Department Press Briefing – October 3, 2024 – United States Department of State

The agreement will secure the future of our joint U.S./UK military facility on Diego Garcia, which plays a vital role in U.S. efforts to establish regional and global security, respond to crises, and counter some of the most challenging security threats of our time. The treaty between Mauritius and the UK also addresses wrongs of the past and demonstrates the commitment of both parties to support the welfare of Chagosians. Mauritius will now be free to implement a resettlement program on the islands of the Chagos Archipelago, other than Diego Garcia, and the UK will capitalize a new trust fund as well as separately provide other support for the benefit of Chagosians.

The agreement also will open up expanded cooperation between the two commonwealth partners who will partner on infrastructure and economic development; environmental protection; maritime security; combatting illegal fishing, irregular migration, and drug and people trafficking within the Chagos Archipelago – with the shared objective of securing and protecting one of the world’s most important marine environments. By settling all outstanding issues between Mauritius and the United Kingdom, today’s agreement reflects the power of diplomacy to solve longstanding challenges and further invigorates our shared commitment to a free and open Indo-Pacific region.

And I would just note that Secretary Blinken discussed this a number of times in recent weeks with officials from both Mauritius and the United Kingdom, including on our trip to the United Kingdom three weeks ago, including in conversations with Foreign Secretary Lammy last week in New York, and another conversation this week, as well as a conversation with the prime minister of Mauritius last week while – a phone conversation while the Secretary was in New York at the UN General Assembly. So especially welcomes this agreement.

QUESTION: Sorry, with U.S. airlines?

MR MILLER: For – I’m sorry, no, with airlines. Sorry, we are working with airlines to block seats for U.S. citizens. Excuse me.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR MILLER: We are also working to increase the commercial capacity by organizing additional flights. In the past week we have made over 1,400 seats available on flights out of Lebanon, and many seats do remain available. In addition, as I announced yesterday, we are organizing additional flights to allow more U.S. citizens and their eligible family members to depart Lebanon now. A second flight departed Beirut this morning with 134 passengers on it, bringing the total number of American citizens and their immediate family members who have departed on these flights to 250. And while we don’t know the total number of U.S. citizens who have left via the seats we have made available on commercial flights, we do know that a high percentage of those seats have been filled.

As I’ve said – or as I said at the top – we do recognize that a number of American citizens do not wish to leave. They have family members in Lebanon and many of them are dual citizens, have lived there for a number of years. So we are also offering loans to U.S. citizens who may wish to stay in Lebanon but want to, instead, relocate to a safer destination inside Lebanon. Americans in Lebanon should visit the embassy website at – or travel.state.gov to fill out our intake form so we can ensure that they are aware of all of the options available to them. And we urge Americans to take advantage of these options now while it is still safe to do so.

With that, Matt.

QUESTION: Yes. Well, I have a question on Diego Garcia, but I’ll let that wait until the end because I want to start with Lebanon.

MR MILLER: Sure.

QUESTION: So, first of all, when you say that 250 total have – Americans have – or I just want to make sure, those are all American citizens and not – and their —

MR MILLER: And immediate family members. And immediate family members.

QUESTION: Who may or may not be Americans. Is that right?

MR MILLER: Yes, correct. May or may not be American citizens.

QUESTION: So —

MR MILLER: It’s 250. Of that 250, some of them are American citizens; some of their immediate family members who are also eligible for departure.

QUESTION: Okay. And there is no distinction between – they can – even if they are not a citizen, if they’re a parent or a child —

MR MILLER: If they’re an eligible immediate family member they can – they can depart on those flights.

QUESTION: — they can get on – and these are the flights that you guys have organized —

MR MILLER: Correct.

QUESTION: — that are not on Middle East Airlines?

MR MILLER: Correct.

QUESTION: Okay. So you’re probably aware that later this afternoon there’s going to be a news conference in Michigan with – an Arab American group is organizing it. They say, at least, that they’re going to announce a class action lawsuit against the U.S. Government, but in particular the State Department, for not – for not doing enough.

Now, the suit hasn’t been filed and – yet, at least that I know of, and even after it’s filed I know that you are just going to defer to the Justice Department. But in terms of the complaint, the broader complaint that appears to be being raised, do you think that you’ve done enough to help?

MR MILLER: So you’re right. First of all, let me say that I wouldn’t comment on a lawsuit, but I’m happy to talk about the efforts that we have provided to help American citizens get out of the country. First, I do want to note that we have been advising American citizens to leave for months now. Lebanon has been a Level 4 travel country for months. We have been telling Americans that the security situation was unstable and that they should leave via commercial options while it is safe to do so. We know that American – a number of American citizens did leave over the past few months. But of course, there are thousands and thousands who didn’t leave and decided to stay, and some for very good reasons. Some, we know, have family members, and as I said, aren’t going to want to depart Lebanon under any circumstances. But we were – we have been advising people to leave via commercial options while they still could.

Over the past week, as the security situation got more tense and as a number of commercial airlines that were flying out of Beirut as recently as the last 10 days or so started to cancel their flights, we then started identifying these other options to get American citizens out. The first thing we did, as I said, was to make seats available on Middle East Airlines, which is the only remaining commercial carrier flying out of Lebanon. And a number of American citizens have left via those flights.

QUESTION: Do you have – do you know —

MR MILLER: I don’t have a number. We – as I said, there were – we don’t ever have perfect fidelity on the Americans that actually show up for those flights, because it’s via a commercial carrier. But we’ve been told by the carrier that a high percentage of the seats that they’ve set aside are being filled. But we just don’t have an exact number. But it is – it is in the hundreds.

In addition, to supplement the seats available on Middle East airways, we started yesterday organizing our own flights. And we had a flight with 300 seats available yesterday, and around 120 people went out on it. We had another flight with 300 seats available today, and a little over 130 people went out on it. We’re going to continue to organize those flights as long as the security situation is challenging, as long as there aren’t sufficient commercial options available, and as long as there’s demand.

So what we have tried to do is be responsive to the situation as it changes. So when there were ample commercial flights available, we were urging American citizens to take them. When the number of commercial flights shrunk, we first worked with the remaining carrier to make seats available, and when we found that there were still more American citizens that wanted to leave, we organized our own flights. And we’ll continue to do everything that we can to help American citizens who want to leave get out safely.

QUESTION: Okay. One of the other complaints that’s been raised is that the cost of a seat on one of these planes – particularly on Middle East Airlines – is just exorbitant. People can’t afford it. So one, if you are an American citizen who wants to leave Lebanon on one of these MEA flights and can’t afford it, can you go to the embassy and get an emergency loan to pay for that seat and for the seats of your immediate eligible family members?

MR MILLER: So I don’t know if you can get a loan from the embassy for a seat on the Middle East airways flight. I can – I’m happy to check on that. But what I – and any individuals who have that question, if they register with our website, either the one I outlined before, or the embassy people will be able to answer that question directly for them, look at their exact circumstances.

I will say yes, the – we know that the price of the flights on Middle East airways have been extremely high. It’s what you would expect in a situation where they’re the only carrier that remains flying, and we know that’s very difficult for some people. But I will tell you that’s one of the reasons why we organized our own flights, because we do recognize that a number of people just can’t afford to pay those flights. And I’ll say —

QUESTION: Okay.

MR MILLER: — and while the cost varies on the flights that we have organized, the most that any American will pay for a seat on those flights is $283. And if they can’t afford $283, if they don’t have $283, we will provide them a loan from the U.S. Government for the cost of that ticket on board one of the flights that we have organized. So we would urge any American citizen who wants to leave to take the advice that we are offering to register with our website, and we will reach out to them about flights that are available and work with them to try to get them on a flight they can afford.

QUESTION: And those flights that you’ve organized are to where, do you know?

MR MILLER: The two flights that have left so far are to Türkiye. The flight that left yesterday, the flight that left earlier today are to Türkiye. If we have additional —

QUESTION: Türkiye meaning Istanbul.

MR MILLER: Istanbul, and people can always obviously move onward from there. If we make flights available to additional destinations, I will be – I will update you after those flights have taken place.

QUESTION: Okay. Last one, extremely briefly, just on – you said at the very top you’ve made 1,400 or arranged for 1,400 seats available. Those are on MEA, right?

MR MILLER: Correct.

QUESTION: The 14 and then – on top, okay. Thank you.

MR MILLER: Yeah. Hi.

MR MILLER: No, it certainly hasn’t changed. I mean, if you look at the – our assessment was, I will say, a little more complex than that. It was not just that they would have a tough time sustaining a major military operation in Gaza and a major military operation in the north. It’s also that additional – additional escalation in the north was potentially destabilizing on the West Bank, and they would ultimately find themselves in a number of different confrontations. So that continues to be our assessment, that the longer conflict goes on, the risk you have of additional conflicts breaking out. And that is – puts the Israeli security services in an extremely stretched situation.

QUESTION: Without betraying a confidence of diplomatic conversations, does the U.S. have a clear picture of Israel’s goals in the north, in terms of how long they might stretch in time or geography?

MR MILLER: We have discussed those goals with them, but obviously it’s, I think, appropriate for them to speak to them publicly, not us.

QUESTION: Okay. And vis-à-vis Iran, similarly, without getting into what they might be targeting or what kinds of operations may be considered, does the U.S. have clarity on what Israel is considering doing, especially because steps that they’ve taken in the past have come with little advanced notice and nonetheless require the U.S. to engage on the deterrence or defensive front thereafter?

MR MILLER: We – sorry. We are having ongoing conversations with them about the options that they are considering, but I’m going to keep everything about those conversations private.

QUESTION: But you have clarity on their planning?

MR MILLER: We have ongoing conversations with them. I just don’t think it’s appropriate for me to get into any level of detail, even about the types of things they’re considering or the types of consultations that we are having.

QUESTION: Have they taken nuclear sites off the table following the President’s —

MR MILLER: I’m just not going to go beyond what I’ve said.

QUESTION: Okay. Does the U.S. believe that Israel striking nuclear sites would lead to a broader war?

MR MILLER: So the President spoke to this yesterday, made clear that we do not believe they should strike nuclear sites. I don’t want to deal with a hypothetical question beyond that.

QUESTION: I mean, it’s not much – it’s not really a hypothetical. It’s like does it —

MR MILLER: It’s an event that has not happened, so I don’t want to —

QUESTION: Like is a consequence of that —

MR MILLER: I just – it is an event that has not happened. I don’t want to talk about potential outcomes.

QUESTION: Okay. But if there is a chance for Israel to lesson Iran’s breakout time from a matter weeks to a matter of months or years, does that not make them a less potent foe and lesson the likelihood of a regional war? It’s just —

MR MILLER: Again, we are well into the realm of hypotheticals and playing out scenarios that have not occurred. I don’t think it’s appropriate for me to get into that level of speculation from this podium.

QUESTION: Okay. And last one. Is there today any sort of messaging from the U.S. that it will condition future arms deliveries to Israel on a circumscribed incursion into the north and a minimizing of civilian casualties there?

MR MILLER: So we have made clear from the start that we are committed to the defense of Israel and that we will remain committed to the defense of Israel. Our security partnership with them dates back decades, and we expect it to continue well into the future. We are also having conversations with them about the shape of that campaign, the scope of that campaign, what their targets are going to be, but I don’t want to get into it beyond that.

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: Just a follow-up —

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: — on how Israel could potentially respond to the attack that we saw on Tuesday. The President today did leave the door open to Iran going – sorry, excuse me – Israel going after Iran’s oil reserves. Is it the assessment of Biden administration officials that going after those oil reserves would keep this conflict at the simmer that it’s at right now?

MR MILLER: So that’s a little bit different question than the Olivia – than the one Olivia asked me, but only because it’s about a different target. It still asks me to speculate about the outcome of an event that has not yet happened, and I’m just going to decline to do that.

QUESTION: But certainly there must be a reason that the President feels that one action would be okay and another action would not be. So can you just help us understand the thinking of that?

MR MILLER: So I’m not going – it would require me to get into a number of conversations that we have been having over the past 48 hours with our Israeli counterparts and that we continue to have, and I’m not going to do that from here.

MR MILLER: So I can’t speak to whether he ever agreed to it and told somebody inside Lebanon. Obviously that could be something that happened that we wouldn’t be aware of. I can tell you that if that’s true, it was never communicated to us in any way, shape, or form.

QUESTION: And you guys met with – Secretary Blinken met with Lebanese officials.

MR MILLER: He did.

QUESTION: In New York.

MR MILLER: We were having a number of —

QUESTION: And specifically discussed this 21-day ceasefire.

MR MILLER: We were having a number of conversations with Lebanese officials, as well as with others in the region. And I can tell you at no time was it ever communicated to us that Hizballah had accepted a ceasefire.

QUESTION: But they were giving you confidence that they might, but it wasn’t necessarily from Nasrallah?

MR MILLER: So we were having a number of diplomatic engagements to talk about the proposals that we were going to put forward.

QUESTION: Right.

MR MILLER: I think all the parties were well aware of the proposals that we were going to put forward, but at no time in those conversations did we get a message that Hizballah was – Hizballah had agreed or was going to agree to it.

QUESTION: Or Nasrallah himself.

MR MILLER: Yeah, or Nasrallah – well, I mean that – one and the same.

QUESTION: Can I —

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: I wanted to come back to the – to sort of the situation on the ground in Lebanon. So obviously these American citizens seeking the flights out – they’re being caused to flee by these Israeli actions. You’ve talked about what the Israelis have said to the U.S. about limited incursions into southern Lebanon, but we’ve sort of seen there’s a ground – there is a ground operation, and there’s also an aerial operation with a lot of bombing going on in Beirut. How do you kind of characterize what Israel is doing? Is this a full-scale war against Lebanon as a state broader though? It seems to be broader than just these limited incursions and targeted bombings to take out Hizballah leaders.

MR MILLER: So they continue to target Hizballah leaders and target Hizballah officials and Hizballah militants. And the – all of their strikes – at least as far as we are aware – and if there are strikes targeting other officials inside Lebanon, we’d certainly welcome that information. But nothing that we have seen as of yet leads us to include that they are doing anything other than targeting a terrorist organization, Hizballah, that had launched strikes and was continuing to launch strikes against Israel, including in the last few days.

QUESTION: So everything that the Israeli – all the elements of the Israeli operation, within what you just said, is – those are sort of – those have the greenlight from the U.S., like we’re okay with this? This doesn’t go beyond – redlines is not a word you like to use.

MR MILLER: So that’s – it’s not to speak to any one individual strike, because it is not like we are sitting and approving individual strikes. But we do approve of the Israeli Government defending itself and defending its people from a terrorist organization that has continued to – that began this conflict with them on October 8th, forced tens of thousands of people to flee their homes, also has been a destabilizing force in Lebanon. We do support them taking military action to bring those terrorists to justice.

QUESTION: But the position last week when you were calling for a three-week ceasefire, is that – there’s no longer a call for a ceasefire?

MR MILLER: We do ultimately want to see a ceasefire and a diplomatic resolution, but we do think it’s appropriate that Israel, at this point, is bringing terrorists to justice and trying to push – trying – and launching these limited incursions, what at least at this point are limited incursions, trying to push Hizballah back from the border.

QUESTION: But this is having the impact of sending civilians, who have no connection to Hizballah, Americans, to leave. So don’t you have a little more concern that this is the escalatory action that you were warning against?

MR MILLER: We are, of course, absolutely concerned about the humanitarian effects of this conflict. We are concerned about the effects on American citizens, thousands of whom live in Lebanon. We are concerned about the effects on innocent Lebanese civilians who live in Lebanon and are now caught in the middle of a conflict that they had nothing to do with. It’s why we are ultimately working for a diplomatic resolution, something that we had been working to for some time. It’s why we’re continuing to support humanitarian assistance for the Lebanese people. It’s why we are organizing the ways to depart Lebanon that I spoke to at the beginning of this briefing.

But ultimately, you do have a security situation that was untenable for Israel. And it – by the way, it’s a security situation that was untenable for Lebanese civilians in southern Lebanon, who had been forced to flee their homes, too. So Israel at this point is – has launched what they have described – and we’re going to watch and see, but what they have described – as limited incursions across the border to try and push Hizballah back so 1701 can ultimately be implemented. We’re going to see how that unfolds over the coming days.

Ultimately our goal is a diplomatic resolution. And where we want to see this go is UN Security Council 1701, which was adopted some years ago and has never been fully implemented, implemented, so you have security on both sides of the border and the ability for Lebanese and Israeli civilians to return to their homes.

QUESTION: Right. And – but you talk about a diplomatic solution, but what’s going on at the moment is a war, right? How long can it – how long is Israel sort of – does Israel need to continue those operations? Or how long is it okay for them to keep this kind of level of attacks up?

MR MILLER: So a conflict is, by its nature, dynamic.

QUESTION: Right.

MR MILLER: And I think it’s impossible to know and it’s impossible to predict what the outcome of the fighting that’s going on in southern Lebanon is going to be over the next few days. I can tell you that all of us here are very cognizant of the long history of Israel launching what at the time were described as limited operations —

QUESTION: Yeah.

MR MILLER: — across the Lebanese border that have turned into something much different, that have turned into full-scale wars, and then at times occupation.

QUESTION: Right.

MR MILLER: And we are going to continue to – we’re going to watch what happens over the next few days. And ultimately, our position has not changed, which we want to see a diplomatic resolution, but we do want to see Hizballah’s capabilities degraded.

QUESTION: Do they have an endgame? Do the Israelis have an endgame, in your view?

MR MILLER: You’ll – the Israelis will have to speak to that question, not me.

QUESTION: When you say the next few days though, Matt —

MR MILLER: Go ahead.

QUESTION: — do you indicate that the U.S. believes that these incursions into southern Lebanon will be finished in the next few days? Or are you saying —

MR MILLER: No, I’m not speaking – I’m not speaking to that at all. My next briefing is on Monday. I’m happy to come back and take the question on the Monday. But look, we’re watching this – we’re watching this – it goes to the point I was making in answer to Simon’s question, which is they have described these as limited incursions across the border with very targeted objectives, which is to clear out Hizballah infrastructure. But we – and so that’s how they’ve described it; that’s what we’re watching happening right now. But we’re also very aware of the long history of limited operations turning into something else. I’m not going to prejudge what’s going to happen. I don’t know what’s going to happen. Daresay the Israelis probably don’t know what’s going to happen at this point. We’re going to take – we’re going to – Said.

QUESTION: Sorry.

MR MILLER: Hold on. Relax. We’re going to watch as this unfolds, and we’ll make our assessments as – in real time, as they occur.

QUESTION: And the U.S. doesn’t know how long this’ll take, the limited incursions?

MR MILLER: I don’t think if you asked Israel they could tell you how long. It is the nature of a conflict that it is dynamic, right? The —

QUESTION: But in the case —

MR MILLER: No, hold on. Listen to me. The – it is – unpredictable things happen in conflicts. The enemy responds in a way oftentimes that you don’t expect. This isn’t to prejudge any possible outcome. It’s just to say it’s a fluid and dynamic situation, and I think all of us ought to be cautious in pretending to say that we know exactly how it’s going to roll out.

QUESTION: So —

QUESTION: But in the case of Gaza, which was not that long ago, Matt, you were pressing the Israelis to articulate a plan or a vision for governance, for what comes next. Are you doing that the same in the north or not?

MR MILLER: We are having very detailed conversations with them about that. I would never read my unwillingness to talk about those conversations publicly to mean that we are not having them privately.

QUESTION: Okay. Well —

QUESTION: It’s just before you said it may be – the Israelis don’t know what’s going to happen. Is it okay for a country with U.S. —

MR MILLER: No.

QUESTION: — using U.S. weapons to go into a conflict with no way out?

MR MILLER: So you are completely misinterpreting what I’m saying. When I say that they cannot know what’s going to happen, the point is that oftentimes when you begin a conflict you do not know how it’s going to go.

QUESTION: Right. You should at least have —

MR MILLER: It’s not to say they don’t have a plan. It’s not to say that they don’t have objectives. It’s to say that conflicts are unpredictable, and the enemy does things that you don’t predict. It is impossible to predict with any – with a complete degree of uncertainty – or a complete degree of certainty how it will unfold. That’s what I meant.

QUESTION: Okay.

QUESTION: So let me – a brief follow-up.

MR MILLER: Yeah, Hiba, go ahead. Go – Hiba, go ahead. Guys. I know, but, like, all of you have your hands up. I’m going to call on you one at a time. Go ahead, Hiba.

QUESTION: Yes, Matt. So till now, you still see it as a limited operation in the south?

MR MILLER: That’s what they’re conducting at this time. And again, as I said, that’s not to make any predictions about what will happen, but that’s what we assess is happening as it stands.

QUESTION: Okay. I want to follow up to your response to Simon on the targeting. If this targeting is systematic, the – the manner in which it’s conducted suggests that there is no safe place. Because how do you expect the people to know who’s living around them, what’s happening in these buildings? Can this be justified?

MR MILLER: So obviously attacks, targeted attacks on civilians, could not be justified, but Israel does have the right to go after terrorists. I mean, that’s – that is just a fact under international humanitarian law, that every country has a right to defend itself against terrorists, but their strikes have to take into account civilian harm, and they need to take into account where civilians are. They need to take actions to mitigate civilian harm. They’re required to do that under international humanitarian law, in Lebanon as they are anywhere else.

QUESTION: There’s 1 million – one half – 1 million and a half person in the streets now. They don’t have a place to go. And the way it’s conducted now, you may have more people in the streets. Because how do you expect the people to know who’s living in this building and what’s happening? It’s not only some places, some – I don’t know. It’s – how do you expect that people can predict who is living beside them?

MR MILLER: So the – there are horrific, horrific consequences of this conflict. It’s why we ultimately want to get to a diplomatic resolution. It is – this is a security situation that has plagued Lebanon for years. And you obviously know the long history well, which is Hizballah has been a destabilizing force that has attacked not just Israel but has attacked Lebanese civilians, and has put the entire region in this untenable situation where, after October 7th, they began launching attacks on Israel that forced tens of thousands of Israeli civilians to move, and then Israel responded and they had this tit-for-tat escalation back and forth that forced tens of thousands of Lebanese to move.

So we are absolutely cognizant of the people who have been forced to move over the past week or so. We’re also cognizant of the tens of thousands of people on the – on both sides of the border who have had to move over the past year. And so it’s why ultimately we want to see a resolution of this conflict where Hizballah doesn’t have the ability to keep sending the region into this spiraling, deteriorating security situation.

QUESTION: So you’re confident that they are targeting only Hizballah?

MR MILLER: So that is what they have said. We will make our assessments, as we always do in these types of conflicts, as we look at them, as we look at individual strikes, and we go through the formal procedures that we have to undertake.

QUESTION: Okay. You said that the Secretary is in contact with the Israeli, and you’ve been in contact with the Lebanese officials. According to many Lebanese officials, there has no communication with them since the assassination of the secretary general of Hizballah. You specifically spoke about the role of the state, the army, and other factors. Can we now conclude that you are waiting to see what unfolds on the ground before making any decisions?

MR MILLER: What do you mean any decisions?

QUESTION: I mean, who you are in contact with? Because the —

MR MILLER: We have been in contact with a number of Lebanese officials, not just at the State Department but from across the government. I won’t – I can’t speak to individual conversations here, but that’s not accurate to say that we’ve not been in contact with Lebanese officials. We have been.

QUESTION: In the last few days?

MR MILLER: Yes.

QUESTION: Okay. One final question. One – today Qatar Hizballah, after the – after what – the President response to the question on the possibility on attacking the oil sites in Iran, Qatar Hizballah put out a statement: If the energy war starts, the world will lose around 12 billions barrel of oil. And as Qatar Hizballah said before, either everyone enjoys the oil or everyone is deprived. Does that concern you?

MR MILLER: Again, I’m not going to speak to hypothetical scenarios. We are consulting with Israel about their response, and we’re going to keep those consultations private.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR MILLER: Said.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR MILLER: Thank you for being patient.

QUESTION: Yeah. Just to follow up on what Kylie said about the Lebanese foreign minister saying that Hizballah agreed and so on. But I want to ask you about the proposal itself, because we were all there and we thought that something was coming. There was never a – some sort of a formalized version for the 21 days, correct?

MR MILLER: What do you mean a formalized – what do you mean?

QUESTION: Well, I mean, like planned out and so on that this is a ceasefire that —

MR MILLER: No. We made the proposal public —

QUESTION: Public, right.

MR MILLER: — and neither of the parties had accepted it when we made it public.

QUESTION: But you did not —

MR MILLER: We were surfacing it in consultation with our allies, the allies that joined the statement. Now, both of the parties were aware that we were going to make the proposal, but neither of them had accepted it when we did and neither of them did.

QUESTION: So – all right. And my question is also on what you said. You say that you support Israel’s limited incursion and so on. You support this operation, but – and you are in a way reconciled to the fact that this war could blow way out of proportion, citing what happened in 1982, an incursion that went on to be an 18-year occupation and so on. So which is it? I mean, are you reconciled to this fact or do you want to push for a diplomatic solution right now, I mean, before things get out of hand?

MR MILLER: So we do ultimately want to see a diplomatic resolution, but we also think it’s appropriate that Israel take steps to try and deal with what has been an untenable security situation both for them and for the Lebanese people.

QUESTION: Okay. So let me ask you, do you – now that we are really on the brink of a – maybe a major war, do you think that this administration, the Biden administration, missed an opportunity by not rejoining the JCOP – POA?

MR MILLER: So if you recall, Said, and I assume you were here in 2021 —

QUESTION: Yes, of course, I was here.

MR MILLER: — 2020 – I wasn’t, but I think you were here during the —

QUESTION: I was. I was here. We were all here.

MR MILLER: — during the – and probably heard from Ned a number of times about this situation.

QUESTION: Right.

MR MILLER: We made clear from day one of this administration that we believe diplomacy is the best way to achieve a solution to Iran’s nuclear program. And in 2021 and 2022, there were multiple efforts to return to the JCPOA after the previous administration’s catastrophic decision to withdraw from it. We approached that process in good faith, we worked with our allies and partners on it, and ultimately Iran wasn’t serious about the process, and they demonstrated that by walking away from it in 2022.

QUESTION: Now, on the issue of the war in Gaza, I mean, you always say Israel has a right to defend itself, and that’s fine. A sovereign state can defend itself. But also, Israel uses the euphemism or the pretext – whatever you want to call it – of saying that there are human shields and so on. So conceivably these are not —

MR MILLER: I just missed – the pretext of what?

QUESTION: On the pretext of continuing its attacks, and so on, on populated neighborhoods and many places, saying that there are militants in these areas, and so on. But these not being regular forces – that there will always be militants. So are you suggesting or are you – I don’t know, I mean, is it possible that Israel could really go on with this slaughter for – endlessly, for days, for weeks to come, for months to come, for years to come, and so on? I mean, only yesterday they killed 55 Palestinian civilians, and so on, so this conceivably can go on.

MR MILLER: So we – I answered a similar question from you yesterday. And we obviously – obviously – support Israel’s right to defend itself – as you said in the run-up to your question, as would be the case for any nation facing an ongoing terrorist threat. But also, ultimately, we want to see the establishment of an independent Palestinian state, which I’m going to be perfectly blunt: The absence of a Palestinian state in no way justifies terrorism against the state of Israel and Israeli civilians. It absolutely does not. We’re also aware that the absence of a Palestinian state is one of the major drivers of insecurity and instability in the region, and we continue to believe that the best way for Israel to achieve its long-term security, in addition to all the benefits it would bring to the Palestinian people and all the benefits it would bring to the region, is the establishment of a Palestinian state.

The current Government of Israel has made clear that they have a very different view of that question. We will continue to make clear on behalf of the United States what we believe is in their interests and what we believe is in the broader region’s interests.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR MILLER: Nadia.

QUESTION: Thank you. First, any reason why these flights that evacuating civilians are not made free? Because I’m sure taxpayers’ money —

MR MILLER: Yeah, so there’s a —

QUESTION: — would be happy to evacuate people in —

MR MILLER: There’s a very good reason. We’re prohibited by U.S. law from making them free.

QUESTION: Oh.

MR MILLER: So the – I have heard that complaint that we should make them available for free, and I would encourage any American who believes that to contact their congressman and ask to change the law, because we are prohibited by law from making them free.

Now, that said, the most that anyone will pay is $283. And I understand that’s still a lot —

QUESTION: That’s only halfway. It’s only to Türkiye.

MR MILLER: I understand that that’s – that’s still a lot of money that some people have, but we will make a loan, we will provide a loan to them so they can go out on that – on that – on that flight, and if you want us to provide free flights, we need to change the law. We’re just not allowed to, fundamentally.

QUESTION: All right, hopefully it will change. Yesterday I asked you about the six first responders who were killed. Today the total number is 97 of people who trying to be – to help others, have been killed. So do you believe that Israel is taking every precaution to avoid people like first responders, doctors, people on the front line who are trying to help people who are wounded or evacuated?

MR MILLER: I cannot give you an assessment of the strikes they have conducted over the past few days. I can tell you that that is the type of thing that requires us to take a very detailed look at the facts and the law and the circumstances. I can tell you when – after a considered period of time in the conflict in Gaza, we’ve looked at the number of civilian casualties, including first responders, including aid providers, including humanitarian workers. We did find that it was reasonable to assess that Israel had in certain incidences violated international humanitarian law. But it takes time to look at the collection of incidents to come to an overall judgment of that nature, let alone a specific judgment on any one strike.

QUESTION: Okay. Lebanese health minister said today that Israel accusing Lebanon of hiding rockets in hospital is pure propaganda. Does the U.S. assess that actually there are rockets or no rockets in hospitals in Lebanon —

MR MILLER: I don’t have —

QUESTION: — which we heard in Gaza?

MR MILLER: Sorry. I don’t have any assessment to provide as it relates to the presence of rockets in hospitals.

QUESTION: But will you look into it? Because it is —

MR MILLER: So – so that potentially requires me to offer you an intelligence assessment. Even if I look into it, it doesn’t mean I can come here and speak to it from the podium. I may be able to, may not be able to, but I’m not going to promise that I’m going to be able to offer an assessment from here.

QUESTION: Okay, sure. Because they give us assessment to other things. One follow-on question, so I give others a question – the chance to ask. There was a clip that’s been circulating on the social media that your former colleague Ben Rhodes has retweeted, and that’s of Prime Minister Netanyahu testifying in Congress 22 years ago, saying basically– and I’m sure you saw it or maybe you’ll see it – if we get rid of Saddam Hussein everything, the whole Middle East, will be great. And we know how the Middle East turn out to be.

So do you see – do you see a scenario now where Netanyahu is saying if we just got rid of Hizballah and Hamas, the whole Middle East will be great? Do you see similarities between the two, the sort of —

MR MILLER: So I’m just not going to comment on something that the prime minister said years and years ago. There is an —

QUESTION: But you’re supposed to know information.

MR MILLER: Just let me finish. There is an obvious difference between targeting a terrorist organization and targeting a state. I’ll say that. They do – we do believe they have the right to target a terrorist organization that has been attacking civilians inside Israel.

QUESTION: Can I have a clarification on the flights, just the flights? Because I remember when we worked for the UN we were getting transported by American military planes, the C-130s, C-17s from Amman to Baghdad and so on. I mean —

MR MILLER: Was that —

QUESTION: And free. I mean, it’s just —

MR MILLER: So, Said, I have no idea the circumstances of the flight you’re talking about it. I can’t —

QUESTION: Okay, I’m just saying —

MR MILLER: I can’t possibly speak to that.

QUESTION: Can I jump in just on the question about the health workers being killed in Lebanon? Did you ever get clarity on whether this American who was killed there the other day was a – was a full-on citizen, or an LPR?

MR MILLER: So you’re speaking of Kamel Jawad.

QUESTION: Yeah, I think his family has put – or they put out a statement now.

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: But I’m just wondering what his —

MR MILLER: So we continue to look into it. I can tell you that the information that we had yesterday – we could not verify that he was a U.S. citizen, and we believed he was a legal permanent resident – I see now that the family has described him as a U.S. citizen. That may very well be true. We are looking through our records now to verify whether he was an American citizen, or whether a legal – whether he’s a legal permanent resident.

Either way, he was an American and —

QUESTION: Yeah, yeah. No, no, I get that.

MR MILLER: And his death is an unavoidable tragedy.

QUESTION: But there is a distinction.

MR MILLER: Yeah, yeah.

QUESTION: So that review is still underway?

MR MILLER: We’re – yeah, we’re looking to – I hope to have some information by the end of the day, but we haven’t determined definitively one way or the other. But as I said, either way he’s an American and his death was a horrific tragedy and – I think I said “unavoidable.” His death is a horrific tragedy, and we offer our sincerest condolences to his family.

QUESTION: Can I just press you a bit more on this? The reports of this strike on – in Bachoura in Beirut overnight, which is a very residential area, reportedly Hizballah-linked – the Islamic Health Organization – in which local reports say nine people were killed. I mean, do – have you any assessment on that or any more information?

MR MILLER: I don’t. Obviously, we want to see hospitals and health care facilities protected. I don’t know any of the underlying circumstances related to that strike, so I really can’t speak to it.

QUESTION: I mean, because it feels like the phenomenon we saw in Gaza of health care facilities being targeted may now be happening in Lebanon. And so the bar under international humanitarian law is extremely high, so I wondered if – how closely you’re looking at this and what conversations you’re having with the Israelis about it now.

MR MILLER: So I just can’t speak to the circumstances of the strike because I don’t know. But I will say when it comes to Gaza there are circumstances where not the Israeli Government but the United States assessed and had definitive evidence that Hamas was operating outside of hospitals and had built bunkers underneath hospitals. So we want to see health care sites protected, but at the same time, at least in Gaza, we saw Hamas actually operating outside of a hospital. It’s not to speak to the strike because I don’t have – I don’t have any definitive information about it.

QUESTION: Well, I —

MR MILLER: But just an important point about the instance in Gaza.

QUESTION: Well, I think it’s important – it’s important to ask the accountability question. I mean, Article 9 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. But you talk about protection ceasing if it’s used for hostile intent, but that is “only after due warning has been given, naming, in all appropriate cases, a reasonable time limit, and after such warning has remained unheeded. The fact that sick or wounded members of the armed forces are nursed in these hospitals… shall not be considered to be acts harmful to the enemy.”

So even if it is a Hizballah-linked organization, the medics are there treating potential militants, whatever, that’s still not a high enough bar to attack it. And once it is attacked, there has to be a huge amount of warning given and enough time for people to leave. So I ask the question, because are you getting a sense from the Israelis that they’re doing that? And we’ve seen this one hit overnight.

MR MILLER: So I’m fully aware of the provisions of international humanitarian law. I just don’t have the underlying facts about this – about this strike and why they made this strike, and what they believed they were hitting, and what they actually hit.

QUESTION: Okay. And Chagos Islands – are we going to come back to that?

MR MILLER: Yeah, we’ll come back to it.

QUESTION: Okay, thank you.

QUESTION: Yeah. Thank you, Matt. First —

MR MILLER: I do – I do note the BBC’s interest, so I will definitely – I was going to come back to Matt. But I’ll come —

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

MR MILLER: No, I’ve already noted your interest. We’ll come back – (laughter) – to that as well.

QUESTION: Are you considering —

MR MILLER: The other – the other UK-based – UK-based outlet raises their hand as well.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Are you considering providing humanitarian aid to Lebanon at this time?

MR MILLER: We are providing humanitarian aid. We are the largest humanitarian aid to the Lebanese people, have been for some time. We are working with another – a number of international humanitarian organizations. We want to make sure that there is enough aid to make it to the Lebanese people; and if we need to look at additional investments, we will, of course, do that.

QUESTION: And regarding the Lebanese army, are you considering too providing them with arms and ammunitions to empower them to implement UN Security Council Resolutions 1701 and 1559?

MR MILLER: So we have supported the Lebanese Armed Forces for some time. I don’t have any additional announcements to make today.

QUESTION: And on the presidential elections, are you pressing the Lebanese leaders to elect a new president at this time?

MR MILLER: We have made clear for some time that we think the Lebanese Government needs to overcome the dysfunction in the system – one of the primary instigators of that dysfunction being the Hizballah veto over who the next president would be – and elect a president. That remains true.

QUESTION: Through your contacts with the speaker of the house, did you feel like he’s moving forward in this?

MR MILLER: I wouldn’t want to get into those conversations in detail.

Let me – all right, one more, and let try to go to a few others because we’re – a few other topics before I come back to Chagos and wrap. It’s been going for a while.

QUESTION: Thank you, Matt. I just want to ask you about a comment you made earlier about the ceasefire is still – is still your goal, but you are supporting the incursion, ground incursion, to target terrorist organization positions in the south, as you mention it. But what is needed to be achieved in the ground so you – then the priority will be the ceasefire?

MR MILLER: So I’m not going to offer an assessment today of where the operations that the Government of Israel has launched – where they’re going to go. We support them in these limited incursions to clear out Hizballah infrastructure above and below ground. But ultimately, we want to get to —

QUESTION: But I’m not asking about the Israeli Government. I’m asking about you.

MR MILLER: I – yeah, I know. But it is a question about where it’s going to go. I’m not going to —

QUESTION: Yeah. No, no.

MR MILLER: — I’m not going to publicly —

QUESTION: I’ll rephrase.

MR MILLER: We are – I’ll say, like, we’re very much aware of the risk of, as I said, this beginning to look like previous incursions across the Lebanese border. And we’re having conversations with the Israeli Government about that, but I’m not going to get into it publicly.

MR MILLER: So I’ve rarely – and I’m not going to in this instance – comment on messages that we have received or may have received from the Iranian Government. I would note that the day after you launch 200 ballistic missiles at another state – or two days after you launch ballistic missiles at another state – it’s hardly time to pat yourself on the back and show that you’ve exercised restraint. Iran very much has not exercised restraint. They escalated this conflict by launching a direct state-on-state attack to defend the terrorist organizations that they have sponsored in the region for years.

We have made clear to Iran that we do want a full-out regional conflict. We have made clear to Iran, going back a number of months, that they should not do anything to escalate this conflict. Unfortunately, they did.

QUESTION: My last question is – today the President said that he doesn’t – nothing will happen today, as on Thursday, about the Israeli retaliation. Is that something based on assurances from Israel, or is just a guess?

MR MILLER: I’m not going to speak to that any further.

QUESTION: All right.

QUESTION: Matt, just to follow that quickly?

QUESTION: Follow-up on that?

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: So has the U.S. Government received any messages directly or indirectly from Iran about what they might do next if Israel retaliates?

MR MILLER: We often receive messages from them. I’m not going to comment on the detail – I’m not going to comment on any messages we might have received, let alone what the contents of those would be. But I would say, just as a general practice, oftentimes the messages that we do receive track pretty closely with the things that you say – that you hear them say publicly.

QUESTION: But on this, Matt —

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: — how would you view the Iranian president visit to Qatar a day after they launched 200 missiles to Israel?

MR MILLER: I don’t have any comment. All those countries have had relations for some time.

QUESTION: Matt.

MR MILLER: All right. Let me – yeah, go ahead.

MR MILLER: So you’re right, we did recently help safely evacuate from Gaza a young Yezidi woman so she could be reunited with her family in Iraq. The circumstances of this case – really, really hard to describe. This is a now-young woman who ten years ago, when she was an 11-year-old girl, was kidnapped by ISIS in Iraq, sold, and forced to marry a Hamas fighter in Gaza, moved to Gaza against her will.

The recent death of her captor in Gaza allowed her to escape, and we were contacted by the Iraqi Government, who was made aware of the fact that she escaped, that she was alive, and that she wanted to come home to her family. And the Government of Iraq asked us to do whatever we could to get her out of Gaza and get her home.

So over the past few weeks, we worked with a number of our partners in the region to get her out of Gaza, to get her safely home, obviously with the Government of Israel and with other partners as well, to get her out of Gaza, get her home to her family. And I can say now that she is safely home with her family in Iraq. I would ask that – obviously, this is someone who’s gone through pretty difficult circumstances. We would ask that everyone respect her privacy, of course.

But I would say in a number of times over the past nearly 12 months, we have been able to get people out of Gaza. Obviously our first priority is always the safety and security of American citizens, and when we’re working to get people out, we always work first to get American citizens out. But there are a number of others who, in certain cases – for example, kids with cancer, other people who needed medical treatment who were not citizens of the United States – where we have been able to get involved and get them safely out of Gaza.

QUESTION: Can you explain a little more? You say work with your partners to help in a rescue – can you speak a little more of the specific role the U.S. played, as far as the embassy or —

MR MILLER: I can’t really get into the full details. I can say she had already made it out of captivity herself inside Gaza, after her captor had been killed. Remember, she was married to a Hamas fighter. We found out about the situation from the Government of Iraq, who asked for our help. We then worked with the Government of Israel to get her out of Gaza and get her safely home, working with other countries in the region. But I really can’t go into some of the underlying details.

Yeah. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Just following up on this question, is that the only case that you’re aware of that the Yezidi girls are in Gaza and in that area? Because there are about 2,600 Yezidi that are missing, and I’m sure that the U.S. Government are helping the Iraqi Government to rescue them.

MR MILLER: Yeah. The – so the Secretary has spoken to this on a number of occasions. You’re right, it is somewhere around 2,600 who remain missing and unaccounted for. We obviously don’t know where all of them are. This is the only case that I’m aware of. There may be others who are in Gaza. We only became aware of this case because, as I said, the Government of Iraq brought it to our attention and asked for our help. I’m not aware of any others.

QUESTION: And —

MR MILLER: It doesn’t mean there aren’t any. I’m just not aware.

MR MILLER: So the only thing I will say to that is that we have made quite clear that we will defend against any attacks on U.S. personnel and U.S. interests in the region. I think I’ll leave it at that.

Let me do one more – go ahead, and then I’m going to come back to the Chagos. Go ahead.

MR MILLER: So every country, of course, has the right to defend itself, but the conflict in Lebanon has not been with the state of Lebanon. It is with Hizballah. I can’t speak to this —

QUESTION: Sure.

MR MILLER: — specific reported exchange of fire because I don’t know the underlying details, but the conflict has not been with the state of Lebanon.

QUESTION: Mm-hmm.

QUESTION: Yeah. Well, so you mentioned – when you were opened with the Chagos, you mentioned that this agreement would – that it addresses the wrongs of the past. And by that I presume you mean the forceable relocation of the island – of the islanders?

MR MILLER: Chagossians. Yeah.

QUESTION: Yeah. But I don’t believe, unless I’m completely wrong and you misstated this, that the people who were actually forcibly repatriated from Diego Garcia are allowed to go back to Diego Garcia. Is that correct?

MR MILLER: So I will let the UK and Mauritius to speak to —

QUESTION: Well, you – but —

MR MILLER: — to speak to the details of it. But my —

QUESTION: Okay. But you said in —

MR MILLER: No, no, Matt —

QUESTION: You said in your opening that they would be allowed to go back to islands other than Diego Garcia.

MR MILLER: I was – yeah, I was about to answer that.

QUESTION: Oh, okay.

MR MILLER: I’ll let them speak to all the details, but my understanding of the agreement between these two countries is that they will be allowed to go back to other islands in the archipelago other than Diego Garcia, and that the UK is setting up a trust fund to help them with those relocations.

QUESTION: Okay. Okay. But why is it that they can’t go back to Diego Garcia? Is what’s going on there at this joint UK-U.S. military base so super, ultra-sensitive or controversial that people can’t – I mean, I recognize it’s not a very big island, and I also recognize that – of the number of Chagossians who were forcibly repatriated off of Diego Garcia at the beginning is not a huge number. But I mean, why can’t they go home? Or – yeah.

MR MILLER: Ultimately that is a question for the UK and Mauritius, who —

QUESTION: Well, it’s your base, though.

MR MILLER: It is our base. But when it comes to the —

QUESTION: So is what’s going on there so, so —

MR MILLER: So that is a question —

QUESTION: — dangerous that people, that civilians can’t live there?

MR MILLER: That is a question for the governments of the United Kingdom and Mauritius who negotiated this agreement and can speak – and can speak to it.

QUESTION: Yeah, but look, you say this is a UK-U.S. base, but it is not really a UK base at all.

MR MILLER: It —

QUESTION: It is a U.S. base. Yes, they have sovereignty over it and will continue to or at least exercise Mauritian sovereignty over it, but this is your guys’ operation there.

MR MILLER: It is —

QUESTION: So why is it that you don’t want people who lived on the – who were on the island and were forcibly moved off of it to go back?

MR MILLER: It is not a question of the United States wanting them or not wanting them. It is a question for the United Kingdom and Mauritius who negotiated this agreement and ultimately came to this resolution that they both – that both countries deemed was equitable, where Chagossians would be able to return to other islands in the archipelago and would get financial assistance to do so. We have stated previously for many years that the manner in which the Chagossians were removed is regrettable, and we welcome this agreement to see them allowed to return to other islands in the archipelago.

QUESTION: Yeah, but I’m sorry. I just don’t get why they can’t – why the people who were removed from Diego Garcia can’t go back to Diego Garcia, but they can go back to other islands. I mean, there must be something about Diego Garcia that makes it either dangerous or inhospitable for civilians, and I just think that people should know what that is.

MR MILLER: Look, obviously we have a base there, but when it comes to this exact question, it really is a question for those other two governments.

QUESTION: It – I mean, it’s just that you’re creating the suggestion that the United States was absolutely no party to this agreement and have no view on it whatsoever. But you said earlier that Secretary Blinken and Foreign Secretary Lammy had multiple conversations about this —

MR MILLER: Yeah.

QUESTION: — for all the things announced. So it seems extraordinary that you would have had no view on whether or not the expelled islanders could come back to Diego Garcia.

MR MILLER: So we were playing the role that we often play in diplomatic agreements of this nature, which is engaging in both – with both the two parties and encouraging them to reach an agreement and trying to get one over the line, but it is ultimately an agreement between the two countries.

QUESTION: And I mean, what about the expelled people themselves? I mean, there’s a statement now from Chagossians that says they’ve been – “[we’ve] been consistently and deliberately ignored and we demand full inclusion in the drafting of the treaty.” So it doesn’t sound like anyone, including the U.S. but the UK as well, was talking to them.

MR MILLER: So Tom, I would direct you to the Government of the UK and the Mauritius who were the parties to this agreement for an answer.

Yeah, and then we’ll wrap up.

QUESTION: Slightly different sort of criticism that’s come up from in the UK. The conservatives, they were also involved in negotiating it, but there’s been this concern raised obviously with Mauritius has a relationship with Beijing, with the Chinese Government. Do you have some concern that the – the sort of handover of this territory to Mauritius will somehow open those U.S.-UK operations up to some more, like, interference by the Chinese?

MR MILLER: I will say we are fully confident that the provisions of the agreement allow us to do everything we need to to protect U.S. security, including the security of that base.

QUESTION: And that – so this I – this fear of somehow Chinese meddling has been sort of incorporated into it, in your understanding?

MR MILLER: So I’m not going to speak to it in detail, but the provisions of the agreement do give us assurances that are – we will be able to maintain the security of our base.

QUESTION: And you can’t say what those —

MR MILLER: No.

QUESTION: — provisions are?

MR MILLER: Not from here. And with that, we’ll wrap for today. Thanks, everyone.

(The briefing was concluded at 2:28 p.m.)

# # #