Department Press Briefing – April 17, 2025

2:12 p.m. EDT

MS BRUCE: Hi, everybody. It was a beautiful day yesterday. I don’t know, is today nice? Have you guys been outside at all?

QUESTION: Nice.

MS BRUCE: It’s nice? Oh, great. I had no idea. Good, that’s good. Spring is here.

Alrighty, obviously, a few announcements here at the top. Busy day. I think I can answer some questions for you; I’m going to do my best. So thank you for being here, and good afternoon, everyone.

On this Holy Thursday, the day before Good Friday, I want to thank – to again extend warm wishes to Christians around the world who are observing this sacred time. May it be one of reflection and peace for all who celebrate.

And once again – someone’s phone rings – once again, Secretary Marco Rubio, Ambassador Steve Witkoff, and their teams have left the comfort of their homes to once again work to end the carnage that is unfolding in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, hoping to, again, bring peace to the families across that region, who one day themselves may be able to enjoy the comfort of their homes as well.

President Donald Trump has been clear: This madness has to come to an end quickly and completely. During his recent visit to NATO, Secretary Rubio also noted that the time for peace is now, not in months or years; it is now. He stated specifically that just – just two weeks ago that it would be a matter of weeks when we would be able to know if Russia was serious about wanting to end this catastrophe. And now, the civilized world waits to see if Russia is, indeed, serious.

President Trump has committed his administration to peace and a future that everyone can count on. His vision and demand for an end to the hostilities remains a north star for Secretary Rubio, Ambassador Witkoff, Special Presidential Envoy for Ukraine Keith Kellogg, and so many others who are determined to make clear to everyone around the world that the Russia-Ukraine war would never have happened if President Trump had been president at the time. Now, he remains committed to reversing the disaster that has unfolded.

To that end, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Ambassador Steve Witkoff, and Special Presidential Envoy for Ukraine Keith Kellogg are in Paris today with a clear motivation: to find a path forward to end the Russia-Ukraine war in order to stop the bloodshed. The visit, which includes meetings with European partners, aims to advance the shared interests and restore stability to the region. The Secretary will also be talking to partners about our shared commitment to ensuring that Iran never develops or obtains a nuclear weapon. These efforts are rooted in common sense and a firm belief that American strength and decisive leadership can reshape the world for the better.

And now, turning to the news of the week – because there is more; I know, everyone’s surprised.

Today, the United States sanctioned the International Bank of Yemen for its financial support of the Houthis, as well as key leaders or officials of that bank. The United States is committed to disrupting the Houthi financial networks and banking access as part of our whole-of-government approach to eliminating Iran’s threat network.

Moreover, we can confirm the reporting that Chang Guang Satellite Technology Co., Ltd. is directly supporting Iran-backed Houthi terrorist attacks on U.S. interests. Their actions and Beijing’s support of the company, even after our private engagements with them, is yet another example of China’s empty claims to support peace. We urge our partners to judge the Chinese Communist Party and Chinese companies on their actions, not their empty words. Restoring freedom of navigation in the Red Sea is a priority to President Trump. Beijing should take this priority seriously when considering any future support of CGSTL. The United States will not tolerate anyone providing support to foreign terrorist organizations, such as the Houthis.

Now, as part of President Trump’s unwavering defense of free speech, Secretary Rubio has permanently shut down the State Department’s Counter Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference office – formerly the Global Engagement Center. As Secretary Rubio stated, “Over the past half decade, bodies like GEC by our own governing ruling class, nearly destroyed America’s long free speech history.” We have launched a sweeping transparency initiative. The American people deserve answers, and we intend to deliver them. Most of you will recall, of course, the effort to censor Americans using certain entities here in the government, including that one here at the State Department.

Now turning to the budget, we continue to review the department’s global posture and programs to ensure that they serve U.S. interests in a rapidly evolving world. Our foreign policy is grounded in delivering results – results that make our nation safer, stronger, and more prosperous.

And as the Office of Management and Budget, the OMB, has already stated, the funding decisions will be detailed in the President’s budget request, which will be transmitted to Congress in due course. And I will not get ahead of that process today – just not that any of you would have asked – but I look forward to detailing more as we receive it.

QUESTION: Oh, yes we would. (Laughter.)

MS BRUCE: With that, I welcome your questions – all of them which I may not be able to even answer, or I will answer them.

Matt Lee.

QUESTION: Thank you, Tammy. And I am – and I have to leave in 12 minutes, because I got to get to the airport.

MS BRUCE: Oh, darn. I should have been later today than –

QUESTION: So I’m not – so when I walk out, I’m not leaving in protest; I’m just – I –

MS BRUCE: I would never suggest that; it’s more fun to stay.

QUESTION: So I just want to ask you about what you said about the talks in Paris.

MS BRUCE: Yes.

QUESTION: Is there any more detail that you can provide? And when you say that “the civilized world waits to see” if Russia will be serious –

MS BRUCE: Yeah.

QUESTION: – are you suggesting that Russia is not part of the civilized world?

MS BRUCE: Well, I guess we’re waiting to see for a minute. And I suppose –

QUESTION: So we’re not sure if Russia is civilized?

MS BRUCE: I think, clearly, Russia has an interest in being part of the civilized world, as we all do. And we take actions that make it easy and appropriate for us to do business with and to be embraced by countries that think accordingly, that peace matters. I don’t – I think that matters to everyone, and that, in part, of course affects the choices we make.

QUESTION: So – okay. So do you have anything more that you can share about what happened –

MS BRUCE: Well, I – yes, I can tell you.

QUESTION: – or what is happening, I guess, still?

MS BRUCE: Yes. Now what I can note, of course, is regarding the other meeting that we expect. And I can confirm that it will be Saturday and in Rome, so that is confirmed for those –

QUESTION: The Omanis actually just confirmed –

MS BRUCE: I’m sorry, ma’am?

QUESTION: Sorry. The Omanis just said it’s going to be in Rome.

MS BRUCE: Yes, it’s going to be in Rome.

QUESTION: Yeah.

MS BRUCE: It’s going to be in Rome on Saturday, so – many of us are saying it.

QUESTION: Yeah, but Secretary Rubio is not going to be there. So I’m not asking about that. I’m asking about Ukraine. I’m asking about the Ukrainian –

MS BRUCE: Oh, so you know that. That’s really – thank you very much.

QUESTION: (Laughter.) Sorry.

MS BRUCE: You’re asking about Ukraine.

QUESTION: I’m asking about the talks in Paris today.

MS BRUCE: Uh-huh.

QUESTION: I’m just wondering if you have any more –

MS BRUCE: Well, they are ongoing as we sit here.

QUESTION: Okay.

MS BRUCE: Yeah, they’re ongoing.

QUESTION: All right. So no update.

MS BRUCE: And they’re – I think also there’s one element where Iran, in fact, was discussed as well with the people who are attending. So as we are expecting certain reports on what the meetings have been, so there – we will have more to say, to say the least. And hopefully by I think tomorrow morning, very early perhaps Eastern Time, we may even have some remarks by the Secretary. But all of this, as I’ve seen on – at these kinds of situations and gatherings that things change quickly and that may be the case now. So I hesitate to go more into what we may see and when we may see it, only based on the fact that, of course, that’s going to be determined by what happens on the ground.

QUESTION: Thank you. All right. And I have to go. See you.

MS BRUCE: Bye, Matt.

All right. Yes, Andrea Mitchell.

QUESTION: Hi. Thank you very much, Tammy. Let me follow up on the Saturday meeting.

MS BRUCE: Yes.

QUESTION: Because when they left the last meetings, initially Ambassador Witkoff said that the U.S. would agree to no dismantling, but then it was clarified –

MS BRUCE: Would agree to what? I’m sorry.

QUESTION: To not require Iran to dismantle everything that they had, that if they – their – the Iranian position has been, according to my best understanding, that they want to retain enough for a peaceful nuclear power, for a civilian program with verification under the NPT, and are willing to give up what they had broken out to 60 percent in the last couple of years, alarming the U.S. and other allies and the rest of the world.

MS BRUCE: Everyone, yes.

QUESTION: But the position now is that they are saying, apparently, that they will not totally dismantle any nuclear program. Is the U.S. position that they have to dismantle even what could be verifiably proved to be a peaceful, low-level enrichment of nuclear power? And I had one other question to ask you.

MS BRUCE: Let me answer that one while it’s fresh, and then I will definitely stay with you. I’m not going to – I won’t scoot; I promise.

But this is important, because – and I – because I do – I – it’s an important question. But that is, of course, if we were going to be negotiating through our conversations or on television or anywhere else, we wouldn’t need to be going to Rome on Saturday. Those are issues that I suppose some would want to have be in the media or discussed publicly, but that’s not the nature of what the negotiations are. That’s not a reflection of what will –

QUESTION: But the U.S. position has been that they have to totally dismantle. Is that still the U.S. position? That’s been the public position that the President and the Secretary –

MS BRUCE: The – right, the bright red line is that Iran will not have a nuclear weapon. That is unacceptable. That’s been President Trump’s statement from the start. Now, one could ask if you need enriched uranium at 60 percent for a peaceful program. I’m not in those negotiations. I don’t know what questions will be asked. But that is the bright red line, and that’s going to be discussed in private between the people who are assigned to have that conversation. And if there is anything we know, it’s what is acceptable and not acceptable to President Trump, and that position has been clear.

QUESTION: No, I understand that.

MS BRUCE: Yes, ma’am.

QUESTION: But at a much lower level, something 5 percent plus, they – the question was whether they have to give up all uranium, which has been –

MS BRUCE: And you know if –

QUESTION: – which has been the official U.S. position –

MS BRUCE: If we were in Rome and having lunch, we could have the conversation.

QUESTION: We could be much happier –

MS BRUCE: I will – certainly will not at all presume what diplomatic conversations or now what might be negotiations. I’m not going to presume about them or comment or have an opinion. And you had a second part.

QUESTION: So this is the – the second –

MS BRUCE: Yes, ma’am.

QUESTION: Second issue. There has been an attempted hijacking on an airplane internally in Belize, Tropic Air, and it involved an alleged hijacker who was a U.S. citizen who, according to law enforcement reports down there, was fatally shot on a confrontation with police. He’s been identified as a U.S. citizen and a passport holder. Does the State Department have anything on this?

MS BRUCE: Not yet. We watched that unfold, I think as everyone else did. Horrifying. We are grateful – I think all of us are – that that did not turn into a mass casualty event with, I believe, over a dozen people on the plane. Clearly, we know a few details. We don’t know much more. But as I was actually working on the briefing, that became – that came across my timeline. It came across yours. And it was – it’s terrifying, but thank God – we don’t know about injuries or any other details, so I certainly can’t comment. But it seems like there was obviously effective law enforcement on the ground. And that’s all I have for you now, but obviously we’re watching it as well.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MS BRUCE: All right. Yes. Humeyra.

QUESTION: Hi, Tammy. Thank you.

MS BRUCE: Hi. Uh-huh.

QUESTION: Back to your comment a moment ago that Matt also picked up, “the civilized world waits to see if Russia is… serious.” So we’re just trying to understand what exactly is the United States waiting given Russia rejected President Trump’s proposal. What exactly are the metrics here, and given Secretary said we will see in weeks? Like what are you waiting to see, and is the administration starting to put together a Plan B if it becomes clear that – to the administration that Russia is not serious?

MS BRUCE: Well, obviously I can’t talk about the specifics of what the President has said to other people or what those decision lines are. We do know that – and also I would say I would dispute, push back a bit on your contention that the Russians have rejected something. Again, that’s based on perhaps what you’ve observed and what others have observed. I don’t know what the conversations are or what’s been stated between any of the parties, so we can’t go there.

But what we do know and what the Secretary has said often and what the President says is that we are going to judge people based on their actions, not their words. And that is a universal standard that we will be using, and I think that’s important.

As far as the metrics, those again – that’s why you go and you meet people face to face or you have conversations, and that’s what we’re doing. That’s an important dynamic of determining, as many people have argued, about whether or not – who’s serious, who isn’t serious, and we have seen the actions that our friends the Ukrainians have taken, which is a commitment to a full ceasefire, the nature of the actions that they have said that they would do. That has been clear from the start and it’s understandable. You’ve got two parties here and we have a standard, and so that’s why though we have now, again, our best and brightest are in Paris making this determination, which is more – which is clearly complicated.

And as far as the Secretary noting it’ll be a matter of weeks, that again is a judgment and a statement that I think all of us can understand on a timeline but clearly is based in what it is they say that they expect to see. I am not privy to that, and those conversations of course – all day long and continuing on right now I would guess are to determine that.

QUESTION: Right. Just one follow-up. The French actually – even though the conversations are ongoing, they described the current conversations so far excellent, positive, constructive. I don’t want to put words in your mouth, but do you have some adjectives to describe how it has been so far?

MS BRUCE: Yeah, I think it’s nice when any party to a conversation of this sort believes that it’s positive, and that’s great. That’s great news. It’s good news. What I care about is what President Trump and Secretary Rubio think when it comes to what they have asked for and what they expect and what the United States expects. That is the standard that the world looks for and we’ll know then what will come from that. The French being happy is fabulous. I love the French. I love Paris. It’s a great country. It really is. And one must go – I know there’s stuff about the French and America, but it really is. Traveling is wonderful, meeting people is terrific, and the French are great people.

But what I do know is that through today as they have been talking in that wonderful, exquisite capital, more people have died who expected to be alive tonight and tomorrow, who will miss Good Friday, who will miss Easter, who just enjoyed Passover.

So we can think about the feelings of diplomats, which are important, but what matters is the end result, what the United States is able to deliver and achieve during those meetings, and what the United States wants, frankly, to make this situation that – this is the first involvement and the nature of both parties at the table since the beginning of this atrocity. And that speaks to power of Trump, the power of diplomacy in the United States. So that’s good news, but the better news will be when America and President Trump’s expectations are met.

Yes. Yes, sir.

QUESTION: Thank you, Tammy. Appreciate it. Two questions. First off, number one, the president of Lebanon remarked yesterday that he intends to disarm Hizballah by the end of the year, but he said it needs to be done on a bilateral basis without foreign interference or foreign pressure. I wanted to get State’s reaction to that comment from the Lebanese president and ask how it might shape Deputy Special Envoy Ortagus’s role going forward in dealing with the Lebanon portfolio.

MS BRUCE: You always ask me things that I have opinions on, would love to answer.

QUESTION: I’m happy to hear your opinion.

MS BRUCE: But you – but I can’t as the State – I’m here to talk to you about what – results of things, what we’re intending, what we’re doing, certainly not speculating on what Morgan Ortagus will be able to do, what any special envoy will be able to do, what our response to another nation’s leader will do or what they are stating. What we do know, of course, and what is clear and remains clear is that we want peace in that entire region, obviously. We are dealing with the Iran threat, which, of course, includes Hizballah, let alone Hamas and the Houthis. This is an over – this is an encompassing dynamic.

So I leave that for very good reason to diplomats and will – we know that they’re addressing and aware of all the other aspects there, but we stand with Israel. This is not – this is not difficult, as is the reason why we’re there and why we stand with Israel.

QUESTION: Second question: It’s been three weeks now since Elise Stefanik withdrew from the nomination for UN ambassador. A draft came out – was leaked, I guess – yesterday, but a draft is always a window into an administration’s thinking. Zeroing out funding –

MS BRUCE: If it’s real.

QUESTION: I’m sorry?

MS BRUCE: If it’s real.

QUESTION: If it’s real.

MS BRUCE: If it actually – yeah, if it actually came from where it – where they say it came from. But go ahead.

QUESTION: Zeroing out funding for the UN.

(Laughter.)

So I’m trying to find out –

MS BRUCE: Oh my, yes –

QUESTION: Is there a correlation here between the lack of willingness to put forward another candidate? And how long – how long does –

MS BRUCE: Oh my, the conversations over drinks at night with you must be amazing. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: I look forward to that. But how long – with an interim ambassador in there, doesn’t it do damage to drag out the process this long?

MS BRUCE: No, it’s – you’ve – I think you’ve been around for a while. The budget process is a long one. We’re also going through a process here of cutting down the budget because the deficit and the problems we’ve had, the way we’ve been spending, is unsustainable. And so the President is making America great again by making sure she doesn’t collapse economically. That’s one of those standards.

When it comes to – we’ve seen the process. I’m not going to speak to the choices President Trump has made or the nature of Congress and the issue of majorities and minorities and the fact, though, that this – there is a great deal of talent that he has to choose from for the UN ambassador, for every other position here. It’s people perhaps who haven’t been in government, people who have been, people who’ve never been ambassadors, people who could be. It really opens up his point of view in who he knows and what he expects, like Steve Witkoff, Ambassador Witkoff – remarkable man now playing an extraordinary role in trying to achieve world peace. That is maybe not something that was ever on his plate, but it’s happening.

I would say the talent that is here is more than enough for the President to choose another candidate. And secondly, that other story which we addressed on Tuesday about zeroing out NATO and the UN is absurd. The fact is there – the funding might look different, but it also will be more effective, more efficient funding that’ll allow us perhaps to do even more as we deal with waste, fraud, and abuse. It is something you’ve heard before, but it’s worth repeating.

So then when we deal with NATO, he’s – Secretary Rubio has stated repeatedly we are committed to NATO, but one that is viable. And our love for NATO will be part of – exampled by our assisting them and encouraging them to become more viable and to be more financially independent. For the UN, the UN clearly needs a strong American voice, as we’ve seen that it can make a difference, and we are going to have one. President Trump will make that decision and it will be a good one.

QUESTION: Thank you, Tammy.

MS BRUCE: All right. Yes, sir.

QUESTION: Thank you, Tammy. I want to also go back to Ukraine with two questions, if I may.

MS BRUCE: Yes, sir.

QUESTION: China. You probably have heard President Zelenskyy’s latest statement on China, saying that China supplies Russia with manpower, gun power, and even helps them to manufacture some weapons inside Russia. This sort of goes back to your earlier statement a couple of days ago about China providing nearly 80 percent of dual-use supplies to Russia. There are calls from the Congress, bipartisan calls, urging the administration to come up with sanctions on China. Are you planning to take any action to prevent this from happening?

MS BRUCE: Well, we know, of course – I don’t need to mention the word “tariffs” to everyone, but these are things that are not about punishment of any one nation, but it’s about a fair playing field. And that’s relevant, certainly proving that President Trump not only isn’t shy about engaging with China, he’s not shy about engaging with anyone. And that’s one thing the American people know. And I think also our commentary and the nature of the actions we’re taking in general when it comes to China’s choices have been clear.

One thing I – speaking of China and the nature of what they’re involved in, I will tell you something – it’s a little bit out of the Ukraine region – is that there is a Chinese company providing satellite imagery to the Houthis – the Houthis – and we are aware of those reports. That has been, I think, reported originally perhaps by the Financial Times. But China consistently attempts, as you know, to frame itself as a global peacemaker. And however, it is clear that Beijing and China-based companies provide key economic and technical support to regimes like Russia, North Korea, and Iran and its proxies. The CCP continues to enable these regimes, whether it be through the provision of dual-use items Russia needs to sustain its war in Ukraine, North Korea’s ballistic missile development, or Iran’s support of terrorism across the Middle East.

And just taking you back to my topper bit on Chang Guang, this – it’s a dynamic where it’s clear, as we’re learning, their engagement with war and the suffering of people globally, and of course that remains unacceptable. Beijing’s support, by the way, of that company, the satellite company, even after we’ve engaged in discussions with them about this – the fact that they continue to do this is unacceptable, certainly contradicts their claims of being peace supporters. And we urge our partners to judge the CCP and Chinese companies, again, on their actions and not their words.

QUESTION: And my second question, Tammy.

MS BRUCE: All right. Yes, all right. What?

QUESTION: The second question, if I may. Also go back to Sumy. You made your comments about that last time.

MS BRUCE: Yes.

QUESTION: I was hoping you could help us clarify – either kill or keep alive – reports that the U.S. has blocked a G7 unified response to Sumy. I’m confused because we have seen the Secretary’s statement, the President’s statement; they were very clear about that. The reports suggest that you have been doing it because you want to refrain from, quote/unquote, “angering Russia” by playing (inaudible).

MS BRUCE: Well, again, we – I understand that we all see a lot of things written. It’s perhaps your colleagues or people you know. But the world does not run on the guesswork or the conspiracy theories that show up in newspapers and magazines. It’s clear to the world that that was a horrible strike, but also, it’s – the notion of me engaging in discussing what are private diplomatic conversations might be is not going to happen. But we also know that because you don’t hear about our reaction, because we’re not going to engage in this public dynamic, doesn’t mean that things aren’t happening. So it’s – we clearly don’t run foreign policy based on whatever new conspiracy theory or supposition that’s coming up in a magazine about what we’re doing or why we’re doing it or why we’re not doing it. That’s not going to happen.

Eventually, maybe not as quickly as some would like, people do find out what the results are. And so that’s as much as I’ll say about that particular report.

Yes, ma’am.

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: Thank you, Tammy. Two quick questions. The French have said there will be additional conversations next week in London on Ukraine. Will the Secretary attend those?

MS BRUCE: I’ve heard about that statement, and I can’t say right now about what those specifics are or what the Secretary’s actions will be, but stay tuned. Obviously, these are – these are important meetings, but as the Secretary has noted, we aren’t going to be having meetings about meetings.

All right.

QUESTION: Sorry, one more.

MS BRUCE: Oh, yes, one more. Of course, of course.

QUESTION: On the case of Mohsen Mahdawi, the Columbia student whose visa has been revoked, The New York Times has a report that Secretary Rubio put out a memo saying that his activities could, quote, “potentially undermine” the Middle East peace process. Can you confirm that’s a legitimate memo and how – how would his activities undermine it?

MS BRUCE: No, I won’t – I won’t confirm or discuss or deny about a memo like that. And when it comes to, as you know, all of these – and I know sometimes it’s not exciting, but it’s true – is that we do have a standard about not talking about individual visa dynamics, including with that individual. And no, I won’t give – talk about that memo.

Yes, ma’am.

QUESTION: Thanks, Tammy. A short while ago the President said that the mineral deal with Ukraine would be signed next Thursday. Just wondering if you have any more details to offer about that. And can you say whether that was a topic of discussion in Paris today with the Secretary?

MS BRUCE: I – again, I don’t know, and even if I did, I wouldn’t talk about the specifics of what that conversation would be. What I’ve said before – and it’s still true, of course – is that there are no conversations that will happen regarding arrangements for things that are related to the ceasefire talks, right? I mean, we’ve had – for the first time we’ve been able to talk with Russia regarding diplomatic relations and the nature of how we’re able to connect with each other, and that’s not at all related to the ceasefire dynamic. And the – while I can’t comment on where that deal stands, what I will say is that negotiations are ongoing. But again, not – it’s not related to, obviously, the effort regarding ending those hostilities. On April 11th and 12th, U.S. and Ukraine technical teams conducted constructive negotiations on the proposed reconstruction investment fund. We will have a – we have agreed to continue those discussions to finalize the agreement as soon as possible. This fund will help provide economic guarantees as we look to bring this conflict to a peaceful end. So you are going to be hearing about the investment fund, and we’ll see what that contains as things go on, but those are active negotiations at this point.

Yes, sir.

QUESTION: Thank you very much. Going – just going back to Iran for a moment –

MS BRUCE: Can you tell me where you’re – where you’re –

QUESTION: Yeah. Tom Watkins with The National.

MS BRUCE: Excellent. Welcome aboard.

QUESTION: Thank you very much. President Trump on Monday said Tehran was “tapping us along,” suggesting a sense of impatience with the pace of talks. Can you talk about that, if there’s a sense of time running out? And staying on Iran, several reports this week pertaining to U.S. discussions with Yemeni factions or Yemeni forces about a potential land offensive against the Houthis. Can you tell us anything about those discussions?

MS BRUCE: Yes. I was asked, I believe, on Tuesday about the reports about what the – what’s happening on the ground there versus the Houthis, which is not something we’re involved in, of course. So I can’t speak to what the plans are or what – battle plans or attacks against the Houthis by other individuals or other governments or regimes.

QUESTION: So those discussions aren’t taking place? Those conversations aren’t happening?

MS BRUCE: The conversations about –

QUESTION: With the Yemeni – between the U.S. and Yemeni factions that are against the Houthis.

MS BRUCE: Well, again, I just said how I’m the spokesperson for the U.S. State Department, I can’t speak to, and wouldn’t, about what Yemen may or may not be saying to the Houthis or anyone else. But your first question was about President Trump’s – what you perceived as irritation about the pace of negotiations. Well, throughout this process, it’s clear that they expect swift answers. Again, there will be no meetings about meetings. It will not be months or years for answers. I see you, sir. It’s a matter of weeks, right? This is about life and death, and that’s how we view it.

I would say that, though, there remains a commitment. President Trump clearly, as the United States, could take many actions against people who threaten this country, and we choose not to. I think that speaks volumes, and the commitment to speak with entities that have threatened us repeatedly, that have an interest in threatening us, or who have done things that have been appalling. And yet, the first issue, in order to stop that without resorting to more violence, which sometimes has had to happen, is to sit down and talk and find an answer. But it’s not – again, he’s – none of these individuals are prepared to have it be that the answer is the search, right, that the effort and the thing that we do is the trying. It has to be a result.

And I think that’s what Trump is exhibiting here, is that it’s not about – it’s not going to be about trying or meeting after meeting. There’s answers that you can say yes or no to and get it done. And that’s what he, as the President, expects. As a businessman he expected that, and as the President he expected it.

Yes, in the back there, sir.

QUESTION: Thank you very much.

QUESTION: Can I –

MS BRUCE: And Nadia right after – right after him. Thank you.

QUESTION: Okay. What did Victoria Taylor discuss in her meeting with senior Kurdish leaders in her visit to Kurdistan?

MS BRUCE: Good question. I don’t have the answer to that, but we’re going to get it. May we? Thank you, ma’am. I’ll get that for you.

QUESTION: And second –

MS BRUCE: Nadia, go ahead, please.

QUESTION: Thank you, Tammy. I just want to – I have a lot of questions.

MS BRUCE: Yes, of course.

QUESTION: Quick, one follow-up on the –

MS BRUCE: We’re also busy. We are.

QUESTION: (Laughter.) One follow-up on the Iran question. Assuming that these talks is going to take place on Saturday in Rome –

MS BRUCE: Yes.

QUESTION: – what will the United States want to see that you can describe it as successful? So as a measuring stick, you will say that we enter this negotiation and therefore we’re considering success. What exactly is involved?

MS BRUCE: I don’t make that decision about what that’s going to be when it comes to the negotiators who are at that table. The President, again, has a bright line: They will not have a nuclear weapon. How that is determined is going to be the people at the table.

QUESTION: Okay. One question on Gaza quickly.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MS BRUCE: All right, you get one more.

QUESTION: The situation for the children in Gaza is described as hell on Earth. Seven weeks, no food is getting in. Do you think that Israel should allow humanitarian aid to get to women and children in Gaza, regardless if there is negotiation or progress with Hamas on the hostages?

MS BRUCE: Yes, there’s – and it comes up all the time for a good reason, because it’s a serious issue, and we all care about it. We also know that it is a zone where there’s still fighting, where there’s – we have – just the other day we had Hamas say that they suddenly don’t know where Edan Alexander is. It is a remarkable dynamic. It’s horrible. Everything that we do, though, is to affect exactly what you mentioned, which is saving the lives of everyone, certainly men as well, and women and children. It is to stop this so that this is not an issue for people. That’s why we do everything. To say that – ask or whether or not we’re concerned during the process when ceasefires are broken or it becomes impossible, of course it’s frustrating. It’s not what any of us want, let alone the people who go there and are negotiating all the time. It is the thing that drives our desire for peace as human beings. And it’s – and yet, we can’t quit because it gets stopped or frustrated. And it is a reminder about why that horrible situation has to end, why the Ukraine-Russia situation has to end. As we are here in a comfortable environment and go home to our families, it is – that seems to be a luxury these days, but to not take it for granted. So of course that is the goal, is to get that fixed. And it’s a goal we work toward every day.

Yes, ma’am. I didn’t get you last time. Welcome back.

QUESTION: Yes. Thank you. Thank you, Tammy. So today I was watching the briefing with Special Senior Advisor of President Trump Mr. Massad Boulos. He just returned from peace trip to Africa.

MS BRUCE: Yes.

QUESTION: He visit DRC.

MS BRUCE: Yes, he did.

QUESTION: And he shared some of the meetings that he had with some presidents in this region. So I want to hear from you. He mentioned about discussion of these mineral deals between United States and DRC. But the main purpose of – of the main interesting of the DRC is the peace that they are looking for in the region.

MS BRUCE: Yes, of course. It’s what we all want everywhere.

QUESTION: So can you share with us how confident Trump’s Administration is that this time finally there will be peace for Congolese people? Because until today, there is people dying in the region.

MS BRUCE: Well, that’s – he’s a – the President is obviously a confident man. He has an apparatus at his hands that he can try to make things work, and he’s confident enough to – he’s a great dealmaker. He’s accessible; he’s transparent. So in general what he does, he’s confident.

But I can tell people a little bit about this dynamic, and I like that you asked, because a lot of people don’t ask about Africa in certain senses, and certainly the DRC. But Senior Advisor Boulos – for those of you who don’t know, B-o-u-l-o-s – he traveled along with the Deputy Secretary for State of African Affairs Sanders, traveled to the Democratic Republic of Congo – of the Congo, Kenya, Uganda, and Rwanda this month to meet with heads of state and business leaders to advance efforts for a durable peace in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo and to promote U.S. private sector investment in the region.

Economic prosperity will not happen without security. We reiterate that there is no military solution to the crisis in the eastern DRC. We want to see a lasting peace in that region, which lays the foundation for a thriving regional economy. And regarding the mineral deal specifically, he met with the president there, Tshisekedi.

QUESTION: Tshisekedi, yes.

MS BRUCE: Okay. Our countries are working on a minerals agreement that will boost U.S. investment in the DRC’s mining sector. And our DRC partners have pledged to facilitate an efficient, transparent, and effective business environment to strengthen our cooperation in this sector and attract U.S. investment that creates jobs and prosperity. We expect that this partnership will involve not only our governments but a range of private sector partners. We are in the process of determining next steps and will have more to announce in the near future.

And as we’ve said when it comes to financial investment funds or otherwise is that when a country has the United States as a partner and private American companies invested in the region, not only is it about jobs and hope for the future, but it also is a signal to the region that there is more strength for that nation.

QUESTION: So he also comment that the United States will fully – I mean, the Trump Administration will fully support the Lobito Corridor project.

MS BRUCE: (Inaudible) yes.

QUESTION: Can you share with us? Because he mentioned also he’s planning to travel to Angola.

MS BRUCE: Well, it’s – I can’t speak on what the – what their president said or what President Trump –

QUESTION: No, he mentioned President – I mean, this administration will fully support –

MS BRUCE: Oh, I’m sure he said that. I don’t doubt that he said that. I’m not a party to what President Trump may or his advisors or envoys may have said or not said. So he said that. It’s not something that I certainly can remark on or confirm.

Yes, sir.

QUESTION: Syria? Thank you. Thank you, Tammy. A question about Syria. There are a lot of people talking about the U.S. withdrawing or reducing their forces in Syria. Discussion is not about the military posture, but it’s about the administration decision to withdraw or keep their forces in Syria. I remember President Trump said that we are looking at our forces in Syria and we will make a decision. So I’m asking this question to the State Department because the State is a key player in decision-making process and oversee ISIS activities in Syria. Have you made any foreign policy decision regarding the U.S. forces in Syria? And I would like to have your comments on these reports, because maybe they will mislead –

MS BRUCE: Well, I know that the State Department is not involved in dealing with ISIS, all right? What – that’s the Department of Defense, right? So we have Homeland Security certain issues, Department of Defense and our military. State Department is the diplomatic arm. Of course, we deal with and – partners and issues when it comes to terrorists, foreign terrorist organizations here, the nature of who’s here and how they got here. But we certainly – I can’t speak to the nature of that.

What we – I can tell you from just my experience is that the Department of Defense routinely reallocates forces based on operational needs and contingencies. So that wouldn’t necessarily be unusual. But for a specific answer on that issue, I refer you to the Department of Defense.

Yes, sir.

QUESTION: Thank you. Thank you so much. Jahanzaib Ali from ARY News. President Trump’s foreign policy – like, peace through strength, bringing the world together – many analysts believe that it is because of this administration policies that we see more opportunities for peace in Middle East and Russia.

MS BRUCE: I hope so.

QUESTION: President Trump also made it clear that he has zero tolerance for terrorism. So when we can expect some, like, military actions against terrorist networks in Afghanistan like we have seen in Yemen? Because those terrorists are using American weapons left by Biden administration –

MS BRUCE: Well –

QUESTION: – against neighboring countries like Pakistan.

MS BRUCE: Yes, it’s – you’re seeing the breadth of what we’re doing regarding and the tools we’re using to deal with terrorist networks. That’s been clear, I think, in every briefing. When it comes to Iran, it’s – I certainly can’t speak to the nature of our choices when it comes to that country, but it’s a worldwide effort, it’s – in both hemispheres. And in part, this is what addresses, of course, our desire to make sure that NATO is strong and reaffirming our commitment to NATO because of that area. But we also, of course, as the United States, have to deal with other areas and other major regions, and the entire globe. So it is worldwide. In that particular instance, I can’t give you any specifics.

QUESTION: Follow-up, please? Follow-up?

MS BRUCE: Yes, Eric, go ahead.

QUESTION: Yes, Tammy, thank you for the question. I wanted to ask you, we saw a short time ago today President Zelenskyy speaking with reporters in Kyiv and accusing China of supplying weapons to Russia and saying that he will present detailed evidence next week. Does the U.S. have a similar assessment of China’s role directly in weapons, not just technology but with actual armed support for Russia?

MS BRUCE: Well, the specifics of their support, which I’ve spoken about a great deal when it comes to Russia and this war – as well as, as I’ve mentioned a few times here in this briefing, their support of Iran and particularly the Houthis – I’m not going to get into the specifics of what sectors that is in. But I think we’ve been very clear about our concern regarding China. Yes, ma’am.

QUESTION: Thank you very much, Tammy. A quick one on Iran. Secretary Rubio spoke with his Turkish counterpart, Hakan Fidan, on Monday over the phone, and they discussed threats posed by Iran, among other issues. This is according to the State Department readout. Can you elaborate a little bit –

MS BRUCE: It probably was sent out by me, as matter of fact. I don’t know. (Laughter.) Yes.

QUESTION: Can you elaborate on the role Türkiye is playing or could play in –

MS BRUCE: Oh, no, I can’t. (Laughter.) I can’t. But it’s a good question. What I can say is that all of our partners and allies, it is a remarkable thing to watch – with all the bad guys that are out there doing things to people, horrible things – there’s a lot of countries working together. It is remarkable to see the global engagement framework that exists. It’s – I’m going to sound like a hippie here, but it’s beautiful. It’s a beautiful thing to see and it’s why we should have hope. You don’t see that so much because it’s quiet. We see the horrible things that emerge. But it is a remarkable network of human beings from a vast array of countries in both hemispheres that are working to make the future a better place. And it’s an honor knowing that the State Department of the United States is a key element in helping to make that happen. It’s beautiful.

Yes, ma’am, in the back there, the white jacket.

QUESTION: Thank you. Two questions. First, I’m following up in Syria, actually. Should we at least expect a kind of drawdown of U.S. troops in Syria in the near future, particularly following the Iran talks?

MS BRUCE: I’m sorry, a kind of what in the near future?

QUESTION: A drawdown of U.S. troops in Syria –

MS BRUCE: A drawdown. Again, I –

QUESTION: – following the Iran talks especially.

MS BRUCE: Yes, I – that is something – and I’m never really – I think you’d know if I was being coy because I don’t do that well. I don’t know. I would not – I don’t speak for the DoD or the nature of what – the military decisions versus a department that I work for, which is about talking, which, of course, is good for me because I’m talking and can’t shut up.

QUESTION: Second question –

MS BRUCE: So we – I can’t speak to that at all. But I’m sure the DoD would have a whole array and they’ve got a great communications department, and I’m sure they’d share with you.

QUESTION: Okay. And the U.S. yesterday voted against a UN General Assembly resolution condemning Russian actions against Ukraine, along with North Korea, Sudan. This marks the second time, similar vote. Does this indicate that you are that optimistic about Russian intentions to end the war? Is it because you are working a peace deal, or are you done with the UN?

MS BRUCE: (Laughter.) We certainly – first, I can’t speak to any of those things since I wouldn’t have an answer to those, I wouldn’t – it – I just can’t speak to it. But again, I do know that this is an administration that we are in the UN for a reason. It’s here in the United States. It can play an important role and it has in the past and it can again, that that’s – that’s the bottom-line truth. When it comes to how votes are done, it’s – that’s, again, not my business and it’s not something I really can speak with.

All right, I think we’re kind of here.

QUESTION: Tammy? One question –

MS BRUCE: I think we’re done. I think we’re done for today.

QUESTION: Tammy?

MS BRUCE: I want to thank all of you. We will – I did not go to Paris specifically so that I could be here with you guys today.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MS BRUCE: We – again, I will remind you we are expecting a statement that would be on the record, we hope – things could change very dramatically – in the very early hours. So keep that in mind. As soon as we get any kind of confirmation, which has not come through, we will let certainly our bullpen know, and I think the rest of you will be able to find out. But we’ll see what happens. We expect that a little later on, and I will see you next Tuesday.

Thank you. Thank you, everyone.

(The briefing was concluded at 2:59 p.m.)

# # #