmed that Khamis Ayyad, a Palestinian – who died due to complications from smoke inhalation after trying to put out a fire started by, allegedly, Israeli settlers in a village in the West Bank – confirmed that he was a U.S. citizen. Is the U.S. State Department calling on Israel to investigate this death? Has this issue been raised with Israeli authorities?

MS BRUCE: Well, we have made comments before. There have been – it’s a violent situation. There have been a few Americans who’ve passed in this kind of a dynamic, certainly also one in Syria. Our first priority – and it’s not a motto or a slogan – is the safety and security of Americans everywhere, so certainly here at home but also abroad. We know that when a death occurs in a foreign country, we – it’s that foreign country’s prerogative, right – they will be doing an investigation. We have called upon Israel to investigate, of course, each of these instances that they are, and that we are – we wait to see what those investigations will be. And that’s the case here in this situation.

There’s a great deal we, of course, still don’t know, but we – that is something – to say we’re following it is an understatement. We are on that and every other situation that has impacted an American citizen wherever they may be in the world. And then once those local investigations are done and we take a look – again, this is a DHS issue, if you will, when it comes to investigations, or the FBI. But as each one of these situations move forward, I will keep everyone up to date.

All right. Yes, sir.

QUESTION: Thanks, Tammy. Yesterday, Speaker Johnson was in the West Bank, which he referred to as Judean Samaria, and said that it rightly belongs to the Jewish people. Is that official U.S. policy? And if it’s not, what is U.S. policy towards the West Bank?

MS BRUCE: Well, I have said this about other diplomats who’ve spoken their minds, including Ambassador Huckabee. Certainly that’s not – if there’s a policy in that regard, you would hear it from me. So I think I can say that. I’m not going to speak for him or characterize his words in any certain ways, but clearly that is his opinion.

QUESTION: But it’s not the opinion of the U.S. Government?

MS BRUCE: Well, I’m not going to speak about opinion of the government, and if there’s a policy regarding the status in any region of the world, certainly in the Middle East, I would wait to hear it from Secretary Rubio and President Trump.

All right.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MS BRUCE: Yes, sir —

QUESTION: Tammy, I want to move to Special Envoy —

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MS BRUCE: One – Nadia, please.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: — Witkoff’s upcoming trip to —

QUESTION: Specia Envoy’s upcoming trip to Russia – how much you guys are hoping to achieve, given the fact that there are reports that Russia is not prepared to give up their claims other than a partial ceasefire?

MS BRUCE: Well, first of all, the President has noted, of course, that Special Envoy Witkoff will be traveling to Russia this week, so we can confirm that from this podium. What that will entail, I have no details for you.

QUESTION: And, as you know, this is happening in front – ahead of forthcoming sanctions on Russia. Can you fill us in on —

MS BRUCE: Well, are you saying that – are you declaring for the United States Government there’s going to be more sanctions on Russia? I’m not sure. I would say I would need to hear that from President Trump when it comes to – clearly, the President’s not happy with Mr. Putin and Russia, but he remains committed to diplomatic solutions. I would say that we’ve also seen a remark, perhaps a reflection of possible secondary sanctions, regarding the sale of oil, people who are – countries that are buying Russian oil, and that has been openly discussed by the President. But when it comes to things that are decided, we would wait for the President to say that.

QUESTION: On that line, Tammy, do you have any response to Indian foreign minister’s statement saying that they are not going to change their position on oil purchase from Russia? And adjacent to that, Ukraine today – Ukraine leadership today announced that they actually flagged India-made parts that they found in Russian drones. Do you have any reaction?

MS BRUCE: Well, again, I won’t speak for what the President would think about those things. We do obviously have Envoy Witkoff going to Russia. We are committed on that end. I will not characterize or remark on another nation’s comments about what they will or will not do. I can barely do that here. But I do know that, of course, President Trump understands the entire field, and he has made it very clear he doesn’t like what’s been happening. He is a man who is a humanitarian. He has spent all these months now getting people to the table, finding a solution, but he’s a realist and he – when he says something and you can see where he’s moving, he’s very transparent. That is the voice that you need to hear from.

So he is the guiding hand. And when it comes to what Russia is doing and those nations that are facilitating this war on Ukraine, it will be up to President Trump about how to respond.

All right. Yes, at the end there.

QUESTION: Thank you. Tomorrow, August 6th, marks 80 years since the United States dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima. The U.S. ambassador to Japan will also participate in the event in Hiroshima. Do you have any comment on that, and what is the current administration’s basic policy on nuclear weapons? Thank you.

MS BRUCE: Yes, I do have a remark on that. Thank you, sir. So for tomorrow, 80 years ago the United States and Japan concluded a devastating war in the Pacific. For 80 years the United States and Japan, however, have stood shoulder to shoulder to safeguard peace and prosperity in the Pacific. Tomorrow marks a solemn day of reflection and remembrance as we honor the people of Hiroshima and their enduring message of peace and hope. For 80 years, their resilience has inspired the world, and their spirit of reconciliation has strengthened the U.S.-Japan alliance and our shared commitment to peace and prosperity.

Today, our two nations stand together as close allies, facing the future with unity and purpose. By embracing the promise of possibility, we have forged a partnership that serves as a beacon of freedom and progress for the world.

It is – if I may just add that it is a perfect example of the nature of what can be accomplished with two nations when we work together, and the nature of friendship, the beauty of Japan, and the fact that we can stand here 80 years later and speak to that, I appreciate. Thanks – thanks for being here, sir.

Yes, Mike.

QUESTION: Thank you, Tammy. On Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, Special Envoy Witkoff at his tour/inspection of GHF sites last week, we were initially told, when the U.S. came aboard as a financial sponsor of GHF, that there’d be an ongoing review essentially to determine if the money is being spent in a wise manner. So a month on now, I guess, or a little bit more, can you point – I mean, beyond just the number of meals – and I know you say —

MS BRUCE: Sure.

QUESTION: — that’s never enough – can you pinpoint down to a more micro level? A, B and C is working really well; D, E, and F areas of concern – can you get into that assessment of that?

MS BRUCE: Well, I really can’t. GHF could get into that, but it – I know the numbers get to be so big it becomes something maybe that’s not of interest, but it’s over a million meals that have been distributed. I think that matters to the people that have been able to have those meals. And yes, he mentions the fact that it’s never enough, because I remind people: we don’t expect it to be enough, and that’s why we work to change the situation. I can refer you, though, also, again, to Special Envoy Witkoff’s approach and his attitude, is that the visit was to make that determination about what else needed to happen in a framework that could be enough. And I’ve noted, of course, the only “enough” would be in an arena that was not a war zone and where you could actually build and facilitate something that could serve the people of that region.

QUESTION: Very quickly,

QUESTION: Yeah —

QUESTION: President Trump remarked on Sunday evening he wasn’t sure if Ambassador Waltz would be a member of the cabinet as the eventual UN ambassador, which was a change, because Elise Stefanik was supposed to be. Does Secretary Rubio have a position as to whether he wants the UN ambassador to be in the cabinet?

MS BRUCE: Well, I love when you ask me the questions that you know I can’t answer. So I’m not going to speak to what the President is thinking or considering regarding the cabinet or what other elements might be involved, nor will I talk about Secretary Rubio’s opinion about what may or may not happen hypothetically.

QUESTION: Okay, thank you.

MS BRUCE: All right. And now to Nadia. Thanks for your patience.

QUESTION: Thank you so much, Tammy. I wanted to press you again on the Gaza plan. The President said clearly and many times that he wants to end wars in the Middle East, and I believe that’s the Secretary’s position.

MS BRUCE: Yes, that’s true.

QUESTION: How does Netanyahu’s plan or proposed plan of reoccupying Gaza fits into this vision, considering that many people believe that, without American weapons, Israel cannot carry with this war? So you have lots of leverage to advise Prime Minister Netanyahu whether to take this decision or not.

MS BRUCE: Well, what I do love is when you’re in the Oval Office and you’re able to ask President Trump a direct question, which you’ve been able to do, and it’s been very impressive. That is a question for the President. I would say, though, that we – and I’m, again, thrilled to be here with his leadership in that we’ve seen him display what his commitment has been, which is to stop the suffering and the carnage, bring peace for the – who wouldn’t if you could – if you had the wherewithal to do it? Of course that’s what we’re doing.

I certainly won’t speak to what Israel’s plans are. There’s been many reports. I’m not going to speak to news reports or what another government is planning or not planning. What I do know is that this government, the Trump Administration, is focused on this. It’s clear this is what they intend to do. He wants this to end. He’s said that from the beginning that this – the actions that we would take wouldn’t be about months or years, about meeting to have meetings, and that there is resolutions. As a businessman, you’ve got to have a point where something is developed and produced and done.

So I would say that considering we know that the Secretary – Secretary Rubio, of course – working very closely and also as the acting NSA with the President in the White House, that we have, I would argue, the best minds in the world dealing with and deciding how to implement this notion that war-torn ravaging and suffering should never be someone’s normal. That’s what we will see from President Trump, Secretary Rubio, and this entire government as a whole.

But we would not – certainly won’t comment on hypotheticals or speculating on what that might mean. The good news is you’ll hear it right from them in a variety of different formats, and that it’s an exciting time to watch this. It’s heartbreaking most of the time; it’s exciting and hopeful part of the time. And I think we’re going to get there.

All right.

QUESTION: And on Ambassador Huckabee, how do we know that he’s speaking his mind as an opinion and when he talks about U.S. policy? Because he reports to the Secretary. So how – as a reporter, how do I know if he is just expressing his opinion about the settlement being part of Israel, and when actually this is a policy if the President or the Secretary did not articulate that?

MS BRUCE: So you want —

QUESTION: I just (inaudible) —

MS BRUCE: So we’re getting into a little bit of a conspiracy dynamic here.

QUESTION: It’s not really. I mean, how do I write the story?

MS BRUCE: But here’s why there’s this podium. We are – have a very particular structure: that the President speaks on the tarmacs, he has gaggles; Karoline Leavitt speaks for the approach of the President in the White House; I am here speaking regarding the approach as the voice of the State Department regarding what our plans are. I obviously can’t say everything to you; that’s very apparent. But I endeavor to say as much as I can to give you details.

There is – there is no one in the world who is randomly going to be speaking about policy that is not evident, that you have not heard from or is a policy of the State Department or the White House, that is not either evident to you, has been said, has been put in a paper, a release, an op-ed, a readout. You have your – I would urge you to focus on the centers that have been created to offer what the policy of the State Department or of the White House – this government – is. It’s very obvious, and yet, of course, people will speak their mind. I would ask you to take everyone’s comments as – in that kind of situation as their opinion and speaking their mind. And that’s why we love the diplomats of this country. We have some very smart, caring, passionate people. And he’s one of them, and I adore him.

Yes, sir, in the middle.

QUESTION: Yes, thank you. Thank you very much. I have two quick questions. Why are you so concerned about the militias bill in the Iraqi parliament? If passed, what will be the implication from American side?

MS BRUCE: So the Iraqi militias in the parliament?

QUESTION: Yes.

MS BRUCE: I’ve got something for you regarding a bill. Is that – you’re – are you alluding to the bill that has —

QUESTION: Yes.

MS BRUCE: All right. Well, there’s been some movement on that, for those who might not know. There is a bill that has furthered – further institutionalizes armed groups associated with terrorist groups and Iran-backed groups, including several that have attacked U.S. interests and killed U.S. personnel. This bill – by the way, we strongly oppose any legislation that is inconsistent with the goals of our bilateral security assistance and partnership that runs counter to strengthening Iraq’s existing security institutions. We support genuine Iraqi sovereignty, not legislation that turns Iraq into an Iranian satellite state.

So there’s – that’s our opinion regarding the bill. We also – can I say that – I think that’s as much as I can say in that regard. I – that’s as much as I can say today.

QUESTION: Okay. Second – second question.

MS BRUCE: But I’ll be back with you Thursday and will likely try to have as much more as I possibly can.

QUESTION: Thank you. This week, we remembered the Yezidis who were targeted for genocide by ISIS terrorist 11 years ago. Thousands lost their lives. At least 3,000 remain missing. How important do you think it is for all refugees to be able to return home to Sinjar?

MS BRUCE: Well – yes.

QUESTION: As you know, Sinjar is now under the control of the militia.

MS BRUCE: It is. It feels – people will remember that; it feels like it was a million years ago. But it was a horrible dynamic that transpired as we watched these Yezidis targeted by ISIS – that time when ISIS was just a cancer running around the world, effectively – certainly through the Middle East, destroying people’s lives. We were told that it would take 30 years to get rid of ISIS, that Muslims would be upset, as though Muslims like what’s going on with this. They don’t. This is not an issue. This was a horrible terrorist group.

Of course, President Trump got into office and was not afraid of this, the nature of that it would take forever, and he wiped them out in about 18 months. And we forget; we move on. There have been other horrible things that have happened, but we did that. And part of that massacre, part of that genocidal action throughout the Middle East, certainly, at least, by ISIS targeted the Yezidis. So yes, this was 11 years ago. Thousands lost their lives; 2,700 remain missing, never found.

And what I can say is this: It is important that survivors receive support as they pursue justice. Security and stability in Sinjar are key for the safe and voluntary and dignified return of the Yezidi community. Yezidis deserve the opportunity to rebuild their lives and homeland. So that’s what we’ll say there.

QUESTION: Can I have a follow-up on that?

QUESTION: Thank you very much. Thank you.

MS BRUCE: All right. All right. Now is it – all right. Go ahead. Nice to see you.

QUESTION: Thank you. Thank you. Nice to see you. Just to clarify on the question about GHF, did Special Envoy Witkoff come away favorably impressed with what he saw of its operations last week?

MS BRUCE: Well, his statement, which I read at the beginning here, spoke to the fact that we’re going to be continuing to look to how best to get humanitarian aid and to further our goal for the humanitarian aid. I have nothing further to say regarding his assessment of GHF or what that additional work or expansion might look like.

QUESTION: Okay. And on his portfolio in Russia, there are reports that the Russians are proposing a limited air truce, a cessation of drone and missile activity. Would that be satisfactory to the U.S. in order to forestall sanctions?

MS BRUCE: Well, I can’t say anything about either one of those questions. First of all, I won’t comment on or speculate on what a diplomatic choice would be regarding what’s offered or what’s not offered. I don’t know that, nor would I suggest that I would know what President Trump would find suitable, and that’s who this decision rests with.

QUESTION: Okay. And on the purposes of oil, I think both India and China have indicated that they fully intend to continue purchasing Russian oil whether or not U.S. sanctions are imposed. Are – is the U.S. seeking additional leverage in order to change Russian behavior? Or what other levers is it going to reach for?

MS BRUCE: Well, we know there’s – of course there’s sanctions. There’s what’s known as secondary sanctions, which is what we’re talking about now, sanctioning a country or a company or others that might be doing business with a country that we have sanctioned in this instance. I know that President Trump, as we all know, has many tools in his toolchest. This is one of them. He has invested a great deal of – and will continue to – regarding the wars and the conflicts around the world, to stop them.

And as a businessman, he likes to use, understandably, the tools that can make a difference with countries. Usually, of course, that is about economy, the economics of what’s happening. And that’s a very specific approach. It’s something every country can understand. It’s a role that America can play, and certainly at the direction of President Trump it makes a huge difference in what certain countries feel. Whether that’s enough for him, what else he might do, I won’t get ahead of him or speculate.

All right. Yes, sir?

QUESTION: Excuse me. On Iran, the Iranian Government has established a Supreme National Defense Council. How does the U.S. see this? Does this show that the Iranians are getting ready for further escalation? And are there chances of future talks between Iran and the U.S.?

MS BRUCE: Well, we are aware of the reports that they’ve set up this new defense council, following, of course, the 12-day war, the Iran-Israel conflict. And I have no further comment for you. (Laughter.) Except maybe that.

Yes. Yes, sir, next to you.

QUESTION: Yes. I was wondering if you have any update on the case of Sayfollah Musallet, who was a Palestinian American, was killed a few weeks ago, last month to be exact. And Ambassador Huckabee said that he requested – he called on Israel to aggressively investigate the murder. If you have an update on that? And if not you can get back to me any time.

MS BRUCE: Thank you.

QUESTION: But also, are there, like, any kind of communication between the U.S. Government and the Israeli Governments on stopping this from keep happening? Because apparently there is a pattern.

MS BRUCE: Well, I don’t have anything new for you, but I – but the initial posture is strong and remains, which is our expecting to see an investigation that comes with results. And of course, we are constantly engaged with Israel. I can’t speak to exactly what those conversations are or on what topics, but it’s been obviously made very clear that we expect some information and resolution to the nature of what occurred and for – and obviously, when we learn that, we will take further action. So I can’t give you the details in this regard. I can tell you it should be a given that anyplace – and we’ve demonstrated this throughout the administration, throughout, certainly, Secretary Rubio’s remarks and his actions as well as President Trump’s – that we are trying to stop conflicts, we are committed to ending carnage and death and destruction around the world for everyone.

But certainly this is from a President whose America First policy recognizes the value and the importance of this country in increasing the value and importance of every other nation around the world. But that is, in our unique position as Americans in this country, reliant on the United States of America being as strong and as capable as possible. Because the world has seen our nature, and that is to stop wars, deter them, try to have ceasefires, have peace around the world.

Our – and his commitment domestically, as you’ve seen, and a whole-of-government effort not just around the world but here at home, to make sure that Americans are safe everywhere, including at our border, in American cities and towns, in large urban areas – that Americans here in the United States, we deserve a better life. That is why President Trump was elected. It is what Americans voted for. But we also expect for Americans to feel that wherever they are in the world.

So yes, I think it’s safe to say – not that I’ve been a party to the conversation – that it’s clear to the world that we expect Americans to be treated well, to be safe, and if something happens, horribly, to have it be dealt with appropriately. That is, I think, the bottom line when it comes to what – when we say here at the State Department the safety and security of Americans everywhere is our top priority, we’re not kidding, and neither is the President and neither is Secretary Rubio.

That is it for today. Everyone, thank you very much. I appreciate it. We’ll be back with you on Thursday. Thank you. Have a great day.

(The briefing was concluded at 3:15 p.m.)

# # #

2:07 p.m. EDT

MR PIGOTT: Hello, everybody. All right. To begin, a few comments at the top, and then I’ll be happy to take some questions.

So first, a statement from Special Envoy Steve Witkoff. Quote: “We have decided to bring our team home from Doha for consultations after the latest response from Hamas, which clearly shows a lack of desire to reach a ceasefire in Gaza. While the mediators have made a great effort, Hamas does not appear to be coordinated or acting in good faith. We will now consider alternative options to bring the hostages home and try to create a more stable environment for the people of Gaza. It is a shame that Hamas has acted in this selfish way. We are resolute in seeking an end to this conflict and a permanent peace in Gaza.”

This week, the United States is advancing a bold and proactive foreign policy that reflects our enduring commitment to peace and security and prosperity for the American people. Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources Michael Rigas is traveling to Seoul and Manila to strengthen the department’s operational posture and deepen our partnerships in the Indo-Pacific, a region central to America’s strategic and economic interests. His visit builds on the administration’s vision of a free, open, and secure Indo-Pacific.

As the White House announced earlier this week, the United States is making significant progress on three major trade initiatives in the Indo-Pacific, reflecting our deep commitment to advancing economic prosperity and long-term security across the region. President Trump announced a landmark economic agreement with Japan, one of our closest allies and most important trading – and one of our most trading partners. This historic deal underscores the enduring strength of the U.S.-Japan relationship and advances the mutual interests of both nations.

The United States and Indonesia also reached a framework for negotiating an agreement on reciprocal trade. This framework is an important step toward expanding bilateral economic ties and will help unlock new opportunities for exporters in both countries.

And on Tuesday, President Trump welcomed President Ferdinand Marcos, Jr., of the Philippines to Washington. During the visit, the United States and the Philippines concluded a trade agreement that will reduce tariffs and expand market access, further deepening our economic partnerships with a key ally. Together, these agreements highlight the United States’s sustained leadership in the region and our strong partnership with Indo-Pacific allies and partners.

We are also gravely concerned by the escalating violence along the Thailand-Cambodia border, and deeply saddened by reports of harm to civilians. The United States urges an immediate cessation of hostilities, protection of civilians, and a peaceful resolution of the conflict.

And with that, I’ll take some questions. Yes.

QUESTION: Thanks, Tommy. The special envoy’s statement, does that suggest that the U.S. is pulling out of any sort of negotiating role in the Gaza ceasefire talks? What are these alternatives?

MR PIGOTT: Well, look, ultimately the statement speaks for itself. But the question has never been our commitment to a ceasefire. The question has been Hamas’s commitment to a ceasefire, and that has been made clear by the special envoy’s statement, the fact that we have entered in good faith in trying to reach an end to this conflict. And as the special envoy said, we remain dedicated to trying to see an end to this conflict.

QUESTION: But will you work within the parties – Qatar, Egypt, for example – in the Doha format? Will you return to that? Are you pulling out entirely from this format?

MR PIGOTT: Well, look, again, I refer you back to the statement. This is a very dynamic situation, and ultimately, again, to reinforce, the question here has never been our commitment to try to get a ceasefire. We’ve seen that engagement. The question here has always been Hamas’s commitment to a ceasefire or willingness to get there.

QUESTION: And can you give us any examples of the alternative options that Witkoff references in his statement?

MR PIGOTT: At this point, I have nothing to preview.

Yes.

QUESTION: Just following up on that, what about the response from Hamas specifically made the administration feel that they are not acting in good faith?

MR PIGOTT: Well, look, these are sensitive diplomatic conversations. We’ll see in the days ahead as we proceed here. Ultimately, the special envoy’s statement speaks for itself, but I think the broader context here is also important, the fact that we have seen Hamas first break that ceasefire that existed on October 7th, then break another ceasefire, and then here, as the special envoy makes clear, not acting in a way in order to achieve a ceasefire again. So to reiterate, the question has never been our commitment to a ceasefire. It has been Hamas’s. They have shown that again and again and again, and have just shown it once again.

QUESTION: And this decision comes as dozens of people have starved to death in Gaza in the last few weeks as a wave of hunger is hitting the enclave. The WHO said yesterday that 21 children under the age of five were among those who died of malnutrition so far this year, and more than a hundred organizations have called for the lifting of all restrictions on the flow of aid and all land crossings to be opened and the restoration of the UN-led a humanitarian response. Given this decision today, is the U.S. considering any other steps to increase the flow of aid to Gaza? Are you talking with Israel about them taking any other steps? How do you move forward on the aid?

MR PIGOTT: Well, look, ultimately what we have seen us do is the delivery of close to 90 million meals into Gaza during a war zone, the ability to deliver that aid in a way where it is not being looted by Hamas. That is what we have seen. We are of course aware – of course we want to see end the devastation that has taken place in Gaza. That’s why we have seen this commitment to get aid to the people who need it in a way where it is not weaponized by Hamas.

That commitment remains. It is a commitment from President Trump and Secretary Rubio. That is why we have supported the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. That is why we continue supporting the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. That is why we’ve seen those 90 million meals being distributed and that commitment again to making sure that aid is reaching the people of Gaza that need it, and the first victims of Hamas being the people of Gaza, as is demonstrated once again here.

QUESTION: Is the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation a sufficient mechanism for delivering aid to Gaza? People are still starving to death. Is that enough, in the U.S. opinion?

MR PIGOTT: Well, as Spokesperson Tammy Bruce has said from this podium before, it is never enough in a war zone. It is never enough. That is why we’re committed to trying to get as much aid in as possible. That is why we worked for that ceasefire, because of what we are seeing. But aid needs to be delivered in a way where it is not being looted by Hamas. So of course enough – it is never enough in a war zone. But we’re dedicated to getting as much aid into Gaza in a way where it reaches the people that need it as possible, and that’s why we were working so hard for a ceasefire.

QUESTION: Okay. And, sorry, I just have one question on the U.S. citizen that died in Syria, Hosam Saraya. Has the U.S. been able to ascertain any further details around the circumstances of his death?

MR PIGOTT: So what I can say on this is first, in terms of the circumstances around his death, I have nothing to confirm on this front. What I can say is we have had direct discussions with the Syrian Government on this issue and have called for an immediate investigation into the matter. Hosam and his family deserve justice, and those responsible for this atrocity must be held accountable.

Yes.

QUESTION: Hi, Tommy. Wanted a quick follow-up on that, and then I have a different subject I want to quickly ask you about, which is very relevant. Doctors Without Borders, internationally known and working with the U.S. for decades, is urgently calling for help beyond the foundation because one in four young children and pregnant women, they say, are malnourished and that it is a policy of starvation. Now, acknowledging 90 million meals and the “progress,” quote-unquote, but there is a whole area of Gaza that is not being served by that. People can’t get to it. It’s only in one region, in the south, and internationally 28 countries, hundreds of aid organizations, are calling for something more than that. There’s been some acknowledgment from U.S. officials as well that there’s real starvation, so is there any – now that the talks have collapsed and so that there’s no immediate ceasefire that might relieve the pressure, is there any alternative that the State Department would begin looking at?

And then I have just one quick other follow-up.

MR PIGOTT: Well, a couple points. First, it is progress to see 90 million meals.

QUESTION: I’m —

MR PIGOTT: That is – yes, and that is progress, and I think it is – it’s worth applauding, especially given the circumstances under which those meals were able to be delivered. I think another important context of this is that the first victims of Hamas are the people of Gaza. Of course, they are not the only victims; we saw the —

QUESTION: But that’s what we’re talking about.

MR PIGOTT: Yes, on October 7th, the atrocities that we saw there, many victims of Hamas. We remain dedicated to getting aid into Gaza to the people that actually need it, and we’ve called from this podium other entities to step up and working through this mechanism in order to deliver aid to the people of Gaza without it being subject to looting by Hamas.

QUESTION: Well, they’re volunteering, but they can’t get past the border. That’s the problem.

MR PIGOTT: We’re calling for conversations with the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, with (inaudible) entities. Through this mechanism, we’ve seen the food being delivered.

QUESTION: It’s also fuel for the hospitals, where the incubators are now taking multiple children.

MR PIGOTT: We are incredibly aware of the humanitarian catastrophe that is happening there. That is the dedication you have seen from the President, the dedication you’ve seen from Secretary Rubio. Every single day, we have conversations here at the State Department; every single briefing, we have conversations here about getting aid into Gaza. It is the dedication of this administration. That’s why we’ve seen the 90 million meals – the support of that effort from this administration. So, of course we want to see as much aid getting into Gaza as possible in a way that is not being looted by Hamas, and this mechanism, the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, has been a way to do that. So we’re calling for additional support of that foundation to deliver that aid.

QUESTION: Follow-up —

QUESTION: Okay. Let me ask you this other question, though, because there is a lot of reporting, New York Times and elsewhere, about planned cuts in PEPFAR going forward. Now, just last week, Republicans led the way on the Hill in carving out the clawback that was proposed in PEPFAR and in continuing the program and expanding it beyond some of the contracts that were frozen under DOGE. Can you give us an update, a status update, on where your – the State Department’s thinking is on PEPFAR going forward?

MR PIGOTT: Well, Secretary Rubio has stated that PEPFAR is an important and lifesaving program that will continue. That dedication continues. That has been clear from the Secretary; the Secretary has made that clear.

I will take a step back when we’re talking about aid programs in general. Part of the new vision of this administration when it comes to aid is looking at recipients of aid, or at least the communities, as allies and partners, not those that are dependent on this aid, and in the long term working towards a scenario where we have the same needs being provided by local partners or other entities as part of that long-term effort when we’re talking about aid in general. So PEPFAR, though, now is an important and lifesaving program that will continue. Secretary Rubio has made that clear.

QUESTION: And just to quickly follow up, some countries have moved towards taking ownership – South Africa, for instance, countries that are capable – but in conflict zones like Haiti, like Sudan, like southern Sudan, like Somalia, and several other countries involved is there a plan to continue it until countries can stand on their own two feet?

MR PIGOTT: Well, look, what I can say now is that PEPFAR – as I just said, that important and lifesaving program that will continue. That’s what our policy currently is here. Again, talking about that longer term, when we’re talking about aid in general, is when we’re talking about those local institutions being able to fulfill a lot of those needs, looking at people as trade and allies, not as those that are dependent on aid. That’s a broader aid vision that is from this administration. But when it comes to PEPFAR, as I said, that it will continue.

QUESTION: Syria?

QUESTION: Can I follow up on Gaza?

MR PIGOTT: Yes.

QUESTION: Thanks, Tommy. At the United Nations Security Council yesterday, the U.S. was isolated in its position when it comes to the humanitarian situation in Gaza, support for the GHF. We’ve had the UK prime minister in the last hour saying the situation in Gaza is unspeakable, indefensible. You have more than a hundred humanitarian aid agencies saying that this system is creating the conditions of starvation. You have desperate Israeli hostage families, who have been for weeks pleading with the prime minister of their country to do this deal.

The U.S. is the only power that has the leverage and the pressure to try and make that happen from the Israeli side. There is clearly a gap between Israel and Hamas; it’s been there for a long time. And there are Israeli families who will say that this is quibbling over a few meters of territory in Gaza; this is quibbling over the number of Palestinian prisoners to be released, and the U.S. could put the pressure on to move these two sides closer together. And I just – can you help us understand why this moment, when you see the conditions on the ground in Gaza – the now mass starvation – the U.S. is deciding this is the moment to walk away from these talks?

MR PIGOTT: This is not a question of what the United States is doing; it’s a question of what Hamas has done. This is a response to what Hamas has done continually –

QUESTION: But that’s not actually the position of many of the Israeli hostage families, of –

MR PIGOTT: Well, and – well, and Israel has long accepted the deal on the table, and Hamas has long rejected it. I mean, this is about – it’s never about – been our commitment to a ceasefire. That’s never been the question here. We have engaged in good faith to try to achieve a ceasefire. The question has always been with Hamas. That is where the question has been. That is where it remains. And the response we just saw from Special Envoy Witkoff is reflective of that. The question is with Hamas, not with the United States.

Yes.

QUESTION: And sorry –

MR PIGOTT: It’s alright.

QUESTION: Just in terms – the statement says you’ll now consider alternative options. I mean – to bring the hostages home – what possible alternative options can there be? We – Israel has tried rescues. Gaza is reduced to rubble; the population is starving. So, I mean, that – if you could help us understand what that statement could possibly be referring to.

MR PIGOTT: I’m not going to speculate more on terms of what his statement – his statement stands for itself at this time. If we have more to announce, we will announce it.

QUESTION: And just – sorry, just one – can I just – there’s just one other thing I wanted to ask –

MR PIGOTT: All right. One more.

QUESTION: — about the two-state solution conference next week. I know the U.S. had said previously when it was postponed that it opposed countries going to this conference in New York. Do you have a position on it this time?

MR PIGOTT: Nothing further, beyond saying that we will not in attendance of that conference.

Yes.

QUESTION: Thank you, Tommy. Just to clarify, now when the envoy says we will consider alternative options to free the hostages and so on, what is meant by that? Because we have seen that only through negotiations were the hostages released in the past. So what other alternatives the U.S. could be thinking about?

MR PIGOTT: Well, I refer you to my previous response. I’m not going to expand upon what the special envoy said.

QUESTION: Okay. All right. Okay. So one other thing. And you also say that Hamas has broken the ceasefire. It was, in fact, the Israeli prime minister who broke the ceasefire on the 18th of March, this past March, and so on. And I say – or at least from what we hear by the interlocutors and so on that Hamas has been more than willing. It’s submitted many concessions and so on. So, what is required of Hamas so a ceasefire can take effect in – as far as the United States is concerned?

MR PIGOTT: Well, look, there has been conversations on this. I will not go into details of what those private diplomatic conversations have been. But what I can say is it is clear now from our perspective that Hamas does not appear to be coordinated nor acting in good faith. We have approached these conversations with good faith, as has been evident by our comments from this podium and other places. And it is clear now that Hamas has not been acting that way.

QUESTION: And lastly —

MR PIGOTT: Yes.

QUESTION: — just lastly, according to news reports and so on, the sticking point was actually the actual entry of aid to Gaza. They apparently did not agree on that. Is that really what broke finally, or what forced the United States team to pull out? Or is it because they want to maintain this GHF method of allowing aid into Gaza?

MR PIGOTT: Look, what I can say is what Spokesperson Bruce spoke to just on Tuesday: that discussions of the humanitarian situation in Gaza were part of this, and our effort was to try to get those humanitarian corridors in there. That has been a clear effort by this administration, as Spokesperson Bruce described.

And again, to reiterate, we are seeing aid being delivered, despite the actions of Hamas here, and those 90 million meals are to be applauded in terms of that effort. Of course, it will never be enough until we see an end to this conflict. But the entity that is standing in the way of ending this conflict is Hamas. They can release the hostages, lay down their arms. As we have said repeatedly, it is Hamas that is preventing an end to this conflict.

QUESTION: Follow-up on —

MR PIGOTT: Yes.

QUESTION: Can I follow up on Gaza?

QUESTION: Tommy, a few Middle East questions for you. Number one, with the Special Envoy Witkoff statement, he said there’s a lack of coordination; Hamas is not coordinated. Can you expand on that? Is it trouble reaching the appropriate leaders? Is it an unclear chain of command? I mean, where is the lack of coordination coming in?

MR PIGOTT: I’m not going to expand on his statement at this time.

So, yes, sir, go ahead.

QUESTION: Second question. Can you give us an update on Tom Barrack’s dealings today, reportedly meeting with Syrian and Israeli officials? Any status update?

MR PIGOTT: I have nothing specific to preview for you. But what I can say is he’s, of course, been in communication, as has the Secretary, with all sides for many days now, and those efforts continue.

QUESTION: Last question for you. Hopefully I’ll drag an answer out of you on this one. I asked in Tuesday’s briefing about why Secretary Rubio is not pushing harder for the extradition of Ahlam al-Tamimi from Jordan. I was given a written answer by the State Department on that yesterday, after you guys took it back. It basically said we continue to impress upon the Government of Jordan to bring her to justice.

President Trump said on day one – his executive order – American citizens come first in American foreign policy, America and American citizens. Secretary Rubio put out his three questions. Every dollar spent, every program has to answer in the affirmative one of three questions: Does it make America safer? Does it make America stronger? Does it make America more prosperous? I’m sure you have these memorized by heart. A billion and a half dollars of foreign aid to Jordan – how is it conceivable that Tamimi is still there and any of that falls under these dictates of what American foreign policy is supposed to be, with three dead Americans at Tamimi’s hands?

MR PIGOTT: On your first point, I mean, to reiterate what we’ve provided to you, the United States has continually emphasized to the Government of Georgia the importance of holding Ahlam al-Tamimi, the convicted terrorist released by Israel in a 2011 prisoner swap, accountable in a U.S. court for her admitted role in a 2001 bombing in Jerusalem that killed 15 people, including three Americans. The United States continues to impress upon the Government of Georgia – Jordan that Tamimi is a brutal murderer who should be brought to justice.

QUESTION: It’s not working.

MR PIGOTT: Well – and on the point in terms of our foreign policy, the President has made clear, the Secretary has made clear through their actions, that America is coming first. We’ve seen that with the Americans that have been brought home. We see that with the pursuit of peace around the region. We see that with a policy that is about strengthening our industrial base and making sure that we are advancing those interests wherever possible. We are continually emphasizing to the Government of Jordan the importance of this issue.

In terms of the three that you mentioned – safer, stronger, more prosperous – those are not slogans here. They are actions. Those are north stars that we fulfill every single day to the best of our ability, making sure we’re advancing the interests of the American people in absolutely every single way that we can.

QUESTION: Israel?

MR PIGOTT: Yes.

QUESTION: Hi. Thank you. I just want to follow up on Gaza. Sorry. Did you want to go?

QUESTION: Would that be okay?

QUESTION: Yeah, sure.

QUESTION: Thank you so much.

MR PIGOTT: Sorry. I signaled to you as next there, so I wanted to follow up, but I’ll – after – and then you.

QUESTION: Thank you so much. Abigail Hauslohner, Financial Times. So I know – to go back to Gaza, I know you all have said repeatedly that the situation and starvation that we’re seeing is because Hamas is blocking progress, or you’ve said because the UN organizations aren’t willing to work within the framework of GHF and that Israel has set for aid distribution. We all acknowledge, obviously, that Israel controls Gaza’s borders completely. It is limiting food to the population because Hamas has not agreed to its terms. I know this question has been asked in many different ways; I’m going to try this way: To be clear, is the U.S. Government okay with Israel allowing children and adult civilians to starve so long as Hamas and the UN refuse to play by Israel’s rules for aid distribution?

MR PIGOTT: I reject the premise of that question, in terms – how that was set up. This humanitarian —

QUESTION: Is it okay —

MR PIGOTT: This humanitarian catastrophe lies at the feet of Hamas, who could end this conflict today by releasing the hostages and laying down their arms.

QUESTION: That suggests that short of Hamas doing that —

QUESTION: Children are – children are dying.

MR PIGOTT: Excuse me.

QUESTION: These kids are dying; doctors don’t have medicine. They don’t have fuel.

MR PIGOTT: This is something that we have dedicated – the President and the Secretary have been dedicated to getting as much aid as we can into Gaza in a way where it’s not being looted by Hamas. It is something that we —

QUESTION: Does it —

MR PIGOTT: Excuse me, if I —

QUESTION: Short of a change by Hamas, the U.S. Government will stand by?

MR PIGOTT: I am going answer this question. I am going to answer this question.

We have been dedicated to getting those 90 million meals into Gaza in a way where it has not been looted by Hamas. We have been dedicated to getting aid into Gaza. It is something that the Secretary and the President have talked about, worked for. These discussions of getting more aid into Gaza have been part of that ceasefire we are hoping for. But again, the blame of this lies at the feet of Hamas, and that is not – that is the fact of the matter.

QUESTION: Short of Hamas doing something, changing its behavior, the U.S. Government will allow the situation to proceed as-is?

MR PIGOTT: The U.S. Government is supporting an effort to get 90 million meals into Gaza. The U.S. Government is supporting an effort to get as much aid as possible to the people that need it without it being looted by Hamas. That is the actions of the U.S. Government in terms of supporting that effort, and we call on others to support that effort to get as much aid as we possibly can. Of course, it will never be enough. It is something we are continually working for, to get more and more aid in what ways we can, without being looted by Hamas, every single day.

QUESTION: Last question.

QUESTION: A follow-up?

QUESTION: Has President Trump seen images of the children or other civilians starving – recently, this week? Has he been shown —

MR PIGOTT: What I can speak to is President Trump’s comments before that he has said publicly about wanting to get aid into Gaza.

Yes.

QUESTION: Thank you. The criticism against the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation is basically it’s controlled by Israel. It’s designed by Israel, it’s controlled by Israel, and therefore it’s weaponizing the food against the Palestinians; where before – before the creation of the GHF, it was 400 points where people can access the food. Yesterday the Jordanians managed to get 110 aid trucks, including baby formula and including flour. They work with WFP and they work with the World Central Kitchen. So there is an alternative to the GHF. Why can’t the U.S. allow other countries to use this kind of method, especially in northern Gaza? Because the four points where the GF – GHF is concentrated is in the south. So people from the north cannot come to the south. So why can you encourage these methods?

MR PIGOTT: Well, I flat-out reject your characterization of Israel weaponizing aid. The only entity that has been weaponizing aid has been Hamas, through the looting of aid, the (inaudible) of its population.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) both? Can you say both?

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR PIGOTT: The – what we have seen is an effort from the United States Government, like I said, to get 90 million meals into Gaza during a war zone. We saw efforts —

QUESTION: But that’s not enough.

MR PIGOTT: We saw efforts to get to a ceasefire that —

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR PIGOTT: We saw efforts to get to a ceasefire that Hamas has decided not to act in good faith to achieve. That is the reality here. And we’re continuing to try to get aid into a war zone that exists only because of Hamas. The war zone exists only because of Hamas, who could end the conflict tomorrow – who is weaponizing aid against the Gaza population. The first victims, as we said, are the Gaza population.

QUESTION: Can I follow —

QUESTION: Okay, I have one more question.

MR PIGOTT: One more.

QUESTION: I want to speak —

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

QUESTION: I want to ask a question on behalf of journalists in Gaza. You and other spokespeople behind this podium, they always talk about the freedom of expression, the value of our work. Our correspondents, including my own of Al Araby and my colleagues of AFP and every other journalist in Gaza, are unable to do their job because they are starving. They don’t have food. How can you allow this to happen? And you tell us and tell everybody else that the work of journalists is vital, especially in a war zone, and yet you’re now saying that it’s Hamas who is controlling the food and therefore we can’t do anything about these people. So what can —

MR PIGOTT: What I’m saying is Hamas is —

QUESTION: What can you – how can you help them? How can you help journalists in a war zone?

MR PIGOTT: So what I’m saying first on that front, in terms of the food, is that Hamas, through looting the food, has led to weaponization. They are weaponizing aid when they are able to. We have a system in place attempting to get as much aid into Gaza as possible in a way where it is not being looted by Hamas. That is the reality that we’re seeing. That is the reality that we’re pushing for – trying to get as much aid in there as we possibly can.

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

QUESTION: Just quickly on Gaza. I – does the State Department have an official assessment of what the humanitarian or the food situation is? Is it famine? Is it mass starvation that we’re seeing? Is there like – do you have an assessment?

MR PIGOTT: Well, I can say that we are acutely aware of the humanitarian situation on the ground. In terms of a specific assessment, I have nothing to preview on that front. But we are acutely aware of the humanitarian —

QUESTION: Is it something you’re looking into?

MR PIGOTT: Well, we are very much aware of the humanitarian disaster that is there. We are very much aware of it. That, again, goes back to the commitment of why we’re trying to get aid into Gaza.

QUESTION: And quickly, because I have something on Syria, but just you keep referencing the 90 million meals. That’s since May 27th for 2.1 million people. I think assessments suggest if – that number needs to be closer to 350 million meals in order to get these people the food they need. So, that’s a big delta, obviously. What can – what can be done short of assigning complete blame to Hamas? What can be done to improve GHF’s ability to get food?

MR PIGOTT: Well, from the beginning, when this started, we did see a ramp-up in terms of the food that they’ve been able to deliver. We also saw efforts from this administration – support for this Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. And the hope is, is that we’ll have other entities supporting this mechanism as well, so that we can deliver as much food as possible. It will never be enough. We are working every day to get as close as possible, but it’ll never be enough because of the situation on the ground. That is not an excuse but that is the reality we are dealing with, and we are working every single day to get as much food to support those efforts as we possibly can because of our recognition of the disaster on the ground, because of the humanitarian catastrophe – every single day working towards that.

QUESTION: And just on Syria really quickly. The – do you think after the recent violence that the administration should perhaps rethink its willingness to lift all sanctions —

MR PIGOTT: Look, the – look, President Trump announced sanctions relief for Syria on May 13th to give all Syrians a chance at a peaceful and prosperous country. Syria is at a critical juncture, and we are looking to the Syrian Government to lead on next steps.

QUESTION: Syria? Follow up. Follow up?

MR PIGOTT: Yes.

QUESTION: Thank you. Just sticking on Gaza Humanitarian Foundation quickly, are you able to say whether you know whether the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation distributes food that is high-nutrient, high-protein – the food that is needed for children, in particular, that have now reached starvation point? Can you confirm whether the U.S. Government knows whether that type of food is being distributed by this organization that you have said a few weeks ago the U.S. Government is now going to support?

MR PIGOTT: Well, I know that we have details in terms of what food they’re providing. Let me take that back to get you the exact details on that.

QUESTION: Thank you. And just – and just one other. And I just want to check, because you again – you’re reiterating 90 million meals. Is the U.S. Government aware of any mechanism that has been used by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation to make sure any of those meals are getting to the most – those that are now at the starvation point to make sure that it is not – that it’s actually finding its way to the hospitals, to the most critical children that need it? Do you have any oversight on that? Does the organization have any control over that? Because it sounds like they only have control over their distribution sites, and once the food leaves that’s it. There’s no – there’s no way of telling where that goes.

MR PIGOTT: Well, in terms of the details, in terms of after it leaves distribution sites, I’ll take that back and see if we can get more details on that.

QUESTION: Please, sir, (inaudible).

MR PIGOTT: Thank you. Yes.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR PIGOTT: Yeah.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

QUESTION: Just to switch topics to Ukraine, do you have any reaction to the talks in Istanbul? And it doesn’t seem like there was any – much progress. And separately, do you have – have the Russians reached out to you or offered any response to President Trump’s 50-day ultimatum?

MR PIGOTT: Well, nothing to preview in terms of that second question. On your first, we are aware that a third round of direct talks took place between the two parties. We support continued calls for a full, unconditional ceasefire – Ukraine’s continued calls for a full, unconditional ceasefire – including the complete halt of all strikes on civilian and critical infrastructure.

QUESTION: Follow-up?

MR PIGOTT: And we welcome the news that Russia and Ukraine agreed on a further exchange of prisoners, particularly the severely ill and wounded.

QUESTION: So do you see this as a – as progress, as – these talks?

MR PIGOTT: Well, what I can say is we continue to encourage direct talks between Russia and Ukraine in pursuit of a comprehensive ceasefire and, eventually, a negotiated peace settlement.

QUESTION: Tommy, may I?

QUESTION: Follow-up?

MR PIGOTT: Yes.

QUESTION: Just to follow up on that, the fact that there was no ceasefire on the table also was overshadowed by Russian attacks. Was it a missed opportunity, in your opinion?

MR PIGOTT: Well, look, the President has been clear many times about how he views certain actions by Russia, especially over recent weeks. He has been very clear on that, very transparent on that. He’s also been clear that we want to see the parties continue those direct talks to reach that ceasefire, that comprehensive ceasefire, and eventually that negotiated peace settlement. Beyond that, I have nothing further to add.

QUESTION: Thanks, Tommy. Also —

QUESTION: On Syria?

QUESTION: I also want to get your reaction to the latest reports about China supplying Russia with drone engines under different names. What kind of reaction does it invite from you guys?

MR PIGOTT: Well, let me take your question back and see if we can get more details there. But in the meantime, I’d refer you to some – some other comments from this podium.

QUESTION: Okay, if I may squeeze in one more topic, I asked you a couple of days ago about Azerbaijan and Armenia. The President said that he achieved some magic. Could you please unpack it for us?

MR PIGOTT: Well, at this point I have nothing to preview. We’ll see if we’re able – when we have something to announce, we’ll announce it. Thank you. That’s all for today. Thank you very much.

(The briefing was concluded at 2:38 p.m.)

# # #

1. Government of Jordan ↑