White House Press Gaggle Aboard Air Force One


Aboard Air Force One, En Route Little Rock, Arkansas


Published on 08 May 2014


by Office of the Spokesperson

(WireNews+Co)

Washington, D.C.

Air Force One
Air Force One

Following are excerpts of the White House press gaggle related to U.S. foreign policy and international engagement. The full transcript of the press gaggle is available on the White House website.

THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
May 7, 2014

PRESS GAGGLE
BY PRINCIPAL DEPUTY PRESS SECRETARY JOSH EARNEST

Aboard Air Force One
En Route Little Rock, Arkansas

12:06 P.M. EDT

MR. EARNEST: I do have a few things at the top that I just wanted to make you aware of.

That was a long windup, but I have one last thing that I want to point out to you. Shortly after we took off, the National Security Advisor, Susan Rice, who is traveling in Israel, announced that Israeli President Shimon Peres would be visiting the White House the last week of June. So I wanted to make sure that all of you were aware of that announcement. That was an announcement that was put out broadly from Israel, but I believe it was right as we were taking off, so I want to make sure you’d seen it.

Q Do you have a date for that?

MR. EARNEST: I believe it’s June 25th.

Q Has that been announced back home?

MR. EARNEST: Yes.

Q Jay, on -- Josh, on others -- sorry. (Laughter.) Putin today is saying that he’s pulling troops away from the Ukrainian border and also calling on Ukrainians to delay the May 11th referendum on autonomy. And I wondered if there's a White House reaction.

MR. EARNEST: I do have a reaction to that. You’ve heard the United States and other leaders from the international community expressing our concern for some time now that Russian forces had been deployed to a newly constructed forward deployment area along the Ukrainian border. This deployment was not for a typical training exercise, but rather was intended to foment instability in the region, and in Ukraine specifically, I should say.

We would certainly welcome a meaningful and transparent withdrawal of military -- of Russian military forces from the border. That’s something that we have sought for quite some time. I will say that, to date, there’s been no evidence that such a withdrawal has taken place.

In terms of President Putin’s comments about the May 11th referendum, we’ve said repeatedly that this referendum is illegitimate, illegal. Secretary of State Kerry yesterday referred to this referendum as “bogus.” So we don’t believe that this referendum should just be postponed, we believe it should be cancelled.

What we would also like to see is greater support for the ongoing effort by the Ukrainian government to hold free and fair elections on May 25th. We would like to see the Russians contribute to the effort to encourage all Ukrainians to participate in that election. That is the best way for the people of Ukraine to determine the future of their country.

What we would also like to see is the Russian government live up to the commitments that they made in Geneva to use their influence with pro-Russian separatists in eastern and southern Ukraine to encourage them to lay down their arms and vacate the buildings that they have taken over; that there is an opportunity for Russia to contribute positively to the environment in Ukraine. Thus far, they have not done that. But we’ll see.

Q So Putin says he’s withdrawn the troops; you have absolutely no evidence that they’ve moved any troops at all. What evidence do you have?

MR. EARNEST: Well, what I can tell you is that there is no evidence to date that there has been a meaningful and transparent withdrawal of Russian forces from the Ukrainian border. Previously, the Russian government has suggested that these Russian troops are deployed for a training exercise.

But the fact of the matter is this is a forward deployment area that was newly constructed right near the border with Ukraine that served only to promote instability and to agitate the communities in that region along the border -- that the destabilizing impact was a bad one. And that is why we have urged for a few months now for the Russians to withdraw their forces from that region. But at this point, there has been no -- there’s no evidence that that withdrawal has taken place.

Q Are you guys detecting at least a change in tone in how Putin is discussing Ukraine right now when he says these kinds of things?

MR. EARNEST: Well, I’ll say, Jim, that what we’re focused on most right now are actions. And President Putin committed to a few important actions in Geneva. So these actions included withdrawing troops from the border. These actions included strong support for the election that’s planned in Ukraine for May 25th. And this included the Russians using their influence in eastern and southern Ukraine to encourage separatists to lay down their arms and to put an end to the violence in that region.

We have not seen the Russians take those actions yet. Their refusal to take some of those actions has caused them to sustain some costs that have been imposed by the international community. We would like to see the Russians play a constructive role in deescalating the situation in Ukraine. So what we’re focused on are not their words related to that effort, but concrete, tangible, transparent steps that they can take to contribute to a deescalation of tensions in Ukraine. That’s what we’re looking for.

Q Josh, on Nigeria, do you have any more details on the announcement yesterday that the President, Goodluck Jonathan, has agreed to have U.S. support be sent to the country? Are there teams on the ground now or do you have any timing on when teams will be on the ground?

MR. EARNEST: Let me try to provide you some more details. Here’s what I have for you. The first is to remind you that the assistance that we’re -- that President Obama has committed to provide are military assistance, law enforcement assistance and information-sharing assistance. The President has said -- and you heard him say in his interviews with a couple of television networks yesterday -- that he is committed to doing all that we can here in the United States to support the effort of the Nigerian government to find these girls that have been kidnapped and return them home safely, as soon as possible.

So part of that effort will include this assistance that we’re providing. And further into that assistance, the U.S. ambassador to Nigeria today is meeting with the Nigerian national security advisor to talk about coordinating the assistance that will be provided by the U.S. The legal attaché at the embassy is meeting with his counterparts in Nigerian law enforcement. The Department of Justice and the FBI stand ready to provide a range of technical assistance to include help with pursuing an investigation, including some forensics assistance and expertise that they can bring to this effort. They also have some expertise and knowledge in hostage negotiations that we can bring to bear to assist the Nigerian government.

USAID is preparing assistance for the families of those who have had girls kidnapped, and stand ready to provide assistance to those girls when they return home. So there are a whole range of things that we can do and are doing. I also know that AFRICOM, the Africa command of our military structure, is conducting a review to see what kind of supplies they could offer up, again, in support of a Nigerian effort to find the girls who have been kidnapped.

Q You’re talking mostly in future tense than about the capabilities that we can lend. Is Nigeria accepting those offers right now?

MR. EARNEST: Well, there are -- I was speaking in the present tense when I was talking about the ongoing efforts related to coordination between -- with the discussions that the Ambassador is having, discussions that the attaché is conducting as well. There is a team on the ground at the embassy right now that can provide the kind of support and assistance that we’re talking about. So I guess I was using multiple tenses in talking, some of which was current tense in terms of what we’re actively doing to support this effort. But if there is additional assistance that can be provided, we will provide it.

Q Josh, rebels are leaving from the city of Homs in Syria; it was kind of their last big stronghold. What does it say about what the situation is in Syria? Does Assad clearly have the upper hand right now?

MR. EARNEST: Well, I’m not in a position to offer that assessment. I think I would just say that we continue to be concerned about the terrible violence that has racked Syria for a few years now. It has divided that country. It has caused a huge flow of refugees into other countries in that region. That’s had a terribly destabilizing effect on a region that was already pretty volatile.

We continue to be concerned with the ongoing violence there. It is a terrible tragedy that the leader of a country is using the armed forces of that country to exact a terrible toll on the citizens of that country. We have said for quite some time that there is a not a military solution to this problem; that this is going to require all of the parties to come to the table and try to resolve this diplomatically and usher in the kind of political transition that’s required to ensure that the people of Syria have a government that reflects their will, and that will, at a bare minimum, put an end to the terrible violence that we’ve seen there over the last few years.

Q On Benghazi and the special panel -- Democrats are insisting on parity representation on the panel; it doesn’t look like they would get that. Would that be the kind of situation that the White House would consider illegitimizes the panel and therefore would make it one that you would not cooperate with?

MR. EARNEST: Well, let me answer that question this way, Jim. As you know, we have cooperated with a number of inquiries related to Benghazi. Some of those have been rather partisan in nature, but have still enjoyed remarkable cooperation from the administration. I have some new statistics here: Five different congressional reports have been issues on this topic. Seven different congressional investigations have been conducted. Eight different subpoenas have been issued. Thirteen hearings have been held. Twenty-five transcribed interviews have been conducted. Fifty different briefings for staff and members; 25,000 pages of documents have been produced by the administration. There has been remarkable cooperation from the administration, with Congress, who have been looking into this.

I do think that we have some new evidence today about the way that this panel can be judged. Relatively early this morning we saw one of the Republican campaign committees issue a fundraising email encouraging their donors to contribute to the party in support of the Benghazi investigation. I think that tells you just about all you need to know when it comes to assessing the political motivations of those who are leading the effort to form this committee.

Q So you’re saying you’ve cooperated enough, then, over Benghazi.

MR. EARNEST: I think I’m saying that there has been -- I think the adjective that I used was a “remarkable” amount of cooperation. And if you look at the statistics, there’s been a remarkable expenditure of resources from Congress related to this investigation, and a remarkable level of cooperation that you’ve seen in terms of witnesses participating in hearings, and transcribed interviews, and in terms of documents that have been provided to members of Congress on this issue.

So the other thing I’ll say about this is the President’s concern as it relates to this issue has been has been bringing to justice those who perpetrated this terrible act. There is an active, ongoing FBI investigation on that right now.

The President is also concerned with making sure that the recommendations forwarded by the Accountability Review Board -- an impartial panel that was chaired by Ambassador Pickering and Admiral Mike Mullen -- those recommendations are being implemented. And just as importantly, the President is committed to making sure that we’re doing every single thing that we can to beef up diplomatic security at U.S. facilities all across the world. We have not seen cooperation from Republicans in Congress on that effort. And it’s unfortunate that they seem more interested in these kinds of investigations than working with the administration to actually make sure that we’re doing all that we can to keep our diplomats safe.

I mean, the fact of the matter is we have diplomats all around the world right now, as we speak, who are putting themselves in harm’s way to represent our country’s interests in remote corners of the globe. And they deserve to have a government that is devoting all the necessary resources to allow them to do their jobs as safely and effectively and efficiently as possible. The President is determined in pursuit of that effort. And, frankly, we’d like to see a little bit more of Republican cooperation when it comes to that.

Q So how do you determine whether this investigation is legitimate? Is there like a way of determining that?

MR. EARNEST: Well, I’ll say a couple of things about that. I think that the fact that the National Republican Congressional Committee is raising money off the creation of this committee is a pretty good indication of the political motivation that’s at work here. That said, the panel has not yet been created. The members have not yet been appointed. And the investigatory tactics that they are planning to employ have not yet been disclosed. So I’m going to reserve judgment on that. But I’m reserving judgment knowing that we have already produced extensive materials to support a wide range of other investigations that have already been conducted, and noting the political motivation that seems rather obvious at this point.

Q So are you saying that when a party raises money off an event, committee, policy for political purposes, it’s politically motivated?

MR. EARNEST: Well, I think I’m saying that I’ll let you be the judge of that. And I’ll be interested to hear what you conclude.

Q On the climate report that was released yesterday, it’s being criticized by opponents, saying that if the policies that are expected to come out of the data do, it will cost U.S. jobs. Obviously, the White House has been focused on job creation. So how do you respond to critics on that charge?

MR. EARNEST: Well, I’ll respond to it in this way. There are serious challenges that we face as a result of climate change caused by carbon pollution. One thing we can do is try to reduce our contribution to that carbon pollution. There are a couple of ways we can do that.

One that we’ll talk about a little bit more on Friday is making buildings a little bit more efficient. Retrofitting buildings and modernizing them is one way to create jobs. It saves companies money in terms of their energy costs, but it also creates jobs in terms of people who are installing updated lighting, modern heating and cooling systems, and other things that make buildings more efficient. The President has put in place a range of efficiency measures that govern the manufacturing of appliances and automobiles and trucks. All of that saves consumers money in terms of energy costs, but it also creates good manufacturing jobs here in this country.

This is a leading trend that we’re going to see all across the world that other countries and other markets are going to turn to more energy-efficient products to try to deal with carbon pollution. So there is an opportunity that exists for American businesses right now to get ahead of the curve; that if we can develop an expertise in manufacturing energy-efficient appliances and energy-efficient cars, that will open up export markets all around the globe. This is also true when it comes to manufacturing for wind turbines and solar panels, that there’s an opportunity for the United States to assert dominance in this market.

We’re seeing other countries that are mobilizing their resources to try to get a toehold on all this. But there is an opportunity for us, for this country, to do the right thing when it comes to the economy -- I mean, when it comes to the environment and climate change, and also do the right thing when it comes to job creation and economic growth.

And that’s what we’re focused on, and that’s why you hear the President talk so frequently about how important investments in clean energy like wind and solar are to his list of economic priorities. But, again, we’ll hear the President talk about this a little bit more on Friday.

END 12:36 P.M. EDT

 

Contacts

Enter your email:
Enter Subject:
Enter your message:
Please enter this numbers in the fields:
 
  Click image to get a new code.
Enter code:
 

Posted 2014-05-08 10:32:00