TRANSCRIPT:

2:07 p.m. EST

MR KIRBY: Afternoon.

QUESTION: You’re back.

MR KIRBY: I’m back, lucky you. I can see the excitement, Matt.

QUESTION: I want to hear all about Antarctica.

MR KIRBY: I’m sure you do. I’m happy to fill you in.

QUESTION: Did you see any penguins?

MR KIRBY: I didn’t see any penguins, but I did see a couple – actually three seals and lots of krill under the ice.

A couple of toppers here, if I could, and then we’ll get right to it. Secretary Kerry welcomes the decision announced today by the Government of Canada to resume funding to the UN Relief and Works Agency – UNRWA, as it’s known. UNRWA plays an essential role in the Middle East and is an indispensible humanitarian partner in times of conflict, saving the lives of refugees who have often nowhere else to turn. The Secretary believes that Canada’s contribution represents a significant step forward in the international efforts we have strongly supported to ensure UNRWA’s important work can continue.

Now, on the Secretary’s schedule, I think you know that today, he did attend meetings at the 22nd Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, or COP-22, as it is known, in Marrakech. During the session there, the Secretary commended participants and their governments for building global momentum to combat the devastating effects of climate change and the strength of the international community’s resolve to take action. And I think you saw we had his speech carried live on our internal network here and the speech transcript, I think, has been released now, has it? Yes?

QUESTION: Mm-hmm.

MR KIRBY: He also participated in the Major Economies Forum to discuss the important role of the world’s largest economies working together to ensure continued global action on climate. The Secretary also met with Moroccan King Mohammed VI to discuss several areas of concern and to thank him for Morocco’s leadership on the environment.

Finally, he also met with Nigerian President Buhari and commended him for his commitment to peace and environmental issues. He thanked the president for being a strong partner in international efforts against violent extremism. I think Mark Toner put out a readout of that. If you haven’t got it, we’ll make sure you get it.

With that, Matt.

QUESTION: Well, just on Morocco for a second, you said several areas of concern. What areas of concern do you have with Morocco --

MR KIRBY: I think there was a --

QUESTION: -- or is it, like, Libya and --

MR KIRBY: -- a range of regional concerns, terrorism concerns, I mean --

QUESTION: You don’t have any specific concerns about Morocco itself, though?

MR KIRBY: No, I don’t think. This was more about the bilateral relationship and the – and regional issues.

QUESTION: Okay. I only have one question other than my daily transition question, which I suspect I know the answer to already, but I have to ask it: Has there been any contact yet --

MR KIRBY: No.

QUESTION: -- with the transition team? None at all?

MR KIRBY: No.

QUESTION: Okay. So my only other question, then, is: You have lamented in the past withdrawals of countries from the International Criminal Court and that – you probably saw that today, Russia --

MR KIRBY: Yeah.

QUESTION: -- said that it’s no longer a part of it. Do you have any reaction to that?

MR KIRBY: Yeah. Look, we’ve seen the statements coming out of Russia on this – on the decision. I don’t really have much to add on it. I mean, our position on the importance of the court remains the same. Obviously, we recognize these are decisions that ultimately are sovereign national decisions to make, but that doesn’t – even though we’re not a signatory, it doesn’t diminish our belief that the court does provide a viable framework.

QUESTION: Can I follow up on the – first off, well, I have a transition and a ICC. I’ll carry on from the ICC: Do you believe, given what’s the trend in Africa and now Russia and others, that maybe a discussion needs to happen on the future of this court --

MR KIRBY: Well, I think that’s for --

QUESTION: -- including with the U.S. maybe considering a new position, maybe?

MR KIRBY: I’m not aware of any new position that we’re favoring in terms of the court’s future, and I think the court’s future is obviously up to the court to decide and discuss. As I said, we’re not a party to the Rome Statute, but we do engage with state parties to the Rome Statute on issues of concern and we do support the ICC’s prosecution of those cases that advance U.S. interests, and we’ve said that many, many times. It’s hard for us to characterize the trend qualitatively in terms of the decisions that some of these states are making. As Matt noted, we have expressed concerns in the past. We are certainly watching this trend with concern, no question about it. But ultimately, does – do there need to be changes or organizational modifications or new policies by the court? Obviously, that’s for the court to speak to and not the United States.

QUESTION: Do you think the court might have a better future if the United States had been a signatory?

MR KIRBY: That’s a great hypothetical, Dave. I just – I don’t know, and I don’t – I think it would be – I think it’s a stretch to – and I’m not saying you’re saying this, but a stretch to think that the United States membership would make a huge difference here. I don’t think anybody can know that. I don’t think that we think that that would have somehow staved this off. The – I mean, it’s just a fact that many African nations feel like they haven’t been treated fairly by the court and that that drove some of these decisions. Again, these are sovereign decisions that they’re making. I don’t know that U.S. membership would have been a tip on the balance there. We – because even though we’re not signatories, as I said, we continue to support the prosecutions that the court seeks that we believe advance U.S. interests.

QUESTION: It would be easier to defend your position that the court’s prosecutions are fair if the U.S. was also subject to its jurisdiction.

MR KIRBY: Well, again, I mean, we’ve been around and around on this issue. We’re not signatories; I understand that.

QUESTION: Well --

MR KIRBY: But that doesn’t mean that we don’t – go ahead.

QUESTION: Well, I’m just going to say the fact of the matter is that it would never get through Congress anyway, so it’s a kind – it’s kind of moot. It’s not an Executive Branch thing.

MR KIRBY: No, I --

QUESTION: It’s not an Executive Branch reason that you’re not a member of the court.

MR KIRBY: That’s correct.

QUESTION: It’s not going to – but what I’m --

MR KIRBY: No, that’s absolutely correct.

QUESTION: -- what I’m curious about here is: What do you mean you don’t know that the United States membership wouldn’t have a – that’s your – that’s the exact opposite of the argument you make for every other international organization. You’re in UNESCO despite the fact that it keeps voting on anti-Israel measures, because you say that your membership and leadership in is important and it will affect things. You’re in the whole, entire United Nations system, NATO, all these international organizations, the argument that administration after administration has made --

MR KIRBY: But you’re – but no, no, no, no. Matt, Matt --

QUESTION: -- is that U.S. membership in and support for these organizations is incredibly important.

MR KIRBY: And we – and I – and we still – no, no, no.

QUESTION: And all of a sudden with the court you say – with the ICC, you say no?

MR KIRBY: No, you’re reading way too much into this, Matt. I mean, what I – obviously we still believe our membership and leadership in international bodies that advance peace and security and stability and justice are important. Of course. That’s not what I’m saying at all. And you’re right, this was not an Executive Branch decision; this is a legislative issue in terms of our not being a part – not being a party to the Rome Statute. But the question specifically was: Do I think that if we were signatories, that these departures would not happen? That’s an impossible question for me to know the answer to.

QUESTION: Okay, fair enough. Well, let me just say it is the Executive Branch to sign it and, in fact, it did – the Clinton Administration did sign it, then the Bush Administration unsigned it. But I’m talking about ratification of the Rome Treaty --

MR KIRBY: I got it.

QUESTION: -- which is – which would never happen in the Senate.

MR KIRBY: No, I got it.

QUESTION: That’s the reason. Anyway --

MR KIRBY: I got it. But the point is – the larger point is --

QUESTION: I want to --

QUESTION: Okay. All right, I didn’t --

MR KIRBY: -- I can’t possibly know whether this – whether us being a party or not would have an effect. I mean, the – as I said, I can’t speak for every country, but it’s a public fact that many African nations – those that have decided to withdraw are doing it because they feel like they’ve been treated unfairly by the court.

QUESTION: But yesterday Elizabeth said from the podium that the recent resumption of Russian airstrikes in Syria was a breach of international law. What better body to prosecute such a breach of international law than the --

MR KIRBY: Well, that’s one of the reasons – I mean, that’s one of the purposes of the ICC, isn’t it?

QUESTION: But your condemnation of these Russian crimes would be stronger if it came from someone who – from a country that was part of the court.

MR KIRBY: Well, again, I’m not disputing that we’re not a member and that – but we also continue to support the work that they do that we believe advances – the prosecutions that advance U.S. interests. And again, I can’t – obviously, we don’t believe that Russian or Syrian activity is in keeping with international law. The Secretary has said that many, many times. And the ICC would be, obviously, a body that could deal with that.

Yeah.

QUESTION: Is that a fatal blow? I mean, the pulling out of Russia and other countries and so on. Now, do you see the future of the ICC as being doomed --

MR KIRBY: Well, no, I think --

QUESTION: -- or in – or at least in severe jeopardy? Or --

MR KIRBY: I think that gets to Lesley’s question.

QUESTION: I’m sorry?

MR KIRBY: I think that gets to Lesley’s question. I mean, I – the future of the court is for the court to speak to. I can’t – I wouldn't be in a position to say that this decision by Russia is some sort of a death knell for the court. We certainly hope that it isn’t.

QUESTION: So what would be the alternative? I mean, in your view, your – as a man of experience and so on, what would be the alternative for countries or individuals or societies that are, let’s say, under military occupation and so on, to – as a recourse to go to to complain about abuses or even to level charges of war crimes?

MR KIRBY: Well, we hope that there – we hope that there doesn’t have to be a substitute. I mean, that’s what the ICC was established to do. And as we’ve said in the past, we’re going to continue to support those kinds of prosecutions. And we want that to be the – that to be the appropriate venue.

QUESTION: Can I – that was an extremely loaded question. So can I just – you’re not saying that you would – the U.S. would support a Palestinian case against Israel at the International Criminal Court, are you?

MR KIRBY: That’s not what I’m saying.

QUESTION: All right. Because his – that’s what his comment was – that’s what his question implied. And the Palestinians had threatened to do that before. But you’re not saying that the U.S. would support that?

MR KIRBY: No, I’m not saying that.

QUESTION: All right.

QUESTION: Can I have a transition follow-up? You’ve probably seen these reports of President-elect Trump meeting or having discussions with foreign leaders without the presence or any kind of briefings from the – on the U.S. position on these. Is that at all concerning or against any kind of protocol that the State Department would recommend?

MR KIRBY: Well, first of all, the – these discussions are decisions that the president-elect’s team are making, and it’s not our place to inject ourselves into those decisions about who the president-elect is going to speak to and what they’re going to discuss. I mean, those are his staff’s decisions to make.

We, of course, as the Secretary has made clear to the entire department – we, of course, stand ready to assist the president-elect’s team in any way that they deem fit. But as I said, there’s been no outreach to date. But it’s not for us to approve or disapprove of conversations that the president-elect is having or may have in the future with foreign leaders.

QUESTION: Well – and it’s not unusual. I mean, the Secretary himself has one-on-one discussions without staff being present or any note takers being present. So it’s not unusual. What is unusual is that the president-elect – or whatever decisions or discussions are made is not passed on to the State Department, who would deal with bilateral or international diplomacy.

MR KIRBY: Well, but those are – again, those are decisions that the president-elect has to make whether he or his team deems it appropriate to pass on a readout or not. So, again, I – we stand ready to support him and his team with any information that they might require, either in advance of or on the back end of these conversations. But the degree to which they want that context or not is really up to them to speak to.

QUESTION: Was the State Department at all asked – I mean, maybe not unofficially but to kind of – or from the foreign leaders to try and facilitate that contact? Did nothing come through the State Department from any – the British or any of those --

MR KIRBY: Not to my knowledge, no.

QUESTION: So tomorrow the president-elect is meeting with Abe, the Japanese leader. And has anything – I mean, has anybody reached out to the State Department on any kind of information or clearance or discussions or talking points or anything to do with that meeting?

MR KIRBY: I’m not aware of any outreach to the Department by the transition team with respect to preparing for that meeting, and I’m not aware of any discussions that we’ve had with the Japanese side either in advance of that meeting.

QUESTION: Okay, thank you.

MR KIRBY: Yeah.

QUESTION: So there’s no obligation for an incoming – is there?

MR KIRBY: An obligation to do what?

QUESTION: To get in touch with you about --

MR KIRBY: No.

QUESTION: -- private conversations between --

MR KIRBY: No. No. And it’s not --

QUESTION: So there’s no concern – there’s no concern in this building about who he speaks to or what --

MR KIRBY: Well, those are – again, those are his decisions to make.

QUESTION: I know, but is there concern --

MR KIRBY: And I mean, there’s no obligation for them to reach out, and no, we don’t --

QUESTION: I understand that.

MR KIRBY: I’m not --

QUESTION: I got that, but you’re also saying that there’s no concern about it?

MR KIRBY: It’s not for us to weigh in one way or the other, Matt. As I said, we’re willing, ready, and able to provide context if it’s desired. And thus far there’s been no – there’s been none of that contact.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

QUESTION: Pence signed this Memorandum of Understanding that can now allow for these – this transition and this information to occur. Apparently, he signed that last night. So that’s the reason I’m asking on whether there had been any kind of outreach from that direction.

MR KIRBY: Yeah, I’ve heard reports of the memo being signed. I obviously can’t confirm that.

QUESTION: Yeah.

MR KIRBY: But what I can tell you is as of this afternoon, there’s been no contact by anyone on the transition team. I would just reiterate again that we are fully prepared and ready and willing to receive them when they’re ready, and even before that if they require briefing materials or context for any discussions that they may be having, internally or externally. We’re certainly – stand ready to assist in any way we can.

QUESTION: Can we go to Syria?

QUESTION: Do you have liaison team members sitting by phones, or do they continue with their current jobs until such time as they’re contacted? (Laughter.)

MR KIRBY: And we have the State Department counsellor, Ambassador Kenney, obviously is our lead for transition issues. And she is – she and her team are, again, standing by, willing to help in any way. But I wouldn’t describe it as, like, a phone bank. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: Do they have other duties, or are they just drinking coffee until – (laughter).

MR KIRBY: No, I mean, they all have full-time jobs too.

QUESTION: Full-time jobs.

MR KIRBY: Yeah, absolutely.

QUESTION: Can we go to Syria?

MR KIRBY: Sure.

QUESTION: Okay. First of all, can you clarify what is going on in terms of where the Russians are bombing? I mean, some say in Aleppo, but there is no evidence that there is any bombardment of eastern Aleppo by the Russians. There is bombardments of Idlib and Homs and so on, and the countryside of Homs. So first of all, if you have information on where they are bombing and what is going on there.

MR KIRBY: Well, I don’t have – as you know, Said, I don’t have specific tactical information about Russian military operations in terms of grid points and locations on a map. We – I would say, though, that we have seen additional airstrikes now in Syria by Russia and by the regime, to include what has been reported to be – and we have no reason to doubt this because of the sourcing that we’re getting – that five hospitals and at least one mobile clinic in Syria were struck by --

QUESTION: Can say which city the hospitals were in?

MR KIRBY: What’s that?

QUESTION: Which city were the hospitals in?

MR KIRBY: I don’t have the exact location. But – so five hospitals and one mobile clinic. And by all counts, it looks like they were deliberately targeted, all in the span of just the last day or so. It’s also worth noting that despite Russian claims that it halted airstrikes in the past month or so --

QUESTION: Twenty-eight days.

MR KIRBY: -- yeah – they’ve allowed no food or humanitarian assistance into east Aleppo. And the regime and Russia have now let Aleppo’s residents starve, all while seeking praise from the international community for halting indiscriminate strikes for three weeks. Again, five hospitals and at least one – maybe more – mobile clinic. That doesn’t sound to me like a halt in indiscriminate attacks.

QUESTION: Can you give us a specific --

QUESTION: Now the Russians are – excuse me, just let me --

QUESTION: Sorry.

QUESTION: -- follow up with a couple of things. The Russian defense ministry claims that it is actually the rebels who are – or the terror groups who are holding back the aid, they are disallowing the public from reaching that humanitarian aid. And in fact, they’re saying that there was some sort of demonstration by the public and that was crushed brutally by the different militant groups and so on. And so I want – how do you sort out after all this kind of conflicting information and so on – how do you get your information on this case?

MR KIRBY: No, look, it’s a very fluid situation and our knowledge is imperfect. That’s why we say I have seen – we’ve seen reports of these things. And I don’t have specifics for you. I don’t have specific locations --

QUESTION: But don’t you think it’s --

MR KIRBY: Hang on a second, I’m answering Said.

QUESTION: Don’t you think it is important --

MR KIRBY: We don’t have that. I’m saying we’ve seen these reports.

QUESTION: Right.

MR KIRBY: And they fly in the face of everything Russia says it’s doing in Syria, and specifically in Aleppo. So I don’t have – I don’t have (inaudible) on this and it wouldn’t be appropriate for me to get into that anyway.

QUESTION: But don’t you think it is important --

QUESTION: So you would refute --

MR KIRBY: But, but --

QUESTION: -- the claim by the Russians that they have stopped or they had a moratorium on striking Aleppo, eastern Aleppo, for the past 28 days? In fact, all the while were – the militant groups were striking western Aleppo.

MR KIRBY: So we’ve seen – well, you’ve also seen reports that – about opposition groups that were limiting or trying to be an obstacle to humanitarian aid and assistance. And we’ve made it clear to the opposition groups that we communicate with and certainly to nations who have influence over other opposition groups that these reports are troubling and concerning and obviously to the degree they’re true, that that obstruction should not occur. That said, it’s without question that it is the regime and its Russian backers that have had the – by far, the most responsibility for stopping the violence, for stopping the strikes, and for allowing the aid to get in, which they haven’t done. I mean, I don’t know how many times now I’ve been to this podium talking about the fact that no humanitarian aid is getting into Aleppo and that hasn’t changed.

QUESTION: Don’t you think it is --

MR KIRBY: It hasn’t changed one bit.

QUESTION: Sorry, don’t you think it is important to give a specific list of hospitals that you’re accusing Russia of hitting? Those are grave accusations.

MR KIRBY: I’m not making those accusations. I’m telling you we’ve seen reports from credible aid organizations that five hospitals and a clinic --

QUESTION: Which hospital --

MR KIRBY: At least one clinic --

QUESTION: In what cities at least?

MR KIRBY: You can go look at the information that many of the Syrian relief agencies are putting out there publicly. We’re getting our information from them too. These reports --

QUESTION: But you are citing those reports without giving any specifics.

MR KIRBY: Because we believe these agencies are credible and because we have other sources of information that back up what we’re seeing from some of these reports. And you know what? Why don’t ask --

QUESTION: If you – exactly.

MR KIRBY: Here’s a good question.

QUESTION: That’s what I --

MR KIRBY: Why don’t you ask your defense ministry --

QUESTION: That’s what I was --

MR KIRBY: -- what they’re doing and see if you can get --

QUESTION: If you give a specific list --

MR KIRBY: No, no, no, no, no, no, no.

QUESTION: If you give a specific list of hospitals --

MR KIRBY: No, no, no.

QUESTION: My colleagues who are listening --

MR KIRBY: I’m supposed to --

QUESTION: -- hopefully would be able to go and ask Russian officials about a specific list of hospitals that you’re accusing Russia of --

MR KIRBY: You work for Russia Today, right? Isn’t that your agency?

QUESTION: That is correct. Yes.

MR KIRBY: And so why shouldn’t you ask your government the same kinds of questions that you’re standing here asking me?

QUESTION: When you level --

MR KIRBY: Ask them about their military activities. Get them to tell you what they’re – or to deny what they’re doing.

QUESTION: When I ask for specifics, it seems your response is why are you here? Well, you are leveling that accusation.

MR KIRBY: No, ma’am.

QUESTION: And if you give specifics --

MR KIRBY: No, ma’am.

QUESTION: -- my colleagues would be able to ask --

MR KIRBY: No, ma’am.

QUESTION: -- Russian officials.

MR KIRBY: Once again, you’re just wrong. I’m not leveling those accusations. Relief agencies that we find credible are leveling those accusations.

QUESTION: But you repeat them.

MR KIRBY: So why don’t you question them about their information and where they’re getting it? And why don’t you question your own defense ministry?

QUESTION: Which organizations then? Which ones? Where should I look?

MR KIRBY: We’ll get you – we will get you a list of them after the briefing. I don’t have it right here in front of me, but I’m happy to provide to you some of the relief agencies that are telling us what they’re seeing on the ground.

QUESTION: And specifically on blocking aid within the 28 days that Russia and Syria had stopped the airstrikes in eastern Aleppo, and I understand they resumed by the – they were resumed by the Syrian military yesterday. Do you – can you give any specific information on when Russia or the Syrian Government blocked the UN from delivering aid? Just any specific information.

MR KIRBY: There hasn’t been any aid delivered in the last month.

QUESTION: And you believe it was blocked exclusively by Russia and the Syrian Government.

MR KIRBY: There’s no question in our mind that the obstruction is coming from the regime and from Russia. No question at all.

Ma’am.

QUESTION: I just have --

QUESTION: John, can I just --

QUESTION: Yeah. Well --

QUESTION: Let me – hold on, just let me say: Please be careful about saying “your defense minister” and things like that. I mean, she’s a journalist just like the rest of are, so it’s – she’s asking pointed questions, but they’re not --

MR KIRBY: From a state-owned – from a state-owned --

QUESTION: But they’re not --

MR KIRBY: From a state-owned outlet, Matt.

QUESTION: But they’re not --

MR KIRBY: From a state-owned outlet that’s not independent.

QUESTION: The questions that she’s asking are not out of line.

QUESTION: The outlet is (inaudible) --

MR KIRBY: I didn’t say the questions were out of line.

QUESTION: Okay. I mean --

MR KIRBY: I didn’t say the questions were out of line.

QUESTION: All right. Okay.

MR KIRBY: Okay? But I’m not --

QUESTION: But I mean – oh no, I understand. But asking --

MR KIRBY: I’m sorry, but I’m not going to put Russia Today on the same level with the rest of you who are representing independent media outlets.

QUESTION: Well --

QUESTION: Do you have an issue with my question?

QUESTION: Well, hold on, but just --

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

QUESTION: Look, there – well, we’ll talk about – we can talk about this later offline --

QUESTION: Maybe I could ask my Iraq question.

QUESTION: -- but just – the question is not an inappropriate question to ask.

MR KIRBY: Didn’t say that it was.

QUESTION: All right.

MR KIRBY: But I also think it should be asked of their own defense ministry --

QUESTION: Okay.

MR KIRBY: -- which they don’t do, which Russia Today doesn’t do.

Said, did you have one?

QUESTION: I’m done.

QUESTION: Iraq. While you were traveling with the Secretary and looking at the seals and the penguins and whatever, we discussed a visit that the Iraq – the U.S. ambassador to Iraq made to Erbil. And he met with Kurdish leaders, and then he gave a press conference and he said that he was confident Peshmerga forces would withdraw to their pre-ISIS positions. But President Barzani stated today – it was televised as being widely tweeted out – quote, “There will be no negotiations,” not even negotiations “about territories liberated by Peshmerga forces before the Mosul offensive. There was an agreement on this between the ministry of Peshmerga and the Pentagon, and between the Peshmerga and the Iraqi Government.” So it seems that the ambassador perhaps misunderstood the substance of his discussions with the Kurdish leadership, because they don’t agree at all with what he --

MR KIRBY: Look, I think Elizabeth gave a readout yesterday of the ambassador’s visit. I can’t speak to these comments. I haven’t seen them, so I really don’t have anything further to add. Look, I guess I have to say it again, but the campaign to liberate Mosul is an Iraqi campaign. And as we’ve said before, our job is to support that campaign, but it is an Iraqi campaign. And the decisions that have been and will be made about how that campaign’s going to be prosecuted, with what forces, who’s going to be where and what they’re going to do – those are Iraqi decisions to make. And so I would refer you to the Iraqi Government for how they’re going to continue to liberate Mosul and then what the force disposition is going to look like after it’s over.

QUESTION: So if there’s an understanding between Baghdad and Erbil about the Peshmerga lines, you don’t have any problem with that?

MR KIRBY: I’m – I think we’ve commented as far as we’re going to comment on that right now.

Yeah, Janne.

QUESTION: Thank you, Kirby. United Nations Security Council adopted a resolution on North Korean human rights issues. Is this a final resolution for United Nations?

MR KIRBY: I mean, our – look, our – I’m not going to speak specifically to – well, actually, I can. We obviously support the report of the special committee – the – I’m sorry, the Third Committee, and our longstanding concerns about human rights in North Korea and elsewhere around the world haven’t changed. In fact, go look on our Human Rights Report on the website and you can see it all right there.

QUESTION: Just another one. U.S. and North Korean delegations have a meeting in Geneva, Switzerland. Do you have anything on that?

MR KIRBY: I’m sorry – can you say that again?

QUESTION: U.S. and North Korean delegations meet – meeting in Geneva, Switzerland.

MR KIRBY: You’re talking about the track two, which again, is not --

QUESTION: Well --

MR KIRBY: -- U.S. Government, and I --

QUESTION: -- nothing like track two, but this kind of – the delegation from North Korean foreign minister. Do you have anything on that, or --

MR KIRBY: No, I don’t. I mean, that’s not a U.S. Government discussion.

QUESTION: Can you take it – because she’s Choe Son-hui. She from North Korean foreign ministry.

MR KIRBY: The North Koreans would have to speak to their participation and who is --

QUESTION: Well – but you have to know that. But U.S. delegations, who they are (inaudible).

MR KIRBY: But it’s not a U.S. Government delegation, Janne, and I don’t have anything to on that.

QUESTION: Can you take the question?

MR KIRBY: Can I what?

QUESTION: Can you take questions?

MR KIRBY: Can I take the question? No.

QUESTION: Why? Why not?

MR KIRBY: Because it’s not a U.S. Government discussion. It’s not led by the U.S. Government. The U.S. Government’s not involved in these discussions – we’ve talked about this before – so it’s not for us to speak to.

QUESTION: But the two-track conversation will going to a government can use these policy or they’re using for the next step, so --

MR KIRBY: Are you asking a question or are you making a statement? (Laughter.)

QUESTION: Well, you’d better know about this, that they have a (inaudible) temporary --

MR KIRBY: I think we’ve talked about this before. I don’t have anything to add.

Yeah.

QUESTION: Thank you very much, sir. Jahanzaib Ali from ARY News TV. Sir, in the last few weeks, there were some terrorist attacks in Pakistan, especially in Quetta. First, they targeted the police cadet training center, then a Sufi shrine day before yesterday, killing more than 52 people. Sir, how much you are concerned about the expansion of Daesh in the area, because both of the attacks were claimed by the Daesh – ISIS? And secondly, sir, how you see the role of Muslims countries in defeating the ideology of Daesh?

MR KIRBY: Well, look, I mean, obviously we’re going to continue to stay engaged on counterterrorism efforts in the region. And attacks like that obviously are devastating and all the more evidence that we need to continue to take a cooperative, regional approach to dealing with the terrorism challenge there.

QUESTION: Sir, Mr. Trump, the president-elect, during his presidential campaign announced that if he comes into the power, he’s going to change the whole foreign policy. So now he is coming to the White House and if he changes the whole foreign policy, what would be the impact at the international level?

MR KIRBY: Well, you’d have to talk to the president-elect and his team. I – our job is to implement the foreign policy objectives of this Administration. That’s what we’re focused on --

QUESTION: Sir, will you be the --

MR KIRBY: -- and that’s what we’ll remain focused on.

QUESTION: Sir, will you be the spokesperson in his administration too?

MR KIRBY: Will I be the spokesman for?

QUESTION: Will you be the spokesperson in his administration too?

MR KIRBY: I’m the spokesman at the State Department in this Administration. I have no expectation that I’ll be serving beyond my time here with Secretary Kerry.

Yeah.

QUESTION: Can we go to the Palestinian-Israeli issue?

MR KIRBY: Yeah.

QUESTION: Okay. Very quickly, yesterday, the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke to the Jewish Federation of North America – via satellite – General Assembly and he told them that he urged the President, President Obama, not to float any ideas on resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in his – in the last final weeks of his term. I wonder if you have any comment on that? Because I have a follow-up on what he said.

MR KIRBY: I mean, again, Said, our position with regard to action at the UN remains the same.

QUESTION: Right.

MR KIRBY: We’re going to continue to oppose one-sided resolutions that delegitimize Israel or undermine its security. I won’t speculate --

QUESTION: Right.

MR KIRBY: -- on hypothetical resolutions or other actions by the Security Council. As we’ve said many times in the past, we’re going to carefully consider our future engagement if and when we reach that point and determine how to most effectively advance the objective we all share in achieving a negotiated two-state solution.

QUESTION: He said something very interesting. He said that – and Israel is becoming more accepted and people – countries are reaching out to Israel and maybe in 10 years, things will be different where actually such a thing can take place. Is he implicitly – sir, just in your view, when he says that – that no change in current policy of settlement expansion, of continued occupation, will continue for at least another 10 years?

MR KIRBY: I couldn’t possibly – I can’t --

QUESTION: Okay – did you read what he – did you read the statement?

MR KIRBY: I didn’t read those comments, but I can’t speak for him or what he meant by that. Our position on settlements hasn’t changed.

QUESTION: Okay. I have a couple more if you indulge me. The Israeli forces over the past few days, they continued demolition of homes in Bethlehem and Hebron and Jerusalem – seem to be accelerating, taking --

MR KIRBY: Yeah.

QUESTION: It is – it’s spiking up. Do you have any comment on that? Do you have --

MR KIRBY: Yeah, we’re very concerned about what we believe to be an accelerated rate of demolitions, absolutely, of Palestinian structures in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

QUESTION: And finally today, the chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat issued a press statement saying that the Israelis this morning raided a number of places all throughout the West Bank, but most notably Al-Mubadarah, headed by the medical committee’s office in Ramallah. And they raided the office, arrested many people – Al-Mubadarah. I wonder if you have – if you are aware, first of all --

MR KIRBY: I have not seen reports of that, Said.

QUESTION: Okay.

QUESTION: Can I --

MR KIRBY: Yeah.

QUESTION: -- go back to the transition?

MR KIRBY: Sure.

QUESTION: Not necessarily about – you said there’s no contact with the team, but can you talk a little bit about world leaders and their calls and such? Is it typical for the State Department to help arrange through the ops center – I think we’ve heard in the past that it’s typical – like President Obama, for instance, the State Department Ops Center was among those who helped place calls to the president-elect.

MR KIRBY: It’s – each incoming team has to figure out how they want to do this. There’s no – you say “typical.” It’s not like there’s a protocol here, or a regulation, or anything like that. As I said earlier, we certainly stand ready to help provide any information or context in advance of or even in the wake of conversations that the president-elect might be having with foreign leaders, of course.

QUESTION: You mean like a pre-brief or something?

MR KIRBY: Absolutely. If it’s requested or desired, we have, as you know, many policy experts, terrific ambassadors all over the world who fully stand ready to provide whatever context is required, but there’s no protocol demanding that.

QUESTION: So --

MR KIRBY: And it’s not atypical for these conversations to occur without any input from the State Department.

QUESTION: So are you trying to say that, like, there has been no request for any type of briefings, or pre-briefs, or anything?

MR KIRBY: That’s correct.

QUESTION: Okay. So is there a typical – so is there a type of protocol in terms of world leaders, in terms of the order, or the number, or the --

MR KIRBY: I’m sorry?

QUESTION: Is there any type of – there’s been a lot of reports, perhaps, that the protocol of speaking with world leaders for the president-elect is a little bit haphazard. Usually, there’s a general protocol of countries that are supposed to come in a certain order. I mean, there’s been no talk to the transition about any of this?

MR KIRBY: I’m not aware of a protocol in terms of the order in which conversations can happen or not. These are decisions that the president-elect has to make in terms of their communication with foreign leaders. Again, I’m not aware of any governing protocol. And no, there has been no contact with the State Department by the transition team on either setting up their transition efforts here at the department or on these communications with foreign leaders.

QUESTION: What about – it’s been reported and I mean, I think the transition team has actually said that President-elect Trump will be meeting with Japanese Foreign – Prime Minister Abe later this week. Was the State Department asked to give any briefings to himself or any of the team in terms of the issues surrounding Japan and anything --

MR KIRBY: No.

QUESTION: -- for this meeting?

MR KIRBY: There’s been no request, no.

QUESTION: Wasn’t that Lesley’s question?

QUESTION: Didn’t we just go through this?

MR KIRBY: It was.

QUESTION: I’m sorry. I’m sorry, Lesley.

MR KIRBY: It was. Okay. Thanks, everybody.

(The briefing was concluded at 2:45 p.m.)