On Thursday, State Department Deputy Principal Spokesperson Tommy Pigott held a press briefing.
NOTE: The Principal Deputy Spokesperson's last name was spelt incorrectly in the video. It should be spelt as "Pigott."
NOTE: The Principal Deputy Spokesperson's last name was spelt incorrectly in the video. It should be spelt as "Pigott."
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00All right, my name is Tommy Piggott. I'm the principal deputy spokesperson here at the State
00:07Department and today for spokesperson Tammy Bruce. To begin, I just have a few comments up top and
00:13then I'll be happy to take some questions. So this week, the United States demonstrated once again
00:20that American leadership matters. Driven by the clear vision of President Trump and Secretary
00:25Rubio, the United States is standing firm on the world stage and delivering real results for the
00:30American people. The United States vetoed a counterproductive United Nations Security Council
00:35resolution that targeted Israel and failed to condemn Hamas. The resolution created a false
00:41equivalency between a sovereign nation and a terrorist group and would have undermined meaningful
00:46diplomatic efforts to reach a ceasefire. As President Trump has made clear, we will not
00:52support any resolution that fails to demand Hamas disarm, leave Gaza and release all hostages,
00:59including the remains of two murdered Americans. The United States will continue supporting the
01:03delivery of aid to the people of Gaza and will work to ensure that Hamas and other terrorist
01:08organizations cannot continue to exist. This is the first Security Council veto of the Trump
01:14administration and we are proud to use our veto on such an important issue. It's time the
01:19U.N. returned to its founding purpose, promoting peace and security and stopping these performative
01:25actions. Earlier today, Israeli forces recovered the remains of Judy Weinstein and Gad Haggai in Gaza.
01:32Judy and Gad were kidnapped and brutally murdered by terrorists on October 7th. Their fate remained
01:38a mystery for months. Even after the worst was confirmed, their families were denied the dignity of a
01:43proper burial for more than 600 days. We hope their families can now find some measure of peace.
01:51At the same time, we are acutely aware of the anguish 56 families continue to endure, including those of
01:57Americans Omer Neutra and Ite Chen. Every single hostage must be released immediately.
02:04To further safeguard the American people, President Trump has signed a new directive restricting the entry of
02:09foreign nationals from specific countries to protect the United States from foreign terrorists
02:13and other national security and public safety threats. This action reinforces the administration's
02:19unwavering commitment to protecting our borders and ensuring that those who wish to do us harm are
02:24denied access. This administration will continue to use every tool at its disposal to defend our homeland,
02:31dismantle terrorist networks, and deny entry to those who threaten the American people. We will never
02:36ever waver and our mission to protect the United States. And with that, I'll take some questions.
02:41Hi, thank you. If I could start with Russia, Ukraine. Was Secretary Rubio on the call between
02:46President Trump and Putin?
02:48MR. Nothing further to add besides what's already been publicly said.
02:51Okay. And then President Trump said today that Putin told him he had no choice but to attack Ukraine
02:55following Kyiv's latest attacks. Trump said he told Putin not to do it. Has the U.S. communicated to Russia
03:01any red lines that it does not want to see crossed?
03:03MR. Look, what's been clear from the very beginning, President Trump
03:06has made this clear, is that he wants to see de-escalation. He wants to see direct dialogue.
03:10He wants to see peace. That has been his driving motivation on this from the beginning,
03:14to end the carnage and the bloodshed. As you said, the President spoke to this. Nothing further
03:19to add to his comments. But his motivation here has been very clear from the beginning,
03:22to get to that direct dialogue and stop this bloodshed.
03:25Would the U.S. take any punitive actions, such as imposing sanctions if Russia attacked?
03:29MR. I'm not going to speculate or get ahead of the President on that. But what I can say,
03:33again, is that the President has been very clear he wants to see this conflict come to an end.
03:37Yes.
03:38Thank you very much, Tommy. Can you explain the apparent conflict between the State
03:47Department's position regarding Afghanistan, the safety, relative safety and security of the Taliban
03:54government regarding the decision made on withdrawing temporary protective status for Afghans here in
04:03the U.S. as of July 12th? Because it's safe enough, presumably, for them to go back. And the fact that
04:11the State Department has now decided that Afghanistan is not safe, so it is on the list of states for which
04:20immigration is banned. MR. So we're talking about two dynamics here. When it comes to the specific
04:24of TPS, temporary being the operative word here, I refer you to DHS for more details, but it was
04:30always a temporary benefit, a temporary protection that's in the name itself. So we have that dynamic,
04:36and people that are here, people that were here on temporary protected status have had opportunities to
04:40apply for permanent residents here in the United States. So you have that dynamic of a temporary
04:45protected status that was temporary, versus the second dynamic of the ability to vet people entering
04:51this country, the ability to ensure people coming into this country on a visa are properly vetted.
04:55So without getting into specifics of individual countries, the White House has put out a fact
04:59sheet on this that I would refer you to for more specifics, but the idea of people coming into this
05:04country, the ability to properly vet is a separate dynamic, and we have to have confidence that we can
05:09vet people properly, and I think the American people would expect us to have that. So what we're looking at
05:13here is, can we vet people properly? Are there terrorist concerns? Do we see visa overstays in regards
05:19to some of these countries? Those are some of the driving purposes here. So we have those two separate
05:23dynamics when it comes to Afghanistan. Just to follow up, there are large numbers of American veterans,
05:30those who have fought in Afghanistan, and also including State Department personnel, CIA personnel,
05:38others who have worked with the U.S. government, who feel very strongly that many Afghanistan refugees
05:47are at risk if they go back because of their connections to the United States in the past,
05:53in the present time, and that going back, particularly for women, is of high risk as well.
06:00And they are asking why it is not a different case, why Afghanistan is being treated this way after
06:09the Afghans worked so hard to try to help us during the war.
06:14MR. Well, the temporary protected status is only one dynamic when it comes to many different ways that
06:19people from Afghanistan have come to this country. And again, I'd refer you to DHS on the specifics of
06:24that TPS announcement. But I think those two separate dynamics are important, again, to stress.
06:28MR. The temporary protected status, which is always meant as a temporary protection,
06:33versus the ability to vet people that are entering this country. And I think we have to have that
06:37realistic approach to say, are we able to vet people that are coming into this country? And the
06:41American people, I believe, want to see us be able to say that we can when we're looking at these visas.
06:47And this is part of a broader action, a broader emphasis from this administration,
06:51with this action and other actions regarding visas to make sure we have that proper vetting in place.
06:55MR. You don't think that we are violating a trust,
07:01a sacred trust, with many of these people who have put their lives on the line for the United
07:05States of America? MR. Well, look, I think when it comes to this, again,
07:08the TPS is one dynamic of the many ways that people from Afghanistan have come to this country.
07:13Special immigrant visas, for example, exceptions related to that, are in the proclamation
07:17itself when it comes to the proclamation we saw yesterday. So I think, again, we're looking at
07:21two different dynamics, a temporary protected status that, again, was always meant to be temporary.
07:25There was the opportunity for those that were here on TPS to apply for permanent residence,
07:30while then also having the secondary part of it, which says, are we able to vet people coming into
07:34this country? And I think those are two separate dynamics. Yes.
07:37Can I continue with Andre's question a bit? When it comes to the travel restrictions,
07:42I mean, there are a number of countries that were taken quite a bit by surprise by this.
07:45I know just Chad right now said that they're going to retaliate, not let in Americans. I realize
07:50there probably aren't that many Americans clamoring to go to Chad. But nonetheless,
07:53we look at Iran, for example, it's no secret that many Iranians are not not very keen on the Islamic
07:58Republic, the diaspora, as many critics. Is there a sense more broadly that the United States is losing
08:03the proverbial hearts and minds by blanketly saying that all these people just purely on basis of
08:08nationality have no right to come in rather than seeing them as individuals?
08:12Well, look, this is a national security imperative. What we are seeing is, can we have trust that,
08:16first of all, that we're vetting people properly? Is there in some of these countries, and I'm not
08:19going to go country by country again, refer you to the White House fact sheet for more information,
08:23which they've made publicly available. But do we have the ability to vet people coming in? And this,
08:28again, has been that priority from the beginning of this administration. Can we say with confidence
08:32that people coming to the United States have been properly vetted? Is there essential authority in
08:35these countries that can confirm that? Can we trust what they're telling us? A whole host of different
08:40issues that are important to figure out here. And I think another part of this is we're in constant
08:44communication with countries around the world to try to determine ways that we can have that be the
08:48case where we can have proper vetting procedures, where we can have confidence with who's coming into
08:52this country. But again, it's part of that broader action from this administration on a whole host of
08:57visa issues to say we're going to properly vet people coming into the United States. Then people that are here,
09:02if they take actions that are contrary to what their visa reported when they apply for that visa or broke our
09:07laws, they may see that visa revoked. It's about making sure we're enforcing our laws, have confidence
09:11in who we're letting into this country. And I believe the American people expect that. I think
09:15a lot of Americans watching at home would want to make sure we have that confidence. And again,
09:20I want to stress that this is a country by country basis, but that each person that applies for visa
09:25is also case by case. So we have that country by country basis, we have those concerns, but then there's
09:30also exceptions that are listed in the proclamation and each visa determination is a case by case
09:34determination. Just a couple of things on that. Of course, the previous administration,
09:39there wasn't, you know, this took place somewhat similar in the first Trump administration and the
09:44previous administration didn't have these blanket bans. I mean, was there a sense that there was a
09:47problem that you said that, you know, that there's a problem with screening? Were those problems existing?
09:52Obviously, there's an attack in Boulder, but the the asylum in that case, there's from Egypt, which
09:56wouldn't, which wouldn't be applicable in this case? Well, as the president said in his video
10:01announcing this proclamation, there was a discussion going on within the government to try to determine
10:06the proper course of action here. And looking at these countries, a country by country basis, again,
10:10looking at different concerns, visa overstays, do we have the ability to properly vet it? Are there
10:14other security concerns? That was a country by country basis, those terminations were made,
10:18we saw the proclamation. We also saw the president and his proclamation outline the idea of further
10:24analysis of these within 90 days, for example, than 180 days thereafter. So to free the proclamation for
10:29more diesel is exactly how that would go forward. But but ultimately, what we're talking about here
10:33is a national security imperative. And I believe Americans watching at home would want us to have
10:37confidence that when we're issuing visas, we can say they've been properly vetted. Can we do we have
10:43that ability? And this is part of that broader effort from this administration to make sure that
10:47we're properly vetting people that come into United States. Just one more, the World Cup, of course,
10:52is coming up and then the Olympics after that. The United States said to FIFA that basically,
10:58obviously, people will be welcome here. The Secretary himself said that the US will be
11:02welcoming in soccer fans to come see the World Cup games that are here. Iran is one of the
11:07countries that has qualified. Will there be special consideration there, soccer fans coming in for
11:13FIFA? Well, there's been a proclamation itself. There are exceptions that were listed regarding
11:17coaches and players and the like that I would free to those the proclamation for. Well, I think both
11:22people that are coming and Americans would hope that we can have confidence that when people come to
11:25the United States when they come that they are properly vetted. I think this goes to the exact
11:29same consideration. I think this is part of what it means to host an event of this magnitude,
11:33to make sure that we can have that confidence. And again, we're in constant communication with
11:37countries about ways that we can see the vetting process we need to see, have that collaboration,
11:41make sure that we're having those security concerns addressed. So this is part of what it means
11:46to host an event. And I believe people coming from all around the world, Americans going to these events,
11:50would want to see actions like this. We take security concerns extremely seriously. We want
11:54people to be able to go to the World Cup and do so safely. Sorry, can I just if there was a two
12:01minute warning, I missed it. Oh, no, no worries. It's all right. There was I though I heard it may
12:05have gotten lost in the in the ether. Okay. All right. This is just in your first response to Sean,
12:11you talked about some of these countries lacking a central authority to that you're saying that you
12:16want other countries to vet people for US visas? No, this is just a concern we have. Can we ensure that
12:22people coming from these countries are properly vetted? What does a central authority in a foreign
12:26country have to do with your vetting process, which is done entirely by the US government?
12:30Well, there's whole ideas of documents provided by people applying for a visa. There's this whole idea
12:36of people providing passports or other types of documents in order to be vetted. So you're saying
12:41that these countries don't have that you have no way you have no trust in the in the viability or the
12:47authenticity of? Well, what I can say is that there's security concerns of our ability to
12:51properly vet people coming for a visa. That's what I can say. Okay. And then will anybody who
12:56currently has a visa lose that have it revoked under this proclamation? Well, this proclamation is
13:05about entry. So that's what this proclamation is focused on that we have about visas. Well, it's about
13:10entries in terms of visas. So I mean, if you're well aware, just having a visa doesn't mean you get into
13:16the country. Yeah, no, whatever. You're saying people here, correct? If I understood your question
13:20correctly? No, I'm saying people either here or who happen to be in, I don't know, Australia or
13:25something, but they have a visa and they are from one of these countries. Will their visas be revoked?
13:32Will anyone? Well, I'm not going to get into hypotheticals at this point. In terms of that,
13:35what I can say again is that this proclamation is about a national security imperative. And visa
13:40determinations are a case by case determination. So we see that constantly when it comes to visas.
13:45What we're saying here on a country by country basis is that we have concerns about visa overstays.
13:49We have concerns about countries accepting nationals that have overstayed their visa.
13:51The bottom line is that you do not know if anyone who currently has a visa who is either in the
13:56United States or outside of the United States, but holds a passport from one of these countries
14:00will have their visa revoked. Well, I'm not going to speculate on a specific hypothetical.
14:03I'm not asking you to speculate on anything specific. I'm asking if you don't know the answer,
14:07then it is clear that this wasn't really thought through that well.
14:10No, I think it was thought through. What we're seeing here is concerns about certain securities.
14:14Okay, so what happens? So what happens as a result of this?
14:18Again, it's a case by case basis. You're asking me a hypothetical situation. It's a case by case basis.
14:22What are the instructions that have been sent out to embassies on how to deal?
14:26Well, I'm not going to talk about our internal communications.
14:29This is ultimately, fundamentally, a national security concern.
14:32These determinations are made on a case by case basis.
14:35I've addressed that. I think we're going to, yes.
14:37Yeah, I have one more about China though.
14:39Yeah, green jacket.
14:43Yes.
14:43Thank you so much. Although there are a lot of questions and explanations, I believe there are still
14:50some doubts among citizens from the seven countries that are with restrictions on this travel ban.
14:56So in a general matter, if you could explain what those restrictions means for those citizens.
15:04Sorry, one more time. I kind of, I lost you right there.
15:06On the travel ban for the countries that are in the list with a partial restriction,
15:10the seven countries, including Cuba and Venezuela, for example,
15:14I believe many citizens that are still doubt what means this restriction. So what does it mean?
15:20Yeah, when it comes to those, the White House has put out a fact sheet talking about those
15:24countries, the partial restrictions. I would refer you to that fact sheet for more information. It's
15:27available on their website there.
15:28From the perspective from the State Department, what does this mean from those who are not here,
15:33and for those who are here in the country and might want to leave and then come back?
15:37Well, again, it's a case-by-case basis, and we have concerns that we want to see addressed,
15:40and that's what this is part of addressing.
15:42Yes.
15:43Thank you, Tammy. I have two questions. First question,
15:47Sergei Shoig, head of Russian State Security Council, and Kim Jong Un, North Korean leader,
15:55met in Pyongyang today and agreed that the North Korean troops will remain in Russia,
16:03even after the war between Russia and Ukraine ends. What is the United States view on this,
16:10and what is your position?
16:11Well, we've talked about many times in terms of from this podium, North Korea and Russia.
16:17I'll repeat what we have said there before, is that third countries like North Korea that have
16:21perpetrated the Russia-Ukraine war bear responsibility. We continue to be concerned
16:25about North Korea's direct involvement in the war. North Korea's military deployment to Russia
16:29and any support provided by the Russian Federation to the DPRK in return must end.
16:34One more kick. Regarding the U.S. response to the South Korean presidential elections,
16:41the White House said that the U.S. remains concerned about and opposes China's interference
16:51and influence in democratic countries around the world. And China warned that the United States
17:00should stop its actions to show discord in South Korea between China and South Korea relations.
17:11Can this be seen as a U.S. concerned that the elected South Korean president is more pro-China
17:23than pro-United States? Look, what I can say is that we congratulate President Lee on his election
17:29as the president of the Republic of Korea. And on more details, I'll take that question back to see
17:33if we can get you an answer on that. Yes, sir. Yes, sir.
17:36Thank you. Can you go back again?
17:38Yes.
17:39Thank you. Yes.
17:40Thank you, Tommy. Change topic.
17:42Okay.
17:42I'm going to talk about the West Bank. Today marks the 58th anniversary of the occupation of
17:49the West Bank in East Jerusalem. And is the West Bank on your radar? Because there has been a spike,
17:55a huge spike, as a matter of fact, in settler violence against the Palestinians and Israeli army
18:00violence against Palestinian villages and so on. They're being locked at night. They're not allowed into
18:06their farms or to tend their animals and so on or even go to school and all these things. My question
18:11to you, is there someone or an office within the embassy in Jerusalem or anywhere or in this building
18:18that follows up on what happened in the West Bank and what measures are you taking?
18:22Well, look, what I can say, as we've said here before, is that certain functions have been put
18:25underneath the embassy in Jerusalem under Ambassador Huckabee. That's the most I can say on that here.
18:30Okay. So where do Palestinians go if they have a grievance that they can raise with the Americans?
18:37You know, some Palestinians have U.S. citizens and so on. Do they go to a certain office, say,
18:43you know, there's been an attack on my land, there's been an attack on my kids, whatever.
18:48Do they go to a place where these grievances can be aired and expressed?
18:53Well, I don't necessarily want to give a hypothetical depending on the exact circumstances you may be
18:59raising. But again, there have been functions that have been consolidated underneath the embassy
19:03in Jerusalem under Ambassador Huckabee. And I have to leave it at that.
19:06Yes.
19:07Thanks, Tommy. Two questions for you. Prime Minister Netanyahu of Israel acknowledged a short time ago
19:13that the Israeli security establishment has been providing weaponry to a rival gang, rival to Hamas.
19:19Number one, was that done in coordination with the American government? And number two,
19:24is it in line with American policy in Gaza?
19:27Well, look, I have nothing to preview on that. I'll take back the specifics, see if we can get
19:31more of an answer on that. What I can say is our approach and our policy remains that we stand with
19:35Israel and we stand for peace. And those are our goals that we want to see.
19:38Second question. It's kind of a different way of asking a question that was asked the other day.
19:43Who's currently in charge of the Lebanon portfolio here at State?
19:46Well, I mean, we see a whole host of people that are involved in this issue.
19:49Who oversees it?
19:50I mean, I have no personnel announcements to really announce at this time, but what I can say.
19:54No, there's no personnel announcement.
19:54Yeah.
19:55Who oversees it?
19:56I mean, we have a whole host of different people that are involved in this. I mean,
19:59we see members of Ambassador Wyckoff's team. We see different members of the Bureau. We have a
20:02whole host of experts here at the State Department that are involved in this.
20:05Yes, sir.
20:06Yes, sir.
20:07Yes.
20:07Thank you, Tommy. Two questions. One question on Iraq and the other one on Iraq.
20:13There are reports that have been published by Wall Street Journal talking about the Iraqi
20:17militia group as they involved...
20:19I'm sorry. Could you speak up just a little bit?
20:21Yeah.
20:21There were reports published by Wall Street Journal which says that the Iraqi militia
20:27groups involved in extracting illicit funds for Iran throughout the visa and Mastercard payments.
20:33I'm wondering if you have any comments on that. And how do you view these militia groups inside Iraq,
20:39which they are serving in the interest of Iranian government?
20:43Well, look, we've been clear in terms of when it comes to the militia groups that
20:47militia groups within Iraq should report to the Iraqi government. Beyond the more specifics of
20:51your question, I'll take that back and see if I can get more specifics on that.
20:54Yeah. And the second question, do you have any updates for us about EU negotiations with Iran?
20:58We've heard about from the Iranian officials, including the Iranian Supreme Leader, Iranian Foreign
21:03Minister, which they said that the proposal you sent to them, it's incoherent, disjointed,
21:08and very unrealistic. And they made clear that Iran will never accept any proposal,
21:15any deal which requests them to abandon all nuclear consortium outside Iran.
21:22Well, look, what I can say is that Senior Advisor and Special Envoy Whitcoff sent a detailed
21:28end proposal, and we encourage the Iranian regime to accept it. It is in their best interest
21:32to accept it. We've also been clear again and again and again that the Iranian regime can never
21:37have a nuclear weapon, that there is a good option and a bad option in regards to that.
21:41Beyond that, it is not in our national interest to negotiate these issues publicly. But I can say
21:46that it is in the Iranian regime's best interest to accept the proposal that was given by Special
21:50Envoy Whitcoff and again reiterate what has been made clear from the beginning, that the Iranian regime
21:54can never have a nuclear weapon.
21:56Will the next round of talks with Iran depends on their response to this proposal?
22:00Look, we expect to meet with the Iranians again soon. But beyond that, I have nothing to preview.
22:09Thank you so much. Going back to Ukraine, I may follow up on the exchange with my colleague.
22:14Given the President's early comments comparing the conflict to a schoolyard fight dispute, if you
22:21want, are you concerned that Russia might deem those comments, particularly by the President,
22:27that they should fight for a while, as a green light to fight?
22:31The President has been clear from the beginning that he wants to see this conflict come to an end.
22:36He has been clear from the beginning that his driver, his motivation here, is to end the bloodshed,
22:41to end the carnage, to end the conflict. He has said that again and again and again. He has also
22:46encouraged de-escalation. He has encouraged the parties to come to the table, to have direct talks.
22:51He has been clear that's what he wants to see. So he's made his position on this clear. And I think
22:55the framing of that question, honestly, has been very clear on this, that he wants to see this
23:00carnage come to an end. He wants to see this bloodshed stop.
23:02But he also made it clear that peace talks are right now basically going nowhere.
23:05Why no pressure on Putin right now?
23:07Look, again, he spoke to this just a little while ago, that he wants to see those direct talks happen.
23:13So I'm not going to get ahead of the President in terms of what he may or may not
23:16decide to do. But what the President is able to do, and it's a credit to his leadership,
23:20that we've seen the progress towards peace that we have seen, that we have seen the parties
23:23engage in some sort of effort to try to get to that ceasefire. That's the goal. That's what
23:27the President wants to see. That's his driving motivation. And as he just said a little while
23:31ago, that remains his motivation here.
23:33I have one more question, if I may, a different topic. USAGN VOA reporters, journalists, colleagues,
23:38they've been in town, they were working for the U.S. government, and some of them are from dangerous
23:42countries. You know, now 50 of them, 5-0, are about to lose their J-1 visas. Does the State
23:47Department have any plan to protect them?
23:50Well, look, I'm not going to comment on specific cases like that, as spokesperson Bruce has often
23:54said from the podium here. There are, though, many different ways and many different ways that
23:58people can enter this country in terms of visas and the like, but I'm not going to comment on specific
24:01cases. Yes. Back to Russia and Iran. President Putin has expressed willingness to help the U.S. in
24:09talks with Iran. Question is whether President Trump has asked Mr. Putin specifically to help
24:14with this, or is it an offer by the Russians? And at this point, why would Russia want to help?
24:19Well, like, I have nothing to preview beyond what the President said in his truth just a little
24:22while ago, or yesterday, whenever that truth came out. Yes. Can I follow on the topic of Russia,
24:27and I'm sorry if you addressed it in the two minutes that I also missed at the top.
24:31Was the Secretary able to join for the Putin call or the call today with President Xi?
24:35Well, look, nothing, again, to offer beyond what the President has already described on these calls.
24:38Okay. On the Putin call, the Secretary was meeting at the White House as
24:42National Security Advisor in one of his capacities with a senior Ukrainian delegation. Do you know
24:48if they were provided either a heads up that the call with Putin was going to happen
24:51or a readout after it did? Well, like, I'm not going to get into those private diplomatic
24:55conversations. Nothing to add beyond what was already stated publicly. Okay. Last, without getting
25:00into the details that may have been provided, is the Secretary or the Department aware of what the
25:05Russian response might be in terms of timing or nature? I'm not going to get into that from here.
25:09I mean, the President has already put out his truth to this nature. The President's been clear
25:12he wants to see de-escalation. He's also been clear he wants to see the parties come to the table
25:16to have direct negotiations. But assuming the response happens,
25:20is the U.S. expecting something of a heads up beyond what Mr. Putin told Mr. Trump?
25:25Again, I'm not going to speculate on this. Thank you.
25:27Yes. Thank you, Tlavery.
25:29U.S. Administration and the State Department established a strong communication line with
25:36transitional government in Syria. And President Trump's envoy for Syrian affairs and the Turkish
25:46ambassador for the U.S. in Ankara is visiting Israel right now. And during this visit, Israel just
25:54started to target some places inside Syria, which stopped before with the intervention of Mr. Trump,
26:02convincing the Israelis that after these communications started with the transitional government. How do you see
26:09the targetings of the Israeli Air Force towards targets inside Syria at the time that the ambassador
26:16is visiting Israel? Look, what I can say is that the United States continues to support efforts
26:21that will bring lasting stability and peace between Israel and Syria. A stable and peaceful Syria is in
26:27everyone's security interests. And that's what I have to say in terms of that question there. All right, thank you.