On-the-Record Press Gaggle by White House National Security Communications Advisor John Kirby

Via Teleconference

11:03 A.M. EDT

MODERATOR: Good Monday morning, everyone. And thank you for joining today's NSC News of the Day On-the-Record Gaggle with John Kirby.

I'll turn it over to Kirby for some opening remarks, and after that, we'll take some questions.

MR. KIRBY: Thank you, Sean. And just because payback is payback, Happy Birthday to you. Sean just had his 34th birthday yesterday, everybody.

Okay. Good morning, and thanks for joining. I do have quite a few things to get to at the top, so just bear with me.

First and foremost, we absolutely condemn this weekend's horrific attack in Majdal Shams that killed a number of children and teenagers playing soccer. Our hearts go out to all the families of those who lost loved ones, and certainly we're praying for a speedy recovery for those who have been hurt.

The attack was conducted by Lebanese Hezbollah, despite their denials. It was their rocket, and it was launched from an area that they control.

We have been in continuous discussions with our Israeli and Lebanese counterparts, and the United States will continue to support efforts to reach a diplomatic solution along that Blue Line that will, number one, end these terrible attacks once and for all, and number two, allow Israeli and Lebanese citizens on both sides of the border to safely return to their homes.

Our support for Israel's security remains ironclad and it's unwavering against all Iran-backed threats, including those from Hezbollah. No nation can be expected to tolerate the kind of severe threats that Israel is facing. At the same time, we believe that there is still time and space for a diplomatic solution.

If I could switch to Venezuela.

The United States applauds the Venezuelan people for their participation in yesterday's presidential election. We commend their courage and their commitment to democracy in the face of repression and adversity.?

We've seen the announcement by Venezuelan electoral authorities, and, quite frankly, we have serious concerns that the result as announced does not reflect the will and the votes of the Venezuelan people.

It's absolutely critical that every vote is counted fairly and transparently; that election officials immediately share information with the opposition; and that independent observers, without delay, and that the electoral authorities publish the full, detailed tabulation of votes. And we're going to hold judgment until that time. We and the international community are watching, and we will respond accordingly.

Switching to Ukraine.

Today, the Biden-Harris administration is announcing new security assistance to meet Ukraine's critical security and defense needs. This includes a Presidential Drawdown Authority package to provide Ukraine with key capabilities for the fight that they're in, including air defense interceptors, munitions for U.S.-provided HIMARS, artillery and mortar rounds, Javelin anti-tank missiles, and other anti-tank weapons.

In addition, the Department of Defense is announcing a significant package of Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative funds to support Ukraine's defenses over the long term. That package includes capabilities to augment Ukraine's air defenses, long-range fires, and anti-tank weapons, and to sustain equipment previously committed by the United States. The Department of Defense will have a press release on this shortly and be able to provide more details.

Since the national security supplemental passed Congress in late April, President Biden and the United States government has delivered for Ukraine. The President has authorized nine security assistance packages since late April, and the men and women of our armed forces have been working around the clock to get those weapons and that equipment into Ukraine as quickly as possible.

I think it's worth taking a step back to just recognize how the landscape has shifted since April. At that time, we were waiting for the Congress to pass the supplemental, and there were legitimate concerns that Russia would achieve a strategic breakthrough on the battlefield. President Biden made the case, strongly, that if we got the supplemental over the finish line, we would be able to shore up Ukraine's position and prevent these types of worst-case scenarios from taking place. And that's exactly what has happened.

Since the supplemental passed, Ukraine's defensive lines have been fortified, and Ukrainian forces have continued to fight bravely and to repel Russia's advances. Over the past few months, Russia has suffered extraordinary costs, sacrificing thousands of Russian soldiers for very little gain.

The Biden-Harris administration will continue to work together with more than 50 allies and partners in the global coalition that we've assembled to help Ukraine prevail against Russia's aggression.

And with that, I'll take some questions.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. First, we'll go to Aamer Madhani with the Associated Press.

Q: Hey. Thank you both. On the Israel strike, is the administration still urging Israel to show restraint? And I apologize, John, if you hit on this in your opening -- I was having little problems with my computer -- but has Amos Hochstein or anyone else from the administration over the weekend spoken to Israeli officials about the strike and made calls for constraint? Thank you.

MR. KIRBY: Hey, thanks, Aamer. Look, we've all heard about this all-out war scenario, now multiple points over the last 10 months. Those predictions were exaggerated then, and, quite frankly, we think they're exaggerated now.

Look, Israel has every right to respond. It's Hezbollah that started firing on Israel way back in October, and I think we need to keep that in mind. But nobody wants a broader war, and I'm confident that we'll be able to avoid such an outcome. I'll let the Israelis speak to whatever their response is going to be.

As for conversations over the weekend, you bet we've had them, and we had them at multiple levels. But I'm not going to detail the guts of those conversations. Again, I want to go back to what I said before: Israel has a right to defend itself. No nation should have to live with this kind of threat.

What's really important, Aamer, is that we continue these diplomatic conversations with both sides -- and we are and we will -- to try to reduce the tensions and to allow for families, both Israeli and Lebanese families, to move back into their homes, where they want to be and where they belong.

MODERATOR: Thank you. For our next question, we'll go to Trevor Hunnicutt with Reuters.

Q: Hey, John. Thanks for doing this. Two things. First, are sanctions on the table as a response to this election situation in Venezuela?

And two, did you have dollar amount on the Ukraine funds? Thanks.

MR. KIRBY: Yes. So, on the sanctions, I think, as I kind of alluded to in my opening comments, you know, we're watching, the world is watching. And I won't get ahead of a decision that hasn't been made here in terms of consequences. We're going to hold our judgment until we see the actual tabulation of the results.

And on the dollar figure for the drawdown, it's valued at up to $200 million.

MODERATOR: Thank you. For our next question, we'll go to Alex Marquardt with CNN.

Q: Hi, guys. Can you hear me? I've been having issues with my mic.

MODERATOR: Can hear you loud and clear, Alex.

Q: Perfect. Thank you. John, do you feel like, in terms of the Netanyahu meetings last week, you were able to move him forward on the ceasefire deal? Do you think the negotiations were affected by the strike this weekend? We have Hamas today saying that Netanyahu has put forward new conditions and demands.

And then separately, if I may, when was the last time the administration raised access to Gaza for journalists with Israel? And if you could tell us at what level. And generally, how do you feel now -- this war is going to be 10 months old very soon -- that we have not had independent access to Gaza for 10 months?

MR. KIRBY: Okay, there's a lot there, Alex. The conversations with the Prime Minister and his team last week, we felt coming out of those discussions that they were very constructive, and certainly nothing that discouraged us in terms of trying to close the remaining gaps and seams with respect to the ceasefire deal.

As you know, teams are back at those discussions as we speak. We are represented in those discussions. We still believe those gaps can be narrowed and can be eliminated and we can move forward. But obviously, as I said earlier, it's going to take compromise, and it's going to take leadership.

There's no indication that we see at this point in time that the weekend strike by Hezbollah into the Golan area is going to negatively affect those discussions. But again, we believe it's important that they go forward, and they are.

On media access, I think you know how much we continue to believe that it's important for journalists to be able to report on what's going on in the Middle East, and that includes in Gaza. We've issued statements, of course, expressing our alarm and deep concern that reporters have been killed in this conflict. And we have continued to discuss with our Israeli counterparts the importance of press freedom and media access.

But I don't have a -- I don't have a date when I can point back to the last time we had that specific conversation. I'll tell you what we can do is take that question and see if there's an answer to it. I mean, I just don't know. And the State Department, I'd encourage you to reach out to them as well.

MODERATOR: Thank you. For our next question, we'll go to Michelle Jamrisko from Bloomberg News.

Q: Hi. Thanks, Admiral. Just one on Venezuela. Quick follow-up to the question on sanctions and next steps. Can you give a sense at all of the kind of timeline that you're working on, when you determine that you've given enough time to the regime to see them act in good faith and that you need to take action further?

MR. KIRBY: I think there's still some tabulation going on there, and we want to respect that process. I couldn't point to a date on the calendar and say that there's some sort of deadline. We want to see every vote counted. We want to see that done in a transparent way. We want to be able to see for ourselves and have election officials see for themselves what the result really is before we make any kind of judgment here. So I couldn't give you a timeline, but we're going to reserve our judgment until we have a better sense of what happened on the ground.

MODERATOR: Thank you. For our next question, we'll go with Danny Kemp from AFP.

Q: Hi there. And thanks for this. Just on the Hezbollah strike and the situation there, can you give us any -- just any further indication or explanation of why you're confident that this isn't going to really escalate and, you know, why you think that those fears that it might are exaggerated? Thanks.

MR. KIRBY: I'll just say, Danny: Based on the conversations that we've been having, we don't believe that this needs to result in an escalation of a broader war. There's no reason for that outcome to occur. And it also, rather than diminishing our interest in a diplomatic solution around the Blue Line, I think underscores for us how important those conversations are and need to be going forward. And we're committed to having them.

Again, I'll let the Israelis speak to whatever response that they're going to have. But we certainly don't believe that as horrific as this attack was over the weekend, that it needs to result in any kind of escalation or broader risk of a bigger war. Israel has a right to defend itself, as we have said many, many times. That is no less true today than it was last week and the week before that. But again, that doesn't mean -- we don't believe that that means it needs to result in a significant escalation.

MODERATOR: Thank you. For our next question, we'll go with Asma Khalid from NPR News.

Q: Hi, John. Hi there. Thanks for doing this. Can I just ask a clarifying question about where the administration broadly stands on the Golan Heights? I think this is a question that's come up in the past. I know the Trump administration changed the policy and recognized the Golan Heights as part of Israel. I believe the administration, the Biden administration, never changed this policy. But I just also wanted to clarify: Is that the administration's official policy that the Golan Heights is recognized as part of northern Israel?

MR. KIRBY: Our policy on the Golan Heights has not changed under this administration. Secretary Blinken addressed this a couple of years ago, where he said that, "Leaving aside the legalities of that question, as a practical matter, the Golan is important" to Israelis -- I'm sorry, Israeli security. "The control of the Golan," he went on to say, "in that situation remains of real importance" to Israelis -- Israel's security.

So, look, we continue to recognize the circumstances that were in the 2019 proclamation recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights. And as that proclamation stated, and I quote from it, "Aggressive acts by Iran and terrorist groups, including Hezbollah, in southern Syria, continue to make the Golan Heights a potential launching ground for attacks on Israel." So, again, no change to the policy.

MODERATOR: Thank you. For our next question, we'll go with Lara Seligman from the Wall Street Journal.

Q: Hello, can you hear me?

MODERATOR: Yes, we can.

Q: So, thanks for doing this. There was some thinking that a ceasefire deal would provide a window of opportunity to lower tensions in Lebanon and get some kind of monitoring mechanism in place there to prevent further attacks. Do you believe the strike over the weekend scrambled those plans at all?

MR. KIRBY: I think it's too soon to know what the final outcome here is going to be. We don't believe -- as I said several times earlier this morning, we don't believe that the outcome needs to be an escalation. It's too soon to know whether there's -- you know, whether it's going to have any kind of an impact on ceasefire deal negotiations.

But I want to, again, reiterate what I said earlier: We don't see any indications at this point in time, here on Monday morning, that there's going to be a significant impact. Teams are back at it. We still believe the gaps can be narrowed and closed, take some compromise, take some leadership. That's what we're focused on.

Q: Would the U.S. support a full-scale or any kind of military action by Israel into Lebanon as a result of the strike?

MR. KIRBY: I'm going to let the Israelis speak to whatever their response to this attack is going to be. I would just point back to what I've said countless times before: We don't want to see the war escalate. We don't want to see a second front opened up there in the north. What we want to do and what we're still focused on is finding a diplomatic solution here to reduce the tensions to the point where Israelis and Lebanese families can go back to their homes.

MODERATOR: Thank you. For our next question, we'll go with Laura Rozen. You should be able to unmute yourself.

Q: Thank you so much. Following up to Alex's question, are you concerned that the reported hardening of Israeli demands and their updated proposal will spoil chances for a hostage release, Gaza ceasefire deal? And would the administration like to see the Israelis show perhaps more flexibility?

MR. KIRBY: I'm not going to negotiate in public, and therefore, I'm not going to speak to any press reporting about positions hardening or additional amendments being offered.

There are teams at work right now trying to close these gaps. And I think it's important that we give them the time and the space to do that in a way that doesn't make it harder.

So, again, we believe the gaps can be narrowed. We believe the details can be hashed out. It's important that the teams who are doing this approach the task before them with that amount of flexibility and that amount of empowerment, and we'll see where it takes us.

But as we've said before, we believe we're close here. It's just going to -- it's going to take a little bit of leadership and compromise, again, to get us over the finish line.

MODERATOR: Thank you. For our next question, we'll go with Raquel from Globo TV.

Q: Thank you so much, Sean. Hi, John. Thanks for this. On Venezuela: Is the National Security Council, or Jake, in contact with his Brazilian counterpart, Celso Amorim, who is in Venezuela right now? What can they do together? How can they coordinating [sic]?

And you were saying that you were waiting before making any kind of judgment or before announcing any kind of response -- sanctions, for example. Are you watching the international reaction? Because Russia, China, Nicaragua, Cuba, they all came in support of Maduro already. So what kind of -- what the U.S. would like to see in terms of international reaction while you're waiting before responding?

And from the intel you're gathering, who do you think -- who do you believe won this election?

MR. KIRBY: Okay, let me start with the first question. I don't have any calls by Jake to read out or to discuss today.

Number two: Look, we've seen our partners, both in the region and globally, like us, also call on the full, detailed tabulation of votes to be released. Many of those partners have also expressed concerns, like we have, that the results that have been released by Venezuelan electoral authorities to date do not reflect the will or the votes of the people.

And so, as I've said earlier, the U.S. and the international community will continue to call on the authorities to release those tabulated results without delay.

And we're going to continue standing by the people and working with the people of Venezuela and working with our partners to promote and support democracy there.

MODERATOR: Thank you. For our next question, we'll go to Juan Silva from W Radio.

Q: Thank you, John. I would like to know: What role do you consider Colombia and the Petro government play in the next steps after this troubling elections in Venezuela? Thank you so much.

MR. KIRBY: We'll let the Colombian officials speak for their views and any actions that they might take.

I'd just say a couple of things. Number one, we are reserving, as I said, our judgment until we can see a full, more complete tabulation of votes. And as I just answered in the previous question, we're going to stay in touch with our partners in the region -- that includes Colombia, of course -- in what the appropriate next steps might look like. But I certainly can't speak for them and what they may or may not do.

MODERATOR: Thank you. For our next question, we'll go with Abigail from the Washington Post.

Q: Hi, John. Thank you. You may have spoken to this at the very beginning of the call and I missed it, but could you just speak quickly about what evidence you all have seen so far that points to or suggests fraud in the elections? Thanks.

MR. KIRBY: All I've said is that we have serious concerns that the result as released by electoral authorities doesn't reflect the will and the votes of the Venezuelan people. We want to see our concerns assuaged. We believe the best way to do that is a full, transparent release of the tabulation. I'll leave it at that.

MODERATOR: Thank you. For our next question, we'll go with James Rosen from Newsmax.

Q: Thank you all. Can you hear me all right?

MODERATOR: Yes, we can.

Q: Happy birthday, Sean.

MODERATOR: Thank you, James.

Q: I hope the Admiral gives you a gift more pleasing than this opportunity to take our questions.

I have two questions, both focused on the Middle East.

First: Admiral, when you emphasize the inadvisability of escalation by Israel against Hezbollah, you are, in effect, urging the Israelis to continue to tolerate an existential military threat from contiguous territory. Why is the U.S. attempting to persuade the Israelis against seizing this occasion to neutralize or eliminate that threat once and for all?

MR. KIRBY: James, first of all, the best gift that I can give Sean is getting him out of the doghouse. So this is my gift to Sean. And he ought to be very grateful for it and just shut up about it. (Laughter.)

Number two, we're not asking Israel to tolerate any of these threats. I mean, one of the things I said right out of the gate was that they should not have to live next to these threats. And they have said they're going to respond; I'll let them speak to that response. We continue to make sure that they have the tools they need to defend themselves; that's not going to change. And we have made clear time and time and time again that the Israeli people should not have to live next to these threats.

I'm not going to hypothesize or speculate about what their response ought to be, but I also am not going to make any apologies for the fact that we don't want to see this war escalate beyond the level of violence that's already visited upon the region. And we're going to keep working because we believe there is still a value in working towards a diplomatic solution along the Blue Line.

Q: Second question. What assurance has the NSC that Vice President Harris, in her meeting with Prime Minister Netanyahu last week, did not conduct a foreign policy separate from that of the incumbent president, including discussion of how policies may change if she is elected in November?

MR. KIRBY: I'm sorry, can you repeat the first part of your question? I didn't get it.

Q: Yes. What assurance has the NSC that Vice President Harris, in her meeting with Prime Minister Netanyahu last week, did not conduct a foreign policy separate from that of the incumbent president, including discussion of policies may change if she's elected in November?

MR. KIRBY: Okay, I'm sorry. I didn't hear the word "assurance."

Look, first of all, the NSC was represented in that meeting. Actually, the NSC was represented in both of those meetings. There was no daylight between anything the President and the Vice President told the Prime Minister. Same points, same emphasis, same commitment and reaffirmation to help Israel continue to defend itself against these threats. Same reaffirmation by both the President and the Vice President that we want to see this ceasefire deal get enacted because of what it can do to improve the humanitarian situation and, of course, get those hostages home with their families.

I honestly think that this is -- that there was some unfortunate and inaccurate reporting about any difference between the President and the Vice President here on Israel.

Q: So why was the meeting necessary at all if she was only going to emphasize what Mr. Netanyahu had already heard from the top man in the administration?

MR. KIRBY: The Vice President couldn't be in town for the meeting in the Oval. And as she has been a full partner in all our foreign policy, but certainly, in particular, the policy that this administration has pursued with respect to the Middle East, she felt it was important to also sit down with Prime Minister Netanyahu. And that was -- that had been her plan for quite a while actually.

So, perfectly in line with the manner in which she has participated in virtually every discussion that the President has had with Prime Minister Netanyahu.

MODERATOR: Thank you. For our next question, we'll go with Laura Kelly from The Hill.

Q: Hi, thank you so much for taking my question. I'm wondering if you're -- if the White House or Security Council is now considering fast-tracking weapons to Israel over the normal processes, given the threat from Hezbollah? Thank you.

MR. KIRBY: I have no policy announcements to make with respect to that. I would remind, and hasten to do so, that U.S. security assistance to Israel has continued at the pace that is needed since the 7th of October, and nothing has changed about that.

MODERATOR: Thank you. We have time for just a couple more. I'll go to Barak Ravid from Axios.

Q: Hi, John. Thanks for doing this. Two clarifications about things you said earlier.

First, you mentioned that you don't think that a scenario of an all-out escalation between Israel and Hezbollah is realistic. Why don't you think that this is a realistic scenario?

And second thing: You gave a very long answer to a very simple question on whether the U.S. sees the Golan Heights as part of Israel or not. Can you give me an answer -- yes/no answer -- whether the Golan Heights is part of Israel? Because I think the Vice President's National Security Advisor tweeted yesterday that it is part of Israel. And also, the National Security Council spokesperson, Adrienne Watson, issued a statement yesterday, also saying that the Golan Heights are part of northern Israel. So can you say yes/no whether the Golan Heights is indeed part of Northern Israel?

MR. KIRBY: Yes.

And as for your second question -- or your first question, sorry -- I'm not going to go into the scope and the details of diplomatic conversations that we're having. What I'm saying, Barak, is there's no reason, in our view, that this has to lead to some dramatic escalation; that there's still time and space for diplomacy. And we're actively having conversations with our Israeli counterparts about all that. And I think -- I hope you can understand why I'm not going to get beyond that.

I'm not predicting things one way or the other. I'm just telling you that we don't believe there's -- that this has to result in some dramatic escalation of the war. And we've been working diligently since the 7th of October to prevent that outcome. We still believe that that's achievable.

MODERATOR: Thank you. We'll go to Nathan Guttman from KAN.

Q: Thanks so much for taking my question. In Israel today, military police officers attempted to arrest reserve soldiers who were accused of abusing a Palestinian detainee in a detention camp in southern Israel. And that was followed by a skirmish outside this base, which was instigated by members of the Netanyahu coalition. Does the U.S. have any reaction to that? And will this be something that the U.S. takes into consideration when it decides about the sanctions against the extremist Israelis?

MR. KIRBY: I think I'll take the question here. This is -- obviously, look, I mean, we just in general don't support

violence against protesters. But let me come back to you after I get some more information about this specific event.

MODERATOR: Thank you. For our final question, we'll do Hiba Nasr from Asharq News.

Q: Thank you, Sean. And Happy Birthday. Thank you, John. I go back to the same question. You are saying, John, that you will be able to avoid an escalation; it's achievable. Can you elaborate a little bit? When (inaudible) that you advised the Israeli, for example, not to strike Beirut, what else did you advise? And what about the LAF? The LAF commander was in D.C. And in his last trip, he said that in case of a war between Hezbollah and Israel, maybe the LAF will be drawn to fight. So what are you trying -- what are you doing to avoid also any kind of -- such a situation?

And bear with me. One last question please. Are you developing scenarios in which the U.S. could be involved if there's a war between Israel and Hezbollah? Thank you.

MR. KIRBY: I'm sorry, can you repeat that last one again?

Q: The last one?

MR. KIRBY: Yeah.

Q: Are you developing scenarios in which the U.S. could be involved in case of a war between Israel and Hezbollah?

MR. KIRBY: All right. So, look, I can do this again. We still believe there's time and space for diplomacy. We're going to continue to pursue diplomacy so that there isn't an all-out war over the Blue Line. You've heard this before. And as I said earlier, those predictions were exaggerated then; we believe they're exaggerated now.

I also said, and I'll repeat it again, Israel has every right to defend itself. And our support for their security is ironclad. That support continues. No nation should have to live with the threats that the Israeli people are having to live with right next door.

We still believe, again, that there's no reason that the outcome of this weekend's attacks has to be some all-out war. And we're going to work very, very hard to prevent that kind of an outcome. And we don't believe that is inevitable.

And as for your second question, I'm not going to -- you know, you're asking me to put the dang cart so far in front of the horse that it's hard to see it. I mean, I can't predict, you know, what our reaction would be one way or another to something we're trying very hard to prevent from happening in the first place.

What we're focused on is a diplomatic solution, because we still believe a diplomatic solution can work. We still believe there's time and space for it. And we still believe that that's where the locus of our energies ought to be, not on a military solution -- certainly not on a military solution that involves directly the United States military. I'll leave it at that.

MODERATOR: Great. Thank you very much. And thank you, everyone, for joining. This concludes our gaggle. If we didn't get to you, we apologize and feel free to send us an email with your question. Hope everyone has a good Monday.

11:37 A.M. EDT