Whiner’s
Affordable & Professional: Breakthrough Web Design 515-897-1144
Enter the Whiner’s Den and post your rants, raves, observations, comments, news tips and confessions.
Founded on Oct. 1, 2010
News & Entertainment for Mason City, Clear Lake & the Entire North Iowa Region
NYT:
New details flesh out how the pressure campaign by Donald J. Trump and his allies to block certification of the 2020 election left the vice president’s staff fearing for his safety.
—
In other words, Pence could have been killed that day.
Yep, Pence’s Secret Service security detail reported to their superiors that was the plan. Trump had his low-IQ cronies build a gallows, for God’s sake! Of course Pence would have been killed. Trump throws anybody and everybody under the bus. He wanted to follow Putin’s example precisely, and thought he could suck up to him to learn how. Trump plays checkers, Putin plays chess.
The delirious mob frenzy, in my opinion, would have overwhelmed Mike Pence. It would have been brutal and vicious. The man would have been stomped, beaten, and led to the gallows that Trump’s maniacs constructed. Hundreds of cell phones would have recorded his demise. And Trump would have gleefully watched from his perch, surrounded by his spawn and his enablers.
More idiocy by the right…….”Representative Louie Gohmert (R-TX) told Newsmax, “If you’re a Republican, you can’t even lie to Congress or lie to an FBI agent or they’re coming after you.”
Well, duh, Louie, you’re not supposed to lie to Congress or the FBI.
Chuck Grassley is finally being asked to become accountable to his constituents.https://iowastartingline.com/2022/06/02/anger-on-gun-violence-boils-over-at-grassley-town-hall/
One Hundred Days of the Kremlin’s War Against Ukraine
06/03/2022 12:56 PM EDT
Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State
In the one hundred days since Russian President Putin ordered his forces to further invade Ukraine, the world has seen the courage and determination of the people of Ukraine as they fight for their country. Since February 24, the United States has provided more than 6.3 billion dollars of security, humanitarian and economic assistance to help Ukraine prevail. As President Biden has said, our goal is straightforward: The United States wants to see a democratic, independent, sovereign and prosperous Ukraine with the means to deter and defend itself against further aggression.
We again call on President Putin to immediately end this conflict and all the suffering and global upheaval his war of choice has caused. Neither the United States nor our allies and partners seek to prolong the war to inflict pain on Russia. We greatly respect the citizens of Russia, who are not our enemy and who deserve a better future than what continued war and increasing repression will bring.
To the families of Ukraine who have lost loved ones, who have been separated by violence, whose villages, apartments, schools, and hospitals have been hit by bombs, shells and missiles, who have been sent to and survived Russia’s so-called “filtration” camps: The United States stands with you; we will help you defend your sovereignty and territorial integrity, and we will help you rebuild when this war is over.
Ukraine will prevail.
MASON CITY:
Starting Monday, June 6, North Pierce Avenue between 9th and 12th Streets NW will be closed to repair a sewer main.
Just wondering, do you get paid for comments that you post on your own site.
Are giggles and snickers a form of currency?
So, answering a question with a question, I’m going to take that as a yes. This used to be a good site to come to for information, but lately it’s been going down the drain with one sided lies and bull shit. It’s too bad that you have to post propaganda to help stir the pot so you can get some hits. What is it they say, “drain the swamp”. I find it hard to enable this site any longer, pulling the plug. No rebuttal needed, expected or wanted…..
Could you point out the “one-sided lies” that are posted here? Just because you don’t like the news doesn’t make it bill shit. Unfortunately, our previous one term President made it vogue among his followers to say that news that wasn’t flattering to him or them was fake news. He expanded it to saying elections that didn’t their way were illegitimate and “rigged”. What’s next? That those who question the morality and ethics of him or his followers should be eliminated?
You realize that little Mattie Markwart gets his panties all in a bunch when you objectively criticize his pathetic nature and his many flaws as a human being.
He gets his money from mooching off $30K of MC taxpayers and begging for money from his Mommy.
U.S. Action Plan on Global Water Security
06/02/2022 09:26 AM EDT
Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State
Water is the source of life, and it nurtures and sustains livelihoods and civilizations. Water security – sustainable access to safe drinking water, sanitation, and hygiene services, as well as water to sustain ecosystems and for agriculture, energy, and other activities – is fundamental to human well-being and central to international peace and national security. When water is scarce, it becomes more difficult for communities to produce food, to prevent the spread of disease and protect public health, and to drive economic growth. Water stress contributes to regional instability, drives mass migration, and can lead to broader conflict.
Vice President Harris launched the White House Action Plan on Global Water Security, a landmark whole-of-government effort to achieve a water-secure world. The plan covers the full spectrum of global water issues and advances United States leadership on water security.
Secure and sustainable access to safe water is an essential element of national security, and the Department of State is working together with our partners and allies to facilitate water cooperation and engagement on water management across our development programming and diplomatic efforts. Through the Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs’ Office of Conservation and Water, we are coordinating with the U.S. Agency for International Development to update the U.S. Global Water Strategy, which outlines a whole-of-government approach to create a more water-secure world, where people and nations have the water they need to be healthy, prosperous, and resilient.
As the Vice President said, water scarcity is a global problem, and the State Department, together with our partners, will work to help achieve a global solution.
GALLUP: Steady 58% of Americans Do Not Want Roe v. Wade Overturned
Just over one-third of Americans, 35%, want Roe v. Wade overturned, while a steady 58% prefer that it stand.
MSON CITY:
The 2022 MacNider Outdoor Art Market will be from 9 am – 4 pm on Sat., June 11. The event is held on the lawns of the Museum and the adjacent Mason City Public Library at 303 2nd Street SE in Mason City, Iowa during MacNider Arts Festival.
NIACC College Board Meeting for the Month of June 2022
5:30 p.m. Board Dinner/Workshop
NIACC Campus – Activity Center – Room 128A
500 College Drive, Mason City, IA 50401
7:00 p.m. Regular June NIACC Board Meeting
NIACC Campus – Pierce Administration Building – Room 100
500 College Drive, Mason City, IA 50401 Thursday, June 16, 2022
A well-regulated militia attacked an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas last week, killing 19 children and 2 adults. If you want to argue it wasn’t a well-regulated militia that attacked the school, and instead, an individual then you already understand the difference between what the Constitution says and what you want it to say.
No, a mentally unstable individual did.
The 2nd amendment state, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
For those like you, I will explain. A militia IS part of the State (government for you liberals). They are to protect the free, as in NOT beholden to a sovereign, people. They are ALSO to protect the RIGHTS, and the people have the RIGHT to bear arms in order to protect themselves from a tyrannical government.
How about I explain it to you? The Constitution gives the right to establish a militia to the federal government not to the states. It also states that the federal government will provide arms to the militia and establish rules to govern the militia., Clearly they meant militia to mean an well regulated GROUP set up and controlled by the federal government not by a bunch of yahoo, wannabe, not really tough guys.
Not to mention the fact that WELL-REGULATED militia has already been established, and has been in existence for many years. It’s called the National Guard.
Recreation Dept. 5-24-22
Southbridge Mall, Suite 201 5:00 P.M. Mason City, Iowa
MINUTES
JOINT COUNCIL WORKSESSION
With the Park and Recreation Board and the Active Living & Transportation Commission
The City Council of the City of Mason City, Iowa, met in a Joint Worksession pursuant to law and rules of said Council, at the Mason City Recreation Department, Southbridge Mall, Suite 201 at 5:00 P.M., on May 24, 2022. The meeting was called to order by the Mayor and on roll being called, there were present, Mayor Schickel in the Chair and the following Council Members: Masson, Jaszewski, Symonds, Thoma (via telephone). Absent: Lee, Adams.
Member of the Park and Recreation Board present: Mike Doc Adams, Melissa Fabian, Anne Hanson, Jay Lala (5:40 p.m.), Troy Levenhagen. Absent: None.
Active Living and Transportation Member present: Dr. Steven Schurtz, Cynthia Hansen, Jim Miller, George Riesen. Absent: Tracey Cram.
Human Power Trail Group: Steve Bailey, Brook Bailey, Matt Curtis.
Administrator Burnett welcomed the members of the Park and Recreation Board, Active Living and Transportation Commission and the Human Power Trail Group emphasizing the reason for getting everyone together was to make sure they were all were up to date on the different components of the project. He outlined the Destination Iowa grant, noting there was 100 million dollars available from AARPA funds with the focus of the grant being tourism. He stressed the Human Power Trail Group had done a lot of through volunteering and fundraising and had been very successful and this was an opportunity to use existing funding for local match and do more with the dollars identified locally.
He then broke down the different components of the grant and explained the format for the meeting was as follows:
The budget was broken out with the total expenses amounting to $11,673,265 and reviewed the areas it encompassed on how important better trail access was. He then turned the presentation over to the North Iowa Power Trail Group, advising they had been involved with cycling for many years.
Steve Bailey explained how they gotten started and their different experiences across the country. He stressed the importance of being able to cycle downtown and to Limecreek safely and how a bike park could become a destination drawing people to Mason City. He explained they weren’t many in the country and it was progressive based on your skill level and referred to the pages that showed the various parks. In addition, he referenced the Railyard that saw 1,000 riders per week and stressed how rare they were and uniquely sought after.
Matt Curtis stated referred to pictures stating the structures were built on one piece of property and indicated the areas of progressive jump zones with increased elevation and options available as the riders were coming down. He mentioned the Railyard Bike Park in Arkansas and how they liked their scale and theme, pointing out Mason City also had a railroad history. He commented on the completed kayak launch and the idea of a Boulder Park and how all of this would bring people to Mason City, stressing how important Mason City was to have the river and how making that part of the plan would make Mason City a destination as well as make it unique.
The Human Power Trail Group discussed all that had been accomplished at Limecreek with volunteer help in a short amount of time and the large donations they received which indicated the high degree of interest.
Administrator Burnett overviewed the regional side, advising when grants were scored the Board wants to know how it affects rural populations and whether it had a county wide reach beyond Mason City. The other important area was from a tourism standpoint and how to get additional spending in the community and that was where the Riverwalk improvements came into play and getting people downtown.
The Administrator opened the presentation up to questions. Discussion followed regarding maintenance, how big the area would be, the length of the season, whether bikes would be available for those that did not have them, the highline trail, etc.
Burnett stated there appeared to be a consensus and therefore staff would continue to work on this and bring it forward to the Council, the Park and Recreation Board and the Active Living and Transportation Commission for a vote.
The Mayor adjourned the meeting at 6:32 P.M.
/s/Bill Schickel
Bill Schickel, Mayor
ATTEST:
/s/Aaron Burnett
Aaron Burnett, City Clerk
Publish 6-5 22
Emailed 6-1-22
Why is it, years ago everything you bought had a tag, MADE IN JAPAN, and you never see that anymore, its all MADE IN CHINA.
We can thank Ambassador Terry Branstad for that.
TIME FOR THE IOWA ATTORNEY GENERAL TO EARN HIS PAY. YESTERDAY AT MURPHY’S AND FLEET FARM GAS WAS $4,17 AND AT QUIKSTAR AND CASEYS IT WAS $4.49, TALK ABOUT PRICE GOUGING, THIS IS IT.
$4.13 at FF if you have a 4 cents off coupon.
Is he running for public office.
Left-leaning Iowa political group demands: Celebrate Pride Month by demanding equality for all
Progress Iowa Executive Director Matt Sinovic issued the following statement as we celebrate the start of Pride Month:
“Iowans believe that we all deserve dignity and respect, no matter our race, income or who we love. Iowa was once a leader in equality, and became one of the first states to recognize marriage equality and to enact comprehensive non-discrimination protections on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.
“But now, lawmakers like Governor Kim Reynolds are stripping away decades of progress to push their extreme, partisan agenda. Queer stories and perspectives in books and school literature have been designated as obscene material this session by Republican legislators, and Governor Reynolds’ discriminatory trans-athlete ban will sideline children and prevent them from playing sports with their friends, missing out on critical social and team building experiences.
“This Pride Month, we must demand Republican elected officials stop playing partisan games with the lives of LGBTQ+ Iowans. Iowa was once a national leader for civil rights, and we need to ensure that our state is leading that charge once again.”
Progress Iowa is a left-leaning multi-issue progressive advocacy organization.
. But now, lawmakers are stripping away decades of progress to push their extreme, partisan agenda. Sounds like what has been happening the last 18 months..
GALLUP: Same-Sex Marriage Support Inches Up to New High of 71%
Seventy-one percent of Americans say they support legal same-sex marriage, a new high in Gallup’s trend.
Was the poll taken in california?
After six hours of deliberation, a federal jury today acquitted Hillary Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussman of making a false statement to the FBI. This is the outcome of the Trump administration’s attempt to discredit the investigation into the ties between Russia and the 2016 Trump campaign.
The Durham investigation was a total sham. Waste of taxpayer $ and a witch hunt to manufacture sound bites for right wingers and sew chaos and confusion for low information rural bumpkins already befuddled about reality.
Donald Trump attended a gun celebration with the NRA in a state where 19 children and 2 teachers were slaughtered by guns. Donald read the names of the victims, then danced afterward.
Nobody can be a poorer choice for President than Donald Trump. No one.
And he lives in your head, rent free.
Nah, I keep him at a distance. He is a fraud and doesn’t deserve to be in my head. You need to distance yourself from him too or you will turn into something just like him, if you haven’t already.
Look back on my comments and see how many times I have brought him up, Oh you can’t because you delete my comments. I’ll help you out a little, it’s zero.
I don’t delete anything. Besides, how would I know which ones were yours because your moniker is anon as are many others.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/white-house-report-card-helpless-unpopular-joe/ar-AAXPj2g?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=413af8e91ae74b5bb3e20a9f20649727
GALLUP: Satisfaction With U.S. Dips; Biden Approval Steady at 41%
Just 16% of U.S. adults are satisfied with the way things are going in the U.S., and job approval ratings of President Joe Biden (41%) and Congress (18%) remain flat.
Other elected presidents in May of second year
Donald Trump 42% May 2018
Donald Trump is a liar and a criminal.
As are all politicians !!!!
NOTES FROM THE NEWSROOMBiden’s public approval falls to 36%, lowest of his presidencyMAY 24, 2022
U.S. President Joe Biden’s public approval rating fell this week to 36%, the lowest level of his presidency, as Americans suffered from rising inflation, according to a Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll completed on Tuesday.
The two-day national poll found that 59% of Americans disapprove of Biden’s job performance. His overall approval was down six percentage points from 42% last week.
Only legal votes count (not shoddy polls) and there isn’t an election for quite awhile … he did win the last one by millions of votes … you think Trump can beat Biden?
I’m hoping neither of them run.
United States Targets the DPRK’s Ballistic Missile and Weapons of Mass Destruction Programs
05/27/2022 05:46 PM EDT
Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State
The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s (DPRK’s) series of escalatory ballistic missile launches – including six intercontinental ballistic missile tests this year alone – are in blatant violation of UN Security Council resolutions and pose a grave threat to regional stability and international peace and security.
Today, the United States is designating for sanctions Air Koryo Trading Corporation, a DPRK entity that has provided or attempted to provide support to the U.S.-designated DPRK Ministry of Rocket Industry; Jong Yong Nam, a DPRK representative for an organization subordinate to the UN- and U.S.-designated Second Academy of Natural Sciences; and Bank Sputnik, a Russian bank that has assisted the UN- and U.S.-designated Foreign Trade Bank, pursuant to Executive Order 13382, which targets proliferators of weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery. The United States is also sanctioning Far Eastern Bank, a Russian bank, pursuant to E.O. 13722, which targets the DPRK government and certain activities in the DPRK.
We are taking these actions in response to the DPRK’s ongoing development of its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and ballistic missile programs in violation of multiple United Nations Security Council resolutions. As a result of today’s sanctions, any property or interests in property of the designated persons in the possession or control of U.S. persons or entities or within the United States must be blocked, and U.S. persons are prohibited from dealing with any of the designated parties.
We continue to coordinate closely with our allies and partners to address the threats posed by the DPRK’s destabilizing activities and to advance our shared objective of the complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. We remain committed to diplomacy with the DPRK and call on the DPRK to engage in dialogue. At the same time, we continue to urge all UN Member States to fully implement the UN Security Council resolutions addressing the DPRK in order to constrain its ability to advance its unlawful WMD and ballistic missile programs.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/five-suspects-in-moss-point-shootings-arrested-two-at-large/ar-AAXOu2j?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=0cac30c9f72648b297aa2cbdd5f9bc43
What is up with this pitiful excuse of a website?
It was bad enough before but now it is just a pathetic ode to the narcissistic site owner. He is about the only one that comments here anymore. What is the story with that?
I post newsworthy comments, but he just deletes them.
Good morning, loyal reader!
Typical lame Markwart response. Never addresses the comment directly but rather just blows smoke out of his sorry ass.
Just like his mooching of MC taxpayer money & having his Mommy finance his pathetic run for MC City Counsel.
He promises but never delivers, akin to his last run for City Counsel when he promised to hold an open public form, but never did.
Markwart is all talk and no walk.
City Council
^^
Pedant
^^ Pedant
^^Moron
Snappy comeback there little buckaroo.
You’re about as sharp as the leading edge of a marble.
Says you as you use the same analogy as you always do.
When the shoe fits, it is worth repeating.
You really should grow a pair & put on some big boy pants.
^^Moron (it is worth repeating)
Dang, I still got a room inside that tiny noggin of yours?
PS Thank$ for the page view$
You really are a pussy, Markwart.
Nothing new there though, you were a pussy in high school, college and have been a pussy your whole life.
That will be your epitaph one day.
“Here lies a pussy”
PS Thank$ for the page view$
How much do you get paid from every (page view$)
The Administration’s Approach to the People’s Republic of China
05/26/2022 01:44 PM EDT
Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State
Washington, D.C.
The George Washington University
SECRETARY BLINKEN: Thank you. Good morning.
It’s a real pleasure to be here at The George Washington University. This is an institution that draws outstanding students and scholars from around the world and where the most urgent challenges that we face as a country and a planet are studied and debated. So thank you for having us here today.
And I especially want to thank our friends at the Asia Society, dedicated to forging closer ties with the countries and people of Asia to try to enhance peace, prosperity, freedom, equality, sustainability. Thank you for hosting us today, but thank you for your leadership every day. Kevin Rudd, Wendy Cutler, Danny Russel – all colleagues, all thought leaders, but also doers, and it’s always wonderful to be with you.
And I have to say I am really grateful, Senator Romney, for your presence here today – a man, a leader, that I greatly admire, a person of tremendous principle, who has been leading on the subject that we’re going to talk about today. Senator, thank you for your presence.
And I’m also delighted to see so many members of the diplomatic corps because diplomacy is the indispensable tool for shaping our shared future.
In the past two years we’ve come together to fight the COVID-19 pandemic and prepare for future global health emergencies, rebuild from economic shocks, from supply-chain disruptions to debt crises, and take on climate change, and reimagine an energy future that’s cleaner, more secure, and more affordable.
The common denominator across these efforts is the simple fact that none of us can meet these challenges alone. We have to face them together.
That’s why we’ve put diplomacy back at the center of American foreign policy, to help us realize the future that Americans and people around the world seek – one where technology is used to lift people up, not suppress them; where trade and commerce support workers, raise incomes, create opportunity; where universal human rights are respected; countries are secure from coercion and aggression, and people, ideas, goods, and capital move freely; and where nations can both forge their own paths and work together effectively in common cause.
To build that future, we must defend and reform the rules-based international order – the system of laws, agreements, principles, and institutions that the world came together to build after two world wars to manage relations between states, to prevent conflict, to uphold the rights of all people.
Its founding documents include the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which enshrined concepts like self-determination, sovereignty, the peaceful settlement of disputes. These are not Western constructs. They are reflections of the world’s shared aspirations.
In the decades since, despite daunting challenges and despite the gap between our ideals and some of the results we’ve achieved, the countries of the world have avoided another world war and armed conflict between nuclear powers. We’ve built a global economy that lifted billions of people out of poverty. We’ve advanced human rights as never before.
Now, as we look to the future, we want not just to sustain the international order that made so much of that progress possible, but to modernize it, to make sure that it represents the interests, the values, the hopes of all nations, big and small, from every region; and furthermore, that it can meet the challenges that we face now and will face in the future, many of which are beyond what the world could have imagined seven decades ago.
But that outcome is not guaranteed because the foundations of the international order are under serious and sustained challenge.
Russian President Vladimir Putin poses a clear and present threat. In attacking Ukraine three months ago, he also attacked the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity, enshrined in the UN Charter, to protect all countries from being conquered or coerced. That’s why so many countries have united to oppose this aggression because they see it as a direct assault on the foundation of their own peace and security.
Ukraine is fighting valiantly to defend its people and its independence with unprecedented assistance from the United States and countries around the world. And while the war is not over, President Putin has failed to achieve a single one of his strategic aims. Instead of erasing Ukraine’s independence, he strengthened it. Instead of dividing NATO, he’s united it. Instead of asserting Russia’s strength, he’s undermined it. And instead of weakening the international order, he has brought countries together to defend it.
Even as President Putin’s war continues, we will remain focused on the most serious long-term challenge to the international order – and that’s posed by the People’s Republic of China.
China is the only country with both the intent to reshape the international order and, increasingly, the economic, diplomatic, military, and technological power to do it. Beijing’s vision would move us away from the universal values that have sustained so much of the world’s progress over the past 75 years.
China is also integral to the global economy and to our ability to solve challenges from climate to COVID. Put simply, the United States and China have to deal with each other for the foreseeable future.
That’s why this is one of the most complex and consequential relationships of any that we have in the world today.
Over the last year, the Biden administration has developed and implemented a comprehensive strategy to harness our national strengths and our unmatched network of allies and partners to realize the future that we seek.
We are not looking for conflict or a new Cold War. To the contrary, we’re determined to avoid both.
We don’t seek to block China from its role as a major power, nor to stop China – or any other country, for that matter – from growing their economy or advancing the interests of their people.
But we will defend and strengthen the international law, agreements, principles, and institutions that maintain peace and security, protect the rights of individuals and sovereign nations, and make it possible for all countries – including the United States and China – to coexist and cooperate.
Now, the China of today is very different from the China of 50 years ago, when President Nixon broke decades of strained relations to become the first U.S. president to visit the country.
Then, China was isolated and struggling with widespread poverty and hunger.
Now, China is a global power with extraordinary reach, influence, and ambition. It’s the second largest economy, with world-class cities and public transportation networks. It’s home to some of the world’s largest tech companies and it seeks to dominate the technologies and industries of the future. It’s rapidly modernized its military and intends to become a top tier fighting force with global reach. And it has announced its ambition to create a sphere of influence in the Indo-Pacific and to become the world’s leading power.
China’s transformation is due to the talent, the ingenuity, the hard work of the Chinese people. It was also made possible by the stability and opportunity that the international order provides. Arguably, no country on Earth has benefited more from that than China.
But rather than using its power to reinforce and revitalize the laws, the agreements, the principles, the institutions that enabled its success so that other countries can benefit from them, too, Beijing is undermining them. Under President Xi, the ruling Chinese Communist Party has become more repressive at home and more aggressive abroad.
We see that in how Beijing has perfected mass surveillance within China and exported that technology to more than 80 countries; how its advancing unlawful maritime claims in the South China Sea, undermining peace and security, freedom of navigation, and commerce; how it’s circumventing or breaking trade rules, harming workers and companies in the United States but also around the world; and how it purports to champion sovereignty and territorial integrity while standing with governments that brazenly violate them.
Even while Russia was clearly mobilizing to invade Ukraine, President Xi and President Putin declared that the friendship between their countries was – and I quote – “without limits.” Just this week, as President Biden was visiting Japan, China and Russia conducted a strategic bomber patrol together in the region.
Beijing’s defense of President Putin’s war to erase Ukraine’s sovereignty and secure a sphere of influence in Europe should raise alarm bells for all of us who call the Indo-Pacific region home.
For these reasons and more, this is a charged moment for the world. And at times like these, diplomacy is vital. It’s how we make clear our profound concerns, better understand each other’s perspective, and have no doubt about each other’s intentions. We stand ready to increase our direct communication with Beijing across a full range of issues. And we hope that that can happen.
But we cannot rely on Beijing to change its trajectory. So we will shape the strategic environment around Beijing to advance our vision for an open, inclusive international system.
President Biden believes this decade will be decisive. The actions that we take at home and with countries worldwide will determine whether our shared vision of the future will be realized.
To succeed in this decisive decade, the Biden administration’s strategy can be summed up in three words – “invest, align, compete.”
We will invest in the foundations of our strength here at home – our competitiveness, our innovation, our democracy.
We will align our efforts with our network of allies and partners, acting with common purpose and in common cause.
And harnessing these two key assets, we’ll compete with China to defend our interests and build our vision for the future.
We take on this challenge with confidence. Our country is endowed with many strengths. We have peaceful neighbors, a diverse and growing population, abundant resources, the world’s reserve currency, the most powerful military on Earth, and a thriving culture of innovation and entrepreneurship that, for example, produced multiple effective vaccines now protecting people worldwide from COVID-19.
And our open society, at its best, attracts flows of talent and investment and has a time-tested capacity for reinvention, rooted in our democracy, empowering us to meet whatever challenges we face.
First, on investing in our strength.
After the Second World War, as we and our partners were building the rules-based order, our federal government was also making strategic investments in scientific research, education, infrastructure, our workforce, creating millions of middle-class jobs and decades of prosperity and technology leadership. But we took those foundations for granted. And so it’s time to get back to basics.
The Biden administration is making far-reaching investments in our core sources of national strength – starting with a modern industrial strategy to sustain and expand our economic and technological influence, make our economy and supply chains more resilient, sharpen our competitive edge.
Last year, President Biden signed into law the largest infrastructure investment in our history: to modernize our highways, our ports, airports, rail, and bridges; to move goods to market faster, to boost our productivity; to expand high-speed internet to every corner of the country; to draw more businesses and more jobs to more parts of America.
We’re making strategic investments in education and worker training, so that American workers – the best in the world – can design, build, and operate the technologies of the future.
Because our industrial strategy centers on technology, we want to invest in research, development, advanced manufacturing. Sixty years ago, our government spent more than twice as much on research as a percentage of our economy as we do now – investments that, in turn, catalyzed private-sector innovation. It’s how we won the space race, invented the semiconductor, built the internet. We used to rank first in the world in R&D as a proportion of our GDP – now we’re ninth. Meanwhile, China has risen from eighth place to second.
With bipartisan congressional support, we’ll reverse these trends and make historic investments in research and innovation, including in fields like artificial intelligence, biotechnology, quantum computing. These are areas that Beijing is determined to lead – but given America’s advantages, the competition is ours to lose, not only in terms of developing new technologies but also in shaping how they’re used around the world, so that they’re rooted in democratic values, not authoritarian ones.
The leadership – Senator Romney and others – the House and Senate have passed bills to support this agenda, including billions to produce semiconductors here and to strengthen other critical supply chains. Now we need Congress to send the legislation to the President for his signature.
We can get this done, and it can’t wait – supply chains are moving now, and if we don’t draw them here, they’ll be established somewhere else. As President Biden has said, the Chinese Communist Party is lobbying against this legislation – because there’s no better way to enhance our global standing and influence than to deliver on our domestic renewal. These investments will not only make America stronger; they’ll make us a stronger partner and ally as well.
One of the most powerful, even magical things about the United States is that we have long been a destination for talented, driven people from every part of the planet. That includes millions of students from China, who have enriched our communities and forged lifelong bonds with Americans. Last year, despite the pandemic, we issued more than 100,000 visas to Chinese students in just four months – our highest rate ever. We’re thrilled that they’ve chosen to study in the United States – we’re lucky to have them.
And we’re lucky when the best global talent not only studies here but stays here – as more than 80 percent of Chinese students who pursue science and technology PhDs in the United States have done in recent years. They help drive innovation here at home, and that benefits all of us. We can stay vigilant about our national security without closing our doors.
We also know from our history that when we’re managing a challenging relationship with another government, people from that country or with that heritage can be made to feel that they don’t belong here – or that they’re our adversaries. Nothing could be further from the truth. Chinese Americans made invaluable contributions to our country; they’ve done so for generations. Mistreating someone of Chinese descent goes against everything we stand for as a country – whether a Chinese national visiting or living here, or a Chinese American, or any other Asian American whose claim to this country is equal to anyone else’s. Racism and hate have no place in a nation built by generations of immigrants to fulfill the promise of opportunity for all.
We have profound differences with the Chinese Communist Party and the Chinese Government. But those differences are between governments and systems – not between our people. The American people have great respect for the Chinese people. We respect their achievements, their history, their culture. We deeply value the ties of family and friendship that connect us. And we sincerely wish for our governments to work together on issues that matter to their lives and to the lives of Americans, and for that matter the lives of people around the world.
There’s another core source of national strength that we’ll be relying on in this decisive decade: our democracy.
A hundred years ago, if asked what constitutes the wealth of a nation, we might list the expanse of our land, the size of our population, the strength of our military, the abundance of our natural resources. And thankfully, we’re still wealthy in all of those attributes. But more than ever, in this 21st century, the true wealth of a nation is found in our people – our human resources – and our ability to unleash their full potential.
We do that with our democratic system. We debate, we argue, we disagree, we challenge each other, including our elected leaders. We deal with our deficiencies openly; we don’t pretend they don’t exist or sweep them under the rug. And though progress can feel painfully slow, can be difficult and ugly, by and large we consistently work toward a society where people from all backgrounds can flourish, guided by national values that unite, motivate, and uplift us.
We are not perfect. But at our best, we always strive to be – in the words of our Constitution – a more perfect union. Our democracy is designed to make that happen.
That’s what the American people and the American model offer, and it’s one of the most powerful assets in this contest.
Now, Beijing believes that its model is the better one; that a party-led centralized system is more efficient, less messy, ultimately superior to democracy. We do not seek to transform China’s political system. Our task is to prove once again that democracy can meet urgent challenges, create opportunity, advance human dignity; that the future belongs to those who believe in freedom and that all countries will be free to chart their own paths without coercion.
The second piece of our strategy is aligning with our allies and partners to advance a shared vision for the future.
From day one, the Biden administration has worked to re-energize America’s unmatched network of alliances and partnerships and to re-engage in international institutions. We’re encouraging partners to work with each other, and through regional and global organizations. And we’re standing up new coalitions to deliver for our people and meet the tests of the century ahead.
Nowhere is this more true than in the Indo-Pacific region, where our relationships, including our treaty alliances, are among our strongest in the world.
The United States shares the vision that countries and people across the region hold: one of a free and open Indo-Pacific where rules are developed transparently and applied fairly; where countries are free to make their own sovereign decisions; where goods, ideas, and people flow freely across land, sky, cyberspace, the open seas, and governance is responsive to the people.
President Biden reinforced these priorities this week with his trip to the region, where he reaffirmed our vital security alliances with South Korea and Japan, and deepened our economic and technology cooperation with both countries.
He launched the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity, a first-of-its-kind initiative for the region. It will, in the President’s words, “help all our countries’ economies grow faster and fairer.” IPEF, as we call it, renews American economic leadership but adapts it for the 21st century by addressing cutting-edge issues like the digital economy, supply chains, clean energy, infrastructure, and corruption. A dozen countries, including India, have already joined. Together, IPEF members make up more than a third of the global economy.
The President also took part in the leaders’ summit of the Quad countries – Australia, Japan, India, the United States. The Quad never met at the leader level before President Biden took office. Since he convened the first leaders’ meeting last year, the Quad has held four summits. It’s become a leading regional team. This week, it launched a new Indo-Pacific Partnership for Maritime Domain Awareness, so our partners across the region can better monitor the waters near their shores to address illegal fishing and protect their maritime rights and their sovereignty.
We’re reinvigorating our partnership with ASEAN. Earlier this month, we hosted the U.S.-ASEAN Summit to take on urgent issues like public health and the climate crisis together. This week, seven ASEAN countries became founding members of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework. And we’re building bridges among our Indo-Pacific and European partners, including by inviting Asian allies to the NATO summit in Madrid next month.
We’re enhancing peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific; for example, with the new security partnership between Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States, known as AUKUS.
And we’re helping countries in the region and around the world defeat COVID-19. To date, the United States has provided nearly $20 billion to the global pandemic response. That includes more than 540 million doses of safe and effective vaccines donated – not sold – with no political strings attached, on our way to 1.2 billion doses worldwide. And we’re coordinating with a group of 19 countries in a global action plan to get shots into arms.
As a result of all of this diplomacy, we are more aligned with partners across the Indo-Pacific, and we’re working in a more coordinated way toward our shared goals.
We’ve also deepened our alignment across the Atlantic. We launched the U.S.-EU Trade and Technology Council last year, marshaling the combined weight of nearly 50 percent of the world’s GDP. Last week, I joined Secretary Raimondo, Ambassador Tai, and our European Commission counterparts for our second meeting to work together on new technology standards, coordinate on investment screening and export controls, strengthen supply chains, boost green tech, and improve food security and digital infrastructure in developing countries.
Meanwhile, we and our European partners set aside 17 years of litigation about aircraft; now, instead of arguing with each other, we’re working to secure a level playing field for our companies and workers in that sector.
Similarly, we worked with the European Union and others to resolve a dispute on steel and aluminum imports, and now we’re coming together around a shared vision on higher climate standards and protecting our workers and industries from Beijing’s deliberate efforts to distort the market to its advantage.
We’re partnering with the European Union to protect our citizens’ privacy while strengthening a shared digital economy that depends on vast flows of data.
With the G20, we reached a landmark deal on a global minimum tax to halt the race to the bottom, make sure that big corporations pay their fair share, and give countries even more resources to invest in their people. More than 130 countries have signed on so far.
We and our G7 partners are pursuing a coordinated, high-standard, and transparent approach to meet the enormous infrastructure needs in developing countries.
We’ve convened global summits on defeating COVID-19 and renewing global democracy, and rejoined the UN Human Rights Council and the WHO, the World Health Organization.
And at a moment of great testing, we and our allies have re-energized NATO, which is now as strong as ever.
These actions are all aimed at defending and, as necessary, reforming the rules-based order that should benefit all nations. We want to lead a race to the top on tech, on climate, infrastructure, global health, and inclusive economic growth. And we want to strengthen a system in which as many countries as possible can come together to cooperate effectively, resolve differences peacefully, write their own futures as sovereign equals.
Our diplomacy is based on partnership and respect for each other’s interests. We don’t expect every country to have the exact same assessment of China as we do. We know that many countries – including the United States – have vital economic or people-to-people ties with China that they want to preserve. This is not about forcing countries to choose. It’s about giving them a choice, so that, for example, the only option isn’t an opaque investment that leaves countries in debt, stokes corruption, harms the environment, fails to create local jobs or growth, and compromises countries’ exercise of their sovereignty. We’ve heard firsthand about buyer’s remorse that these deals can leave behind.
At every step, we’re consulting with our partners, listening to them, taking their concerns to heart, building solutions that address their unique challenges and priorities.
There is growing convergence about the need to approach relations with Beijing with more realism. Many of our partners already know from painful experience how Beijing can come down hard when they make choices that it dislikes. Like last spring, when Beijing cut off Chinese students and tourists from traveling to Australia and imposed an 80 percent tariff on Australian barley exports, because Australia’s Government called for an independent inquiry into COVID’s origin. Or last November, when Chinese Coast Guard vessels used water cannons to stop a resupply of a Philippine navy ship in the South China Sea. Actions like these remind the world of how Beijing can retaliate against perceived opposition.
There’s another area of alignment we share with our allies and partners: human rights.
The United States stands with countries and people around the world against the genocide and crimes against humanity happening in the Xinjiang region, where more than a million people have been placed in detention camps because of their ethnic and religious identity.
We stand together on Tibet, where the authorities continue to wage a brutal campaign against Tibetans and their culture, language, and religious traditions, and in Hong Kong, where the Chinese Communist Party has imposed harsh anti-democratic measures under the guise of national security.
Now, Beijing insists that these are somehow internal matters that others have no right to raise. That is wrong. Its treatment of ethnic and religious minorities in Xinjiang and Tibet, along with many other actions, go against the core tenets of the UN Charter that Beijing constantly cites and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that all countries are meant to adhere to.
Beijing’s quashing of freedom in Hong Kong violates its handover commitments, enshrined in a treaty deposited at the United Nations.
We’ll continue to raise these issues and call for change – not to stand against China, but to stand up for peace, security, and human dignity.
That brings us to the third element of our strategy. Thanks to increased investments at home and greater alignment with allies and partners, we are well-positioned to outcompete China in key areas.
For example, Beijing wants to put itself at the center of global innovation and manufacturing, increase other countries’ technological dependence, and then use that dependence to impose its foreign policy preferences. And Beijing is going to great lengths to win this contest – for example, taking advantage of the openness of our economies to spy, to hack, to steal technology and know-how to advance its military innovation and entrench its surveillance state.
So as we make sure the next wave of innovation is unleashed by the United States and our allies and partners, we’ll also protect ourselves against efforts to siphon off our ingenuity or imperil our security.
We’re sharpening our tools to safeguard our technological competitiveness. That includes new and stronger export controls to make sure our critical innovations don’t end up in the wrong hands; greater protections for academic research, to create an open, secure, and supportive environment for science; better cyber defenses; stronger security for sensitive data; and sharper investment screening measures to defend companies and countries against Beijing’s efforts to gain access to sensitive technologies, data, or critical infrastructure; compromise our supply chains; or dominate key strategic sectors.
We believe – and we expect the business community to understand – that the price of admission to China’s market must not be the sacrifice of our core values or long-term competitive and technological advantages. We’re counting on businesses to pursue growth responsibly, assess risk soberly, and work with us not only to protect but to strengthen our national security.
For too long, Chinese companies have enjoyed far greater access to our markets than our companies have in China. For example, Americans who want to read the China Daily or communicate via WeChat are free to do so, but The New York Times and Twitter are prohibited for the Chinese people, except those working for the government who use these platforms to spread propaganda and disinformation. American companies operating in China have been subject to systematic forced technology transfer, while Chinese companies in America have been protected by our rule of law. Chinese filmmakers can freely market their movies to American theater owners without any censorship by the U.S. Government, but Beijing strictly limits the number of foreign movies allowed in the Chinese market, and those that are allowed are subjected to heavy-handed political censorship. China’s businesses in the United States don’t fear using our impartial legal system to defend their rights – in fact, they’re frequently in court asserting claims against the United States Government. The same isn’t true for foreign firms in China.
This lack of reciprocity is unacceptable and it’s unsustainable.
Or consider what happened in the steel market. Beijing directed massive over-investment by Chinese companies, which then flooded the global market with cheap steel. Unlike U.S. companies and other market-oriented firms, Chinese companies don’t need to make a profit – they just get another injection of state-owned bank credit when funds are running low. Plus, they do little to control pollution or protect the rights of their workers, which also keeps costs down. As a consequence, China now accounts for more than half of global steel production, driving U.S. companies – as well as factories in India, Mexico, Indonesia, Europe, and elsewhere – out of the market.
We’ve seen this same model when it comes to solar panels, electric car batteries – key sectors of the 21st century economy that we cannot allow to become completely dependent on China.
Economic manipulations like these have cost American workers millions of jobs. And they’ve harmed the workers and firms of countries around the world. We will push back on market-distorting policies and practices, like subsidies and market access barriers, which China’s government has used for years to gain competitive advantage. We’ll boost supply chain security and resilience by reshoring production or sourcing materials from other countries in sensitive sectors like pharmaceuticals and critical minerals, so that we’re not dependent on any one supplier. We’ll stand together with others against economic coercion and intimidation. And we will work to ensure that U.S. companies don’t engage in commerce that facilitates or benefits from human rights abuses, including forced labor.
In short, we’ll fight for American workers and industry with every tool we have – just as we know that our partners will fight for their workers.
The United States does not want to sever China’s economy from ours or from the global economy – though Beijing, despite its rhetoric, is pursuing asymmetric decoupling, seeking to make China less dependent on the world and the world more dependent on China. For our part, we want trade and investment as long as they’re fair and don’t jeopardize our national security. China has formidable economic resources, including a highly capable workforce. We’re confident that our workers, our companies will compete successfully – and we welcome that competition – on a level playing field.
So as we push back responsibly on unfair technology and economic practices, we’ll work to maintain economic and people-to-people ties connecting the United States and China, consistent with our interests and our values. Beijing may not be willing to change its behavior. But if it takes concrete action to address the concerns that we and many other countries have voiced, we will respond positively.
Competition need not lead to conflict. We do not seek it. We will work to avoid it. But we will defend our interests against any threat.
To that end, President Biden has instructed the Department of Defense to hold China as its pacing challenge, to ensure that our military stays ahead. We’ll seek to preserve peace through a new approach that we call “integrated deterrence” – bringing in allies and partners; working across the conventional, the nuclear, space, and informational domains; drawing on our reinforcing strengths in economics, in technology, and in diplomacy.
The administration is shifting our military investments away from platforms that were designed for the conflicts of the 20th century toward asymmetric systems that are longer-range, harder to find, easier to move. We’re developing new concepts to guide how we conduct military operations. And we’re diversifying our force posture and global footprint, fortifying our networks, critical civilian infrastructure, and space-based capabilities. We’ll help our allies and partners in the region with their own asymmetric capabilities, too.
We’ll continue to oppose Beijing’s aggressive and unlawful activities in the South and East China Seas. Nearly six years ago, an international tribunal found that Beijing’s claims in the South China Sea have no basis in international law. We’ll support the region’s coastal states in upholding their maritime rights. We’ll work with allies and partners to uphold freedom of navigation and overflight, which has enabled the region’s prosperity for decades. And we’ll continue to fly and sail wherever international law allows.
On Taiwan, our approach has been consistent across decades and administrations. As the President has said, our policy has not changed. The United States remains committed to our “one China” policy, which is guided by the Taiwan Relations Act, the three Joint Communiques, the Six Assurances. We oppose any unilateral changes to the status quo from either side; we do not support Taiwan independence; and we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means.
We continue to have an abiding interest in peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. We’ll continue to uphold our commitments under the Taiwan Relations Act to assist Taiwan in maintaining a sufficient self-defense capability – and, as indicated in the TRA, to “maintain our capacity to resist any resort to force or other forms of coercion that would jeopardize the security or the social or economic system, of Taiwan.” We enjoy a strong unofficial relationship with Taiwan, a vibrant democracy and leading economy in the region. We’ll continue to expand our cooperation with Taiwan on our many shared interests and values, support Taiwan’s meaningful participation in the international community, deepen our economic ties, consistent with our “one China” policy.
While our policy has not changed, what has changed is Beijing’s growing coercion – like trying to cut off Taiwan’s relations with countries around the world and blocking it from participating in international organizations. And Beijing has engaged in increasingly provocative rhetoric and activity, like flying PLA aircraft near Taiwan on an almost daily basis. These words and actions are deeply destabilizing; they risk miscalculation and threaten the peace and stability of the Taiwan Strait. As we saw from the President’s discussions with allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific, maintaining peace and stability across the strait is not just a U.S. interest; it is a matter of international concern, critical to regional and global security and prosperity.
As President Biden likes to say, the only conflict worse than an intended one is an unintended one. We’ll manage this relationship responsibly to prevent that from happening. We’ve prioritized crisis communications and risk reduction measures with Beijing. And on this issue – and every other – we remain committed to intense diplomacy alongside intense competition.
Even as we invest, align, and compete, we’ll work together with Beijing where our interests come together. We can’t let the disagreements that divide us stop us from moving forward on the priorities that demand that we work together, for the good of our people and for the good of the world.
That starts with climate. China and the United States had years of stalemate on climate, which gridlocked the world – but also periods of progress, which galvanized the world. The climate diplomacy channel launched in 2013 between China and the United States unleashed global momentum that produced the Paris Agreement. Last year at COP26, the world’s hopes were buoyed when the United States and China issued our Glasgow Joint Declaration to work together to address emissions from methane to coal.
Climate is not about ideology. It’s about math. There’s simply no way to solve climate change without China’s leadership, the country that produces 28 percent of global emissions. The International Energy Agency has made clear that if China sticks with its current plan and does not peak its emissions until 2030, then the rest of the world must go to zero by 2035. And that’s simply not possible.
Today about 20 nations are responsible for 80 percent of emissions. China is number one. The United States is number two. Unless we all do much more, much faster, the financial and human cost will be catastrophic. Plus, competing on clean energy and climate policy can produce results that benefit everyone.
The progress that the United States and China make together – including through the working group established by the Glasgow Declaration – is vital to our success in avoiding the worst consequences of this crisis. I urge China to join us in accelerating the pace of these shared efforts.
Likewise, on the COVID-19 pandemic, our fates are linked. And our hearts go out to the Chinese people as they deal with this latest wave. We’ve been through our own deeply painful ordeal with COVID. That’s why we’re so convinced that all countries need to work together to vaccinate the world – not in exchange for favors or political concessions, but for the simple reason that no country will be safe until all are safe. And all nations must transparently share data and samples – and provide access to experts – for new variants and emerging and re-emerging pathogens, to prevent the next pandemic even as we fight the current one.
On nonproliferation and arms control, it’s in all of our interests to uphold the rules, the norms, the treaties that have reduced the spread of weapons of mass destruction. China and the United States must keep working together, and with other countries, to address Iran and North Korea’s nuclear programs. And we remain ready to discuss directly with Beijing our respective responsibilities as nuclear powers.
To counter illegal and illicit narcotics, especially synthetic opioids like fentanyl that killed more than 100,000 Americans last year, we want to work with China to stop international drug trafficking organizations from getting precursor chemicals, many of which originate in China.
As a global food crisis threatens people worldwide, we look to China – a country that’s achieved great things in agriculture – to help with a global response. Last week at the United Nations, the United States convened a meeting of foreign ministers to strengthen global food security. We extended an invitation to China to join. We’ll continue to do so.
And as the world’s economy recovers from the devastation of the pandemic, global macroeconomic coordination between the United States and China is key – through the G20, the IMF, other venues, and of course, bilaterally. That comes with the territory of being the world’s two largest economies.
In short, we’ll engage constructively with China wherever we can, not as a favor to us or anyone else, and never in exchange for walking away from our principles, but because working together to solve great challenges is what the world expects from great powers, and because it’s directly in our interest. No country should withhold progress on existential transnational issues because of bilateral differences.
The scale and the scope of the challenge posed by the People’s Republic of China will test American diplomacy like nothing we’ve seen before. I’m determined to give the State Department and our diplomats the tools that they need to meet this challenge head on as part of my modernization agenda. This includes building a China House – a department-wide integrated team that will coordinate and implement our policy across issues and regions, working with Congress as needed. And here, I must mention an outstanding team at our embassy in Beijing and our consulates across China, led by Ambassador Nick Burns. They do exceptional work every day, and many have been doing their jobs in recent weeks through these intense COVID lockdowns. Despite extreme conditions, they’ve persisted. We’re grateful for this terrific team.
I’ve never been more convinced about the power and the purpose of American diplomacy or sure about our capacity to meet the challenges of this decisive decade. To the American people: let’s recommit to investing in our core strengths, in our people, in our democracy, in our innovative spirit. As President Biden often says, it’s never a good bet to bet against America. But let’s bet on ourselves and win the competition for the future.
To countries around the world committed to building an open, secure, and prosperous future, let’s work in common cause to uphold the principles that make our shared progress possible and stand up for the right of every nation to write its own future. And to the people of China: we’ll compete with confidence; we’ll cooperate wherever we can; we’ll contest where we must. We do not see conflict.
There’s no reason why our great nations cannot coexist peacefully, and share in and contribute to human progress together. That’s what everything I’ve said today boils down to: advancing human progress, leaving to our children a world that’s more peaceful, more prosperous, and more free.
Thank you very much for listening. (Applause.)
On Wednesday, June 1, U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack will visit Georgetown University in Washington, D.C., where he will give a speech announcing details of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s framework to transform the nation’s food system. The address will underscore USDA’s commitment under the Biden-Harris Administration to increase competition, bolster access to healthy, affordable food, ensure growers and workers receive a greater share of the food dollar, and advance equity as well as climate resilience and mitigation. This announcement provides additional details on how USDA will make good on its June 2021 commitment to invest more than $4 billion to strengthen critical supply chains and address longstanding structural challenges that were revealed and intensified by the pandemic. After the remarks, the Secretary will participate in a conversation on the Food Systems Transformation framework, followed by a press availability. The Secretary’s visit is hosted by USDA and Georgetown University’s Rural Opportunity Initiative, a partnership between the two organizations that aims to foster, study, and promote rural economic development through partnerships between the public and private sectors.
Top Takeaways from latest U.S&. Chamber of Commerce Bulletin:
The Iraqi Parliament’s Anti-Israel Normalization Law
05/26/2022 09:33 PM EDT
Ned Price, Department Spokesperson
The United States is deeply disturbed by the Iraqi Parliament’s passage of legislation that criminalizes normalization of relations with Israel. In addition to jeopardizing freedom of expression and promoting an environment of antisemitism, this legislation stands in stark contrast to progress Iraq’s neighbors have made by building bridges and normalizing relations with Israel, creating new opportunities for people throughout the region.
The United States will continue to be a strong and unwavering partner in supporting Israel, including as it expands ties with its neighbors in the pursuit of greater peace and prosperity for all.
—-
(All that war in Iraq so they could turn terrorist on us again, how nice.)
GALLUP: Americans Remain Steadfast on Policing Reform Needs in 2022
Two years after George Floyd’s murder by Minneapolis police, half of Americans (50%) support “major changes” to policing in the U.S., and another 39% favor “minor changes.”
The Washington Examiner:
HUNTER BIDEN’S LAPTOP IS 100% AUTHENTIC, FORENSIC EXAMINATION CONCLUDES
Yes, it definitely exists. Didn’t need a forensic exam for that. If Jared Kushner, Ivanka, or Dump Jr. knew how to use one, they’d have them too.
City of Mason City offices will be closed on Monday, May 30 for the Memorial Day holiday. This includes City Hall and other City offices and facilities.
Sanitation service staff will not be running routes on Monday, May 30. The make-up day for garbage, recyclable and yard waste collection service for those that normally have pick-up on this day will be Wednesday, June 1 and must be set out by 7 am.
The City’s public transit buses will not operate on Memorial Day.
Gov. Kim Reynolds and Lt. Gov. Adam Gregg released their public schedule for the week of Monday, May 23, 2022 – Sunday, May 29, 2022.
Friday, May 27
Governor Reynolds attends Iowa Governor’s Charity Steer Show 40th Anniversary Kickoff Event
Ronald McDonald House of Des Moines
1441 Pleasant St.
Des Moines, IA
10:00 a.m.
Saturday, May 28
Governor Reynolds attends John Wayne Birthday Celebration
John Wayne Birthplace Museum
205 S. John Wayne Dr.
Winterset, IA
10:30 a.m.
State Department Press Briefing – May 25, 2022
05/25/2022 07:00 PM EDT
Ned Price, Department Spokesperson
WASHINGTON, D.C.
MR PRICE: Good afternoon, everyone.
QUESTION: Good afternoon.
MR PRICE: Before I get to your questions, I would like to take just a moment to highlight an initiative that illustrates the U.S. commitment to pursuing accountability for war crimes and other atrocities committed by members of Russia’s forces in Ukraine, using every tool we have available.
Earlier today, with our European and UK partners, we announced the launch of the Atrocity Crimes Advisory Group for Ukraine, or the ACA.
This multilateral initiative directly supports ongoing efforts by the war crimes units of the Office of the Prosecutor General of Ukraine, the OPG, to document, preserve, analyze evidence of war crimes and other atrocities committed in Ukraine, with a view to criminal prosecutions.
As the Secretary said in a statement earlier today, evidence continues to mount of war crimes and other atrocities committed by members of Russia’s forces in Ukraine. In addition to continued bombardments and missile strikes hitting densely populated areas, causing thousands of civilian deaths, we continue to see credible reports of violence of a different order: unarmed civilians shot in the back; individuals killed execution-style with their hands bound; bodies showing signs of torture; and horrific accounts of sexual violence against women and girls.
The establishment of this multilateral accountability effort, therefore, comes at a critical time. The ACA will provide strategic advice and operational assistance to the war crimes unit of the OPG, the legally constituted authority responsible for prosecuting war crimes and other atrocities in Ukraine. The ACA will reinforce and help coordinate existing U.S., EU, and UK efforts to support justice and accountability for atrocity crimes. It will demonstrate our international solidarity with Ukraine as it seeks to hold Russia accountable.
Although the United States and our partners are supporting a range of international efforts to pursue accountability for atrocities, the OPG will play a crucial role in ensuring that those responsible for war crimes and other atrocities are held accountable at the domestic level. The ACA is an essential element of the United States commitment to seeing that those responsible for such crimes are held to account.
With that, happy to take your questions. Shaun.
QUESTION: Can I follow up on Ukraine?
MR PRICE: Sure.
QUESTION: The – Ukraine has voiced unease. Russia has said it’s going to make it easier for people in parts of Ukraine that are under Russian control to obtain Russian citizenship. Does the United States have a view on that?
MR PRICE: We certainly have a view on some of the horrific tactics that the Russian Federation has employed in parts of Ukraine, eastern Ukraine, where its forces are present. We have seen Russian forces forcibly remove individuals from occupied territory. We have seen Russia’s forces transport Ukrainians to the so-called filtration camps. We have seen Russia’s forces attempt through other ways to subjugate, otherwise subdue the Ukrainian people in these areas.
So to the extent that this is an effort that is only loosely disguised as an element of Russia’s attempt to subjugate the people of Ukraine, to impose their will by force, that is something that we would forcefully reject. It is not entirely unlike Russia’s attempts to manufacture these fake referenda, referenda that are designed to offer the veneer of legitimacy to Russian rule over parts of what is sovereign Ukrainian territory; referenda where Russian-backed officials tend to somehow accrue 90-plus, 99 percent of the vote. It is a tactic that Russia’s forces, the Russian Federation have used in different contexts before – in Crimea in 2014, in Chechnya, more recently our concerns that we voiced with Russia’s aggression against Ukraine in this phase, including in places like Kherson.
QUESTION: Ned, a follow-up. Shooting people in the back and things like this, tied behind – their hands – is that a new thing, or is that the Bucha massacre? Are you looking into old stuff, or all lumped together?
MR PRICE: The reference that the Secretary made in his statement today and the reference I made at the top of course includes Bucha. But we have seen reports of these types of summary executions in places well beyond Bucha. As the Secretary speaks to this, as he has talked about it, he has described a receding tide, a receding tide of brutality. And when Russia’s forces leave a city, a town, a place like Bucha, in the coming days a place like Mariupol, what we have found in its wake are additional reports of these types of atrocities.
QUESTION: Okay. And the ACA, is it going to be something akin or parallel to the ICC, for instance? How will it conduct its work?
MR PRICE: So what the ACA does is bring together multinational experts to provide strategic advice, operational assistance, and capacity building, including technical capacity building in areas such as crime scene and forensic investigations; the drafting of indictments; the collection, preservation of evidence; operational analysis; the investigation of conflict-related violence, including sexual violence; and cooperation with international and national accountability mechanisms.
It specifically includes two key elements. The first is an advisory group to the OPG, the Office of the Prosecutor General, made up of experienced war crimes prosecutors, investigators, and other specialists, based in the region to provide expertise, mentoring, advice, and operational support to the OPG. And the second component is something known as MJTs, or Mobile Justice Teams, composed of both international and Ukrainian experts. These experts will be deployed at the request of the OPG to increase the capacity of the war crimes unit and regional prosecutors to assist the investigation on the ground.
We’ve said this before, but the reason we are focusing at least in the first instance our efforts on the Office of the Prosecutor General and her war crimes unit is precisely because they have the capacity, they have the determination, and importantly they have the jurisdiction to bring these cases to trial, including criminal prosecutions, one of which we have already seen result in a guilty plea.
Simon.
QUESTION: It is U.S. Government officials who will be working in those Mobile Justice Teams?
MR PRICE: Right now these are non-official American experts, individual who bring expertise, knowledge, and know-how, as well as experience in all of these areas.
QUESTION: So they – so those are civilians, but they will travel into Ukraine sort of despite the current warnings of —
MR PRICE: As part of the Mobile Justice Teams, there will be international experts who will be on the ground at the disposal of the Ukrainian prosecutor general and her team whose expertise then can be deployed as appropriate.
Yes.
QUESTION: Hold on —
QUESTION: Will the ACA – will the ACA be able to advise to investigate Putin?
MR PRICE: The ACA is focused on war crimes and potential war crimes in Ukraine, so they will be looking at reports, reports that may well entail much more than reports and could constitute evidence of war crimes. Now, of course, in the first instance they are going to look to criminally prosecute those who are in Ukraine, as is the case now with the Russian soldier who has recently undergone trial. But we have made the point clear that under international humanitarian law it’s not only the individual that pulls the trigger or conducts the war crime on the ground, but it is anyone in the chain of command who was witting and part of a war crime. And so that’s something that more broadly we will look to as well.
QUESTION: Ned, I’m sorry, I missed the top. I’m beginning to think there might be something of a conspiracy with no two-minute warning, or at least I didn’t hear if there was one, so anyway, I apologize.
MR PRICE: I will just – I will make the point, Matt, that everyone else was here on time.
QUESTION: Okay. Well, I apologize for missing the very top, and I hope that you’re prepared to answer this question. And I want to preface it by saying I am not suggesting that it is a waste of time or money to investigate war crimes allegations at all, wherever they take place, whether it’s in Burma, whether it’s in Iraq, whether it’s in Afghanistan, whether it’s in the West Bank, whether it is in Ukraine or Syria. I – that’s fine.
But since the President – President Biden – first said that he believed war crimes were being committed by Russia in Ukraine, there have been, by my counting – correct me if I’m wrong – at least three different initiatives that the United States has either begun, launched, or taken part of to investigate war crimes in – allegations in Ukraine. This latest one says in the joint statement – it says it seeks to streamline coordination and communications efforts to ensure best practices, and most critically, avoid duplication of efforts.
Now, less or just a week ago – like eight days ago – you guys announced that there was this – the creation with $6 million of this new conflict observatory, which is basically going to do the same thing as what this ACA thing is, unless you can tell me that I’m wrong and that it doesn’t.
MR PRICE: I can —
QUESTION: But you had already, when – but you – even before then, after the President’s comments, when the Secretary made his announcement that he had concluded that war crimes were being committed, you guys had also pledged additional funds to NGO investigators who were going to be in the region – maybe not necessarily in Ukraine, but traveling in and collecting evidence and sharing it with the ICC and others.
So this latest thing, which – I’m sure that there’s – it’s being done with good intentions, but how is it not duplicating efforts that you guys have – are already spending millions of dollars on?
MR PRICE: If your point, Matt, is that we are heavily —
QUESTION: I don’t have a point, I just want to know how this is not duplicative of the other three – two – at least two, and maybe three, initiatives that you guys are already doing.
MR PRICE: Well, the premise of your point or perhaps your question seems to be that we’re heavily invested in this. We absolutely are. We are committed to working with the Ukrainian prosecutor general and her team to see to it that we can do everything we can to be helpful in the effort to bring to justice those who are responsible for war crimes. You raised a few different mechanisms; let me see if I can offer some clarity on that.
You are correct that we did launch something called the Observatory in recent weeks. That is —
QUESTION: It was last week.
MR PRICE: That is separate and distinct from this new mechanism. The Observatory is a consortium working with, by the way, some of the same partners who are involved in this, but for a very different purpose. It is not to provide the sort of technical expertise, technical analysis, the writing of indictments, the forensics, the investigation on the ground of potential war crimes. The Observatory is a hub to collect open-source potential evidence pointing to war crimes, not only for authorities in various jurisdictions but for the public, including to continue to shine a spotlight on what are clearly atrocities and apparent war crimes that are ongoing in Ukraine.
This, as I alluded to a moment ago, is quite separate. There is, as I said, two elements to this. There is an advisory group that is made up of war crimes prosecutors, investigators, other specialists to provide expertise, mentoring, advice, operational support, the kind of tactical operational support that you’re not going to see from the Observatory – the writing of an indictment, for example, the forensics investigation. And then, of course, the Observatory does a service by publishing open-source information; but what the ACA does is it helps our Ukrainian partners actually collect that evidence actually on the ground, with Mobile Justice Teams composed of international and Ukrainian experts to be deployed to augment the capacity of the Ukrainian prosecutor general.
You are also right that we have funded various operational partners, again, some of whom are – have been recipients of that funding that we talked about and who are involved in both the Observatory and the ACA. So when we talk about deconfliction and the avoidance of duplication, that is absolutely a goal of the ACA.
QUESTION: Yeah, but it involves the —
MR PRICE: That’s part of the reason why we’re working with the UK and the EU, bringing to bear this technical expertise, this technical know-how, and this technical capacity, so that together with some of our closest partners we can help direct it precisely where the Ukrainian prosecutor general and her team need it.
QUESTION: All right. Well, maybe we can get someone in here to explain to me exactly how these aren’t duplicative, because I don’t get it in what you – I don’t think your response has cleared it up. Maybe it has for others, but not for me. So perhaps we could have a conversation with someone who’s actually directly involved.
So anyway, how much is this ACA going to cost?
MR PRICE: This is something that we’ve just launched today. We don’t have specific figures to release, but we’re working with Congress to allocate additional assistance funds that will continue to support the important work that’s being undertaken.
QUESTION: And then the last one on this is that you have a pretty senior – I don’t know if this was at the top that I missed, but you have some senior officials who are in The Hague today or finishing their trip today. Did you get into that?
MR PRICE: We have not.
QUESTION: Oh. Is that not part of this?
MR PRICE: It is separate.
QUESTION: Well, they seemed to talk about the —
MR PRICE: Well, of course —
QUESTION: I mean, the statement about their visit says that they were talking about the European Democratic Resilience Initiative, EDRI, which is the same thing that –
MR PRICE: But the visit —
QUESTION: — you guys are drawing on for this ACA.
MR PRICE: The visit is not linked to the launch precisely of the ACA.
QUESTION: Okay, all right. So does it have anything to do with more cooperation or increasing cooperation with the ICC and the – the visit I mean.
MR PRICE: The visit has to do, again, with our support for the announcement, the fact that we welcomed the announcement by the ICC prosecutor general looking into the situation in Ukraine. Again, we have said that we are willing to assist the efforts of all of those mechanisms that have the potential to bring to justice, to hold accountable, those who are responsible for war crimes in Ukraine.
In the first instance, as I just said at some length, we are focused on the Ukrainian prosecutor general and her team, precisely because they have the determination, the know-how, and importantly, the jurisdiction to do just that, which they’ve already proven in at least one case. But there’s the Moscow mechanism, there’s a commission of inquiry through the Human Rights Council that we helped to establish, and there’s the ICC, whose announcement we did welcome when it came about.
QUESTION: So just to put a fine point on it, they didn’t go there to say we’re going to do more to help you, we’re just going to continue what we’ve already been doing; is that correct?
MR PRICE: I don’t have conversations to read out. Of course, the visit is ongoing. But we have said that we are prepared to work with the appropriate mechanisms in the pursuit of justice in Ukraine.
Nazira.
QUESTION: To follow on the ACA a little more.
MR PRICE: Sure.
QUESTION: Will the ACA be involved in investigating of war crimes elsewhere, or is it only distinctly about Ukraine?
MR PRICE: This is focused on Ukraine.
QUESTION: Okay. Thank you.
MR PRICE: Nazira?
QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. Price. As you know, the Taliban recent decision ordered all woman during the programming in TV to use mask. It’s too difficult. I don’t know United States has some reaction to them and what their expectation, what they want from the United States or international community because it’s really tough decision. Every day they create a new regulation for the woman.
Number two, can you update me about refugee number, how many came since August 15, and how many expected to come to the United States, plesae? Thank you.
MR PRICE: Thank you for that. You raise the most recent set of restrictions, and it’s important that we dwell on the fact that it’s only the most recent because these restrictions do come in the context of a number of restrictions that the Taliban has imposed on women and girls inside of Afghanistan, including the continuing ban on girls’ secondary access to – access to secondary education and work, restrictions on freedom of movement, and the targeting of peaceful protestors.
We have said – I think I’ve said this to you – that the Taliban’s policies towards women and girls, they are an affront to human rights; they will continue to negatively impact the relationship that the Taliban has and potentially hopes to have not only with the United States but with the rest of the world. We are discussing this with our – with other countries, with our allies and partners. You may have seen the joint statements that came out of the G7, also the joint press statement out of the UN Security Council. The legitimacy, the support the Taliban seeks from the international community, it depends on their conduct, including – and centrally – their respect for the rights of women.
When it comes to the public and private commitments that the Taliban have made. They have made a number of them, including their counterterrorism commitments, including their pledge to respect and to uphold the human rights of women, girls, Afghanistan’s minorities, including access – the freedom of access, freedom of travel for those who wish to leave Afghanistan, and when it comes to ISIS-K and al-Qaida.
Of course, the Taliban has not been living up to the commitment it has made in the realm of human rights, in the realm of what it has pledged to the women and girls of Afghanistan. It is not just the United States that has taken note, but it is a number of countries around the world, including multilateral organizations, including the UN, that have also taken note. And of course that will have implications for the world’s relationship with the Taliban going forward.
QUESTION: A number, too? How many refugee expected to come to the United —
MR PRICE: I don’t have an updated refugee figure to offer, but we can get back to you on that.
QUESTION: Okay. Thank you.
MR PRICE: Yes.
QUESTION: Thank you, Ned. On North Korea and the PRC, so could you give us your reaction to the ballistic missile test yesterday? Is there any indication of another nuclear test? And on the PRC, could you help us understand what would be the main focus of the Secretary’s policy speech tomorrow?
MR PRICE: So on the missile launches that we’ve seen overnight, we condemn the DPRK’s multiple ballistic missile launches that took place last night Eastern Time. These launches are a violation of multiple UN Security Council resolutions and they are a threat to the region, a threat to its peace and stability. We call on the DPRK to refrain from further provocation and to engage in sustained dialogue.
Our commitment to the defense of the ROK and to Japan is ironclad. That was a message that Secretary Blinken delivered to his Japanese and South Korean counterparts shortly after the most recent launches last night. Secretary Austin also spoke to his counterparts. This of course came on the heels of President Biden’s meeting with his Japanese and ROK counterparts in Tokyo and South Korea. It is a testament, we think, to the strength of our alliances with the ROK and Japan that we had this close coordination at multiple levels and multiple principals in the immediate aftermath of the launches of these ballistic missiles. In the Secretary’s call last night – calls last night, all three officials strongly condemned the DPRK’s ballistic missile launches as a clear violation of multiple UN Security Council resolutions. The Secretary noted our commitment to the defense of our treaty allies and affirmed the importance of continued close trilateral cooperation on the threat that is posed by the DPRK and towards the objective of the complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.
We know that the DPRK’s ongoing provocations pose a threat to the region, pose a threat to all of us. And it’s incumbent on the international community to join us in condemning the DPRK’s flagrant and repeated violations of these multiple UN Security Council resolutions and to uphold their obligations under all relevant UN Security Council resolutions.
When it comes to the Secretary’s speech tomorrow, I of course want to allow the Secretary to deliver that speech before we go too far into detail, but he will deliver remarks at the Asia – or at the George Washington University in a speech that is being hosted by the Asia Society. He will outline our approach to the People’s Republic of China. I think you will hear from the Secretary the fact that this relationship is one that will and has the potential to contour the international landscape. The next 10 years will in many ways be the decisive decade in the competition between the United States and China. That’s why even as we’re focused together with our allies and partners on Russia’s aggression in Ukraine, we’ve continued our focus on the long-term challenge of the PRC. And that’s what the Secretary will detail tomorrow, how we’re going to and how we have pursued that.
Will.
QUESTION: Thank you. Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Rudenko said today that he would support helping Ukrainian grain and other grain get out of the Black Sea today in exchange for the lifting of sanctions on Russian exports and financial industry. So I’m wondering if the U.S. supports that given that, as many of us thought, the negotiations that the UN was leading were looking for some sort of sanctions carveout or sanctions exemption on fertilizers and food.
MR PRICE: Well, first and foremost, we continue our close cooperation with our Ukrainian partners. What we said in the lead-up to the invasion is true now: nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine.
You have heard from Russian officials a series of lies, a series of disinformation, regarding the issue of food security and the global food supply. Despite those claims, U.S. sanctions are not causing disruptions to Russia’s agricultural exports. The fact is that U.S. sanctions were specifically designed to allow for the export of agricultural commodities and fertilizer from Russia.
So we certainly won’t lift our sanctions in response to empty promises, and we’ve heard empty promises before from the Russian Federation. I think we have – all have good reason to be skeptical when we hear various pledges and offers from Russia. This was the same country, of course, that for months maintained that it had no intention of invading its neighbor and taking on this brutal war.
So we’ll continue to coordinate closely with our allies and partners on this matter, just as we have since Russia initiated its unjustified and appalling further invasion of Ukraine. It is Russia that continues to destabilize global food markets through its war, through its self-imposed export restrictions, which have raised the cost of food around the globe.
You heard from the Secretary this message last week, but we find it appalling that Russia would seek to weaponize food and energy to try to bring the world to heel. We have never sanctioned food. We have never sanctioned agricultural goods from Russia. Unlike Russia, we have no interest in weaponizing food against the needy. Our nonfood sanctions will remain in place until Putin stops this brutal war against Ukraine’s sovereignty. And we know that the quickest solution to the rising commodity prices, the rising food prices that have had implications around the world, is for the Russians to cease this brutal war, for Russia to stop blockading Ukraine’s ports, for Russia to stop targeting grain silos, to stop targeting grain ships, and to bring this violence to a close.
So we are working along multiple lines of effort together with our allies and partners. You heard about a number of those from the Secretary last week in his remarks at the ministerial in the UN Security Council. But the bottom line is that there is one country that is fully capable of putting an end to this crisis, and that’s Russia.
Yes.
QUESTION: The New York Times today said the Biden administration has accelerated its efforts to reshape Taiwan’s defense systems and that U.S. officials are taking lessons learned from arming Ukraine. Could you describe what some of those lessons are and how they relate to arming Taiwan?
MR PRICE: Well, you’ve heard us talk about the Taiwan Relations Act, and the Taiwan Relations Act stipulates that we have an obligation to make available to Taiwan defense articles and services necessary to enable it to maintain a sufficient self-defense capability. Within recent years, the United States has notified Congress of over $18 billion in arms sales to Taiwan.
We have encouraged the – our partners on Taiwan to push forward with an asymmetric strategy, knowing that an asymmetric strategy, an asymmetric model has – will be the most effective for them should it be necessary. We are in regular, routine conversations with them about the best systems, the best capabilities to pursue that strategy, and we will continue to consult with Congress as we move forward with other potential sales.
Yes, Said.
QUESTION: Thank you. On the Palestinian issue?
MR PRICE: Sure.
QUESTION: Okay. Not only major American news organizations such as AP and CNN have basically laid out almost a clear – clear evidence that the Israelis were behind the killing of Shireen Abu Akleh, but also major Europeans like France 24, DPI, many others, and so on. My question to you – I know you want transparent and thorough investigation and so on, and I’m sure you guys probably have the best investigative assets anywhere in the world. Will the United States pursue its own investigative to determine whether these reports by respectable news agencies and companies and so on are authentic or right on target?
MR PRICE: Said, we have made clear to both Israeli and Palestinian authorities that we expect the investigations to be transparent and impartial – a full, thorough accounting into the circumstances of the killing of Shireen Abu Akleh. We do expect full accountability for those responsible for her killing. Again, we are not going to prejudge that investigation. Both investigations are ongoing. We have conveyed to our partners that we do expect to be updated on the status of their investigations, but in the end, we want to see accountability.
QUESTION: Should there be a time limit on the investigation? Because, I mean, Israel’s record is abysmal in this regard. They can drag on and on and on. Should there be, like, a time limit – say, we expect that you guys will be done with what you are doing by such and such date?
MR PRICE: We’re not going to impose a specific deadline, but these investigations need to be conducted, need to be concluded as rapidly as is possible.
QUESTION: Because the —
QUESTION: Sorry, sorry, just – yesterday I asked you if you were aware of an offer, at least, from the Israelis to – for the U.S. to participate in or to be an observer in their investigation, and you said you weren’t aware of that. Is that still the case?
MR PRICE: That’s still accurate, yes.
QUESTION: Okay. And then —
MR PRICE: Said, did you have another question?
QUESTION: Well, I have another one on this too, and that is the fact that you left out the word “immediate” in what you talked about, what you —
MR PRICE: Well, the investigations are ongoing.
QUESTION: You said – yeah, but yesterday you said you want an immediate – oh, so “immediate” meant the start of the investigation?
MR PRICE: It means —
QUESTION: Like immediately after the incident happened?
MR PRICE: It means the —
QUESTION: It doesn’t mean immediate like you want it done as – what —
MR PRICE: Well, of course, as I just said to Said, we want to see the investigations concluded as quickly as is possible.
QUESTION: Well, why did it drop out? Why did “immediate” drop out of the talking point today? Or did you just skip over it by —
MR PRICE: There has been no change in our policy.
Yes, Said.
QUESTION: Yeah, just a couple more on Gaza. Yesterday marked the 15th anniversary of the blockade on Gaza, and there is a very tight or actually potentially disastrous situation in terms of grain and so on, all factories have stopped and so on. Isn’t it time to really lift the blockade on Gaza? It’s layer after layer of blockades – the Israelis, the Egyptians, you. I mean, everybody is blockading Gaza. Don’t you think that the time has come to lift these blockades?
MR PRICE: Said, we have made clear that obviously we have concern for the humanitarian plight of the Palestinian people in Gaza. It’s precisely why we have taken a series of steps to provide humanitarian assistance to those in need.
Yes, Shaun.
QUESTION: Something you don’t usually address from the podium, but the situation in your home state, the tragedy in Texas with the shooting. As it relates to foreign affairs, your counterpart in Beijing today mentioned it and said that it’s unacceptable that the U.S. hasn’t addressed gun violence, said it’s hypocritical for the U.S. to be raising human rights with China when this goes on. Do you have any response to that? Do you think it’s fair game for Beijing to raise this?
MR PRICE: I don’t have a direct response to it. Perhaps I can get to it in a roundabout way. The toll of watching this, even for those of us who are enmeshed day to day in foreign policy, has been a real punch to the gut, and it’s been a punch that has landed on what is in many ways a bruise that hasn’t healed from just the other day, what we saw in Buffalo. It is a toll that – it’s a devastating human toll, but of course, it has implications for our work here at the department as well.
And as I’ve thought about it, I’ve – couldn’t help but focus on President Biden’s conception of American leadership. He’s made the point that it is not the example of our power, it’s the power of example that at our best we use to lead. We do so when we are at our best. The fact is that what happens in this country is magnified on the world stage, and countries around the world, people around the world are going to fixate on what transpires here, oftentimes out of envy, but again, that’s when we’re at our best. And that’s what we want. We’ve been a city on a hill, the last best hope, a shining beacon to the world, and again, when we’re at our best, that example is one that countries around the world would seek to emulate.
But the opposite is also true, can also be true. We have the potential to set an example for the world that no country would wish to emulate, and rather than be an object of envy, we have the potential to be a source of confusion, a source of disbelief for our closest friends and allies; worse yet, an object of pity, or in the case of competitors and adversaries, a source of – a source of schadenfreude, a source of in some cases glee.
So the power of our example has the potential to be our greatest asset. On days like today, however, it’s that example, an example that the world is clearly watching, that will have implications for our standing. And we’re very mindful of that.
QUESTION: What does that mean? On this point, I mean, it really is heartbreaking. And I just want to remind everybody, since Columbine in 1999, upward of 300,000 Americans have been hit by gun violence. I mean, this year alone, this is the 27th mass shooting. Last year, 42 mass shootings. We all have kids, and grandkids in my case. I mean, you talk about genocide. Isn’t this considered a genocide if you look at it in this kind of perspective, in this context for which, perhaps, the gun lobby ought to be at least partially held responsible?
MR PRICE: Said, genocide has a very specific definition, so of course I’m not going to weigh in on that. But you —
QUESTION: Massacre after massacre after massacre.
MR PRICE: You don’t have to tell me – and I will just say on a personal level, I was the age of the kids at Columbine in 1999 when they were targeted in Littleton. And now that we’re nearly 25 years beyond that and there are kids in elementary schools much younger than me who have been targeted on a mass scale twice in the past 10 years, it’s not lost on me; I don’t think it’s lost on anyone.
QUESTION: Are you aware – other than what Shaun mentioned about the Chinese foreign ministry spokesman, are you aware of instances in which rivals or adversaries have taken – you said the word “glee,” or used derision, made comments, derisive comments? And has this come up at embassies?
MR PRICE: In the aftermath of events like this, we often do receive formal notes of condolence from other governments.
QUESTION: That’s understandable.
MR PRICE: I am not aware of other instances of that, but I have every expectation that my colleagues around the world who are posted in embassies and posts around the world are hearing directly from their counterparts. Again, I think it’s probably a mixture of condolence, confusion, of disbelief how something like this could continue to happen. But also importantly, an air of regret. Our friends and allies around the world want us to be that beacon, they want us to be that object of envy. And when we give the world reason to pity or to change that assessment of us, it is not only not in our interests, it not only has a cost for us, but it has a cost for them, too.
QUESTION: Well, are you aware of anything that U.S. officials or the administration has found to be particularly offensive in comments from foreign governments or foreign officials?
MR PRICE: I’m not. I’ve heard limited public comments.
Yes.
QUESTION: Ned, on Iran, I asked you this question yesterday, but it looks like Israel and members of Congress today have welcomed the administration commitment not to de-list the IRGC. Is there any official or public commitment that you can announce today in this regard other than the reports from yesterday?
MR PRICE: I’m not in a position to speak to the details of our negotiations. You’ve heard us say before that we’re not going to negotiate these issues in public. But what I will say – and Special Envoy Malley mentioned this in his opening statement earlier today – if Iran maintains demands that go beyond the scope of the JCPOA, we’ll continue to reject them and there will be no deal. The discussions in Vienna are focused on the nuclear element, the JCPOA itself. That is what we have spent more than a year now negotiating indirectly with the Iranians. The two sides of this – one, the sanctions relief that we are prepared to take should there be a mutual return to compliance with the JCPOA; and on the other hand, the nuclear steps that Iran would need to take if there were a mutual return to compliance, the nuclear steps that would see to it that Iran is once again permanently and verifiably prohibited from obtaining a nuclear weapon.
QUESTION: And on other topic, special presidential envoy for hostage affairs has met with General Abbas on Monday, Abbas Ibrahim, and discussed U.S. citizens who are missing or detained in Syria, as a State Department spokesperson has said. What role did the U.S. ask General Ibrahim to play in this regard?
MR PRICE: Well, as you alluded to, I can confirm that Roger Carstens, our special presidential envoy for hostage affairs, did meet with General Abbas Ibrahim on May 23rd to discuss U.S. citizens who are missing or detained in Syria. You won’t be surprised, Michel, to know that we are not going to comment on the specifics of those discussions beyond restating the fact that we have no higher priority than seeing the safe release of Americans who are wrongfully detained or held hostage anywhere around the world. Of course, we talked about the case of Austin Tice yesterday, an American who has been – who has been separated from his family for nearly 10 years, who has spent a quarter of his life separated from his family. He is always top of mind. The other Americans who are detained in places like Iran and Russia and Afghanistan and Venezuela and elsewhere are always top of mind for us too.
QUESTION: Do you have any information that he is still alive, and what do you expect from General Ibrahim to do after this visit?
MR PRICE: It is our goal to see Austin safely returned to his family so that he can once again give them a hug, he can be with them for the first time in 10 years. That is what we’re working towards.
Yes, Shannon.
QUESTION: From that hearing this morning, we did hear a commitment from the State Department that should a deal be reached with Iran that it would be submitted to Congress for approval. Now, that’s something of a departure from what Secretary Blinken said just last month. Can you explain the change?
MR PRICE: There has been no change. What we have always said is that we would follow the law, we would follow INARA. And what Special Envoy Malley clarified today is that we would submit, pursuant to INARA, for congressional approval a deal if we were to reach it.
QUESTION: But the Secretary did say that he would submit it to the lawyers. Did the lawyers make that determination?
MR PRICE: Of course, we’re going to consult closely with lawyers to determine what the law – what the INARA, what the law actually stipulates in this case, and pursuant to INARA, it is our intention to submit it for congressional review if – and it’s a big if – there is a mutual return to compliance with the JCPOA.
QUESTION: Well, wait a second. So you’re – so then it’s the lawyers first? So if – if, and it’s a big if – you get a deal —
MR PRICE: No, I just said we will submit it to Congress for review pursuant to INARA.
QUESTION: Well, you said it would go to the lawyers to see what INARA requires. Is it your – is it the administration’s belief that simply rejoining the 2015 deal does not constitute a new deal and that therefore it doesn’t need to be submitted to review? It can be given to the Congress so they can take a look at, but it isn’t subject to the delays that INARA – there’s a time period here that will need to be overcome to get it done quickly if you are to get back into one. So are you saying that it will go through the whole thing, the whole INARA thing regardless?
MR PRICE: You heard from Special Envoy Malley this morning that it is our intention to submit the deal to Congress for review if we are able to get there.
QUESTION: Okay, so that means that the administration believes that even if the deal that might – you – that you might get is simply a rejoining of the 20 – of the JCPOA as it existed in 2015, that means that you will still submit – the administration still believes that it should and will submit —
MR PRICE: It is our intention to submit it to Congress for review.
Yes.
QUESTION: A couple things on Russia. Nobel Peace Prize winner Dmitry Muratov will be – I believe he’s already at the State Department. He’s got a meeting with Deputy Secretary Donfried. Increasingly, Russian journalists back at home and abroad are under pressure. Most recently we had two reporters that got charged for, I believe, disseminating, quote/unquote, “fake news.” And separately but not unrelated, Duma recently passed another legislation going after English-speaking-language media, to ease up prosecutions against them without any court order. But – meeting with Muratov is one way to express your support, but can you be more specific how you’re going to support those Russian journalists and foreign media at home and abroad who are trying to be truth-tellers in this crucial time?
MR PRICE: Yes. So, importantly, one of the elements of that is to stand in solidarity with those Russian journalists, many of whom are inside Russia operating under what even before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine could have been described as incredibly difficult. Now, of course, President Putin’s efforts to manipulate even further the information environment to suppress the truth, to keep from his people the true motivations, the true costs, the true consequences of this war have made the operating environment for journalists in Russia even more difficult. And of course, the Duma has done its part: the sentencing, the potential for jail terms for anyone who would dare call this war anything other than the benign-sounding special military operation.
We have seen Russian media outlets have to shutter their operations. We have seen journalists forced to flee Russia. We have also seen – and you referenced a couple cases – journalists who have been thrown behind bars for their persistence in doing nothing but peacefully continuing to perform their indispensable function, a function that is indispensable inside Russia and a function that is indispensable for those of us living and viewing this from afar.
It is our goal to do everything we can responsibly to see to it that the information environment in Russia is not further constrained. That’s precisely why we have urged stakeholders around the world not to enact so-called internet blackouts on Russia, to keep information flowing to Russia, to keep the internet free and open and interoperable within Russia itself.
Now, of course, this is very challenging for any country to do given the fact that the Kremlin really does have a tight grip on the information flow, but we will continue to do what we can to support Russian journalists, to support Russian media organizations that are attempting to do their work, whether they are now located outside of Russia or to those who are remaining inside Russia.
QUESTION: Another Russia-related question, if I may?
QUESTION: On Saudi Arabia?
MR PRICE: One more question?
QUESTION: Yeah. On cyber security, you expressed previously your concerns about Russia’s cyber activities. There are signals, most recently coming from Moscow – National Security Council Deputy Secretary (inaudible) sent out a message saying that they are planning to put together agreements between Russia and a number of countries such as Serbia, Tajikistan, Azerbaijan. I’m just wondering what kind of reaction would that invite from the West if they move forward with that.
MR PRICE: Well, to put it mildly, the Russian Federation has not proved itself to be a responsible actor in cyberspace. So we would certainly caution countries against entering into such agreements.
Yes.
QUESTION: On Saudi Arabia, Axios reported that two advisors for President Biden, Brett McGurk and Hochstein, are actually on a secret mission or secret trip to Saudi Arabia for a possible increase in oil production for – to discuss the islands and for possible normalization. Are you aware of that or can you comment on this?
MR PRICE: I’ve seen the report. I don’t have any travel to speak to at this time. We have spoken at length, including at senior levels, about the critical importance of the strategic ties between the United States and Saudi Arabia, how strengthening those ties, putting those ties on stable footing, can work to the benefit of both countries. I think we’ve seen that across different realms in recent weeks, in recent months.
We’ve talked about Yemen here. Now that we have a truce, something that our Saudi partners were quite helpful in helping working with the UN special envoy, working with our special envoy, working with other stakeholders in the region to achieve, it has enabled humanitarian access to parts of the country that have been denied critical humanitarian supplies for far too long, and it has quelled the violence that has plagued Yemen for far too long dating back to 2014.
We have, of course, seen welcome steps with regards to the kingdom’s relationship with Lebanon, the kingdom’s relationship with its other Gulf neighbors, but the fact is that many of these steps also work to our benefit. Of course, there are 70,000 Americans who live in Saudi Arabia. They – these Americans, like our Saudi partners, are encountering legitimate security threats. So we’ll continue to work closely with our Saudi partners to counter the threats to both of our interests as we continue to support a relationship that works to the benefit of both of our countries.
QUESTION: Thank you.
MR PRICE: Yes.
QUESTION: China is also said to be pursuing a new regional agreement with Pacific Island nations that would expand Beijing’s role in policing maritime cooperation and cyber security. They’re also planning to offer scholarships for more than 2,000 workers and young diplomats from the region. Do you see this as a reaction to President Biden’s trip to Japan and meeting with allies? And what concerns do you have about this expanded regional agreement, if any?
MR PRICE: I think it would be a stretch to call this a reaction to President Biden’s engagement. I think this may be a reflection – the PRC’s response to our sustained engagement with the region since we came into office. Of course, President Biden’s visit to Japan, to South Korea, was only the latest element of that, but we have had senior officials from the White House, senior officials from the State Department, travel to the region, including to the Pacific Islands region, to speak of our vision for an affirmative partnership with the countries of the region.
This is precisely what Secretary Blinken laid out when – from Indonesia. He spoke of our Indo-Pacific strategy, our strategy for the region that depicts the United States as a partner of choice, not a partner of compulsion, and since we have repeatedly and consistently spoken of what we can bring to the relationships with countries in the Pacific Islands.
When it comes to what we have seen of the PRC’s foreign minister’s intention to travel, we’re aware of media reports of his travel. We are also aware that China seeks to negotiate a range of arrangements during the foreign minister’s visit to the region. We are concerned that these reported agreements may be negotiated in a rushed, non-transparent process. At the same time, we respect the ability of countries of the region to make sovereign decisions in the best interests of their people.
It’s worth noting that the PRC has a pattern of offering shadowy, vague deals with little transparency or regional consultation in areas related to fishing, related to resource management, development assistance, and more recently, even security practices. And these recent security agreements have been conducted with little regional consultation, provoking public concern not only in the United States but across the Indo-Pacific region. And we don’t believe that importing security forces from the PRC and their methods will help any Pacific Island country; on the other hand, doing so could only seek to fuel regional and international tensions and increase concerns over Beijing’s expansion of internal – of its internal security apparatus to the Pacific.
So we have had recent engagements with our Pacific Island counterparts; this, of course, was a discussion in the context of the Quad at the leader level with President Biden and the newly sworn-in Australian prime minister and our other Quad partners. This, of course, was a topic of discussion when Secretary Blinken traveled to the Pacific Island region in February and spoke in very concrete terms regarding what the United States is able to offer in our affirmative partnerships.
Yes?
QUESTION: Ned, there is an Iraqi delegation in town. Did any official from this building meet with them?
MR PRICE: I do not know offhand. If there was a meeting, we’ll let you know.
QUESTION: Sorry, just back on the Pacific – on the islands. I mean, China is also an Indo-Pacific country, correct?
MR PRICE: Correct.
QUESTION: And so you – as long as it’s benign, you wouldn’t have any issue with them signing deals, right?
MR PRICE: Of course. These are sovereign decisions of individual countries.
QUESTION: Okay. Okay. So the importation of non – of security forces from countries other than China into the Pacific Island region wouldn’t cause an issue with you?
MR PRICE: The importation of – I’m sorry?
QUESTION: Non-Chinese security forces. I don’t know, say Australians or Americans or non-Chinese.
MR PRICE: What we have seen – these are —
QUESTION: These are sovereign decisions for the Pacific Islands to make.
MR PRICE: These are sovereign decisions. Our concern is that when the PRC has grown increasingly involved in the region in these – with various countries, we’ve seen a range of behavior that can only be described as increasingly problematic: assertion of unlawful maritime claims, ongoing militarization of disputed features in the South China Sea, predatory economic activities including illegal unregulated fishing, and then the investments that are extractive rather than beneficial to the countries that are subject to them, that often undermine good governance, often fuel corruption, and often undermine protections for human rights.
QUESTION: Can I just follow up —
MR PRICE: Yes.
QUESTION: – one more time on that? The – I know you said that – the concerns that they’re not transparent. Is there diplomacy on the part of the United States with the South Pacific nations specifically on this asking them either to reject it or to look at it more carefully?
MR PRICE: We look at this not through the China lens, but through the lens of how we can partner with these countries. So our pitch to them is not the negative; it is very much the affirmative. It is what the United States can bring to the table, how we bring it to the table, the high standards that we bring in terms of our partnerships, in terms of our investments, and how, when we work together, when we work together cooperatively, we can benefit both of our peoples.
Yes, sir.
QUESTION: Yes. Ned, I have two questions on Turkey and Greece. The first question is that there have been – is it true that the United States are mediating between Greece and Turkey to end the crisis caused by President Erdoğan? If you don’t have an answer, can you take that question?
MR PRICE: Mediating between —
QUESTION: Mediating between Athens and Ankara.
MR PRICE: We talked about this yesterday.
QUESTION: Yes.
MR PRICE: We encourage our NATO Allies, including, of course, Greece and Turkey, to work together to maintain peace and security in the region and to resolve their differences diplomatically. We also encourage them to avoid rhetoric that could further raise tensions.
QUESTION: But when you say you encourage, you talk to them? You mediate?
MR PRICE: We – these are – these have been – this has been a topic of discussions with our Greece and Turkish allies.
QUESTION: I have another question I asked you yesterday but you didn’t give me an answer. What are you going to do if Turkey attacks Greece? Because there are a lot of reports that Erdogan is planning to invade the Greek islands. The situation is very serious.
MR PRICE: That is a hypothetical that I’m just not going to entertain. Again, our message remains to both our allies – in this case, Turkey and Greece – that they should work together to maintain peace and security in the region and to resolve any differences diplomatically.
Yes.
QUESTION: Is there a contingency at NATO, what happens if one Ally attacks another? Do all the other ones gang up and come to the —
MR PRICE: That would be a question best directed at NATO.
Yes.
QUESTION: But there are (inaudible), I mean, Greece and Turkey went at it, right?
MR PRICE: Yes, please.
QUESTION: Thank you, Ned. I had a question about something that you mentioned yesterday. You said you’re deeply concerned about the potential escalation of the military situation in Syria. Have you communicated that to your Turkish counterparts? And are there or will there be any diplomatic efforts to convince Turkey not to escalate the situation there?
MR PRICE: We have engaged with our Turkish allies on this question, in the first instance, to learn more about the proposal that President Erdogan first voiced within recent days. We’ve done so from our embassy, from the department here as well.
Yes.
QUESTION: Yemen?
MR PRICE: Yes.
QUESTION: So the truce deadline is approaching. Can you tell us about – anything about the effort to extend the truce?
MR PRICE: We’ll have more to say as the time gets closer, but this has been a priority of ours, in the first instance not only to lay the groundwork for the humanitarian truce, groundwork that took – that was set in place over the course of many months of our Special Envoy Tim Lenderking working very closely with the UN’s special envoy – Hans Grundberg in this case – working closely with our Saudi partners, working closely with other Gulf partners, working closely with other stakeholders in the region. We have sought to consolidate and to reinforce the truce not only because it brings additional stability and security to the people of Yemen, but because it has very practical effects. It has allowed humanitarian aid to reach individuals in parts of Yemen that have not been able to receive adequate aid for far too long.
We have also seen concrete steps in terms of the first flights that have departed Yemen en route to Amman. We have seen encouraging signs that the parties are looking to consolidate and to perpetuate the current conditions and the steps that have given way to this.
QUESTION: Ned, on —
QUESTION: So you’re optimistic?
MR PRICE: Again, I’m not going to be optimistic, I’m not going to be pessimistic, but we are going to do everything we can diplomatically to reinforce the humanitarian truce and the increased stability and security that we’ve seen in recent weeks.
QUESTION: On Yemen, are you aware of reports that – of the death of former USAID employee Abdul Hamid Al-Ajmi, who was one of the people who was taken hostage, prisoner by the Houthis?
MR PRICE: As you know, Matt, we’ve been unceasing in our diplomatic efforts to seek the release of our Yemeni staff in Sana’a. We’ve demanded that the Houthis release our detained current and former U.S. locally employed Yemeni staff in Sana’a. We’re committed to ensuring the safety of those who have served with us. When it comes to this case, we were deeply saddened by the news of the death of one of our retired employees. This individual passed away in Houthi detention with no contact with his family during the last six months of his life. We express our most sincere condolences to his family and loved ones, but we’re not in a position to provide further detail.
QUESTION: Well, okay, maybe not, but is it your understanding that the only reason that he was taken prisoner is because of his affiliation or former affiliation with the embassy, with the U.S. Government?
MR PRICE: We have seen a number of former LE staff, individuals who previously worked with and for our embassy in Sana’a, held in detention. I couldn’t speak to the motivations, but of course, the former affiliation is a commonality that many of these detainees share.
Yes.
QUESTION: On Lebanon, Ned, the situation at all levels is deteriorating rapidly there. Is there any U.S. plan to intervene, to help, to pressure the officials to move forward with reforms there?
MR PRICE: Well, we spoke of this in the immediate aftermath of the May 15th parliamentary elections, but we were pleased to see that the elections took place on time in Lebanon and without major security incidents. The most difficult tasks now await. We encourage Lebanon’s political leaders to recommit themselves to the hard work that lies ahead to implement the needed reforms, including the reforms that are necessary to rescue the economy.
We also urge the swift formation of a government capable of and committed to undertaking the hard work required to restore the confidence of the Lebanese people and the international community. The economy, of course, is in quite dire straits. These reforms are necessary for a number of reasons, including the fact that they are required to bring the IMF agreement to fruition to help rescue Lebanon’s economy and put it back on the path towards sustainability and success.
QUESTION: On this topic too, Assistant Secretary Barbara Leaf has met with other U.S. officials with the Lebanese foreign minister in Washington. Can you elaborate on that meeting? What did they discuss?
MR PRICE: I suspect our Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs will have a readout for you for that.
Yes.
QUESTION: Back to Iran quickly. There is some reporting that the U.S. has seized a cargo of Iranian crude oil from a Russian-flagged tanker in Greece or in Greek waters. I wondered – I think that this ship had been seized last month, but I wonder if you could confirm the U.S. action to seize that.
And separately, the State Department announced today some new sanctions on an oil-smuggling, money-laundering network linked to the Qods Force. I wonder with these kind of – these kind of actions happening while you insist that you’re still trying to get back into the JCPOA, don’t they signal to Iran – or don’t they send sort of an opposite message to Iran in terms of trying to get back into the deal that you are taking these specific actions against the Iranians?
MR PRICE: I couldn’t speak to the signal that Iran is receiving. The signal that we are sending is that we are not going to tolerate the illicit activities of the Qods Force, of other Iranian proxies, terrorist groups, that receive Iranian support. We have been clear all along that we absolutely seek a mutual return to compliance with the JCPOA that would, in the first instance, put Iran’s nuclear program back into a box, to once again permanently and verifiably prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon; but at the same time, we are going to use every appropriate authority that we have to take on the broader set of challenges that Iran poses. That includes its support for proxies. That includes its support for terrorist groups. That includes its other destabilizing activities in the region. That includes its ballistic missile program.
The fact is that every single challenge, including those I just listed and more, is made all the more difficult to address as long as Iran’s nuclear program is in a position to gallop forward without the strict limits that the JCPOA previously imposed.
So we are continuing down this dual path to attempt to put these strict limits back on Iran’s nuclear program just as we push back and hold Iran accountable for its other illicit activities, but also knowing that if and when we permanently and verifiably have Iran’s nuclear program once again contained and confined, we are going to be able to take on these other challenges together with our allies and partners – and in some cases, potentially diplomatically as well – much more effectively knowing that an unconstrained Iranian nuclear program would be the most significant threat that we can and do face.
QUESTION: And on the tanker?
MR PRICE: On the tanker, I don’t have anything to offer.
Yes.
QUESTION: On Iran and Russia, can you fill us in on the statement that you guys put out there this morning in terms of designating a network that involves Russian – high-level Russian officials and IRGC? Are there other countries involved? Is there an ongoing investigation behind this action?
MR PRICE: So the Department of the Treasury can provide you the full set of details on this. It essentially boils down to the fact that one of the designated individuals has raised funds for the Qods Force in coordination with senior levels of the Russian Government and intelligence apparatus. But I understand my colleagues at the Department of the Treasury can provide you fuller details.
QUESTION: Do you have the name?
MR PRICE: I’m sorry?
QUESTION: Is the person a Kremlin —
MR PRICE: They can get you the full details.
QUESTION: Okay. And my last question —
QUESTION: 
BREAKING NEWS VIA NY TIMES:
Trump Said to Have Reacted Approvingly to Jan. 6 Chants About Hanging Pence
The House committee investigating the Capitol assault has heard accounts of the former president’s remarks as he watched the riot unfold on television.
—-
Anyone not think the televised hearings coming up won’t be incredible?
His own vice president. Trump throws anybody under the bus, anytime, anywhere, for the slightest reason, or no reason at all.
Key work is, “said”.
You are a real piece of work anon. If Trump was on television and stated he was all for hanging Pence, you would say fake news, they took it out of context or he meant it as a joke.
Top Takeaways from U.S. Chamber of Commerce Bulletin:
MASON CITY SPORTS ANNOUNCEMENT:
The MCHS Baseball games vs. Marshalltown tonight (WEDNESDAY) at Roosevelt Field have been postponed due to weather.
GALLUP: Feelings of Job Security Remain High in U.S.
More than seven in 10 Americans rate the U.S. job market positively, and U.S. workers largely feel secure in their jobs.
Secretary of State Blinken’s Calls with Republic of Korea Foreign Minister Park and Japanese Foreign Minister Hayashi
05/25/2022 07:52 AM EDT
Office of the Spokesperson
The following is attributable to Spokesperson Ned Price:
Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken held separate calls yesterday with Republic of Korea Foreign Minister Park Jin and Japanese Foreign Minister Hayashi Yoshimasa following the DPRK’s ballistic missile launches. Secretary Blinken, Foreign Minister Park, and Foreign Minister Hayashi strongly condemned the DPRK’s ballistic missile launches as a clear violation of multiple UN Security Council resolutions. Secretary Blinken noted the United States’ commitments to the defense of the Republic of Korea and Japan remains ironclad and affirmed the importance of continuing close trilateral cooperation with the ROK and Japan to achieve the complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.
I wonder how many dead children are needed before this country does something.
what do you expect from this administration.
More than the last one. Thoughts and prayers seem rather insignificant.
Trump would attend a gun rally the next day, across the street from the tragedy. That’s how low these people are.
Hypothetically of course.
You can’t even discuss the tragic issue that has been going on for far too long, you just have to go political.
Dumbass, you truly are a prime candidate for “thinning the herd”.
What if it were your child or grandchild, would you just brush it off and make an idiotic comment like you did?
Well, Joe, I think you are responding to NIT, but, in case you weren’t, thinning the herd should be a phrase utilized by the right as they once again scream “Guns don’t kill people”. They do, of course, but they have to be engaged by a human (most of the time). The problem the right won’t address is the number of guns in this country and how accessible they are. I just watched Greg Abbott praise the tactical response team (which he should have) but make no mention of how we must stop this from happening. He also had no praise for the teachers who were killed, only thoughts and prayers. If this had happened in Iowa, we would have heard the same from Reynolds.
Hypothetically of course.
No worries, Alex Jones will soon declare it never happened and make it all better.
I think Alex has kinda learned his lesson. Expensively painful, I am sure. But the right wants us to forget this atrocity today. If Alex can help Americans do that, then i am sure the Repugs will back him.
Biden sends hundreds of U.S. troops back to Somalia
I saw only trump made the ‘ok to fly into Russia’ list. Even Joni made the ‘not welcome’ list.
Like normal, you can’t make a coherent argument to the topic, so you have to revert to “Orangeman Bad” mentality.
The topic is Vegetable in Residence sends hundreds of troops back to Somalia.
This after touting how, he is the President to get us out of others’ wars.
Trump screwed things up so badly that he had no choice.
“This decision was based on a request from [Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III] and included advice from senior commanders and, of course, concern for the safety of our troops who have incurred additional risk by deploying in and out of Somalia on an episodic basis for the past 16 months.”
This is a return/repositioning of several hundred troops in Africa. Sort of different than bringing home 1000’s of troops from Afghanistan (Biden, thank you) not to mention, what, a trillion $ a year in that sand hell hole? (to accomplish nothing)
PS: Orange Man called our military heroes “suckers” and “losers” … were you asleep for that or too busy hugging your AR-15 in bed? What did he say about our captured POWs?
Get a clue.
I am thankful you aren’t a Democrat too. You would be an embarrassment to whatever party you were in.
He’s scattering our military in preparation for when the shit really hits the fan.
What a shit pit of a website.
Hardly anyone comments on here now due to the site owner being a prick & censoring people. What a douchbag & a loser.
He likes to play little games to keep people form commenting. But he has not the talent nor the skill level to accomplish that. He’s just a narcissistic”copy & paste” ass clown.
While somewhat true, I’m surprised that this comment is still up while other newsworthy comments are deleted. Enter the Whiner’s Den and post your rants, raves, observations, news tips and confessions.
Secretary of State Blinken’s Call with Ukrainian Foreign Minister Kuleba
05/24/2022 08:08 AM EDT
Office of the Spokesperson
The below is attributable to Spokesperson Ned Price:
Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken spoke today with Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba to follow up on their May 15 meeting in Berlin. The two leaders discussed ongoing diplomatic efforts to address the consequences of Russia’s unprovoked and unjustified war against Ukraine and to hold the Kremlin to account. The Secretary noted the global food security crisis resulting from President Putin’s brutal war requires a global response, and they discussed potential means to export Ukraine’s grain to international markets. The Secretary conveyed details on the $40.1 billion supplemental appropriations act signed by President Biden on May 21, which provides further funding for security, economic, and humanitarian assistance to Ukraine and countries impacted by the war. The Secretary again underscored the United States’ strong support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity in the face of Moscow’s aggression.
GALLUP: One in Three Americans Think Pandemic Is Over
One-third of Americans think the pandemic is over, and a majority say their lives are at least somewhat back to normal. Most expect COVID-19-related disruptions in society to continue through the end of the year or longer.
Mason City Room May 17, 2022
Mason City, Iowa 7:00 P.M.
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CITY COUNCIL
The City Council of the City of Mason City, Iowa, met in regular session pursuant to law and rules of said Council, in the Mason City Room of the Mason City Public Library, at 7:00 P.M., on May 17, 2022. The meeting was called to order by the Mayor and on roll being called there were present, Paul Adams Mayor Pro tem in the Chair, and the following Council Members: Jaszewski, Masson, Adams, Symonds, Thoma, Lee (left Council Chambers at 7:21 P.M.). Absent: Mayor Schickel
Adopt Agenda: Motion, Lee; 2nd, Jaszewski Item #22 be moved to Item #1, preceding the Administrator’s Report and that the agenda be adopted. AYES: All (Motion carried.)
22. Agreement with SMARTcity and SAFEcity Solutions: Motion, Jaszewski; 2nd, Lee that Resolution No. 22-99, approving Master Services Agreement between Sector, LLC and the City of Mason City, Iowa and authorizing Mayor to execute same, be adopted. Discussion followed regarding the benefits to downtown Mason City, the additional oversight provided, transparency, the upfront cost and the revenue anticipated to be generated from ads, etc. AYES: All (Motion carried.)
Council Member Lee left Council Chambers at 7:21 p.m.
1. City Administrator Burnett presented his Monthly Activity Report. Council comments and questions followed the report.
Prior to adopting the Consent Agenda Item #11, #12, #16 and #17 were removed to be acted upon separately.
Consent Agenda: Regular Minutes of May 3, 2022; Claims dated May 5 and 12, 2022 in the amount of $9,150,169.81; Plaza Mexico – Class C Liquor License, Catering Privilege; Las Palmas Restaurant – Class C Liquor, Outdoor Service; Mills Fleet Farm – Class B Wine, Class C Beer; Wild Bill’s Billiards – Class C Liquor, Outdoor Service; Music Man Square – Catering Privilege, Class C Liquor; Mason City Brewing – Class A Beer, Outdoor Service; The Corner Pizza and Ale House – Class C Liquor License; Mason City Brewing – Expanded Outdoor Service Area; Simply Nourished – Outdoor Service Area July 24, 2022 through July 29, 2022; Fat Hill Brewing expanded Outdoor Service for July 26, 2022 through July 28, 2022; Appoint/hire Tyler Rowell as Police Officer at four-year step, $33.87/hour; Request RFP’s for the City Hall Phone System Replacement; Resolution No. 22-100, award of contract to Abdo, LLC of Mankato/Edina Minnesota for the City of Mason City Auditing Services for Fiscal Year 2022-2026 Audits; Resolution No. 22-101, regarding a special election on the imposition of a Local Option Sales and Services Tax within the City of Mason City, Iowa; Resolution No. 22-102, approving the allocation of SLFRF/ARPA funds for the City of Mason City; Resolution No. 22-103, approving the purchase of a lagoon mixing pump from Eldon Stutsman Inc. of Hills, Iowa for the Water Reclamation Facility; Resolution No. 22-104, award of contract for professional services to WHKS & Co. of Mason City, Iowa for FY23 2022-2023 Sanitary Sewer Repairs; Resolution No. 22-105, authorizing the temporary closing of public ways for North Iowa Band Festival; Resolution No. 22-106, approving the proposal for the lease of a motorcycle for the Police Department at a cost of $1.00 and authorizing execution of lease agreement from Harley Davidson, Inc.; Resolution No. 22-107, approving an encroachment permit for Pottery on the Plaza located at 14 South Federal Avenue to host outdoor pottery painting events in front of the business; Resolution No. 22-108, approving the permanent placement of four pieces of public art (River City Sculptures) in downtown Mason City; Resolution No. 22-109, approving and authorizing execution of an agreement for consulting services between the North Iowa Corridor Economic Development Corporation and RDG Planning & Design, Inc. to prepare a joint comprehensive plan for Cerro Gordo County, the City of Mason City, and the City of Clear Lake (subcontracting jurisdictions); Resolution No. 22-110, fixing a date for a public hearing on the proposal to enter into a development agreement with West Lakes P & S, L.L.C., and providing for publication of notice thereof, was presented. Motion, Masson; 2nd, Symonds that all items in the Consent Agenda be approved and Resolutions adopted. AYES: All (Motion carried.)
11. Purchase Monroe Park Shelter: Motion, Jaszewski; 2nd, Thoma that Resolution No. 22-111, approving the purchase of a shelter to be installed in Monroe Park from Outdoor Recreation Products of Omaha, Nebraska, be adopted. Questions followed regarding whether this would include the installation. AYES: All (Motion carried.)
12. Sanitary Sewer CCTV Inspection – Phase 4: Motion, Jaszewski; 2nd, Symonds that Resolution No. 22-112, award of contract for professional services to WHKS & Co. of Mason City, Iowa for the Sanitary Sewer CCTV Inspection – Phase 4, be adopted. Clarification was made regarding whether televising the sewer would be a separate contract (it would). AYES: All (Motion carried.)
16. MOA to Fund a 5 Year Pilot Study Using Health IM: Motion, Symonds; 2nd, Thoma that Resolution No. 22-113, approving and authorizing a Memorandum of Understanding between the Mason City Police Department and Central Iowa Community Services to fund a five year pilot study using HealthIM, be adopted. Comments made that this was a great idea. AYES: All (Motion carried.)
17. Adopting the Revised Personnel Policy Manual: Motion, Adams; 2nd, Masson that Resolution No. 22-114, adopting the revised Personnel Policy Manual for the City of Mason City, Iowa, be adopted. Discussion followed regarding what personnel this would encompass, when the various union contracts were up, how this compared to Union contracts, etc. AYES: All (Motion carried.)
Budget Amendment #2 FY Ending June 30, 2022: The Public Hearing was held as per published notice. Mayor Pro tem Adams asked if there were any written comments or objections or anyone on Zoom that would like to comment with Burnett replying there were no written comments and no “raised hands” via Zoom. There being no comments the Public Hearing was declared closed. Motion, Jaszewski; 2nd Thoma that Resolution No. and 22-115, amending the budget (#2) for fiscal year ending June 30, 2022 City of Mason City, Iowa, be adopted. Clarification was made regarding the reserves and general fund status. AYES: All (Motion carried.)
Adjourn: The Mayor adjourned the meeting at 8:00 p.m.
/s/Paul Adams
Paul Adams, Mayor Pro tem
ATTEST:
/s/Aaron Burnett
Aaron Burnett, City Clerk
Publish 5-27-22
Emailed 5-23-22
MASON CITY:
There will be several road closures and parking lots closed in the downtown area to accommodate Band Festival activities. Please observe all ‘no parking’ signage designations and use caution when traveling in the downtown area as there will be an increase in pedestrian traffic. Plan ahead and allow extra time when heading downtown to enjoy the Band Festival festivities.
Below is general information for the downtown area beginning next week.
Monday evening, May 23:
Parking lots west of City Hall will be closed for carnival setup
Wednesday night, May 25:
Road closures: no parking on the following streets in downtown:
State Street from Commercial Alley next to the Historic Park Inn (HPI)
Federal Avenue from State Street to 2nd Street NE
1st Street North from Commercial Alley to Washington Avenue
Thursday and Friday, May 26 and 27:
Transit routes will relocate to run from the parking lot on 1st Street NW just east of Brick Furniture
Saturday, May 28:
Road closure along parade route from 6 am to 12 noon
Monday, May 30:
City offices are closed in observance of Memorial Day
Transit routes will not be operating on Memorial Day
All downtown road closures will open to normal traffic flow Monday evening
Tuesday, May 31:
The parking lot west of City Hall will reopen at 6 am
Transit buses will resume normal routes from the comfort station
Secretary of State Blinken’s Meeting with Japanese Foreign Minister Hayashi
05/23/2022 09:49 AM EDT
Office of the Spokesperson
The below is attributable to Spokesperson Ned Price:
Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken met today with Japanese Minister for Foreign Affairs Hayashi Yoshimasa in Tokyo. The Secretary and the Foreign Minister hailed the U.S.-Japan Alliance as the cornerstone of peace, security, and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific region. They reaffirmed their resolute support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and independence and committed to holding the Kremlin accountable for its war of aggression in Ukraine. Secretary Blinken and Foreign Minister Hayashi welcomed the launch of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework, which will drive sustainable and inclusive economic growth and prosperity and planned to convene a meeting of the U.S.-Japan Economic Policy Consultative Committee this summer. They condemned the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK)’s ballistic missile launches, which have been in violation of multiple UN Security Council resolutions. Secretary Blinken and Foreign Minister Hayashi discussed their shared interest in maintaining peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait. The Secretary underscored the importance of U.S.-Japan-ROK cooperation, which reinforces a free, open, interconnected, prosperous, resilient, and secure Indo-Pacific region.
here’s one
STATEMENT: Republicans shrug at formula shortage
Progress Iowa Executive Director Matt Sinovic issued the following statement in response to U.S. House passing a $28 million emergency spending bill to address the nationwide shortage of baby formula:
“Iowans work hard for our families, but things are tough right now. Many are struggling to make ends meet. Families with infants are worried about where their child’s next meal will come from as we face a nationwide baby formula shortage.
“Thankfully, leaders like President Joe Biden and Congresswoman Cindy Axne are working to combat the nationwide shortage. President Biden has invoked the Defense Protection Act to get formula back on shelves, and Rep. Axne voted in favor of a bill that would send $28 million to the FDA to boost formula supply.
“After blaming President Biden for the formula shortage, all of Iowa’s Republican Congressional delegation voted against the measure. We know the shortage is actually due to corporate greed and the fact that only four manufacturers are responsible for nearly all of the country’s infant formula sales. For years, Republicans have allowed corporations to consolidate and have even rewarded them with massive tax breaks.
“We must hold our Republican lawmakers accountable for their role in this crisis and voting against a bill that would combat the formula shortage. We must also call on Senators Chuck Grassley and Joni Ernst to vote yes on the emergency spending bill to get infant formula back on store shelves.”
MASON CITY:
Starting Monday, May 23 the Operation & Maintenance Utility Crew will close South Virginia Avenue between 3rd Place and 4th Street SE and west bound traffic will be reduced to one lane. This road and lane closure is necessary to replace a leaking water valve.
This closure is anticipated to last until Friday, May 27.
Motorists are encouraged to avoid this area and use alternate routes during this repair.
Top Takeaways from Chamber of Commerce Bulletin:
Jobs Report: Reynolds Refuses to Represent Working Iowans
The April Jobs Report from Iowa Workforce Development shows a drop in unemployment claims, but it fails to tell the full story. While 3,300 jobs were created in April, it’s important to note that the state lost 2,800 jobs in March.
“While Governor Reynolds brags about the state’s unemployment rate, she continues to ignore the workforce crisis she created,” said Lance Coles, Communications Director for the Iowa Federation of Labor, AFL-CIO. “Iowa continues to underperform compared to our neighbors. Nebraska, Minnesota, South Dakota and Wisconsin all have lower unemployment rates than Iowa. That is a direct reflection on Governor Reynolds’ lack of leadership.”
Since taking office, Governor Kim Reynolds has refused to enact policies that support working Iowans. Instead, she has focused on cutting unemployment benefits and forcing Iowans into jobs that don’t pay enough, all in an effort to give the wealthy and big businesses massive tax breaks.
“Iowa’s job growth continues to lag behind the rest of the country,” said Matt Sinovic, Executive Director of Progress Iowa. “This should be a sign to Governor Reynolds that her policies are not working. It’s time the Governor ends her attacks on working families and takes real action to end the Reynolds Workforce Crisis.”
We know slashing unemployment benefits won’t solve the Reynolds Workforce Crisis, since there are nearly twice as many open jobs in our state than there are unemployed Iowans. Iowans need our governor to value hard work and make sure employers pay their employees what they are owed.
“Democrats like President Biden are fighting to reward our hard work, not wealthy shareholders. And their efforts are paying off,” said Sue Dinsdale, Executive Director of Iowa Citizen Action Network. “Just last month the country added 428,000 jobs. Governor Reynolds needs to rethink her policies that hurt working families, like blocking wage increases and siding with corporations. She needs to stand with working Iowans and make our state a place where people want to live, work and raise a family.”
State Department Press Briefing – May 20, 2022
05/20/2022 05:47 PM EDT
Ned Price, Department Spokesperson
WASHINGTON, D.C.
MR PRICE: Good afternoon, everyone. Beyond preemptively apologizing for the limited time I’ll have with you today, I don’t have anything at the top beyond wishing everyone a Happy Friday, and we’ll turn to your questions.
Operator, do you mind repeating the instructions to ask a question?
OPERATOR: Yes, and once more, as a reminder, ladies and gentlemen, if you do have a question, please press 1 then 0 on your touchtone phone.
MR PRICE: We’ll go to the line of Tracy Wilkinson.
QUESTION: Hi, thank you. My question is about the Summit of the Americas. Ned, you a week or so ago said that once the invitations went out, you would have more to say. And now that the invitations have gone out as of Wednesday, could you talk a little bit about this – what appears to be a widening threat to boycott, what it says about the U.S. role and influence in this hemisphere that it can’t get everybody to a summit, and then the wider criticism that we’re hearing about the organization being chaotic and that it’s taken this long to get the list together – the invitation list together, this long – the agenda is still vague. Some people are saying the U.S. is sort of missing an opportunity here to really make a splash on its – on the U.S. – Biden administration’s policy towards Latin America. Thanks.
MR PRICE: Thanks, Tracy. Lots of assertions there, not many of which I would agree with, but let me start with this: The first tranche of invitations for the summit did go out yesterday. As is standard in the case of summits, we’re still considering additional invites and we’ll share the final list of invites once all invitations have gone out. We certainly understand the speculation you alluded to about who will receive an invite or who will attend – that’s understandable. It’s understandable in part because this would be the first since – summit of this sort since its inauguration in 1994 that we’ve been able to serve as host, and the first time since 2015 that a U.S. president will participate.
We’ll plan to work through a variety of questions by engaging directly with the countries of the region. The President has engaged with his counterparts; the Secretary has had a number of calls with his counterparts as well. He’s also engaged with special advisor for the summit, former Senator Chris Dodd. He has been traveling throughout the hemisphere, and also speaking with leaders from the region.
For the summit itself, our agenda is to focus on working together when it comes to the core challenges that face our hemisphere, that face our neighbors. We’re a region that’s still recovering from COVID-19. We’re a region that has endured economic shocks that are generating unprecedented levels of migration – not just to the United States, but also to Mexico and Central America. We’ll talk about shared challenges like climate change as well.
So, there’s a lot to talk about. We are confident that there will be robust participation. We’re confident that the summit will bring together thousands of people to focus on some of the most important and, again, shared challenges and opportunity – opportunities that face our hemisphere. In addition to heads of state and representatives of government, we also look forward to welcoming civil society stakeholders, young leaders, CEOs, business leaders from across the hemisphere, making this summit the most inclusive to date.
With that, why don’t we go to Shaun Tandon, please.
QUESTION: (Inaudible) doing this. If you don’t mind, I’ll try to be brief on a couple of different unrelated things. North Korea – the administration has been saying for a number of days now that there’s a risk of a nuclear test. Do you have anything new on that? Is there anything new in the messaging you might have to North Korea about repercussions, if any, if they go ahead with this?
On China, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet is – has confirmed a trip next week to China. Civil rights groups are critical of this, saying she could be seeing a Potemkin village. What – does the United States have an assessment of whether the trip is appropriate at this point, whether be useful, whether the Chinese will be giving access?
And just finally, briefly, Brittney Griner – I was wondering if there’s any update. I know the Secretary spoke to her wife recently. Do you have any more updates on the case there? Thank you.
MR PRICE: Sure, let me start with that last question first. I do have an update to offer. I can confirm that a consular officer visited Brittney Griner in detention yesterday, on Thursday, May 19th. The consular officer found her continuing to do as well as could be expected under these exceedingly challenging circumstances. But again, our message is a clear and simple one. We continue to insist that Russia allow consistent and timely consular access to all U.S. citizen detainees. One-off visits are not sufficient, and we will continue to call on Moscow to uphold its commitments under the Vienna Convention for consistent and timely access as well.
When it comes to China and the visit of High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet to the PRC, what I’ll say is that we are deeply concerned about the upcoming visit. Our understanding of the planned restrictions that she will be subjected to during the visit – based on that, we have no expectation that the PRC will grant the necessary access required to conduct a complete, unmanipulated assessment of the human rights environment in Xinjiang. The high commissioner, we believe, must act, and be allowed to act, independently; and the high commissioner must report objectively and factually on the human rights situation.
A credible visit to the region would feature unhindered, transparent, and unsupervised access to affected communities of the high commissioner’s choosing, as well as timely, candid, and complete reporting of the visit’s full findings. We have repeatedly made our concerns known to the PRC and to the high commissioner, and for months we and others in the international community have called upon the high commissioner to release a report drafted by her staff detailing the situation in Xinjiang. Despite frequent assurances by her office that the report would be released in short order, it remains unavailable to us, and we call on the high commissioner to release the report without delay and not to wait for the visit to do so.
The high commissioner’s continued silence in the face of indisputable evidence of atrocities in Xinjiang and other human rights violations and abuses throughout the PRC, it is deeply concerning, particularly as she is and should be the leading UN voice on human rights. The United States remains gravely concerned by the genocide and crimes against humanity that PRC authorities are perpetrating against Uyghurs, who are predominantly Muslim, and members of other ethnic and religious minority groups in Xinjiang. And we call on the PRC to immediately cease committing these atrocities, release those unjustly detained, and allow independent investigators full and unhindered access to the region. We’ll continue to work closely with our likeminded partners and the international community to urge an end to these atrocities and provide justice to the many victims.
When it comes to the DPRK, we’ve spoken for several weeks now about our concerns for additional provocations. We’ve seen multiple tests of ICBM systems. We’ve seen additional tests of ballistic missile technology. We remain concerned that the DPRK may attempt to undertake another provocation during the course of the President’s visit to Northeast Asia or in the days following. That could include an – another ICBM test. That could include a test of a nuclear weapon. Of course, the President is in the region. He is in the region to send a message of solidarity with our partners, to send a message that the United States is there and will be there for our allies and partners to provide deterrence, to provide defense for our treaty allies in the region – of course, the ROK and Japan, both of which the President will have an opportunity to visit in the coming days – and to make very clear that we’ll respond decisively to any threats and any aggression. And, of course, our cooperation bilaterally – and in the case of the ROK and Japan, trilateral – is an essential ingredient to the way in which we will approach – what are shared security concerns in the region and beyond.
With that, let’s go to Missy Ryan, please.
QUESTION: Hi. Not sure if you guys can hear me or if you have to unmute to be unmuted, but just wondering, Ned, if you could give us an update on the discussions in NATO about the ongoing troop presence in Eastern Europe. There was a record today from CNN that’s saying that there would be a ongoing presence of 100,000 troops in Europe. And that is something that – that seems like it would be something as – sort of a forerunner to the decisions that are going to be locked in or out in Madrid. Any comment on that would be helpful. Thanks.
MR PRICE: Missy, I’m confident these discussions will continue, especially as we look forward to the NATO Summit in Madrid next month. These are conversations that we’ve been having within Alliance both since and before President Putin’s decision to further invade Ukraine on February 24th.
Before that invasion, we were clear that we would do a few things if President Putin’s aggression went ahead. We made clear that we would provide unprecedented levels of security assistance to support our Ukrainian partners so that they could effectively defend their freedom, defend their democracy, defend their country from what was then the potential of Russian aggression. We made clear that we would impose severe consequences on the Russian economy, on the Russian financial system. But to your question, we also said that we would reinforce and take steps to reassure the Alliance, the member states of the Alliance, and particularly those on the eastern flank of the NATO Alliance, and that’s what we’ve done.
We have – there are now some 100,000 U.S. service members on the European continent. That number has risen in recent weeks precisely because we are fulfilling the pledge that we made prior to Russian – prior to Russia’s invasion. But we will continue to speak to questions of force posture, both in terms of NATO forces and in terms of U.S. deployment as an alliance and bilaterally and multilaterally with our Allies and partners in Europe, in the weeks ahead – especially as we look towards the summit in June.
Let’s go to Alex Raufoglu of Turan.
QUESTION: Thank you, Ned. Happy Friday. I have two questions, one on Russia. Russia’s supply of natural gas to Finland will be cut tomorrow morning, both Finnish and Russian energy companies confirmed today. Can I get your reaction to this latest attempt of Kremlin’s wielding natural gas flows as a weapon and its implications, if possible, for the region?
And secondly on Armenia and Azerbaijan, Prime Minister Pashinyan and President Aliyev will be in Brussels this weekend and they’re going to meet for the third time since last December. What is your expectation of the current ongoing negotiations process? Thanks so much.
MR PRICE: Thank you very much. I think you put it well in your first question. You said Russia’s latest attempt to weaponize energy, and the fact is that this is not the first time Russia has attempted to weaponize energy. What we are doing is to work with our allies and partners to see to it that, going forward, Russia won’t be able to do this in a way that holds hostage countries in the region and around the world who have a reliance on Russian energy sources. So, in many ways, what we’re seeing from Russia is not surprising precisely because they have done this before. They have done this before, in the context of Ukraine in 2014; they have done this before in the context of Ukraine, more recently; and of course, we’ve seen them make these threats and follow through with actions in the aftermath of Russia’s further invasion of Ukraine on February 24th.
Since Russia’s invasion, actually well before Russia’s invasion, we began working very closely – as I mentioned before, with our allies and partners around the world, including those partners in Europe that are reliant on Russian energy. And we’ve done this with two timeframes in mind. In the short term, we have sought to ensure that there is adequate energy supply available to our allies and partners, in part by tapping various strategic petroleum reserves – our own, a million barrels a day over the course of six months is what President Biden has committed to; other allies and partners around the world are doing the same. We’re working with those same partners to see to it that energy is shipped and available to countries that may find themselves vulnerable to Russia’s manipulation in the near term.
Of course, this is not only a near-term challenge. There is a longer-term dimension to this as well, and our goal is to see to it that countries in Europe and countries well beyond, including countries that have been reliant on Russian energy for decades, are and will be in a position to lessen that reliance over time. In the case of Europe, in the aftermath of President Biden’s visit to Brussels last summer, we established with our European Union counterpart, the U.S.-EU Energy Council, to discuss these very issues, how we can work together to see to it that in the years to come Russia is not able to use energy as a weapon in the same way.
Let’s go to Humeyra Pamuk, please.
Oh, I’m sorry, I – you asked a second question about Armenia and Azerbaijan. Before we go to Humeyra, let me just spend a moment on that.
We very much welcome the dialogue between Armenia and Azerbaijan. We remain committed to promoting a peaceful, democratic, and prosperous future for the South Caucasus region as part of that. We do urge this dialogue to continue and for the parties to intensify their diplomatic engagements to make use of existing mechanisms for direct engagement, and in an effort to find comprehensive solutions to all outstanding issues related to and resulting from the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, and – to normalize their relations through the conclusion – excuse me – conclusion of a comprehensive peace agreement. We are there to support this process. We remain ready to assist Armenia and Azerbaijan with these efforts, including in our capacity as a co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group.
We’ll go to Humeyra Pamuk, please.
QUESTION: A question on the NATO issue. While the dispute is officially between Turkey, Sweden, and Finland, American officials have said if there is anything they can do to be supportive, they’ll do it. And it’s no secret that Turkey has a number of asks from Washington. I’m wondering if the U.S. is willing to entertain any of these to solve this issue. Some of those would be expediting the F-16 sale or expediting the smaller F-16 package, or lifting any of the S-400-related sanctions. Basically, if there is anything you’re prepared to do beyond expressing your support and having consultations with Turkey.
Second question is: Israel said they’re holding an operational inquiry into the killing of Palestinian-American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh, but they’re not launching a criminal probe for now. Is the United States satisfied with that? Can you say if the Biden administration is committed to making sure that there will be accountability for her killing? Thanks.
MR PRICE: Thanks, Humeyra. On your first question, you raised a series of bilateral topics of conversation and potential topics of conversation between the United States and Turkey. The question of Turkey’s approach to the NATO accession of Finland and Sweden, that is not a bilateral question between the United States and Turkey; that is a question before Turkey as a member of the NATO Alliance, and between and among Turkey and other members of the NATO Alliance.
For our part, you heard President Biden say this yesterday when he greeted his Swedish and Finnish counterparts at the White House. You heard Secretary Blinken make this same point in Berlin last week when he attended the NATO ministerial. But we strongly support NATO’s “Open Door” policy, the right of each country to decide its own future, its foreign policy, its security arrangements. And when it comes to Sweden and Finland, two countries that have now made that decision for themselves, we are proud to offer the strong support of the United States for their applications.
The President yesterday called them two great democracies, two close, highly capable partners to join the strongest, most powerful, defensive Alliance in the history of the world. These are countries that have been longstanding partners of the United States in terms of security, in terms of our economic integration, in terms of the important ties that bind us to the region as well.
As you know, we did have an opportunity to meet with – Secretary Blinken had an opportunity to meet with his Turkish counterpart yesterday in New York City. Turkey is a longstanding, valued NATO Ally. We understand Turkey’s longstanding concerns, and will continue to work together in our efforts to end the scourge of terrorism. For their part, Finland and Sweden are working directly with Turkey. But we’re also talking to Turkey about this issue. Yesterday the Secretary had a good, constructive conversation with Foreign Minister Çavuşoğlu. I’m not going to go into the full details of that engagement, beyond saying that we remain confident that Turkey’s concerns will be addressed and that we’ll be able to reach consensus as an Alliance on the accession process for Finland and Sweden. We’ve heard strong allied support for their applications, and we look forward to quickly bringing them into the strongest defensive Alliance in history.
Finally, on your question into – regarding the investigation on the killing of Shireen Abu Akleh, we reiterate the administration’s call for a thorough and transparent investigation to determine the circumstances of her killing. Investigating attacks on independent media and prosecuting those responsible are of paramount importance. We urge countries around the world to pursue accountability for attacks on journalists anywhere. And we’ll continue to promote media freedom and to protect journalists’ ability to do their jobs without fear of violence, threats to their lives or safety, or unjust detention. So again, we’ve been clear that there must be a transparent and credible investigation of Ms. Abu Akleh’s killing, and that any such investigation must include accountability.
Let’s go to the line of Laura Kelly, please.
QUESTION: How concerned is the U.S. over Turkish military flights over Greek islands, and how do those actions impact NATO’s stability?
And if I could ask a second question, the Anti-Corruption Foundation headed by Aleksey Navalny has compiled a list of 6,000 Russians that it wants the U.S. and allies to sanction in response to Russia’s war in Ukraine. Are you aware of this list they have compiled, and is it likely to be considered for another round of sanctions against Russia?
Thank you.
MR PRICE: Thank you very much. So, on your second question, Mr. Navalny’s organization has consistently put forward proposals. We take a look at – we take a look at what we receive and information available to us, but also information that is available in the public realm. We very much appreciate the efforts on the part of organizations, like Mr. Navalny’s, to shine a spotlight on corruption, to shine a spotlight on injustice, to shine a spotlight on repression in Russia and around the world. And so, of course, we will take a very close look at what they have put forward as we continue to hold to account the Russian Federation for its invasion of Ukraine, for its human rights abuses, for corruption, and other offenses when it comes to Russia’s conduct.
On your first question on Turkish overflights, we encourage all countries to respect the sovereign airspace of other countries and to operate state aircraft with due regard for the safety of navigation of civil aircraft. Where disagreements exist over the limits of a country’s territorial airspace, we urge coordination and discussion, not provocative actions that could lead to deadly accidents. As a matter of principle, we encourage all states to resolve maritime delimitation issues peacefully and in accordance with international law.
Let’s go to Cindy Saine.
OPERATOR: I don’t show Cindy on any longer. Please, go ahead.
MR PRICE: Okay. Let’s go to Joseph Haboush, please.
QUESTION: (Inaudible) to ask, over the last week we’ve seen the Secretary of Defense speak to his Russian counterpart, and then I believe yesterday we saw General Milley also speak with his Russian counterpart. Are there any plans or is there any will to have a conversation between Secretary Blinken and his counterpart Lavrov? Is there – or are there any updates on the U.S. trying to open a line of communication there? Thank you.
MR PRICE: Thanks, Joseph. So, we discussed this earlier this week in the last briefing, so let me briefly recap. As you know, prior to the February 24th Russian invasion of Ukraine, Secretary Blinken was at the forefront of the effort to attempt to forestall what may well have been an inevitability the whole time. But Secretary Blinken traveled around the world, met with his Russian counterpart. Deputy Secretary Sherman met with her Russian counterpart. Both of them took part in phone calls in an effort to prevent what has since taken place.
We have demonstrated time and again that we believe in the power of dialogue and the effectiveness and the usefulness of open lines of communication. But we also believe that there needs to be the potential for any such engagement to have a constructive outcome and to advance the ultimate and overriding objective. And of course, in this case the ultimate and overriding objective is a diminution of violence in Ukraine leading an end to this brutal war of aggression – a brutal war of choice, against the people, the government, and the state of Ukraine.
It is, in our assessment, not the time at the moment for a high-level call between Secretary Blinken or other seniors at the department precisely because we have seen no indication just yet that the Russians are serious about engaging in a constructive dialogue that could help to advance the prospects for a diminution of the violence or ultimately putting this conflict to an end. If we feel that a conversation has the potential to do that, has the potential to save lives, of course we won’t hesitate to do that.
In the meantime, I don’t have to tell you because you’ve seen the readouts. You’ve seen our travel around the world, including to be with our allies and partners in Europe that the Secretary has been leading the diplomatic effort to provide support to our Ukrainian partners, to provide security assistance to them, to provide economic assistance to them, and to provide humanitarian assistance to the Ukrainian people. He’s been leading the effort to hold Russia to account for its actions in Ukraine and its actions against its own people, and he will continue to engage with our allies and partners, including as we look to the Madrid summit next month to convene the NATO Allies.
We’ll go to Kylie Atwood, please.
QUESTION: Hi, Ned. Thanks for doing this. Quick question on a report yesterday from The Wall Street Journal about the Biden administration weighing the possibility of waiving Belarus potash sanctions to get Lukashenko to allow a corridor from Ukraine to Lithuania to get that grain out of Ukraine. I know you guys don’t preview sanctions, or sanctions relief for that matter. But would the administration consider any form of sanctions relief if Russia, or Belarus for that matter, were to come to some sort of agreement to essentially entice them to get this grain out of the country?
And then my second question is just a bit of a throwback here, something we haven’t talked about in a while, but the State Department concluded their Afghanistan withdrawal review, as I understand it, back in March or April. And I’m just wondering when the State Department plans to present those findings, at least the unclassified portion of it, speaking to kind of transparency and the fact that you guys said you would reflect upon the lessons that could be learned. Thank you.
MR PRICE: Thanks, Kylie. So on your first question, of course, we had an opportunity over the past couple days in New York City to discuss the issue of food security and food insecurity owing to longer-term challenges like climate change, but also owing to in many cases what is the proximate cause of food scarcity and the rise in commodity prices, and that is Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine.
It is very simply that the Government of Russia, using food as a weapon in this case by blocking the exports – the export of foodstuffs from Ukraine’s ports, the Kremlin has sought to deflect responsibility for its actions by blaming sanctions for disruptions to the global food system. This is patently false. Our sanctions on Russia specifically exclude food and fertilizer.
On the other hand, it is very clear that it is President Putin’s unjustified, his unprovoked, his brutal war against Ukraine that has put millions around the globe at risk of food insecurity and whose effects are felt thousands of miles away by many of the world’s most vulnerable citizens. And so when we think about what would be the most effective means by which to alleviate the challenge of food insecurity, of course, that would be for the Kremlin to end this senseless war; to see them let farmers safely plant, harvest, tend to their fields; to let ships loaded with essential food commodities and related goods to sail freely; and essentially, to stop weaponizing the flow of food and foodstuffs from Ukraine and from Ukraine’s ports.
In terms of the broader issue, no country has done more than the United States to seek to address that, and Secretary Blinken was able to convene dozens of high-level officials, including many of his counterparts, on Wednesday and Thursday of this week in the UN General Assembly but also in the Security Council to discuss this very issue. This is something that the UN secretary-general has focused on as well. We support his efforts to persuade Russia to end its unprovoked, unjustified war, and his efforts to see to it that Ukraine is able to export its agricultural products unhindered to once again help feed the world.
When it comes to Belarus, we sanctioned Belarusian state-owned potash producer Belaruskali and its primary exporting arm in coordination with our transatlantic allies in 2020. This was to impose costs on the Lukashenka regime following the fraudulent 2020 elections and the regime’s ensuing crackdown on peaceful protests and human rights – peaceful protests and human rights and fundamental freedoms. It is the Lukashenka regime that uses these state-owned enterprises to enrich and to sustain its repressive regime. And until the regime ends its support for Russia’s unprovoked aggression against Ukraine, we’ll continue to take all appropriate actions to disrupt its military’s – its military and financial capabilities through targeted sanctions, including the actions taken against Russia.
So as you alluded to at the top, we don’t preview potential upcoming actions, but sanctions will remain a key tool in our efforts to address global security concerns as well as human rights abuses in Belarus and other areas of concern for the United States.
On Afghanistan, you are right that we did launch a review, an after-action review, covering the couple years before the military withdrawal from Afghanistan late last year. We are reviewing the findings of that review, and we’ll let you know when we’re at a point to potentially say more on that front.
We have time for one final question. Let’s go to Ali Harb.
OPERATOR: At this time, I don’t show Ali Harb in queue.
MR PRICE: Okay, let’s go to the line of Shannon Crawford.
QUESTION: Thanks so much. Just a quick question about the family of Paul Whelan. They’ve put out a statement saying that State Department representatives have told them they need to make more noise or be a squeakier wheel to get the attention of the administration, or perhaps to prove that Paul’s case deserves action. Can you comment on this?
MR PRICE: Thank you for the question. We know that each of these cases deserve action, and we are taking action in each and every one of these cases. It is accurate, it is true, that we don’t often speak publicly to what we’re doing behind the scenes, but Secretary Blinken is committed to seeing to it that this department, including the office of our special envoy – special presidential envoy for hostage affairs, is doing everything we potentially can to see the safe and effective release of Americans who are unjustly or wrongfully detained or held hostage around the world.
We remain in regular contact with the families of those held hostage or wrongfully detained. We are absolutely grateful for their partnership and feedback, and we continue to work to ensure that we’re communicating and sharing information in a way that is useful to families. One of the most vital sources of information to us is that communication with the families. There is no one that knows the context, that knows the background, that knows the history of any particular case better than the families and the loved ones of those who are held hostage or wrongfully detained around the world. It’s why it’s so vitally important to us that we continue that coordination and that communication, even as we are often taking steps that we don’t speak to publicly to ensure that we are doing everything we can to effect the safe release of Americans who are wrongfully detained or held hostage.
Thank you very much, everyone. We will see you back at the department next week. In the meantime, have a good weekend.
(The briefing was concluded at 2:28 p.m.)
GALLUP: Americans Divided on Nuclear Energy
Americans remain evenly divided on nuclear energy, as they were in 2019, but this follows a period from 2004 to 2015 when majorities backed it. Support throughout has varied sharply by party.
Why is it that the vast majority of comments posted on here these days are just by
the NIT Publisher?
Is there some sort of censorship going on?
Because Russian spammers have now been filtered out. This illustrates how much they were doing.
GALLUP: Concern About Race Relations Persists After Floyd’s Death
Americans’ concern about race relations remained elevated in March, nearly two years after George Floyd’s murder.
$100 Million in Additional U.S. Military Assistance for Ukraine
05/19/2022 02:10 PM EDT
Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State
For nearly 12 weeks, Russia has waged its unprovoked and brutal war against Ukraine, its sovereignty, its territorial integrity, and its people. Beaten back from its failed attempt to seize Kyiv, Russia continues a grinding offensive across Ukraine’s south and east. Ukraine’s courageous defense forces remain firmly in the fight. The United States, as well as more than 40 Allies and partner countries, are working around the clock to expedite shipments of arms and equipment essential to Ukraine’s defense.
Pursuant to a delegation from the President, I am authorizing our tenth drawdown of additional arms and equipment for Ukraine’s defense from U.S. Department of Defense inventories, valued at up to $100 million. This brings total U.S. military assistance to Ukraine to approximately $3.9 billion in arms and equipment since Russia launched its brutal and unprovoked full-scale invasion of Ukraine on February 24.
U.S. and international military assistance continues to complement direct U.S. financial support to Ukraine, support for documenting evidence of Russia’s atrocities against the people of Ukraine, and measures to continue ratcheting up the pressure on Russia and its remaining enablers. Taken together, these efforts strengthen Ukraine’s position at the negotiating table while continuing to isolate Russia from the world until it ends its senseless and brutal war of choice against Ukraine. The United States is committed to helping Ukraine continue to meet its defense needs and build its future capabilities, as well as to bolster Allies and partners across NATO’s Eastern Flank and the broader region.
The United States, our allies, and our partners are proud to stand in solidarity with the people of Ukraine in their just cause: the defense of their country and their democracy. United with our Allies and partners, we will succeed, and a democratic, sovereign, and independent Ukraine shall prevail.
GALLUP: Many Are Dropping Their Guard (and Their Masks) on COVID
Americans are less worried than they previously have been. Are we in a new phase of public attitudes about the pandemic? Megan Brenan joins the podcast to talk about Gallup’s tracking since the pandemic began and where we are now.
STATEMENT: Reynolds Broke Our Child Care and is Relying on Biden to Fix it
Progress Iowa Executive Director Matt Sinovic issued the following statement in response to Governor Kim Reynolds’ announcement of a $25 million Child Care Business Incentive Grant Program made possible by American Rescue Plan funds:
“If you look up hypocrite in the dictionary there should be a picture of Kim Reynolds. The Governor broke Iowa’s child care. And now she’s relying on President Biden to fix it, with funding she opposed.
“Make no mistake: this $25 million dollar grant program is made possible by the American Rescue Plan, a bill Reynolds spent months campaigning against. We’re only seeing this investment because Rep. Cindy Axne voted in favor, and President Joe Biden signed ARPA into law.
“Unfortunately, this grant program won’t be nearly enough to fix Iowa’s worst-in-the-nation childcare crisis. We need leaders who will undo Reynolds’ mess by lowering childcare costs for families and paying childcare workers what they deserve.”
Shell Rock Greenbelt roads open for season
Effective immediately the Shell Rock River Greenbelt roads will be open to authorized vehicle traffic. Authorized vehicle traffic are those vehicles that have a valid license plate issued by a state department of transportation. All other motorized vehicles are prohibited i.e. ATV’s, UTV’s and Golf Carts. A reminder to vehicle users that the roads are a shared roadway with hikers, bicyclists and horses and the posted speed limit is 15 mph. All vehicles are required to stay on the main roadway. The roads will remain open, subject to exceptional weather conditions, until late November and reopen next spring in late May. For further information call 641-423-5309 M-F 7:30-4:00.
Raising the Flag at U.S. Embassy Kyiv
05/18/2022 01:49 PM EDT
Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State
Three months ago, we lowered our flag over the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv, Ukraine, just days before Russian forces streamed across Ukraine’s border to carry out President Putin’s unprovoked, unjustified war of choice. When we suspended operations at the embassy, we made the point clear: while we would relocate U.S. embassy personnel for their safety and security, this would in no way prevent our engagement with, and support for, the Ukrainian people, government, and civil society as well as our allies and partners. We underscored our commitment to Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, pledged to continue our assistance, and started working toward the day we could return to Kyiv.
Now, that day has come. Today we are officially resuming operations at the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv. The Ukrainian people, with our security assistance, have defended their homeland in the face of Russia’s unconscionable invasion, and, as a result, the Stars and Stripes are flying over the Embassy once again. We stand proudly with, and continue to support, the government and people of Ukraine as they defend their country from the Kremlin’s brutal war of aggression.
As we take this momentous step, we have put forward additional measures to increase the safety of our colleagues who are returning to Kyiv and have enhanced our security measures and protocols.
We are committed to confronting the challenges ahead. The war rages on. Russia’s forces inflict death and destruction on Ukrainian soil every day. Millions of Ukrainians are displaced from their homes and mourn the loss of their loved ones. With strength of purpose, we reaffirm our commitment to the people and government of Ukraine, and we look forward to carrying out our mission from the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv.
Pending favorable weather conditions, the City of Mason City will be conducting vegetation control at the following locations on Thursday, May 19:
*City Hall parking lot and grounds
*Operation & Maintenance lot and grounds
*Downtown parking lots including Southbridge Mall, 1st Street and Pennsylvania Avenue, 1st Street NE and Delaware Avenue, 1st Street NW and N. Washington Avenue, 2nd Street NE and N. Federal Avenue, 2nd Street NE and N. Delaware Avenue, Public Library
*Police Department parking lot and grounds
*South Federal Avenue and 6th Street SW parking lot
*Center circle and Statue of Liberty in Central Park only
*Enterprise Alley (south of Central Park)
*N. Federal Avenue and N. State Street to 4th Street NW
*4th Street NE and N. Hampshire Avenue (both sides of bridge)
*Village Green Drive & 4th Street SW (medians)
*Federal Avenue & 19th Street Medians
*Underpass at South Federal Avenue and 10th Street SW
*Sidewalk area at 3rd Street NE and N. Delaware Avenue
Residents are asked to avoid these areas until the treatment flags are removed.
Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for the product to be applied are available in the City Administrator’s office located on the 1st Floor of City Hall.
State Department Press Briefing – May 17, 2022
05/17/2022 07:05 PM EDT
Ned Price, Department Spokesperson
WASHINGTON, D.C.
2:32 p.m. EDT
MR PRICE: Good afternoon, everyone, and I apologize for the late start. And if you will indulge me, we have a few items to get through at the top.
Today on the International Day Against Homophobia, Biphobia, Interphobia, and Transphobia – IDAHOBIT – we affirm that the promotion and protection of human rights of LGBTQI+ persons is a foreign policy priority. We emphasize that the human rights of LGBTQI+ persons are just that: human rights to which all persons are entitled, as made eminently clear in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which provides in its first Article that “ll human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.” Regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or sex characteristics, everyone deserves to live with respect, dignity, and safety.
The United States commits to doing our part to promote and advance the human rights of LGBTQI+ persons globally and to end discrimination and violence against LGBTQI+ persons. We will capitalize on commitments made during President Biden’s Summit for Democracy and the Year of Action to encourage positive reforms. Together with inclusive democracies, multilateral institutions, and civil society organizations around the world, we will continue to work toward a world where no one lives in fear because of who they are or whom they love.
This week we marked the occasion of Vesak Day, joining Buddhists around the world in celebration of a day honoring the life, legacy, and teachings of Buddha. This occasion also provides us with an opportunity to acknowledge the contributions of Buddhist communities around the world, communities that have helped to build a better world for people of all faith traditions. Let us all recommit ourselves to upholding the timeless values of tolerance, compassion, and respect that are imbued in the Buddhist faith.
Happy Buddha Purnima.
Next, the international community has witnessed horrific atrocities perpetrated by Russia’s forces since President Putin launched his devastating and unjustifiable war of choice against Ukraine. We are working through partnerships with U.S. academia and the private sector to assist current and future quests for justice following months of fighting and mounting evidence of these widespread, large-scale atrocities that have been committed.
To ensure that crimes committed by Russia’s forces are documented and perpetrators are held accountable, today we have launched a new Conflict Observatory for Ukraine. The program will capture, analyze, and make publicly available open-source information and evidence of atrocities, human rights abuses, and harm to civilian infrastructure, including Ukraine’s cultural heritage. Forthcoming reports will be posted on the program’s website: ConflictObservatory.org.
The information collected by the Conflict Observatory will be a resource for the world to see the deplorable and brutal actions of Russia’s forces against the Ukrainian people. It will shine a light on atrocities and is intended to contribute to eventual prosecutions in Ukraine’s domestic courts, courts in third-party countries, U.S. courts, and other relevant tribunals. It will provide information to refute Russia’s disinformation campaigns and expand the range of our and our partners’ accountability mechanisms.
However long it takes, we are committed to seeing that justice is served.
In Guatemala yesterday, President Giammattei chose to re-appoint Maria Consuelo Porras Argueta de Porres as attorney general, despite her record of facilitating corruption. This is a step backward for Guatemalan democracy, transparency, and rule of law – a step that will hurt the people of Guatemala.
During her tenure, Attorney General Porras has worked to dismantle Guatemala’s justice sector, protect corrupt actors, and perpetuate impunity. She has a documented record of obstructing and undermining anticorruption investigations in Guatemala to protect her allies and gain undue favor. Porras’s pattern of obstruction includes reportedly ordering prosecutors in Guatemala’s Public Ministry to ignore cases based on personal or political considerations and firing prosecutors who investigate cases involving acts of corruption.
This corruption weakens the Guatemalan Government’s ability to reduce violence and stop narcotraffickers. It also slows down economic growth and scares away investments, robbing Guatemalans of jobs and opportunity – all of which are primary factors driving migration.
Yesterday, as a result, we announced the public designation of the attorney general under Section 7013(c) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act of 2022. This designation renders the attorney general and her immediate family members ineligible for entry into the United States. We’ll have more announcements about consequences for the bilateral relationship of this decision at the appropriate time, and we’ll continue to robustly use our counter-corruption tools going forward.
The United States is determined to stand with all Guatemalans in support of democracy and the rule of law, and against those who would undermine these principles for personal gain. We call on the Government of Guatemala to take serious, concrete steps to reverse democratic backsliding.
And finally, on Monday, May 23rd, the United States will welcome the Organization of Islamic Cooperation – OIC – Secretary General, His Excellency Hissein Brahim Taha, and the OIC delegation to Washington, D.C., for the inaugural U.S.-OIC Strategic Dialogue.
The United States and the OIC have been close partners for decades, and we share enduring economic, social, cultural, and person-to-person ties with the organization and its 57 members. The launching of this dialogue is an important affirmation of our growing ties. The dialogue will be led on our side by our Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs Assistant Secretary Yael Lempert and other senior department officials.
On Wednesday, May 25th, Secretary Blinken will meet with the OIC Secretary General. We’ll discuss shared challenges and opportunities in the fight against climate change, our support for greater respect for human rights the world over, mutual goals regarding women’s empowerment and health issues, and our commitment to countering violent extremism.
The strategic dialogue with the OIC is also part of our commitment to working closely with multilateral organizations, and it shows the depth and breadth of our shared interests. Through our sustained engagement, we will further this important partnership and enable greater joint efforts to address shared challenges.
So having said all that, there may be time for a final question or two.
QUESTION: (Laughter.) I’ve got a – thank you. Let me see, I’ve got a couple very brief logistical ones. But they’ll only be brief if you keep your answers brief, so make —
MR PRICE: Okay.
QUESTION: Let me make that appeal.
MR PRICE: Okay.
QUESTION: Just one on this Ukraine Observatory.
MR PRICE: Yes.
QUESTION: I’m not quite – what exactly is new about – I mean, aren’t you guys already doing this?
MR PRICE: Well, it’s a new mechanism. And essentially, we are providing millions of dollars worth of funding to our partners on the outside.
QUESTION: Aren’t you already providing millions of dollars of funding to your partners?
MR PRICE: Well, yes, to partners to work with the Ukrainian Prosecutor General. But this is a new mechanism, and it’s a new mechanism that will encompass the efforts of some of our key partners, including Yale, including Esri, PlantScape AI, the Smithsonian Cultural Rescue Initiative.
QUESTION: And these groups, these institutions or groups weren’t involved before?
MR PRICE: You would have to ask them about their level of involvement before, but this is the first time we’ve launched a portal like this that will not only be a mechanism by which the Department can work with these outside organizations to collect, to analyze, to document, but also importantly to share the findings that together we’re able to uncover. And just as I said, they will be shared publicly on the website.
QUESTION: Well, I think you’ve said almost the exact same thing as it relates to the collection of war crimes evidence in the past. So anyway, it’s fine that you have a new mechanism. I just want to know if there’s – I mean, fundamentally you’re still doing the same thing, right?
MR PRICE: We have been engaged in the work through a variety of mechanisms and efforts to collect, to document, to analyze, to share evidence of potential atrocities, potential war crimes with the relevant prosecutors, with relevant state entities, with relevant organizations. But this is the first time that these partners will have come together and to share those findings so that not only the public can see it, to shine a spotlight on what Russia’s forces are doing in Ukraine, but so that relevant authorities in areas of appropriate jurisdiction, including within Ukraine, potentially including within the United States – so that prosecutors can potentially even build criminal cases based on the material that is published online.
QUESTION: Okay. On the Afghan embassy and consulates thing that – that I pointed out to you earlier?
MR PRICE: We will get you updated information on that.
QUESTION: You don’t – do you know why off the top of your head the U.S. – I mean – the U.S. – the Afghan mission to the UN is not included in —
MR PRICE: I’m sorry. I didn’t hear.
QUESTION: The Afghan mission to the UN is not one of the facilities that has – that is being quote/unquote, “seized, taken control”?
MR PRICE: I don’t have any more details to share, but if we do, we’ll let you know.
QUESTION: On the Secretary’s meeting tomorrow with the Turkish foreign minister, are you guys more, less, or the same concerned about what President Erdoğan’s position is on Finland and Sweden?
MR PRICE: Well, you heard the Secretary speak to this over the weekend in Berlin. And the Secretary was in Berlin to meet with his counterparts in the context of a NATO ministerial. He had an opportunity to meet with Foreign Minister Çavuşoğlu there, to speak with him. Other NATO members did as well. The Secretary, as you alluded to, Matt, will have an opportunity to see the foreign minister, Foreign Minister Çavuşoğlu, on the sidelines of the UN event tomorrow in New York City.
What the Secretary said is that he, of course – and we, of course, won’t characterize private conversations, but there was over the weekend and there has been a strong consensus for bringing Finland and Sweden into the Alliance if they so choose. The Secretary made the point that we are confident that we will be able to preserve that consensus should Finland, should Sweden, formally apply for NATO membership. Of course, that has not yet happened. I know there is a perception that it may be a foregone conclusion, but precedent, protocol, procedure – all those P words – are very important, especially in the world of diplomacy. So we’ll reserve further comment until we hear additional —
QUESTION: Well, but are – there seem to be, at best, conflicting if not absolutely contradictory positions coming from the President and then President Erdoğan, and then apparently the people who the Secretary and NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg have been – and the other foreign ministers have been talking to, because Erdoğan’s comments yesterday were very clear in raising opposition. So are you still seeking clarification of the Turkish position or —
MR PRICE: It is not for us to speak for the Turkish Government, of course. It is for us —
QUESTION: I’m asking you —
MR PRICE: It is for us to speak as —
QUESTION: — do you understand what the Turkish position is?
MR PRICE: — as a member of the NATO Alliance. And Secretary Blinken, who had the opportunity to sit into the – sit in on the foreign ministerial discussions in Berlin over the weekend came away with the same sense of confidence that there was strong consensus for admitting Finland and Sweden into the Alliance if they so choose to join, and we’re confident we’ll be able to preserve that consensus.
Daphne.
QUESTION: I mean, Erdoğan said yesterday that Swedish and Finnish delegations should not bother coming to Ankara to convince it to approve their NATO bid. I mean, I just don’t understand how you’re reconciling that there’s this consensus when Turkey’s telling them not even to bother coming.
MR PRICE: Again, it is not for me to speak for the Turkish Government or to characterize their position. What we can do is characterize what we heard inside the NATO ministerial, what we have heard in bilateral and multilateral – including in conversations as an Alliance – with our fellow NATO Allies. There is strong consensus, there has been strong consensus for admitting Finland and Sweden if they so choose to join, and again, as you heard from the Secretary, we are confident we’ll be able to preserve that consensus.
QUESTION: Has Turkey asked for anything from the U.S. in exchange for supporting their bids?
MR PRICE: Again, we’re not going to read out private conversations. The Secretary did have a chance to see the foreign minister, Çavuşoğlu, in Berlin. He will have a chance to see him in New York City and I am certain these conversations will continue.
Francesco.
QUESTION: Just to follow up on that, you keep referring to the confidence that emerged from the meeting over the weekend, and were referring to what President Erdoğan said yesterday, so is that confidence still there? And what explains your confidence as to President Erdoğan said the contrary publicly?
MR PRICE: I am explaining our confidence in the context of discussions that we have had bilaterally, multilaterally, and together as an Alliance. Again, it is not for me to characterize the Turkish Government’s position. It is for us to characterize our position. You know where we stand should Finland and Sweden opt to apply for NATO membership. You have heard from a range of other NATO Allies, of their positions on this. Some have been quite explicit. I’m sure more will be if and when we hear that Finland and/or Sweden are formally applying for the Alliance, but all of the conversations we have had to date lend us that sense of confidence that we will be able to preserve that strong consensus for admitting Finland and Sweden if they so choose to apply.
QUESTION: And so today, after President Erdoğan spoke yesterday, you are confident that Turkey will not be a roadblock on the way – on that path?
MR PRICE: Our assessment of the sentiment among our NATO Allies and within the NATO Alliance has not changed.
QUESTION: Can I follow up?
MR PRICE: Kylie.
QUESTION: Yeah. So I’m just – you refused to answer the question if Turkey’s asking the United States for anything to allow Sweden and Finland to join. You said that was private discussions. But if Turkey does leverage this moment to get something that it wants from NATO members in return for greenlighting these two countries joining, doesn’t that set a dangerous precedent? And can you speak to efforts underway to make sure that precedent isn’t set?
MR PRICE: Your question entails a hypothetical that’s on top of a hypothetical. Neither country have yet put forward an application for membership. Turkey, of course, has not made any specific asks or requests. So I will respectfully dodge the question on those two grounds, but again, we are having these conversations among Allies bilaterally and as an Alliance with the 30 existing NATO Allies. Those conversations will continue. Secretary Blinken, again, will have an opportunity to speak to Foreign Minister Çavuşoğlu. Other conversations are ongoing between and among current NATO Allies and with potential aspirant countries.
QUESTION: And just one more question: Are you confident that Turkey’s concerns will be in the rear view mirror by the time the leaders of Sweden and Finland come to the White House later this week?
MR PRICE: We are confident that we will be able to preserve the consensus within the Alliance of strong support for a potential application of Finland and Sweden.
Yes.
QUESTION: Ned, same topic?
MR PRICE: Stay on the same topic? Sure.
QUESTION: Based on your response, is it fair for us to assume that you still don’t have clear understanding of what Turkey wants?
MR PRICE: The Turkish officials have made public statements. I would refer you to those public statements, including some statements that have been referenced here already.
QUESTION: Well, that doesn’t clear up anything, because the statements that —
MR PRICE: Again, it is not – it is —
QUESTION: We get you telling us that in Berlin the Turks were all on board and then the president of the country comes out yesterday and says he’s not on board.
MR PRICE: It is not up to me to characterize what the Turkish Government’s position is. I will leave it – I will leave it —
QUESTION: No, but that’s not the question. It’s: Do you understand what the Turkish position is?
MR PRICE: I will leave it to the Turkish Government to articulate —
QUESTION: Is it clear to you?
MR PRICE: — to articulate their position.
Yes, please.
QUESTION: Is it clear to the United State Government what the Turkish position is?
QUESTION: On two major issues. So one is media freedom in Georgia and the second one will be about the rights of the LGBTQI community in Georgia as well. So yesterday the director of Mtavari Channel, Nika Gvaramia, was imprisoned for three and a half years. Based on the verdict by the Georgian city court, this U.S. Ambassador to Georgia issued the statement on this that reads, and I’m quoting, “The disturbing pattern of selective investigations and prosecution targeting those in opposition to the current government undermines the public’s confidence in the police, prosecution, the courts, and the government itself.” The ranking member of the Senate’s Foreign Relations Committee, Jim Risch, tweeted as well, and I’m quoting, “Silencing political opposition will send Georgia in a very troubling direction.”
That’s the channel that I work for. I don’t know if I have a job next week or not. That’s the same concern that my team in Tbilisi has. So taking into account how much the U.S. Government values and cherish the importance of free media worldwide, what do you have to say about that?
MR PRICE: We have been quite clear, quite candid with our Georgian partners about the continued need to strengthen the pillars of democracy that we want to see bolstered in Georgia, that we want to see bolstered around the world. That includes democratic institutions; it includes the rule of law as well. And we’ll continue to partner with the people of Georgia as they pursue a democratic, prosperous, peaceful, and Euro-Atlantic future.
When it comes to media freedom, you have heard us consistently speak to the indispensability of a free, of an independent media the world over. Secretary Blinken just a couple weeks spoke to this in extended remarks at the Foreign Press Center here in Washington, D.C., where he extolled the virtue and really the necessity of a free and independent media, noting that over the past year, too many journalists have been repressed, too much of their work has been suppressed, and too many tragically have been wounded or even killed in the line of duty. And of course, their duty is to do nothing more than to report the truth, to spread the truth the world over using nothing more than a pen and perhaps a keyboard.
So we’ll continue to stand resolutely behind independent media, whether it’s in Georgia, whether it is anywhere around the world.
QUESTION: And all the LGBTQI rights in Georgia, that community still cannot enjoy their constitutional rights to peaceful assembly and to freedom of expression, because Georgian Orthodox Church and pro-Russian ultra-nationalists persecute them and threaten to beat and kill anyone who tries to rally in the street. So Georgian Government and the law enforcement do not guarantee the safety – the prime minister last year called for not holding the peaceful rally because the police wasn’t able to protect them from the violent mob.
How much of a support should the members of the LGBTQI community in Georgia expect from the United States?
MR PRICE: LGBTQI communities around the world have the support of the United States. That is not only a rhetorical position; it’s a policy position. In February of 2021, President Biden issued an executive order calling for, once again, the policy of the United States, of our foreign affairs departments and agencies, to be to protect and to promote the rights of LGBTQI+ persons around the world. We do that in a number of ways. We of course do it rhetorically, but we also do it through programmatic funding for supporting the important work of advocacy organizations, for calling out abuses, repression, intimidation, violence against LGBTQI communities around the world.
And of course, whether the cause, whether the community is the community of LGBTQI+ individuals or any other community, including marginalized communities, we always call for universal rights to be protected and to be enshrined in democratic institutions. And of course, the right the peaceful assembly, the right to freedom of expression – two of those important rights.
QUESTION: And very lastly, when you look at the media free speech in Georgia – we just previewed that – and when you look at the human rights record of the country, I know you don’t preview any sanctions or speak about the hypotheticals. But still, I just want to gather your thoughts on the general idea where the U.S. Government stands on that. When you look at those two venues of a country that is declared to be a partner of the United States, what is your major concern? Do you – how do you see the detrimental effect of the Georgia-U.S. relations when you look at those two avenues, and that’s the least?
MR PRICE: Well, we do consider Georgia a strategic partner. And as a strategic partner, the United States is well positioned to encourage Georgia down the path of reform, to encourage Georgia to take on some of the improvements, some of the steps that we have talked about here.
Of course, Georgia’s aspirations don’t occur overnight. They’re impossible to realize over the course of a single year, even a single decade. It takes hard work; it takes patience. It takes significant resources to realize. Part of our task is to continue to partner with Georgia, to continue to support them down that path, to do that with resources, with guidance, with direct support in many cases. And that is an area where we will continue to cooperate closely with our Georgian partners.
Yes.
QUESTION: On Ukraine, just going back to something last week, President Zelenskyy told Chatham House in London that he’d be open to start discussing things normally with the Russians if the Russian military pulled back to their position that they were at on February 23rd. He said something similar to Margaret Brennan on CBS News – the beginning of April – he mentioned the date February 24th. What does this administration understand that to mean? Does that mean the Russians need to pull out of the country, or pull back to where their forces were already operating in parts of the Donbas? And then does that mean that Zelenskyy would be open to giving up parts of the Donbas to discuss with the Russians to move negotiations forwards?
MR PRICE: The important point here is that it is not for us to define the objectives that our Ukrainian partners seek to achieve. It is the task of the Ukrainian Government, which is, in turn, expressing the will of the Ukrainian people. It’s a democratically elected government, a representative government, and it is up to that government on behalf of the Ukrainian people to define what their objectives in pushing back on Russian aggression should be.
It is our task to support our Ukrainian partners in every appropriate way we can, to strengthen their hand at the negotiating table, recognizing that, at the moment, there are not high-level negotiations to speak of. We have heard very clearly from our Ukrainian partners that there has been no significant progress, that the Russian Federation has remained intractable in its positions.
And so of course, what we are doing now is two things: one, as I said before, supporting and strengthening the hand of our partners in Kyiv; and two, simultaneously, is imposing the massive costs and consequences that we have warned the Kremlin about since late last year. And in doing so, it is our hope to generate the conditions where dialogue, where good-faith diplomacy can take place.
And, of course, more so than the process, we are most concerned about the outcome, seeing to it that our Ukrainian partners are successful in seeing their objectives through. To do that, we will continue to provide them with security assistance. We will continue to provide them with economic assistance. We will continue to provide our Ukrainian partners, the Ukrainian people, with what they need with humanitarian assistance in the meantime as well.
Yes.
QUESTION: Just a follow-up to that: If your job is not to define their objectives but it is to support your Ukrainian partners – excuse me – at what point does that stop for those objectives and that support? Is there a limit to what the U.S. is willing to back?
MR PRICE: The U.S. wants what the Ukrainian people and the Ukrainian Government wants. It is a Ukraine that is democratic, a Ukraine that is independent, a Ukraine that is sovereign, a Ukraine that is free. Now, the contours of that, the specific objectives, will have to be defined by the Ukrainian Government – what those objectives are to them, how they want to pursue those at the negotiating table. Those are not questions for us. Those are questions for our Ukrainian partners to sort through.
Yes, Michael. Yes, in the back.
QUESTION: Yeah, thanks. So recently on this topic, the French President Macron implied that we should learn lessons from World War I and not punish Russia too severely. I was wondering if you could speak on the topic of whether the U.S. and its European allies support the same endgame scenario in Ukraine. And then, more broadly, if you could choose your most ideal, realistic endgame in Ukraine, what would that be?
MR PRICE: So I think your second question is just a clever way of asking the last question that was asked to me. It is not up to us to choose our ideal endgame. It is up to our Ukrainian partners to determine how they would like to see this conflict end. What we know is that they would – just like United States, just like NATO, just like the international community – we would profoundly like to see this conflict end. We would like to see a cessation of the violence, a cessation of the bloodshed, a cessation of the atrocities that have inflicted the country of Ukraine over the past 82 days, owing to the brutality that Russia’s forces are perpetrating against Ukraine’s people, its state, and its government as well.
Your first question —
QUESTION: Possible fissures between the Europeans’ idea of what an endgame scenario would be like and what the United States endgame is.
MR PRICE: We have any number of fora in which to discuss with our European partners and our European allies the long-term course of all of this. And I think there is no daylight between the United States and our European partners in the G7, in our European partners in the Quad, the European Quad, our European partners in the European Quint, our European partners at the EU, and our European partners more broadly – that we would like to see – and we know the Ukrainian people and government would like to see and will see – a Ukraine that at the end of this conflict is free, it is independent, it is sovereign, and democratic.
Yes.
QUESTION: Yeah. Different topic, please.
MR PRICE: Sure.
QUESTION: Thank you, Ned. About the corona crisis in North Korea, it was reported that three North Korean cargo planes were carrying corona treatment medicine from China yesterday. You know that the North Korea likes Chinese vaccines. What if North Korea requests assistance through COVAX with the United States (inaudible) North Korea’s – if North Korea wants assistance through COVAX.
MR PRICE: Your question is what has North Korea requested?
QUESTION: Yeah.
MR PRICE: Well, unfortunately, to date the DPRK has refused all vaccine donations from COVAX. I say it is unfortunate because we are deeply concerned about the apparent COVID outbreak within the DPRK, how it might affect the North Korean people. And the United States continues to support the provision of vaccines to the DPRK. We would like to see humanitarian, including medical relief, provided to the people of the DPRK. To that end, we strongly support and encourage the efforts of U.S. and international aid and health organizations in seeking to prevent and, as necessary, to contain the outbreak, the spread of COVID-19 in the DPRK, and to provide other forms of humanitarian assistance to the North Korean people.
It is COVAX that determines allocations for the Pfizer vaccines we have donated. Those are the brunt of the vaccines that we have donated. Should COVAX allocate doses to the DPRK, we would be supportive of that, as we would to any member of the grouping and to the African Union as well. As I said before, however, it is the DPRK that has consistently refused all vaccine donations. We don’t currently have bilateral plans to share vaccines with the DPRK, but we continue to support, as I’ve said before, those international efforts aimed at the provision of critical humanitarian aid to the most vulnerable within North Korea.
There is another great irony, or perhaps it’s even a tragedy, in that even as the DPRK continues to refuse the donation of much – apparently much-needed COVID vaccines, they continue to invest untold sums in ballistic missile and nuclear weapons programs that do nothing to alleviate the humanitarian plight of the North Korean people. The DPRK leadership continues to enrich themselves, to take care of their cronies, while the people of the North – of the DPRK suffer, apparently now with the added burden of COVID.
QUESTION: There was previously that South Korean director of intelligence service said that there is the secret papers. He announced that the U.S. and South Korea previously suggested this through the COVAX, but Kim Jong-un refuses to help. Is that true?
MR PRICE: We have discussed with our Republic of Korea allies, with our Japanese allies, and with others ways that we might mitigate the humanitarian plight of the North Korean people. Unfortunately, it is the North Korean leadership that has prevented many of those steps from proceeding.
QUESTION: Lastly, do you think North Korea likely to put on hold nuclear test due to coronavirus?
MR PRICE: We have never seen the DPRK regime prioritize the humanitarian concerns of their own people over these destabilizing programs that pose a threat to peace and security in the Indo-Pacific and beyond, so I do not think there is any expectation of that.
Yes, Nazira.
QUESTION: Thank you. Two question, and surprise, one is about Haqqani’s recent interview in CNN, and he said the United States is not our enemy. So good thing. If United State not your enemy, United State has expectation to reopen girls’ school. Number one, do you have the same – United States has the same position, establish friendship – new friendship – with Haqqani Network, leader of the Taliban?
MR PRICE: It is our position that the women and girls of Afghanistan, including those girls who have been denied the opportunity to attend post-secondary education for weeks now – it is our strong position, it is the position of countries around the world, as you may have seen in a statement that came out from the G7 and other multilateral statements as well, that these girls have – should have the opportunity to attend school, to build skills, to develop the capacity to improve their own lives, to improve the lives of their families, and ultimately the welfare and the livelihood of their communities and their country. We have made the point before that any society that seeks to suppress, to hold back, half of its population is not a society that can be thriving, is not even a society that can succeed.
So, of course, we’ve seen the remarks from Siraj Haqqani. I think you will understand that we have developed a well-earned skepticism of these sorts of comments. We’ve heard these types of comments before. What we care much more about rather than rhetoric is action, and we await the Taliban acting on these positive signals and reopening schools at all levels across the country, which itself would be a very welcome development.
QUESTION: Okay. The second question, Mr. Price, can you update U.S. on Afghan funds frozen by the New York courts?
MR PRICE: You may recall that several months ago now there was an executive order that came forth from the White House that spoke to the disposition of the $7 billion – approximately $7 billion – in frozen assets. It provided for a sum, an element, a part of these assets to be used for the humanitarian needs of the Afghan people. So that is something that we continue to work closely with our colleagues throughout the administration, including in the Department of Justice.
But as you know, Nazira, we have continued to be the world’s leader in terms of our humanitarian support to the people of Afghanistan, contributing hundreds of millions of dollars for education, for health care, for shelter, for food, for clean water, for sanitation, and for winterization projects at the appropriate time. We will continue to do that going forward, using the humanitarian funding that we currently have available to us.
QUESTION: Thank you.
MR PRICE: Yes, Daphne.
QUESTION: On Taiwan, Taiwan has been trying to secure an invitation to the World Health Assembly, and 13 member states made a proposal for it to join. Was the U.S. one of the 13? And what is the U.S. doing to try to get Taiwan access to the WHA, beyond public statements?
MR PRICE: Well, we strongly advocate for the WHO to invite Taiwan to participate as an observer and lend its expertise to the solution-seeking discussions at the 75th World Health Assembly, scheduled for this month. We believe that inviting Taiwan to participate as an observer would exemplify the WHO’s commitment – stated commitment – to an inclusive approach to international health cooperation and, quote/unquote, “health for all.” Taiwan in that regard is a highly capable, engaged, responsible member of the global health community, with unique expertise and approaches that can benefit the world.
We’ve made this point before, that Taiwan has much to share with the world in different realms, including in the realm of public health. And, of course, Taiwan’s absence from the WHA in recent years is something that we have sought to rectify. The WHO broke years of precedent at the 70th World Health Assembly in 2017 when it failed to invite a Taiwanese delegation to observe. Taiwan’s inclusion, unfortunately, has continued every year since 2017.
As we continue to battle a pandemic, as we continue to confront other public health threats, Taiwan’s isolation from the world’s preeminent global health forum – it’s unwarranted. It represents itself a serious health concern. We believe that its significant public health expertise, its technical and technological capabilities, its democratic governments – governance, its resilience in the face of COVID-19, and its robust economy offer considerable resources to inform the WHA’s deliberations, and we believe there is no reasonable justification to exclude its participation.
QUESTION: Was the U.S. one of the 13 that made the proposal?
MR PRICE: We have supported – excuse me – Taiwan’s participation as an observer in at the World Health Assembly.
Nick.
QUESTION: Just back to Afghanistan quickly, there was some reporting that the Afghans during the NEO who didn’t pass vet and were being held at Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo – there were about some 16 of them – that the State Department is making a final determination of what to do with these 16 or more. Has a final determination been made on what to do with them? And if so, where are they going?
MR PRICE: So I don’t have anything to share in terms of specific cases, but as you know, every individual who was transported out of Afghanistan underwent and has undergone, in most cases, vetting throughout by the interagency, by our partners within law enforcement, within the Intelligence Community, within the Department of Homeland Security as well. In some cases, there have been individuals who have required additional vetting. They have undergone that additional vetting at Camp Bondsteel. In many cases, that remains ongoing, but I just don’t have anything to offer in terms of disposition.
Yes.
QUESTION: One follow-up. Is there a time limit on how long they can be held at Camp Bondsteel?
MR PRICE: Again, the vetting usually can take place fairly quickly. There will be limited cases that require a longer vetting period. Our goal always is to see to it that we can complete the process as quickly as possible.
QUESTION: A follow-up on that, please?
MR PRICE: Yeah.
QUESTION: Just one question. Can you definitively say that they won’t be sent back to Afghanistan?
MR PRICE: I will – I can definitively say that we will comply with all regulations and guidelines when it comes to international humanitarian law and the principle of non-refoulement.
QUESTION: Can we go to Iran?
MR PRICE: Sure.
QUESTION: Okay. Israeli defense minister said, I think yesterday, that Iran is currently trying to complete the production and installation of 1,000 advanced IR-6 centrifuges, including at a new underground facility being built near Natanz. Is that the U.S. understanding of what is currently occurring by the Iranians?
MR PRICE: I am not going to detail what our understanding is. As you might gather, much of this, some of this may be derived from elements that we typically don’t speak to in public. But of course, we do share information routinely with our Israeli partners. We have a common understanding across many fronts, and we share a common strategic interest and that is seeing to it that Iran is never able to acquire a nuclear weapon.
So of course, our Israeli partners are not the only ones to have expressed concern about the progress that Iran’s nuclear program has been in position to make since the previous administration left the Iran nuclear deal in 2018. We, too, have expressed our own profound concerns about the pace at which Iran’s nuclear program has been in a position to gallop forward since 2018.
That is precisely why we are continuing to test whether we will be able to secure a mutual return to compliance with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, because doing so remains profoundly in our interest. It would put back in a box the nuclear program, a nuclear program that has not been subject to the same limits, to the same transparency, to the same verification and monitoring that Iran’s nuclear program was prior to 2018 when the nuclear agreement was in full force – when it was verifiably and demonstrably, according to international weapons inspectors, according to this building, and according to our Intelligence Community, working to prevent Iran from ever obtaining a nuclear weapon.
QUESTION: Ned, on this topic, U.S. Central Command chief lands in Israel tonight to coordinate a joint Iran strike exercise. Is the military option on the table now since the Vienna talks stalled?
MR PRICE: We believe that diplomacy and dialogue affords an opportunity to sustainably and durably and permanently put an end to Iran’s ability to produce or otherwise acquire a nuclear weapon.
Yes, Gitte.
QUESTION: You’re aware that Enrique Mora left the – Iran on Friday, so I think it’s safe to assume that by now, he may – he has briefed Rob Malley on his talks with the Iranian officials. The Iranians are saying that they have presented it as several proposals. You have said that you don’t negotiate in public, but can you confirm that?
MR PRICE: Well, we don’t negotiate in public. What I will say is that we and our partners are ready. We have been for some time. We believe it is now up to Iran to demonstrate its seriousness. As you’ve heard from us before, there are a small number of outstanding issues. We believe these small number of outstanding issues pertaining to Iran’s nuclear program could be bridged and closed quite quickly and effectively, if Iran were to make the decision to do so. We are grateful, as always, for Enrique Mora and his team’s efforts to – and we look forward to more detailed conversations with them in the days ahead.
But, as you’ve heard from us before, at this point, a deal remains far from certain. Iran needs to decide, as I alluded to before, whether it insists on conditions that are extraneous to the JCPOA, or whether it is ready, willing, and able to conclude the JCPOA, a mutual return to compliance with it, quickly. We know that it would serve America’s national security interests; we believe that it, in turn, would serve all sides’ interests.
QUESTION: Well, they’re saying the same thing, that it’s now up to the U.S. to make the decision, and that if it does so, if it does answer, that you could get back to the talks again.
MR PRICE: There are a number of parties involved in this negotiation. I think if you talk to the parties, they will tell you that the United States has negotiated indirectly, in the case of Iran, earnestly, in good faith, seeking to arrive at a mutual return to compliance. And unfortunately, the same cannot always be said of the Iranian side.
QUESTION: One last one on this?
MR PRICE: Sure.
QUESTION: There are reports that Iran has set up a drone factory in Tajikistan. Are you aware – is the United States aware of this? Because the Israeli defense minister thinks that the drone program also is part of their program to send drones to Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank.
MR PRICE: We’ve expressed our concerns about Iranian UAV technology. We have taken action using appropriate authorities against proliferators of Iranian UAV technology. I just don’t have anything to add on a possible drone factory in Tajikistan.
Courtney.
QUESTION: A couple on Russia?
QUESTION: On Iran? Yeah.
MR PRICE: Okay.
QUESTION: Go ahead.
MR PRICE: Iran? Go ahead.
QUESTION: Iran, yeah. Last week, we heard that Iran arrested two Europeans. Today we got to know they are French; we know their name. And Iran is labeling them with security accusation, like always familiar pattern. That is a matter related to French – to France foreign minister, so my question for you is about the negotiations you are having in Vienna about the hostages, dual nationalities, foreign citizens. Those negotiations, are they still going on? Are they tied to the nuclear talks? Can you give us an update? And as a country who has at least five citizens in Iranian jail, how do you react to that behavior?
MR PRICE: Well, let me first start with the arrest of the two French nationals. We, of course, are aware of these reports. We echo what you’ve heard from our French allies, the condemnation of these arrests. We similarly call on Iran to immediately release these two French nationals. As you alluded to, Iran has a long history of unjustly imprisoning foreign nationals in an attempt to use them as political leverage. It continues to engage in a range of human rights abuses, which include arbitrary and large-scale detention of individuals, some of whom have faced torture and execution after trials that have lacked due process. These practices are outrageous. We have continued to speak out against them together with our allies and partners.
When it comes to the Americans, the U.S. citizens who are held unjustly inside Iran and who have been for years, as we often say, we have no higher priority than seeing – than the safety and security of Americans everywhere, and of course, that includes Americans who are unjustly detained in places around the world.
The – we have been careful not to tie the fate of these individuals – their freedom, I should say – to a potential mutual return to compliance with the JCPOA. And we’ve been careful not to do that for precisely what I said just a moment ago. A mutual return to compliance with the JCPOA is far from certain. We want to see the return of our unjustly detained American citizens as a certainty.
Now it is true, as you have heard others say, that we are treating this as an utmost priority. The Iranians – we have made quite clear to them the priority we attach to this, and it is something that we will continue to do, regardless of what happens with the JCPOA.
Yes.
QUESTION: I have another one about a phone call between Secretary Blinken and the Qatari Foreign Minister Al-Thani. He thanked him for the mediating role he played between Iran and America. My question is that – can you give us detail about what sort of a role Qatar played and what exactly Al-Thani achieved from his trip to Iran?
MR PRICE: So I will have to refer you to the Qatari authorities to speak to the Amir’s visit to Iran. What I can say is that we’re grateful for the constructive role that Qatar has played in our efforts to achieve diplomatic resolutions to some of the important and difficult issues between the U.S. and Iran, and that includes what you referred to just a moment ago, the unjust detention of several U.S. citizens and our efforts to achieve a mutual return to compliance with the JCPOA.
Courtney.
QUESTION: (Inaudible) on Russia. Secretary – Defense Secretary Austin spoke on Friday with his Russian counterpart, and I’m just curious if there are plans for Secretary Blinken and Foreign Minister Lavrov to speak – they haven’t done so since February 12th – and just if there are additional lines of communication beyond Ambassador Sullivan and officials in Moscow.
MR PRICE: You are correct that the Secretary has not spoken to his Russian counterpart since February, and this goes back to something I noted just a moment ago in terms of where we are and, more precisely, where we are not with the diplomacy. The Russian Federation has not given – has not afforded us any reason to believe that a conversation at that level between Secretary Blinken and Foreign Minister Lavrov would be constructive in the current environment. We have demonstrated many times that we have no bones about picking up the phone if doing so – having a conversation, having a meeting – has the potential to lead to a more constructive outcome. Everything we have heard from our Ukrainian partners, everything we have heard publicly from the Russians gives us no indication that a conversation at this time would be a useful exercise.
There are lines of communication between the United States and Russia. As you know, we have an embassy that is limited in terms of its – in terms of its ability to function fully given some of the restrictions that the Russians have unjustly and unfairly imposed on our mission community in Moscow. But Ambassador Sullivan continues, as he did last week, to meet with and to speak with his MFA counterparts. Our Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs here in Washington continues to have occasional contact with Russian officials who are based here. We have spoken previously of the National Security Advisor’s contact with his Russian counterpart, Mr. Patrushev. And as the Pentagon read out this – Secretary Austin did have an opportunity to speak with his Russian counterpart.
There are issues that the Defense Department deals with, including issues of deconfliction, that are more tactical, that are different from the types of strategic conversations that Secretary Blinken has had in the past with Foreign Minister Lavrov, and if the conditions present themselves and if we make the judgment that a conversation between them could advance the cause of a dimunition of violence or easing the humanitarian plight of the Ukrainian people that they may have going forward.
QUESTION: And can you just give us an update on the case of Brittney Griner? There’s some talk of a possible prisoner swap with Viktor Bout, for instance.
MR PRICE: Well, of course I’m not going to get into – I’m not going to entertain that. But let me first speak generally to her case. You may have seen Ambassador Sullivan issued a statement earlier today. He made the point that it is unacceptable that for the third time in a month, Russian authorities have denied an embassy visit to Brittney Griner. A consular official was able to speak with her on the margins of her court proceedings on Friday. That consular official came away with the impression that Brittney Griner is doing as well as might be expected under conditions that can only be described as exceedingly difficult.
But sporadic contact is not satisfactory. It also may not be consistent with the Vienna Convention, to which Russia has subscribed. That is why we continue to urge the Russian Government to allow consistent, timely consular access to all U.S. citizens detained in Russia, in line with those very legal obligations, and to allow us to provide consular services for U.S. citizens detained in Russia.
Among the issues that Ambassador Sullivan raises with his MFA counterparts are the cases of detained Americans. More broadly, I can confirm that Secretary Blinken had an opportunity in recent days to speak to the wife of Brittney Griner. He conveyed once again the priority we attach to seeing the release of all Americans around the world, including Brittney Griner in the case of Russia, Paul Whelan in the case of Russia – those are Americans who we consider to be wrongfully detained. That has been a priority of Secretary Blinken since the earliest days of his tenure. He’s had an opportunity to speak with the families of American hostages and detainees as a group, but he often does one-on-one – has one-on-one conversations with these families as well. And he was appreciative of the ability to speak to Brittney Griner’s wife.
QUESTION: Ned?
MR PRICE: Yes.
QUESTION: I have a couple questions on the Middle East. First, how will the U.S. delegation visit to UAE to offer condolences affect the relations between the two countries, and how was or how can you describe the meeting between Secretary Blinken and UAE foreign minister yesterday?
MR PRICE: Well, as you know, Secretary Blinken did join the delegation that was led by the Vice President to offer condolences and to pay respects to Sheikh Khalifa, and to honor his memory, his legacy in the context of his passing. The Vice President underscored the strength and the – of the partnership between our countries and our desire to further deepen our ties in the coming months and years. Really, the visit itself was an opportunity to commemorate the life of Sheikh Khalifa and to congratulate His Highness Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed on assuming the presidency of the United Arab Emirates.
The Secretary did – on Monday night, I believe it was – have an opportunity to have dinner with his Emirati counterpart. It was a session that, again, commemorated the life and legacy of Sheikh Khalifa and was held in that context, but they were able to discuss a number of substantive areas, both regional and bilateral issues. They discussed our joint efforts to reinforce the ceasefire in Yemen; they discussed our – the international emphasis on defusing tensions in the West Bank and Jerusalem; they discussed our joint cooperation in countering Iran and the threat that it poses; and ways that we can build on what is already a strong partnership between our two countries.
As you know, this is a relationship that Secretary Blinken – where Secretary Blinken has been fortunate to have had a lot of face time in recent weeks. He saw his Emirati counterpart in the Negev for the summit focused on the Abraham Accords. We then later traveled to Morocco, where he saw his Emirati counterpart, but of course met with Mohammed bin Zayed, then the crown prince, to discuss the relationship – the valued and valuable relationship – between the United States and the United Arab Emirates. And the conversation that he had with ABZ at dinner yesterday evening was an opportunity to build on those conversations and to look ahead to additional cooperation.
QUESTION: I have two more, one on Libya. Any comment on the clashes in the capital, Tripoli, and the visit that the prime minister made?
MR PRICE: We are highly concerned by reports of armed clashes in Tripoli. We urge all armed groups to refrain from violence, and for political leaders to recognize that trying to seize or retain power through force will only hurt the people of Libya. It’s critical for Libyan leaders to find consensus to avoid clashes like the ones we saw yesterday. We continue to believe that the only viable path to legitimate leadership is by allowing Libyans to choose their leaders through free and fair elections. The constitutional talks underway in Cairo are now more important than ever. Members of the house of representatives and the HSC gathered there must recognize that the continued lack of a constitutional basis leading to presidential and parliamentary elections on a realistic but aggressive timeframe is depriving Libyans of the stability and the prosperity they deserve.
QUESTION: And finally, on Lebanon, any comment on the elections and the results? And do you think that Hizballah is weaker today than it was yesterday?
MR PRICE: Well, we are pleased that the parliamentary elections took place on time in Lebanon without major security incidents. We encourage Lebanon’s political leaders to recommit themselves to the hard work that lies ahead, to implement needed reforms to rescue the economy. We believe that part of that important work that lies ahead is government formation, a government that is responsible and responsive to the Lebanese people, that can undertake some of the reforms that have been called for, some of the reforms that are necessary – both in terms of international financial and lending institutions, but also, more importantly, to address the humanitarian concerns of the people of Lebanon.
Daphne.
QUESTION: Just to clarify quickly on UAE, and then I have a question on Ethiopia. Did oil not come up during yesterday’s visit?
MR PRICE: Again, I don’t have additional details to read out. We have held discussions with – previously with Saudi Arabia and the UAE on a collaborative approach to managing potential market pressures stemming from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. We are committed to doing everything we can and to work with other countries to bring down the costs of energy for the American people, and to make countries around the world more resilient to the type of – to potential price shocks and to potential disruptions in energy supplies owing to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
QUESTION: Okay, and then —
MR PRICE: Yes.
QUESTION: — the Ethiopia question, sorry.
MR PRICE: Ethiopia question.
QUESTION: Reuters reported yesterday that authorities in Ethiopia’s Tigray region are forcing young people to join their army’s fight against the central government by threatening and jailing relatives. Is this something the U.S. is aware of? And are you concerned that the TPLF may be preparing for a possible resurgence in combat?
MR PRICE: Well, we certainly hope not. Our goal is to build on the humanitarian truce that was announced on April – that was announced last month. We strongly support that humanitarian truce that the Government of Ethiopia and the Tigray regional authority have committed to as well. We’ve seen a series of encouraging actions by the Government of Ethiopia that we hope will lead and help lay the groundwork for an end to the conflict. That includes lifting the state of emergency, releasing some political prisoners and detainees. Tigrayan forces, for their part, have withdrawn most of their forces from Afar.
Our emphasis now is on doing all we can to support the parties in efforts to accelerate, to uphold, and expand efforts to ensure that this humanitarian truce sticks, but also to expand immediate, sustained, and unimpeded humanitarian access to all Ethiopians affected by this conflict. So certainly would not like to see any backtracking that has the potential to undermine the humanitarian truce that we’ve seen.
Yes.
QUESTION: Ned —
MR PRICE: Let me go to you, and then we’ll come right to you.
QUESTION: My question is about the Secretary’s policy speech on PRC. Could you help us – could you help us understand the rough outline of it? And I also wonder when he will deliver it.
MR PRICE: I am not in a position today to offer a rough outline, but I can assure you that the Secretary intends to deliver these remarks at the first possible opportunity. As you know, he was set to deliver it the other week, but of course, his COVID diagnosis disrupted those plans. But we’ll have more details on that shortly.
Yes.
QUESTION: Thank you, Ned. I want to go back to the very first question on a new program. You said something important about sharing your findings with partners. Does that include the ICC as well? As you know, ICC is sending its largest-ever team to Ukraine. What is the U.S. position on that? And will you have your own separate investigation, or is this part of the cooperation with the ICC?
And secondly, President Zelenskyy last week said that he thinks that Moscow believes it’s going to get away with its war crimes because of its nuclear capabilities. Can you assure us that that’s not going to be the case? Thank you.
MR PRICE: In terms of the ICC, we support all international investigations into the atrocities in Ukraine. We welcomed the announcement by the prosecutor general of an effort vis-à-vis Ukraine. We support those conducted by the ICC.
We’ve said before that everything is on the table. We are considering the most appropriate options for accountability. We’ve also said that the Ukrainian prosecutor general, her team, obviously has an appropriate jurisdiction. They have developed well-developed efforts to document, to analyze, to preserve potential evidence of war crimes for criminal prosecutions. As you saw the announcement from her office just a couple days ago, they have actually started proceedings in one case.
So we will continue to pursue all appropriate venues to see accountability. And accountability means accountability; and no country – no matter how large, how potentially powerful, what types of weapons they may have in their arsenal – can escape accountability for the types of atrocities that we have seen Russia’s forces perpetrate against the Ukrainian people.
We have already made the assessment that Russia’s forces have committed war crimes. Our task now is to support those, to support the important work of those who are seeking to build criminal cases against those who are responsible for this, whether at the tactical level or those who at much more senior levels may have given orders or may have been complicit in the war crimes that have occurred.
Thank you all very much.
QUESTION: Thank you.
(The briefing was concluded at 3:38 p.m.)
Gov. Kim Reynolds and Lt. Gov. Adam Gregg released a public schedule update for the week of Monday, May 16, 2022 – Sunday, May 22, 2022.
The following additional events are open to credentialed members of the media:
Wednesday, May 18
Governor Reynolds visits Rada Manufacturing Company
Rada Manufacturing Company
905 Industrial Rd.
Waverly, IA
4:30 p.m.
Thursday, May 19
Governor Reynolds visits XL Specialized Trailers
XL Specialized Trailers
1086 S. 3rd St.
Manchester, IA
9:00 a.m.
Governor Reynolds visits Elkader Downtown Housing Project
Elkader Opera House & City Hall
207 N. Main St.
Elkader, IA
10:30 a.m.
Governor tours Brain Health Retreat Room
Dubuque Hempstead High School
3715 Pennsylvania Ave.
Dubuque, IA
1:15 p.m.
***NOTE: The Pre-Flight Dinner for the Honor Flight of the Quad Cities on Thursday, May 19 at 6:00 p.m. is NOT open to the media/public as previously listed.***
Madison Cawthorne is gone, hopefully for good. Now we can work on Taylor-Green, Boebert, Jordan and the rest of the crazies.
You trumpettes have such a great role model…if you’re a criminal
https://twitter.com/robertmaguire_/status/1526312876075524102?s=25&t=ChG1zZEyYcE0AMd55EV6uw&fbclid=IwAR1ysPJfGo4SO4nG9BGGY_YBCiGMQn1vKLei8T32Fjqyj6OHULCAlIkzoXk
STATEMENT: Lawmakers must stand against white supremacy, fight for stronger gun laws
Progress Iowa Executive Director Matt Sinovic issued the following statement in response to the deadly mass shootings that took place in Buffalo, NY and Laguna Woods, CA this weekend:
“Our hearts go out to all of the victims of this weekend’s deadly mass shootings. We grieve with those whose loved ones were injured or killed in these terrible events.
“Law enforcement is investigating each of these crimes, but what we do know is that the 18-year-old white man accused of killing 10 and injuring three others at a Buffalo, NY supermarket, specifically targeted Black victims. The suspect had planned to shoot and kill even more Black people before being stopped by police.
“There is no doubt that this was a hate crime. And it’s clear where the blame lies. For years, Republicans have enabled white supremacists by failing to denounce and reject racist rhetoric, which has led to countless other violent attacks on Americans based on their race. Once again, we are seeing stark differences in how a white suspect is characterized in comparison to Black suspects. This trend cannot continue. Not only do we need to improve gun laws for public safety, but the press, police and each of us must work to rectify this injustice.
“Sadly, the deadly shooting in Buffalo wasn’t the only act of gun violence committed this weekend. While it’s not clear that the suspect in Sunday’s deadly shooting in Laguna Woods, CA was racially motivated, we do know that for years, Republicans have worked to weaken our country’s gun laws, making it much easier for anyone to obtain a firearm. These continued attacks on gun control laws have made all of our communities less safe.
“Congressional leaders must stand up against hate and condemn and punish any lawmaker that promotes white supremacy, white nationalism, “replacement theory” or anti-semitism. Our lawmakers must also pass common sense gun laws to ensure the safety of our communities.”
Biden Administration Expands Support to the Cuban People
05/16/2022 06:19 PM EDT
Ned Price, Department Spokesperson
The Administration’s policy towards Cuba continues to focus first and foremost on support for the Cuban people, including their human rights and their political and economic well-being.
Today, the Administration announced measures to further support the Cuban people, providing them additional tools to pursue a life free from Cuban government oppression and to seek greater economic opportunities.
We will reinstate the Cuban Family Reunification Parole (CFRP) Program and further increase consular services and visa processing, making it possible for more Cubans to join their families in the United States via regular migration channels.
We will make it easier for families to visit their relatives in Cuba and for authorized U.S. travelers to engage with the Cuban people, attend meetings, and conduct research.
We will encourage the growth of Cuba’s private sector by supporting greater access to U.S. Internet services, applications, and e-commerce platforms. We will support new avenues for electronic payments and for U.S. business activities with independent Cuban entrepreneurs, including through increased access to microfinance and training.
We also will support Cuban families and entrepreneurs by enabling increased remittance flows to the Cuban people in ways that do not enrich human rights abusers. We will lift the family remittance cap of $1,000 per quarter and will support donative remittances to Cuban entrepreneurs, both with the goal of further empowering families to support each other and for entrepreneurs to expand their businesses.
With these actions, we aim to support Cubans’ aspirations for freedom and for greater economic opportunities so that they can lead successful lives at home. We continue to call on the Cuban government to immediately release political prisoners, to respect the Cuban people’s fundamental freedoms and to allow the Cuban people to determine their own futures.
Mason City Alternative School Annual Awards Ceremony
For further information or questions, please contact the Office of the
Dave Versteeg Superintendent of Schools
The Mason City Alternative School will be celebrating the graduation completions of its senior class and honoring student accomplishments at the Mason City Alternative School Annual Awards Ceremony on Thursday, June 2, 2022, at 7:30 p.m. in the Mason City Performance Hall in the FEMA Safe Room located on the Mason City High School campus. 1700 4th St. SE, Mason City, Iowa.
Gov. Kim Reynolds and Lt. Gov. Adam Gregg released their public schedule for the week of Monday, May 16, 2022 – Sunday, May 22, 2022.
The following events are open to credentialed members of the media:
Tuesday, May 17
Governor Reynolds signs HF2128 – Biofuels Bill
Private Farm Residence
8718 W. 109th St. S.
Prairie City, IA
10:00 a.m.
***The Governor will hold a media availability following the bill signing.***
Wednesday, May 18
Governor Reynolds attends Iowa DEV Conference
Hyatt Regency Coralville Hotel & Conference Center
300 E. 9th St.
Coralville, IA
11:30 a.m.
Governor Reynolds visits Geater Machining and Manufacturing
Geater Machining and Manufacturing
901 12th St. NE
Independence, IA
2:45 p.m.
Thursday, May 19
Governor Reynolds attends Pre-Flight Dinner for Honor Flight of the Quad Cities
Quad Cities Waterfront Convention Center
2021 State Street
Bettendorf, IA
6:00 p.m.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MASON CITY IN THE STATE OF IOWA, ON THE MATTER OF THE PROPOSAL TO ENTER INTO A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH WEST LAKES P & S, L.L.C., AND THE HEARING THEREON
PUBLIC NOTICE is hereby given that the Council of the City of Mason City in the State of Iowa, will hold a public hearing on June 7, 2022, at 7:00 P.M., at which meeting the Council proposes to take action on the proposal to enter into a Development Agreement (the “Agreement”) with West Lakes P & S, L.L.C. (the “Developer”).
The Agreement would obligate the Developer to construct certain Minimum Improvements (as defined in the Agreement) and all related site improvements on certain real property located within the Mason City Unified Urban Renewal Area as defined and legally described in the Development Agreement, under the terms and following satisfaction of the conditions set forth in the Agreement. The Agreement imposes obligations on the Developer related to employment retention and/or creation by commercial tenants in the Minimum Improvements.
The Agreement would further obligate the City to make up to ten (10) consecutive annual payments of Economic Development Grants to Developer consisting of 100% of the Tax Increments pursuant to Section 403.19, Code of Iowa, and generated by the construction of the Minimum Improvements, the cumulative total for all such payments not to exceed the lesser of $433,000, or the amount accrued under the formula outlined in the proposed Development Agreement, under the terms and following satisfaction of the conditions set forth in the Agreement.
A copy of the Agreement is on file for public inspection during regular business hours in the office of the City Clerk, City Hall, City of Mason City, Iowa.
At the above meeting the Council shall receive oral or written objections from any resident or property owner of said City, to the proposal to enter into the Agreement with the Developer. After all objections have been received and considered, the Council will at this meeting or at any adjournment thereof, take additional action on the proposal or will abandon the proposal to authorize said Agreement.
This notice is given by order of the City Council of the City of Mason City in the State of Iowa, as provided by Section 364.6, Code of Iowa.
Dated this 17th day of May, 2022.
/s/Aaron Burnett
City Clerk, City of Mason City
In the State of Iowa
Publish 5-24-22
Emailed 5-16-22
PUBLISHED MEETING
5/16/2022, 5:30 PM
Mason City Community School District | Board of Education | Administrative Center Board
Meeting Title: 5/16/2022, 5:30 PM-Board Meeting Agenda
No news on the shooting behind the park inn?
Here’s some I found on a local news site. Read it quick as it will be deleted.
Mason City Police Department responded to a call of a shooting downtown shortly after 5 p.m. on Saturday.
The incident occurred in the alley way behind the Historic Park Inn Hotel, which is located at 15 South Federal Ave. on the Plaza.
Responders confirmed that one person was taken away by Mason City Ambulance, and that no other injuries were reported.
An investigator on the scene said there is no danger to the public.
Apparently it was a self-inflicted wound.
Little Mattie Markwart is such a pussy.
He makes futile attempts to block people that disagree or are critical of him.
He can’t really do that because is a no talent copy & paste hack, with very little skills and knowledge. All he can do is mooch money off of Mason City taxpayers and get money from his mommy. Mattie is just a middle age loser and a wannabe.
He has been, is now and always be a pathetic ass-clown.
Joe, I think you might be right. There aren’t many commentors anymore, I think he’s losing his fan base.
I don’t think so. A lot of people don’t like change and many of the previous posters fit that description. Can’t handle the new world and won’t admit changes are here to stay. Once they realize that, they will start to post.
If NIT’s success was solely connected to comments, I’d make more selling shoes to you at Payless. Trust me, NIT does very well, very well.
The administration has restricted Russian bot access to the internet, and we see the result here. This tells us how much of the sh*t-stirring here was Putin’s hackers.
Filed under opinion from Joe, the loyal daily NIT reader 😉
I see that you put your hand job to work. Are you going to answer the question or keep spinning off from it?
State Department Press Briefing – May 11, 2022
05/11/2022 07:50 PM EDT
Ned Price, Department Spokesperson
Washington, D.C.
MR PRICE: Good afternoon. I apologize for the late start.
Let me start by saying that we are absolutely heartbroken to learn of the killing of Palestinian American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh and injuries to her producer Ali Samoudi today in the West Bank. We send our deepest condolences to Shireen’s family, her friends and loved ones, and strongly condemn her killing as we do the killing of journalists around the world.
Shireen was a veteran reporter. She was followed closely by those who care about the region and is mourned by all who knew her. The Secretary spoke just one week ago on World Press Freedom Day about the fundamental role journalists play in the free flow of information, ideas, opinions, including dissenting ones, as being essential to inclusive and tolerant societies. It is heart-wrenching to see the killing of another journalist just one week later.
We call for an immediate and thorough investigation and full accountability. Investigating attacks on independent media and prosecuting those responsible are of paramount importance. We will continue to promote media freedom and protect journalists’ ability to do their jobs without fear of violence, threats to their lives or safety, or unjust detention. Her death is a tragic loss and an affront to media freedom everywhere.
With that, I’ll take your questions.
QUESTION: Thanks, Ned.
MR PRICE: Matt, I see you have a minder with you today. I’m very glad to see it.
QUESTION: Yes. Yeah, my boss. My boss. This is Anna. Ned, Anna.
QUESTION: Hello.
MR PRICE: Good to meet you. We’ll talk later today.
QUESTION: Yes. On this situation, when you call for “an immediate and thorough investigation,” who exactly do you want to do the investigating?
MR PRICE: We – it is important to us that those who are responsible for her death be held responsible, that full accountability be ensured in this case.
QUESTION: Okay, but my question is not that. My question is who do you think can conduct a credible investigation into her death that would be accepted by all parties, including the United States?
MR PRICE: Well, in this case, I’m not going to prejudge where any investigation may go. We’ve seen, of course, that the Israeli Defense Forces have already announced that there is an investigation underway. We welcome that announcement. It is important to us, it is important to the world that that investigation be thorough, that it be comprehensive, that it be transparent, and importantly, that investigations end with full accountability and those responsible for her death being held responsible for their actions.
QUESTION: Okay. But I mean, do you want the Palestinians to be involved in the investigation?
MR PRICE: The IDF has announced an investigation.
QUESTION: Okay, that’s the IDF.
MR PRICE: Correct.
QUESTION: “I” standing for Israel.
MR PRICE: That is correct.
QUESTION: So what about the Palestinians? Because there are calls in Israel for the Palestinians to take part in this.
MR PRICE: What is – and I’m sure the Palestinians will do their own review as well. We have heard statements from both Israelis and Palestinians over the course of the day. What is important to us is that those responsible for this killing be held accountable for their actions.
QUESTION: Okay.
QUESTION: So —
QUESTION: All right, so just one more thing and then I’ll defer. But are you confident that – maybe you’re not because the investigation hasn’t been done, but does it appear to you, circumstances right now as you know them, that she was targeted because she was a journalist?
MR PRICE: I’m not going to prejudge an investigation. That’s precisely why we’re calling for an investigation. We’ve heard the statements that she was clearly – she was wearing attire that was clearly – marked her as a journalist, but we are going to wait for the investigation to go where it goes. We are going to wait to hear where the facts lead in this case, and importantly, to see the accountability that is mounted in the aftermath of that investigation.
Said.
QUESTION: Ned, I just want to ask you, do you trust Israel investigating itself? I mean, I have asked this question over the past 20 years so many times. Can you trust them? Have they ever come back to you with saying these are the results? I mean, only in January, Omar Assad died in their custody, and you said – and he was a Palestinian American, and you said – from that podium you said that you are waiting on their investigating. You have not even followed through on this. So do you trust the Israelis investigating themselves?
MR PRICE: The Israelis have the wherewithal and the capabilities to conduct a thorough, comprehensive investigation. Let me give you an example because you asked the question. In June of 2020, Israeli police in Jerusalem’s Old City fatally shot – and you are familiar with this case – Iyad Halak, a Palestinian resident with autism, after he allegedly failed to stop and to obey orders. About a year later, in June of 2021, the Ministry of Justice’s Department for Investigations of Police Officers, DIPO, filed an indictment with a Jerusalem district court against the border police officer who shot and killed Halak. Clearly, Israeli authorities have the wherewithal to conduct a thorough, comprehensive investigation.
That is what we expect in this case. In this case we expect that the perpetrators, those responsible for the death of Shireen – who, by the way, was a very close contact of our post and someone our people, someone presumably many of you knew quite well. It is —
QUESTION: She was with us in this room.
MR PRICE: And it is important to us —
QUESTION: You have to remember that.
MR PRICE: It is important to us that her legacy be honored, be protected, with accountability for those who senselessly took her life.
QUESTION: Well, you know on this police case that you cited – just bear with me, indulge me, my colleagues. In this case that you cited, you know that the Israelis charged the policemen something like maybe $10 fine and so on. I don’t want to delve into that. But you talked about Press Freedom Day last week, Press Freedom Day. You never mentioned the Palestinian journalists. There are 15 Palestinian journalists in prison – in prison. They are held there, as we say in Arabic, zuran mwbitani, which means falsely and malevolent. They have been held there day after day, year after year. They are disallowed from conducting their work, from doing their work, including colleagues of mine from my newspaper.
So I want you to respond to that. I mean, you talked about other things, which is laudable, which is great. Talk about what journalists face in Ukraine and other places. But you never mention what Palestinian journalists face.
MR PRICE: Said, we know what many Palestinian journalists have faced, and we’ve commented quite a bit on that. You well remember what we said in the aftermath of the strike last year against the Associated Press building, against the Al Jazeera building in Gaza. We had an opportunity to speak to that publicly. Secretary Blinken had an opportunity to speak to the editor-in-chief of the Associated Press in the aftermath of that strike. We have spoken vociferously about the rights to a free press around the world, the fact that reporters should not be targeted, reporters should not be the objects of violence or suppression or repression anywhere around the world, whether that country is an autocracy, a democracy, whether that country is a friend or whether that country is a foe or competitor.
QUESTION: Let me just follow up on how journalists, Palestinian journalists, when there is an operation like this. The Israelis were about to storm the Jenin refugee camp. They go by, including the group that was with Shireen, including someone from my newspaper. They went by the Israelis that were standing right out there, and they said, “We’re going right there.” They told them just this morning, “We’re going to go right there.” So they knew perfectly. They knew exactly who was there and how clearly marked these people were.
So I want to hear from you if that – if – if ever the investigation shows the guilty party, should that guilty party be prosecuted to the full extent of the law?
MR PRICE: Those responsible for Shireen’s killing should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, yes.
QUESTION: Ned, sorry, just really briefly since you brought it up, the bombing of the AP and the Al Jazeera office in Gaza, did you guys ever get an explanation from the Israelis that was satisfactory?
MR PRICE: We were in contact with the Israelis. They shared with us some of the information regarding that strike.
QUESTION: And did you think that it was a legit target?
MR PRICE: Clearly, the fact that there were the offices of at least two independent media organizations made it highly concerning, highly troubling to us. But beyond that —
QUESTION: Well, is it still troubling, or were your concerns resolved after what they told you?
MR PRICE: It is —
QUESTION: I mean, it’s been almost – literally, that happened on May 15th of last year. It’s now, what, May 11th. Or is it the 12th?
MR PRICE: It is – that assessment has not changed. It is —
QUESTION: Will you guys —
QUESTION: So you’re still troubled by it? In other words, the explanation that the Israelis gave to you is not – it did not allay your —
MR PRICE: We voiced our concern by the fact that journalists were put at risk, that their offices came under assault.
QUESTION: I get that. But it’s been a —
QUESTION: Will you send someone to the church —
QUESTION: But it’s been a year, so I just want to know if the Israeli explanation has satisfied you and so those concerns are no – you don’t have those concerns.
MR PRICE: Those concerns still exist, yes.
QUESTION: Will you send someone to the church on Friday for the service of Shireen in Gaza?
MR PRICE: I will check with post. As I know, as I relayed to you, she was a close contact of post. They were in regular contact with her. They valued her work. They valued in some cases a personal friendship and relationship with her. And if we have anything to say regarding representation, we’ll let you know.
Francesco.
QUESTION: Has the Secretary spoken to any leader in Israel or the Palestinian side about this? And just on the record, do you have any early assessment or understanding of who did that?
MR PRICE: We’re not going to prejudge an investigation. We’ve heard various statements throughout the day. Some of those statements have shifted. That’s why we have called for a thorough, comprehensive investigation ending in accountability. There have been a number of conversations by senior officials in this building, senior officials at our embassy in Jerusalem, to both Israeli and Palestinian counterparts conveying many of the same messages I conveyed to you just now.
Yes.
QUESTION: Can I briefly ask about Hong Kong and Taiwan?
MR PRICE: Sure.
QUESTION: I still have something on Shireen, if I can.
MR PRICE: Let’s take one more question on this, and then I’ll come right back to you, Nike.
QUESTION: Can I have one question too, please?
MR PRICE: Okay. Go ahead.
QUESTION: Many press and human rights organizations are calling for international independent investigation into her killings, because they condemned Israeli maybe before that they’re not going to thoroughly investigate themselves. Are you willing to support such efforts to turn this into an international investigation?
MR PRICE: Israel has the wherewithal and the capability to conduct a thorough, comprehensive investigation. They’ve done it before and we expect they’ll do so in this case.
Yes.
QUESTION: Do you intend to conduct your own investigation or at least participate, since the lady or the – our colleagues, she is an American Palestinian. Because – because the record shows that Israeli investigation on those kind of incident haven’t been reliable, so I wonder if you are planning to do your part of the investigation.
MR PRICE: Our role every time an American citizen is – passes overseas, whether that individual – however that individual succumbs, is to provide appropriate consular support. We’ll be providing any necessary consular support in this case. But what we are calling for is an investigation – a comprehensive, a thorough investigation that ends with accountability.
Nike.
QUESTION: Yes. On Hong Kong, do you have anything on the arrest of the Catholic cardinal, Joseph Zen? And separately, if I may, can you recap the U.S. policy toward Taiwan? Does the U.S. support Taiwan independence? I’m asking because the Taiwan President Tsai has already said there is no need to declare Taiwan independence because Republic of China was established in 1912. Thank you.
MR PRICE: Thanks, Nike. We discussed this a bit yesterday, but let me just reiterate that our policy towards Taiwan has not changed. The United States remains committed to our longstanding “one China” policy which is guided by the Taiwan Relations Act, the Three U.S.-China Joint Communiques, and the Six Assurances.
To your question, we do not support Taiwan independence and we have repeatedly made this clear both in public and in private. Though the United States does not have diplomatic relations with Taiwan and does not support Taiwan independence, we do have, as you know, a robust unofficial relationship with Taiwan as well as an abiding interest in maintaining peace and stability across the Taiwan Straits.
In terms of Hong Kong, we – I expect we’ll have more to say on this later today, but we do strongly condemn the arrests of Cardinal Joseph Zen, Margaret Ng, Hui Po-keung, and Denise Ho. In arresting these veteran activists, scholars, and religious leaders under the so-called National Security Law, Hong Kong authorities have again demonstrated that they will pursue all means necessary to stifle dissent and undercut protected rights and freedoms. We call for the immediate release of all of those who remain in custody, and of course, we continue to stand with the people of Hong Kong.
Janne.
QUESTION: Do you assess – do you assess the frequent deployment of Chinese PLA airplanes to Taiwan Straits is sending the wrong message to the people of Taiwan and may actually push them to the direction that PRC does not want to see, which is trigger the Taiwanese independence movement?
MR PRICE: I will let the people on Taiwan remark on the implications of the PRC’s actions. What I will say is that we have continued to voice our concern for these provocative operations. What we continue to call for is stability across the Taiwan Strait. We will continue to stand with our partner Taiwan. Our commitment to Taiwan is rock-solid, including in the face of acts of potential intimidation.
QUESTION: Taiwan? Can I —
QUESTION: Sorry, when you said you’ll have more to say about the arrests later in the day, is that like some kind of a statement or —
MR PRICE: I expect we’ll have some kind of a statement.
QUESTION: Like a written statement —
MR PRICE: Yes.
QUESTION: — from the Secretary? Okay. And then just the other – on the other thing on Taiwan, going back to our little discussion yesterday, when you say you do not support Taiwan independence, fine, but you sell them weapons. You send official delegations there, congressional delegations. You push —
MR PRICE: I can guess —
QUESTION: — for their inclusion – you push for their inclusion in international organizations as a —
MR PRICE: That don’t require statehood as a criterion for membership, correct.
QUESTION: But as a – but as something separate from mainland China. So —
MR PRICE: In organizations that do not require statehood as a membership. You are speaking to everything that we do as part of our unofficial relationship with Taiwan that falls under the auspices of our “one China” policy.
QUESTION: Right. So what I’m getting to is the WHO and the WHA this year, and you are pushing again, as I understand it, for Taiwan to be invited or to participate as an independent entity as a – not part of China. So how is that not supporting Taiwanese independence?
MR PRICE: These are two very separate things, Matt. We believe, on the one hand, that Taiwan’s —
QUESTION: First of all, you are, right?
MR PRICE: Excuse me, what?
QUESTION: You want the WHO to invite Taiwan as Taiwan?
MR PRICE: We support Taiwan’s robust and meaningful participation in international organizations that don’t require statehood as a criterion for participation or for membership.
QUESTION: Okay. So you are pushing for them to participate in the WHO?
MR PRICE: I don’t have any announcements today, but you’ve heard from us before that we push for Taiwan’s robust and meaningful participation in international organizations that don’t require statehood as a condition for membership. Taiwan is a leading democracy. The world has a lot to learn from our Taiwanese partners. Whether it is in the area of public health, whether it is in the area of economics, whether it’s in the area of climate change, we partner with the people on Taiwan, with our Taiwanese partners in a range of areas. We will continue to push for Taiwan’s meaningful participation, all within the bounds of our “one China” policy that has not changed.
QUESTION: Okay. So does the same apply for the Palestinians, that you push for them to be a part of and to participate in international fora that do not require statehood or —
MR PRICE: We are pushing – we are pushing for a two-state solution because we believe —
QUESTION: No, no, no, but I’m asking in the interim for – before that. So are you also pushing for the Palestinians to take part in international fora that —
MR PRICE: What we are pushing for, Matt, is a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. We believe that Israelis and Palestinians deserve equally to enjoy equal measures of safety, security, dignity – in the case of the Palestinians, and a state of their own.
Yes, Janne.
QUESTION: Thank you, Ned. I have a couple of question on China, North Korea, and South Korea.
First question: South Korean President Yoon said that – recently – he would provide drastic economic support to North Korea if it achieve substantial denuclearizations. On aid after North Korea has denuclearized first, how does it compare to the U.S. policy toward North Korea?
MR PRICE: Well, yesterday, I don’t know that you were here, but we did offer congratulations to the new South Korean President Yoon Seok-youl on his inauguration. We made the point that the U.S.-ROK alliance is rooted in close friendship. It’s the linchpin for peace, security, prosperity in the Indo-Pacific. And we have and will continue to coordinate closely with our treaty allies in the ROK across all variety of challenges and opportunities.
And of course, when it comes to challenges, there is no more pressing challenge than that posed by the DPRK’s WMD programs, its nuclear weapons, its ballistic missile programs. We will, as I said, coordinate closely to address the threats that they pose. And the fact is that we share an objective together with our allies in the ROK, together with our allies in Japan. That is the complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. How we get there, the steps, what that will look like is something we will continue to coordinate closely on with our allies in the ROK and Japan.
We know and we agree as allies that it will require principled dialogue and diplomacy. We have made very clear that we are willing to engage in good-faith diplomacy with the DPRK. We do so, of course, with no hostile intent. Our only intent is to see the complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula in the interests of peace and security in the Indo-Pacific and beyond. So that’s something we’ll continue to discuss with our South Korean allies.
QUESTION: On China, Chinese Vice President Wang Qishan, who recently attended the inauguration ceremony of the South Korean President Yoon, made a remark that put pressure on South Korea. China is concerned about the – Yoon Seok-youl administration’s strengthened U.S. and South Korea alliance. Do you know why China is concerned about strengthening the U.S. and South Korea alliance?
MR PRICE: I will let the PRC speak to that. I will say, for our part, we believe that the United States has a number of sources of strength in the world. One of them is our sources of strength here at home: our economy, the creativity, the vitality of our people, of our workforce. Another is our values and the principles, many of which we share with partners and allies around the world, and a third is very much that, our allies and partners around the world.
And we view our unprecedented systems – system of alliances and partnerships, including those we have in the Indo-Pacific, as a core source of strength. That is why Secretary Blinken, this department, has focused intently since day one of this administration on repairing, rebuilding, revitalizing those alliances, knowing, as Secretary Blinken often likes to say, that there is no challenge that the United States could take on more effectively alone than with our closest allies and partners. And that’s what we’ve sought to do.
Yes.
QUESTION: Last one: Will the North Korea issues be discussing at the U.S. and ASEAN summit?
MR PRICE: There’s a lot that we have to discuss with our ASEAN partners. This is a region of the world that is among the most dynamic. It is the fastest growing region of the world. It is one where the United States is making clear we have an abiding commitment and interest in. The fact that this leader-level summit is taking place in Washington, D.C., the fact that it has not taken place in recent years, I think, underscores our commitment to Southeast Asia, to ASEAN centrality. There will be a number of topics that we’re going to discuss, including shared interests, combating COVID, economic recovery, climate, security challenges in the region, as well as our shared values. So all of that will be on the agenda. We’ll have more to say in the coming days.
Rich.
QUESTION: Ned, just one follow-up on Taiwan.
MR PRICE: Sure, sure.
QUESTION: Is it still your position that the changes to the fact sheet on Taiwan have nothing to do with the timing of Secretary Blinken’s speech on China or what had been planned to be his speech on China?
MR PRICE: That is our position. As you know, the Secretary was scheduled to deliver remarks on our approach to the PRC last week, and that was separate and apart from routine updates to a fact sheet.
QUESTION: One more on Taiwan?
MR PRICE: Sure.
QUESTION: The Taiwanese defense ministry in recent days has talked about some of the deliveries of U.S. weapons being delayed. Are all of the other U.S. weapons that have been notified to Congress and are in progress going to Taiwan – are all of those other systems set to be delivered on time?
MR PRICE: Well, let me say our defense relationship with Taiwan remains based on an assessment of Taiwan’s defense needs and the threat posed by the PRC. Continuing to pursue systems that will not meaningfully contribute to an effective defense strategy, we believe it’s inconsistent with an evolving security threat that Taiwan faces, and we strongly support Taiwan’s efforts to implement an asymmetric defense strategy. As you know, we have continued to provide Taiwan with the security assistance that together we deem most necessary. I don’t – I can’t give you an update on the pace of those deliveries, but if there’s anything additional we can share, we will.
QUESTION: Do you – sorry, do you guys not specifically track the pace of those deliveries? What is U.S. policy about when you want those deliveries to get there? I mean, I know it’s sort of out of your hands once it goes to the companies that are producing these weapons. But surely you guys are focused on this. So when do you want those weapons to get to Taiwan?
MR PRICE: Well, our – we want to see those systems delivered to Taiwan just as soon as they need them, and that is based on a need assessment and a needs assessment. It is something that we routinely do with our Taiwanese counterparts. I’ll say that air defense systems and artillery, these are critical to supporting Taiwan’s self-defense. The swift provision of Taiwan defensive weaponry and sustainment via our FMF, our Foreign Military Sales, and our direct commercial sales, or DCS, we believe is essential for Taiwan’s security and we’ll continue to work with industry to support that goal based in part on the assessment that I mentioned before. Since 2017, the Executive Branch has notified Congress of over $18 billion in arms sales to Taiwan. Of course, we can’t provide details on ongoing defense procurement discussions, but those discussions regarding Taiwan’s needs are constantly ongoing.
QUESTION: And just a final question on this. Ukraine – the Ukraine war. Has the deliveries of weapons to Ukraine at all impacted the scheduled deliveries of weapons to Taiwan, as far as you know?
MR PRICE: These are two very different security challenges. The vast majority of emergency military assistance to Ukraine is being delivered via the presidential drawdown authority that you’ve heard from. That is to say it’s being directly delivered out of DOD inventories. Taiwan, on the other hand, its defense procurements of defensive weaponry and sustainment are conducted via FMS, the Foreign Military Sales, and the direct commercial sales, which are subject to the standard contracting and manufacturing process.
QUESTION: Ned, off the top of your head, how many other non-state entities do you guys sell weapons to for self-defense?
MR PRICE: We’ll come back to you if we have anything to add.
QUESTION: In other words, none?
MR PRICE: I don’t know if there’s another example, Matt, to your question.
Yeah.
QUESTION: A follow-up?
QUESTION: Ned.
MR PRICE: Sure. Ukraine?
QUESTION: Yes. I wonder if you had any comment on this idea of a Marshall Plan-style plan for rebuilding Ukraine. The top – president of the European Investment Bank sort of today pledged support for that, said the EU’s lending arm would back that. But they’re also saying they want to make sure that Europe is not left alone and make sure the U.S. contributes to that. Is that – is there a plan in place to get involved with that as a joint effort with the Europeans?
MR PRICE: It’s something that we are absolutely prepared to take part in. We have led the world already, and, of course, we have a legislative proposal that is awaiting action before Congress when it comes to more immediate support to the people and the Government of Ukraine. So we are very much focused on the near term, but we haven’t lost sight of the longer term, and it is our hope that we will be in a position to help the Ukrainian Government, the Ukrainian people rebuild and reconstruct in the near term. Of course, the first order of business is bringing this – Russia’s aggression to a close. We’re focused on that. We are focused on providing economic support to the Government of Ukraine in the meantime. We’re focused on providing humanitarian support to the people of Ukraine in the meantime. And we’re focused on providing security assistance to Ukraine in the interim as well.
But when there is an opportunity to help rebuild Ukraine to emerge from the destruction that the Kremlin has wrought across parts of the country, the United States will be there for that as well.
QUESTION: And separately, the Russians announced today a list of companies that they’re sanctioning, energy companies, including subsidiaries of Gazprom in parts of Europe. Do you have any response to that? Does that impact your efforts on energy and keeping gas prices down?
MR PRICE: No, I don’t have any response to that. What we are doing is focusing with our allies and partners, very similar to what we’re doing in the other context we just discussed, on the near term and providing our allies and partners, including those in Europe, with the energy supply that they need in the interim. We’re doing that through – with a coordinated release from various strategic petroleum reserves around the world. We are doing that by surging energy supplies, working with partners around the world, as we look towards the longer term. And over the longer term, it is about lessening our reliance, lessening our collective dependence on Russian energy sources, lessening our dependence on fossil fuels in general so that countries around the world, whether they’re in Europe or elsewhere, cannot be held hostage, cannot be subject to Moscow or any other country attempting to use energy as a weapon.
Yes.
QUESTION: The White House has repeatedly said that Vladimir Putin doesn’t have a way out right now, while experts have said a cornered Putin is a dangerous Putin. Is the State Department providing a clear offramp through diplomacy, and if it’s not, when is the time to do that?
MR PRICE: Well, you mentioned the offramp yourself. The offramp is very simple, it’s straightforward – it’s genuine diplomacy. The State Department, this administration, provided an offramp well before President Putin decided to launch this war against Ukraine. I made this point the other day, but many of us in fact were with us when we traveled to locations around the world working bilaterally with Russian counterparts, but also working multilaterally through the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, working multilaterally through the NATO-Russia Council, in an effort to forestall what was then our concern: that Vladimir Putin would go forward with his war against Ukraine.
Once he did make that decision, the offramp of diplomacy, it has not closed. What has not been the case, however, is there has not been a Russian partner, there has not been a Russian negotiator, that has had inclination or the ability to engage in good-faith diplomacy and dialogue with their Ukrainian counterparts. We know from our Ukrainian counterparts that they are ready, willing, and able to engage in the type of diplomacy that we believe must be the offramp that you’ve spoken of.
Russia has heretofore shown no indication that they are as of yet ready to accept that offramp. So in the interim, we are going to continue to do what has demonstrably proven effective. We are going to continue to provide our Ukrainian partners with the defensive security assistance they need to continue to fend off some of these vicious attacks, to continue to protect their freedom, to protect their democracy, to protect their independence, and to protect their homeland. All the while, we’re going to continue to mount economic costs and financial costs on the Kremlin and all of those who are enabling this war of choice. Because that’s what it is.
It’s awfully ironic to speak of the party that is engaging in a war of choice of not accepting an offramp. The offramp is clear, it has been clear. The Kremlin’s choice has been to wage war, just not to pursue that offramp just yet. That is why we’re doing everything we can through supporting our Ukrainian partners and holding Russian officials, and Belarusian officials for that matter, accountable to change that decision-making calculus, to incentivize a – the start, the initiation of good-faith diplomacy and dialogue that we believe, that our Ukrainian partners believe can diminish the violence and lead to an end to this war.
QUESTION: Ned, can I follow up on that?
MR PRICE: Sure.
QUESTION: I have another question later on Azerbaijan. But there was a meeting between Ambassador Sullivan and Ryabkov today. Can you fill us in about who initiated the meeting, and also was there any specific message that you want to deliver? And if you can, how much was coordinated with the Ukrainians? Because that was our policy, that we should not talk about Ukraine without Ukraine.
MR PRICE: That absolutely is our policy, nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine. I can confirm that in this case, our bilateral ambassador to Russia, Ambassador Sullivan, met with Russian Government officials today. It was a prescheduled meeting to discuss a narrow set of bilateral issues.
So to your question, Ambassador Sullivan is discussing issues in the bilateral relationship with his Russian counterparts. Those tend to be quite narrow. In many cases, those tend to be centered on the functioning of our embassy, which of course is a concern to us given the limitations – the undue limitations that the Russian Government has imposed on the operations of our embassy in Moscow.
We do maintain diplomatic communications with the Russian Federation through our Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs and through our embassy in Moscow. There is no doubt that it is a difficult relationship; that is clear to everyone. But we do believe that these lines of communication should remain open.
QUESTION: Just to clarify, there was a speculation that there was a connection between that meeting and also Russia summoning Polish ambassador. These are separate – two separate issues?
MR PRICE: The – I’m sorry, the Russians doing what?
QUESTION: Connections between that meeting and Russians summoning the Polish ambassador in Moscow. That was on —
MR PRICE: I would need to defer to our Polish allies to speak to their interaction, but —
QUESTION: Okay. And on Azerbaijan, I have seen the readout between the – on the call between the Secretary and President Aliyev. One of the topics is human rights, and there’s several cases in the past couple months here, most recently journalist Aytan Mammadova, also attack against human rights defender Bakhtiyar Hajiyev, and also arrest of opposition party leader Ali Aliyev. These are specific cases that perhaps this call was a chance to raise by the Secretary. Did the Secretary have a chance to raise specific cases or it was just overall about human rights concerns?
MR PRICE: I will leave the specific contents of the call to the call itself. As you noted, we did issue a readout. It was just last week, I believe, that we had a Strategic Dialogue, the U.S.-Armenia Strategic Dialogue. So Secretary Blinken’s discussion today with President Aliyev was an opportunity to discuss some of the positive momentum and the future concrete steps on the path to peace in the South Caucasus. That includes some of the issues we discussed with our Armenian partners last week: border delimitation and demarcation, opening transport and communication links, and the release of the remaining Armenian detainees.
He did reiterate, as you saw, that we stand ready to help by engaging bilaterally as well as with likeminded partners, including through our role as an OSCE Minsk Group co-chair, to help the parties find a long-term, comprehensive peace. He did, as you note, also highlight the importance of increased respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. That is something that we also had an opportunity to discuss with our Armenian partners last week.
QUESTION: Okay. You mentioned positive momentum on Karabakh. Is there any concern at all on your end that Russians might jeopardize whatever positive connection is going on, as they have done before?
MR PRICE: Forging what we are seeking to forge here, a long-term, comprehensive peace, happens to be in our interest. It also happens to be in Moscow’s interest. Moscow, of course, is a part of the OSCE Minks Group as well.
Yes, yes.
QUESTION: So coming off the question earlier about the lack of an offramp, the slog, the fact that this war is going to grind on for a very long time as far as we can tell, is there already discussions beyond the 40 billion that’s before Congress for more?
MR PRICE: Well, this 40 billion, the proposal that is before Congress at the moment, is for the remainder of the fiscal year. So it is for a finite period. It, of course, is our hope, it is our goal to see to it that this war comes to a close just as soon as can be managed. And so that is why we have asked for these resources, to continue to advance our strategy, to support our Ukrainian partners, to impose additional costs on the Russians so that we can help bring that about. If that strategy continues to be successful, the war, of course, we hope will be – it will be shorter in duration. That of course will help us request fewer funds over time. So our goal is to bring this war to a close and to see to it that we can turn to the task of rebuilding and working together with our Ukrainian partners on that task.
QUESTION: You’ll recall the fiscal year ends at the end of September, which is four months from now. We’re talking $10 billion a month.
MR PRICE: And, Matt, our point —
QUESTION: Right? I just want to make sure we’re talking – that’s what we’re talking about.
MR PRICE: That’s what the math says, yes.
QUESTION: Yeah?
MR PRICE: And our point —
QUESTION: When you talk about the end of this fiscal year, you’re talking about the current fiscal year, which ends in September?
MR PRICE: That – you’ve —
QUESTION: Okay. Can I —
MR PRICE: But let me just make the other point: the alternative would be much costlier. The alternative to doing nothing in the face of aggression, to doing nothing in the face of what we’re facing in terms of global food supply, what we are facing in terms of the broader implications of Russia’s war and what indifference or what inaction could spell around the world, that would be far costlier.
QUESTION: Okay. I wasn’t trying to cast aspersions on it.
MR PRICE: You never are.
QUESTION: I just want to make sure the timeline was correct. Back to Ambassador Sullivan’s meeting. Did the cases of the remaining American detainees come up? Did he raise them? I’m sure you’re aware that – I believe Brittney Griner has a hearing coming up, a court hearing on the 19th, so next week. Is there any movement? Did he raise them? Did he get any response?
MR PRICE: And I am sure you are aware that we just don’t discuss these elements in public.
QUESTION: Well, did he raise the cases of —
MR PRICE: I’ve – I’m – you —
QUESTION: Without naming names.
MR PRICE: You know that we don’t even go that far. I’ve made this point before, but in the days and the weeks and the months prior to the release of Trevor Reed, we did not discuss the specifics of our efforts beyond saying that securing the release of Americans who are wrongfully held around the world is of paramount importance to us, and it’s something we’re always working on.
Michel.
QUESTION: May I?
MR PRICE: Let me move around a little bit, Said.
QUESTION: No, no, I just want to — on this point, you just mentioned that you want to bring the war to an end. You’d like to see this war brought to an end as soon as possible. If as a part of that strategy were for you to, say, announce that you are willing to discuss Russia’s concerns, including the expansion of NATO or the non-expansion of NATO to countries like Ukraine and Georgia and Finland and so on as a part of that, would you do this as a peace offering?
MR PRICE: Two separate issues. Before Vladimir Putin chose to wage this war, we made very clear that we were prepared to discuss some of the purported concerns that Russia had put on the table. And there were concrete steps – or at least there were concrete discussions – that we thought were in the offing that would advance the security of the transatlantic community, that is to say the United States and our European allies and partners, as well as to address some of the stated concerns of Moscow. Of course, Russia rejected that. And if you might recall, they went to war on February 24th before even responding to the written proposal that we had put forward.
When it comes to NATO, Said, we have been very clear that for us NATO’s “open door” means an open door. That is important, and it is something for us that is non-negotiable.
Said – or Michel.
QUESTION: Any updates on the talks with Iran?
MR PRICE: No updates to offer. We are still in the same place since we last talked about it. It is still our assessment that if we were able to achieve a mutual return to compliance with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, that it would manifestly be in our national security interest because it would once again put permanent and verifiable limits on Iran’s nuclear program, a program that has been in many ways unconstrained since 2018 and a program that has galloped forward in ways that are unacceptable to us. We don’t have any more to share than what we discussed last time.
Simon.
QUESTION: Could —
QUESTION: One more?
MR PRICE: Sorry, let me move around. Courtney and then Ysef. Or do you want to stay in Iran? Yes.
QUESTION: A follow-up on Michel. So does that mean that you don’t have any readout from Enrique Mora from his first day in Tehran?
MR PRICE: I am confident that our team will be in touch with Enrique Mora and his team. Of course, he is still on the ground, but Enrique Mora has been conveying messages back and forth. That is the role he’s been playing for some time. I am confident that our team will have an opportunity to discuss his time on the ground with him. I am also confident that we probably won’t be able to share much of that dialogue.
QUESTION: Yeah, but just one reminder. The last communication exchanged, was it from Washington to Tehran or Tehran to Washington?
MR PRICE: We have not given a play-by-play of the diplomacy. And once again, we are not in direct communication with Iran. Of course, we’ve made clear that it would in some ways facilitate diplomacy if we were in a position to have direct discussions with Tehran so that we weren’t reliant on a middleman, an especially capable middleman in this case in the form of Enrique Mora. But regardless, we’re not going to detail a play-by-play.
Courtney.
QUESTION: Just to return to Simon’s earlier question about rebuilding efforts for Ukraine. Is it the administration’s policy that you do not want to commit funds to such an effort until Russian forces are completely out of the country? Or —
MR PRICE: It’s our policy that we want to continue with a strategy that has proven demonstrably effective, and right now we are investing, and investing heavily, in that strategy. That’s why the legislative package that is before the Hill is primarily comprised of security assistance, security assistance that to date has been a key enabling facet of the effectiveness that our Ukrainian partners have been able to achieve on the battlefield. But it also has economic assistance, it has humanitarian assistance, it has assistance in the realm of food security as well.
Clearly, there will be a need – and we hope a need before long – to reconstruct and to rebuild, and the United States will be there for that task as well.
QUESTION: Some of those efforts are ongoing even as the war continues. Is your position that you would wait to dedicate U.S. funding for that purpose until after the war ends?
MR PRICE: Well, we’re providing – we’re seeking – we have provided and we’re seeking to provide economic assistance. We’ve provided direct budgetary assistance, and of course, our Ukrainian partners have great discretion in terms of what they do with that.
Yes.
QUESTION: Can I go back to Asia?
MR PRICE: Sure.
QUESTION: I’d like to ask about Indo-Pacific Economic Framework, so-called IPEF. Japanese ambassador to the United States said the Biden administration will launch Indo-Pacific Economic Framework during the time of the President Biden’s visit to Japan. Firstly, can you confirm it? And secondly, is the Biden administration eventually willing to replace Trans-Pacific Partnership, the so-called TPP, with Indo-Pacific Economic Framework?
MR PRICE: So of course, I don’t want to get ahead of the President’s travel to Japan. Secretary Blinken, when he was in Jakarta, Indonesia in December of last year, he did deliver a speech on our Indo-Pacific strategy, and there were key elements to that strategy. And deepening our economic ties with the region were a clear element of that strategy, and I suspect you’ll be hearing more about that before too long.
When it comes to the TPP, this is something that our – that my – still my current colleague at the White House has spoken to before. It was last September, I believe, when she said that the President has been clear he would not rejoin the TPP as it was initially put forward. We know a lot has changed in the world since 2016. We are evaluating our options to deepen our economic partnerships with countries in the —
QUESTION: But he supported it when it was initially proposed, right? When he was the vice president?
MR PRICE: The White House has been clear that the President has been clear he would not rejoin the TPP —
QUESTION: Yeah, but when he was the vice president, he supported it.
MR PRICE: — as it was initially put forward.
QUESTION: Right, when it was initially put forward —
MR PRICE: Simon.
QUESTION: — he was vice president, and he supported it. Correct? Right or not?
MR PRICE: Matt, I am telling you – I am telling you what – I am telling you what our policy is.
Yes.
QUESTION: I wanted to come to the Philippines. You said yesterday it was too early to comment, so wanted to kind of ask again specific – I guess particularly because the ASEAN Summit is happening this week, and part of the focus of that is obviously – is obviously towards China or showing your prioritization of the region in the light of your broader China policy, I guess, or Indo-Pacific policy. But specifically, do you have any concerns that the new president-elect, Marcos Jr., represents a challenge to U.S. policy in the region, specifically with his comments, I believe during the campaign, talking about the 2016 ruling on – the UNCLOS ruling that he said this is not effective, and he said he’s going to seek a bilateral agreement with China to resolve their dispute in the South China Sea. How does that square with what the U.S. wants to do with this region?
MR PRICE: Simon, this applies to the Philippines, it applies to everywhere around the world: We will judge and we will operate within the confines of our bilateral relationship based on what happens once an individual or a party is in office. And when it comes to Ferdinand Marcos Jr., you heard from the Secretary earlier today that we congratulated him, we congratulated the people of the Philippines on their successful election. We look forward to working with the president-elect to strengthen the enduring alliance between our two countries. It’s a special partnership that is rooted in a long and deeply interwoven history of shared values, shared interests, and strong people-to-people ties. We’ll continue to collaborate closely with the Philippines to promote respect for human rights and to advance a free, open, connected, prosperous, secure, and resilient Indo-Pacific.
That will be at the top of our agenda. We look forward to seeing Foreign Minister Locsin when he is here at the ASEAN Summit later this week, and I suspect that we will be able to engage with the incoming Marcos government in the near term.
QUESTION: And specifically on the 2016 ruling, is that – does the U.S. still see that as relevant to resolving the South China Sea disputes?
MR PRICE: We still stand by that ruling. We issued a statement not all that long ago underscoring that the South China Sea, as we know, contains some of the world’s busiest shipping lanes, trillions of dollars in merchant shipping transit annually. We have to remain vigilant to any effort to unlawfully restrict navigational rights and freedoms in this vital waterway. It serves as a lifeline to so many economies. And we reaffirm our statement of July of last year regarding the maritime claims in the South China Sea, and we stand by that.
QUESTION: Ned, I must admit that I don’t expect a whole lot of an answer from this, but given the history here, the United States and the Philippines and the fact that the United States played such a pivotal role in the ouster of Bongbong Marcos’s father, do you have any concerns about the return of the family?
MR PRICE: Matt, as I just said to Simon, we look forward to working with the incoming government —
QUESTION: So in other words, no?
MR PRICE: We have – we know that we have an enduring, shared values and shared interests. It is at the top of our agenda, and we expect at the top – it’s at the top of the agenda of the incoming administration in Manila to work to advance this.
QUESTION: So the – so you’re prepared to, like, start on a fresh page?
MR PRICE: We —
QUESTION: And the history doesn’t matter?
MR PRICE: Our bilateral relationships are contoured by what happens when individuals, parties come to office.
QUESTION: Can I have one more that I also expect this is going to be very brief, and that is I – we saw the joint statement out of the Marrakech, the anti-ISIS meeting, and I just want to know if you guys have anything that – if you have anything to add to it, or if there’s anything in particular that you wanted to highlight from this that you thought was a particular success or a particular accomplishment.
MR PRICE: Well, our Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Toria Nuland is there representing us. There was a joint statement release. She did have an opportunity to speak to – before the cameras earlier today. It’s my understanding that she spoke to some of the salient points of that discussion. But again, I’d point you to that joint statement.
QUESTION: Sorry, one more on Marcos.
MR PRICE: Sure.
QUESTION: Just – could you just state whether the president-elect is welcome in the United States? He hasn’t visited I think for 15 years given he and his mother are facing this court ruling, I think in Hawaii. Is the new president of the Philippines welcome in the U.S.?
MR PRICE: We look forward to engaging with the incoming Marcos administration, again, to pursue those shared interests and those shared values.
Thank you very much. Thanks.
QUESTION: Thank you.
(The briefing was concluded at 3:25 p.m.)
GALLUP: Cryptocurrency Infrequently Named as Best Investment
Eight percent of U.S. adults choose cryptocurrency as the best long-term investment among six options, well behind real estate (45%), stocks (18%) and gold (15%).
Gov. Kim Reynolds signed an extension for a proclamation relating to the weight limits and hours of service requirements for the transportation of crop inputs for planting season.
The extension is effective immediately and continues through June 11, 2022. The proclamation allows vehicles transporting corn, soybeans, other agricultural seed, water, herbicide, pesticide, fertilizer (dry, liquid, and gas), manure (dry and liquid), gasoline, diesel #1, diesel #2, ethanol, and biodiesel to be overweight (not exceeding 90,000 pounds gross weight) without a permit for the duration of this proclamation.
This proclamation applies to loads transported on all highways within Iowa (excluding the interstate system) and those which do not exceed a maximum of 90,000 pounds gross weight, do not exceed the maximum axle weight limit determined under the non-primary highway maximum gross weight table in Iowa Code § 321.463 (6) (b), by more than 12.5 percent, do not exceed the legal maximum axle weight limit of 20,000 pounds, and comply with posted limits on roads and bridges.
See the proclamation here.
Update from: Rockwell Community Fire Department:
Contractors struck a buried natural gas line near the intersection of 1st Street and Maple Street in Rockwell. Please avoid the area- traffic in the area will only delay repairs. We are on scene conducing air monitoring and will notify residents in the immediate area if they need to evacuate. MidAmerican Energy is responding to control the leak. This is an ongoing incident and may take several hours to mitigate the leak. Please avoid the area and we will post updates as we have them.
Somebodies in trouble…cha ching.
Cerro Gordo County Conservation
Spring 2022 updates
Effective immediately the following areas and activities are now open for the season.
Cerro Gordo County counties three campgrounds (Wilkinson Park at Rock Falls, Linn Grove Park at Rockwell, and Ingebretson Park at Thornton) are open for the season.
The trails at the Lime Creek Conservation are open to bicycles and horses.
Maintenance activities have begun on the Trolley Trail.
The dock has been installed at Bluebill Lake for the season.
Progress Iowa Executive Director Matt Sinovic issued the following statement in response to today’s report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics that inflation may be leveling off:
“Iowans work hard every day. But right now many of us are struggling to make ends meet because corporations continue to jack up prices even while they’re making record profits. And the things that cost and matter the most — a roof over our heads, childcare for our kids, healthcare for our families — have long been put out of reach, so wealthy corporations and billionaires can pay us less than they owe and rake in record profits.
“Republicans want us to focus on the rising price of gas and groceries, but we know they are the ones who refuse to hold greedy corporations accountable and rig the rules for them with massive tax cuts.
“Today’s report proves that President Biden’s policies are working. Inflation is slowing down and the U.S. unemployment rate remains at a near historic low.
“We must demand that our elected leaders here in Iowa follow in the President’s footsteps and act to reduce the cost of housing, childcare, prescription drugs and healthcare, so we can afford all that we need for our families.”