MS BRUCE: Hi, everyone. Welcome aboard. Look at that front row. Look at that second, third, and fourth, and fifth, and tenth row, and hundredth row. Thank you all for being here. I do appreciate it very much.
Of course, we have some announcements. I have a little bit of breaking news I’m going to start with, and then at the end I will have a few remarks about my personal situation and my work. So, if I could ask us to – I don’t know if you’d ask any questions, but I don’t know if you’re going to be able to. But I will have a few things to say about my work and where I’ll be doing it, as you all, I think, already know.
So, thank you again for being here. First of all, I can confirm for you that Secretary Marco Rubio spoke with Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov – we have that, the fact that Sergey Lavrov, again, in a phone call with the Secretary – regarding preparation for the upcoming summit between President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin. Both sides confirmed their commitment to a successful event. I can also tell you that it was President Putin who called to make this arrangement, as well. But of course, I will certainly take your questions as we move forward here.
And now to our announcements. We are deeply saddened to learn of Colombian Senator Uribe’s tragic death. Senator Uribe – his leadership and vision for Colombia’s future were evident throughout his years of public service to the nation and the Colombian people. His vision and courage and commitment to his country encouraged countless individuals at home, throughout the world. And his contributions to Colombia’s democratic future, though obscenely halted, will endure and inspire future generations.
As Secretary Marco Rubio has said, the United States stands in solidarity with Senator Uribe’s family and the Colombian people both in mourning and demanding justice for those responsible. And Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau will travel to Bogotá today to attend the memorial services for the senator on Wednesday, August 13th.
Also, further, the declaration of peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan has reaffirmed that President Trump is indeed the president of peace. Last week, he hosted the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan at the White House, where they signed a historic joint declaration for peace after decades of bitter conflict and too many lives lost – a landmark achievement for international diplomacy and an end to violence that only President Trump could deliver. The two leaders also signed bilateral economic agreements with the United States, unlocking the great potential of the South Caucasus region in trade, transit, energy, infrastructure, and technology; and creating new opportunities for the American people and American businesses.
This achievement follows negotiated peace arrangements between Cambodia and Thailand, Israel and Iran, Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, India and Pakistan, Egypt and Ethiopia, and Serbia and Kosovo, in addition to a remarkable achievement of the Abraham Accords. President Trump continues to prove that nations across the globe can move beyond longstanding conflicts of the past toward a shared future of peace, prosperity, and success.
Now, today, the 2024 Human Rights Report has been released publicly on the State Department website. That is at state.gov, where everyone watching from home and around the world can access the report. The Human Rights Report has been restructured in a way that removes redundancy, increases report readability, and is responsive to the legislative mandates that underpin the report, rather than an expansive list of politically biased demands and assertions.
The calendar year 2024 individual reports are more readable, objective, true to their statutory origins, and more useful than ever before. The report continues to call out the world’s repressive actors while also addressing abuses that had not previously been covered.
The United States has long promoted respect for international universal rights, including in our own founding documents, which asserts that human beings are quote, “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Today, we reaffirm the words of those documents which have served as a beacon of hope and freedom for people around the world.
And again, at the end now of this briefing, I’ll have a few words – and about some news relating to my own work. But of course, now I am happy to answer your questions.
All right. Yes, sir. And when I call you in the front row, if you could announce your name and your outlet, that would be terrific.
QUESTION: Yeah, absolutely. Diyar Kurda with Rudaw Media Network.
MS BRUCE: All right.
QUESTION: It’s a Kurdish media outlet. First of all, Tammy, congratulation on your nomination by the President for the UN role.
MS BRUCE: Thank you.
QUESTION: I’ll start with Iraq and Syria. After you raised the concern of the PMF bill at the Iraqi parliament which you think that it might increase the Iranian influence on Iraq, we saw yesterday the top Iranian security guy, Ali Larijani, he went to Baghdad and he signed a security agreement with Iraq. Do you have any concern with that agreement? And have you pushed Baghdad to not pass the PMF bill? If they pass, then there will be consequences for Iraq?
MS BRUCE: Well, we – as I think we’ve stated before, we oppose any legislation that is inconsistent with the goals of our bilateral security assistance and partnership and runs counter to strengthening Iraq’s existing security institutions. We support genuine Iraqi sovereignty, not legislation that would turn Iraq into an Iranian satellite state. And so, I think we have – we’ve been clear, in this particular instance certainly and others, that the future of nations should be in the hands of the people of those nations. And certainly our commitment here, as we’ve made clear, this particular dynamic runs counter to what our commitment has been regarding security in general.
QUESTION: Then I’ll ask one question on Syria, and then I’ll let my colleagues choose their questions.
MS BRUCE: Sure.
QUESTION: The Syrian interim government has refused to join the meeting with SDF in Paris under auspice of U.S. and France. Does the United States believe that the Syrian Government, the Syrian interim government, is adequately respecting the rights of minority like Kurds and Druze who are seeking a decentralized Syria? And have you put any pressure on them to make these meetings happen, especially in Paris?
MS BRUCE: Well, this is why we have special envoys. Again, we’re in regions that are unstable that have had problems sometimes for generations if not hundreds of years. So that automatically means that continual work has to be done to bring the parties together. I will read a tweet from Ambassador Barrack, who is our special envoy for Syria. He has noted from – well, was it today, “Syria remains steadfastly committed to a united process that honors and protects all its constituencies, fostering a shared future for the Syrian people.” And I think that that is his work. We know we’ve seen, of course, skirmishes re-emerge, differences emerge, and that’s what negotiators and diplomats are meant to do, which is kind of thread that needle and bring parties together. And that is exactly what Ambassador Barrack is doing, and we look forward to his results.
All right. Yes, ma’am.
QUESTION: Tammy, Kilmeny Duchardt with Newsmax. Congratulations on your posting to the United Nations.
MS BRUCE: Thank you.
QUESTION: Two questions for you. The influential Pakistani chief of defense has met with President Trump once and seemed to have developed a strong relationship. Do you think that this will lead to more U.S. assistance to Pakistan via an increase in arms sales, and is this being done at the expense of the President’s relationship with Modi?
MS BRUCE: Obviously, we had an experience with Pakistan and India when there was a conflict, one that could have developed into something quite horrible. I was here at the State Department at the time, and there was immediate concern and immediate movement with the Vice President, the President, and the Secretary of State in addressing the nature of what was happening. Many of you who were in the room in the days afterward, we described the nature of the phone calls, the work that we did to stop the attacks, and to then bring the parties together so we could have something that was enduring. And it’s a very proud moment and a very good example of what Secretary Rubio is committed to, of Vice President Vance in that, of course, case as well, but our – the top leaders in this nation involved in stopping that potential catastrophe.
I would say that our relationship with both nations is as it has been, which is good, and that is the benefit of having a president who knows everyone, talks to everyone, and that is how we can bring differences together in this case. So it’s clear that the diplomats here are committed to both nations. I can tell you also that there has been a U.S.-Pakistan Counterterrorism Dialogue that was established. At this dialogue in Islamabad, the United States and Pakistan reaffirmed their shared commitment to combatting terrorism in all its forms and manifestations during this latest round of the talks in Islamabad. The United States and Pakistan discussed ways to enhance cooperation to counter terrorist threats. And I think that for the region and for the world, the United States working with both those nations is good news and will promote a future that’s beneficial.
QUESTION: A quick follow-up on the subject of relationships. When it comes to the summit with Putin, do you anticipate that Ukraine’s Zelenskyy will be invited?
MS BRUCE: Well, I can tell you a few things the President has said. As I had mentioned when I opened that it was Putin who suggested this meeting. It is something that also my colleague, Karoline Leavitt, discussed a great deal just a little bit ago in her briefing. And I think that that’s important to know that the President is viewing this, as she described, as something that was fact-finding in a way to see exactly what was possible. I do also want to bring to you some of his comments which you may not have heard regarding this commitment to our European partners and to Ukraine and President Zelenskyy.
We know at this point, he said that this is really a feel-out meeting. He said, “I’m going to meet with President Putin. And we’re going to see what he has in mind. And if it’s a fair deal, I’ll reveal it to the European Union leaders, and to the NATO leaders, and also to President Zelenskyy. I think out of respect, I’ll call him first.” – being President Zelenskyy – “And then I’ll call them afterwards. And I may say, lots of luck. Keep fighting. Or I may say, we can make a deal.” “I’ve seen a poll out of Ukraine,” the President said, “88 percent of the people would like to see a deal made.” Lastly he noted, as he does, “The death is incredible. It’s the worst thing that’s happened by far, the worst that’s happened since World War II. So I’m going in to speak to Putin and I’m going to be telling him you’ve got to end this war, you’ve got to end it.”
So, we know what his agenda is, which is what it’s always been. We know what has bothered him, which is this – the killing of civilians. We know that he has been not happy with President Putin with his actions and what’s happened in Ukraine. We know that he is going to inform President Zelenskyy and European leaders about what happens at this meeting, and then we will all find out what happened. And this is what I know the President has been caring about.
Yes, Nadia.
QUESTION: Thank you, Tammy. Congratulations on the new job, and I guess soon we’re going to call you Madam Ambassador as the new title.
MS BRUCE: Well, we’ll wait. Just call me Tammy for now. That’s a good one. (Laughter.) I’ve been called worse things. (Laughter.)
Yes, ma’am.
QUESTION: So I have two questions. First, there is 26 foreign ministers who signed a joint statement calling on Israel to allow unrestricted access to Gaza. The GHF work is not enough by the standard of every organization that works there, and there is no evidence that Hamas actually stealing the food. So, considering that, like, international figures – whether it’s Madonna calling on the pope to visit Gaza before it’s too late – why not allowing other ways, including the UN, to help people who are on the precipice of dying, basically, of starvation?
MS BRUCE: Well, I will remind you – and I know you know because of your work; everyone here knows – that that situation is rapidly evolving. We’ve been working from the beginning for a ceasefire, specifically for the reasons you’ve noted and that we all care about, which is the aid for the people of Gaza. Hamas has been at war with the people of Gaza. We’ve seen that through their refusal to stop this war. We know that it is – they are the first victims. And our intention is, of course, is to stop that carnage. That’s the bottom line.
I can tell you that the aid dynamic – there’s been more aid that has flowed in. We know that there is an understanding that this dynamic is changing, but even within the midst of this war zone more food has arrived. I believe the GHF numbers at this point that I was briefed on this morning is close to 120 million meals. And now, of course, also as we’ve discussed, nothing will ever be enough in a war zone. The war zone has to stop. It has to end. So that is – that is our recognition here. Our posture has not changed. Our actions have not changed. And yet it – the situation is fluid, more so than in recent days. And so I just – I would ask you to recognize that and we’re working within that framework.
QUESTION: And the UN and also many of your allies have been asking for an independent commission to investigate the killing of Palestinian journalists in Gaza who reach now at 247, including five of our colleagues who were killed the day before. So why not supporting that independent commission, considering that Israel has failed every time to investigate the killing of journalists or doctors or teachers in Gaza?
MS BRUCE: Well, I would take issue with your premise here. To say that Israel every time has failed to do that is not true. We know that, again, this is a nation fighting a war with a terrorist group that have always used human shields, have used hospitals, have used schools, have – it’s been just the worst example of the barbarity of human beings, if you can call them that. It’s just – it’s been shocking.
For Donald Trump to make the commitment to end this would be a tremendous gift to the entire world, as you know, and that is – that is our commitment. We also – we call on our ally and partner Israel to investigate these situations. I do it from this podium, and the United States does it. We expect investigations and we – for a sovereign nation to take – to engage in that, and then we’ll follow up when we see what those results are. But they do investigate. They’re – that is one of the things that unlike other dynamics in war, Israel has done that and they’re transparent about it.
So, I would say that as we are working on all of this to stop, we encourage Israel always, and they do so as one of our, again, stalwart allies, and I think that their background proves that in fact – look, they were minding their own business on October 7th. They are constantly dealing with those kinds of attacks. This is a chance for everyone to be able to have a future that is different. That’s what we’re looking for.
QUESTION: Can you share the investigation with us?
MS BRUCE: Yeah. Well, clearly – yeah. And I can’t say for each situation, because each one is different. But we – I know the goal here at the State Department, and why I felt very comfortable working with the people in this building is that information is key, right; is that knowing what’s happening matters. That is your job as journalists. I respect that immensely. It holds – it keeps me centered knowing that we have to explain things or talk about them, makes us view the news as it’s coming up in a slightly different way, makes us ask questions. That will never end. And so, I trust that while I will be in some fashion asking the same questions, I know you will be too.
Andrea Mitchell.
QUESTION: Can I follow up, please? Can I —
QUESTION: Thank you very much.
MS BRUCE: Andrea Mitchell, please. Andrea Mitchell.
QUESTION: Thank you so much, Tammy, and congratulations on your new adventure.
MS BRUCE: Thank you. That’s what it will be, I’m sure.
QUESTION: And I have a couple of things to follow up on that, but —
MS BRUCE: Yes.
QUESTION: — first of all, do we have any update on what Ambassador Huckabee said would be 16 new distribution centers for food in Gaza? And as the U.S. tries to deal with two wars simultaneously as part of the challenge that the President is facing —
MS BRUCE: Right.
QUESTION: — with this summit, President Zelenskyy said today that after the overnight attacks, which were throughout his country, that there is evidence as far as he’s concerned that President Putin is not committed to peace but is committed to a new – to plans for a new offensive against Ukraine. So going into these negotiations with what President Zelenskyy says is an imbalance in what is going on on the battlefield right now, how does the President hope to try to get President Putin to abandon this commitment that seems obvious from the battlefield, the day after day advancing —
MS BRUCE: I – let me answer the first question about —
QUESTION: Let me just maybe more precisely say “and accept a ceasefire?”
MS BRUCE: First of all, we have nothing else to announce regarding the ambassador’s remarks about the increase in sites for GHF. Of course that would be welcome news, but when we see that and we have more, we’ll let you know.
I’ll remind you also that the President is not calling this a negotiation. He is not the one that asked for it. This is what, as I’ve equated to you before, is his remarks were that this is to see what’s happening, to see what’s possible. So negotiation, I think, is certainly not the right word. How he expects to get to where he gets, I won’t have details for you in that regard, but there is a reason why he’s the one there and we aren’t. He is clearly – the list that I read out to you regarding being the president of peace is an astounding one. Perhaps it’s situations around the globe that just didn’t interest other people.
But for President Trump, everyone matters; he sees these dynamics which his presence and the power of the United States is able to change, and he knows that. He has many tools in his tool chest. We know, of course, that he had remarked about secondary sanctions on those who are buying Russian oil. That’s one thing of many that can happen. We know, of course, of NATO’s commitment regarding defensive weapons, and helping assisting Ukraine.
There is many things that are moving that should have an impact that President Trump – again, I don’t know what his approach will be. What I do know is that I’m grateful that he’s the President, that I’m able to be here, read to you a list of ceasefires and peace agreements, and know that he’s meeting with Putin in regard to one of this – one of the most outrageous dynamics that we’ve experienced. I will also remind people that he has met alone with President Zelenskyy. He has met alone with European leaders. This is a man who is doing everything possible, and fairly, to get an end to this carnage.
QUESTION: But just a quick follow-up.
MS BRUCE: Yes, ma’am.
QUESTION: There has been a lot written that by just granting Vladimir Putin – who has been charged with war crimes by people, by other countries around the world – by granting him a summit with the leader of the United States on U.S. soil, it’s already a victory for Putin, because he is the aggressor here and he has refused to agree to a ceasefire.
MS BRUCE: Well, that – this – Andrea, this will be a – the President —
QUESTION: Can you respond to that?
MS BRUCE: The President is not operating on what a – what something might look like. He’s operating on how to stop obscene carnage among innocent civilians in Ukraine. And that is – he took some heat when he started talking to Putin. Because Biden hadn’t talked to him for three years. You don’t make peace through performative actions or theater; you make it by talking to people. And this is what he’s committed to. This is the end goal. The end goal is not performance or perception; it’s getting the job done. And I’m honored that I can be here and at least be a part of reminding people – because he’s done – we know him. It’s – he’s a remarkable achiever, not just in business but in knowing people and knowing how to get what he wants. And he wants peace, and he wants an end to carnage around the world. And this country is in this position now because of him and because of the power of the American people, and we’re going to use it. And so it – I’m praying for a good result, and with President Trump, we very well may get one.
Yes, Daphne.
QUESTION: Thank you, Tammy. And I’ll echo my congratulations on your nomination.
MS BRUCE: Not that anyone knows what I’m going to mention at the end of the briefing now, but yes, go ahead. (Laughter.) Thank you.
QUESTION: On the Human Rights Report, the State Department has cut down criticism of some countries that have extensive records of human rights abuse, including in El Salvador, where the State Department said there was no credible reports of significant human rights abuses, cutting an entire paragraph from last year’s report that mentioned issues such as arbitrary arrests and harsh and life-threatening prison conditions. What is this change based on? Has El Salvador taken any steps to change these issues, or how did the State Department determine that these abuses were no longer taking place?
MS BRUCE: Well, I’m not going to speak on – from country to country. This is something that is available; people can go look. Again, Americans – obviously, the reporters here in this room have had it for a little bit of time and have had a chance to take a look at it, which is important. Again, state.gov, and you can search for “Human Rights Report,” and you’ll get all the countries, et cetera.
The first thing I want to mention is that every administration in a transition year has to deal with this particular product, this particular report, for the last calendar year to be released by a new administration. And there’s always changes – as you might imagine, if someone is the new president, you’ve got a new administration, the American people made a choice, and they clearly are taking over for the previous administration. Each administration, like with President Trump, reflects a value system and an agenda and a vision that convinced the American people to vote for them. And in this case, President Trump always – as ever, I should say – was clear and obvious about the nature of what he wanted to achieve, and the American people agreed with him.
This report, as a result – because it was also late, and many of you noted that. It was late because we weren’t – just like with other administrations, we weren’t going to release something compiled and written by the previous administration. It needed to change, based on the point of view and the vision of the Trump Administration. And so those changes were made, in addition to the fact that one of the things we’re proud of, and what you’ll also see next year, is the notion of something being readable by people, something being a reflection overall of what it is that we’re dealing with with certain nations.
So it does not – the restructuring doesn’t reflect a change of any U.S. policy when it comes to human rights. It is – it certainly promotes, as does our work, respect for human rights around the globe. It does not reflect on any particular country. We’ve stopped ranking countries, by the way. People can make their own decisions about what nations are doing. So that is one thing, also, that is over.
We also – and I want to mention the notion of the – how large the report had become in its condemnation of nations and its – the detail listing of certain things. What I can say is – and I think it’s pretty clear – that you can issue reports, you can make them giant, but it depends on what we do. The Trump Administration has proven, from day one, their commitment to human rights around the globe and to the quality of people’s lives. We will have, perhaps some – in this case, smaller reports. But I would suggest that you watch the actions that are taken by an administration and that commitment to human rights. In this case, you could have giant reports from the Biden administration as the world began to collapse into war, into conflicts, and it’s a reminder.
So, reports are important; transparency about our positions are important. That’s what these reports will serve. And I can tell you again, for the people who work here at the State Department, these reports do matter. And our actions as a nation also back up the nature of our commitment to human rights.
QUESTION: I understand that this is a narrowed report, but can you explain why this was changed and why an entire paragraph on rights abuses was omitted from this report?
MS BRUCE: Well, again, I won’t go into the details of each country. What I do know is that the approach and the attitude of what we expect – and new complaints are added in. Complaints regarding censorship of people in various countries has been added in that had not been dealt with before. So I’m not going to speak on the decisions that our diplomats have made in looking at the nature of the – of the data that they’re receiving. But I can tell you that the nature of the attitude, the reason for the report, hasn’t changed. It is to make sure people know what’s happening around the world, what our posture is toward that. And our actions show our willingness and our commitment to changing the quality of life in people around the world.
Yes, sir.
QUESTION: Thank you, Tammy. I just want to follow up on Nadia’s question. You said that you urge Israel always to investigate, and they do investigate in some incidents. But I want to go back to Sunday’s incidents, when a airstrike struck a tent of journalists – four of them are my colleagues – killing them. And there is no need for investigation here, because the IDF statement was clear that they targeted Anas al-Sharif, my colleague, claiming that he’s a leader of a Hamas cell that fires rockets into Israel without providing any proof. And this will add to 238 journalists who died in Gaza in two years; 11 of them are my colleagues – 11 of them.
And my question is: Are you comfortable with all the claims and excuses that Israel made to target those journalists, whether they are my colleagues or the other 200?
MS BRUCE: Well, what I can tell you – and I think what’s been apparent from this podium – is our concern about the loss of any innocent life. We’ve made that clear. The work of the people in this building is committed to that. And it’s – every day, every briefing certainly, we have examples of that. It is difficult for you – some of you are war reporters, and you go into those zones, and I respect that immensely. So I’m not in a position, nor will I discuss my feelings – that’s not what I’m here for – whether I’m comfortable or uncomfortable. What I will tell you is that we refer you to Israel for information regarding al-Sharif. Israel has released evidence that Sharif was part of Hamas and was supportive of the Hamas attack on October 7th. They’re the ones who have the evidence. They’re the ones who can be reached and will hopefully talk with you and certainly talk with others who reach out to them.
I will remind you – and this, again, as we’ve dealing with a complicated, horrible situation – is that Hamas historically has had members who are embedded in society, including posing as journalists. It is a horrible thing to do – for those of you who are committed to finding information for people – to be in that situation. It’s horrible in any war. I think some of us, if not most of us, have met someone who’s been injured or know of someone who’s been killed who we’ve worked with because of a war situation. They are a terrorist organization. They launch rockets from near hospitals. They have bases under hospitals, in schools. We’ve seen this happen over and over again.
We’ve become, in some ways, inured to the inhumanity of that, and what I can tell you is what this administration is trying to do is trying to stop it, finally, once and for all. That’s what I can speak to, is Secretary Rubio’s focused passion on getting things done in what is a short period of time. And my goodness, it’s been seven months, and they’re doing it. And that’s what – again, regarding the specific instance, very big news. But that’s my request and my comments on that exclusively.
Yes, sir. We’re going to – we’re moving on.
QUESTION: A follow-up?
QUESTION: I have a second question.
MS BRUCE: Go ahead, Tom.
QUESTION: I mean, you’ve said on the killing of these journalists that you refer us to the Government of Israel.
MS BRUCE: Yes.
QUESTION: I mean, this is one of the worst – if not the worst – single attack on journalists in modern history, this particular incident on Sunday. As have all the journalists who’ve been killed, probably many of them by American weapons that are supplied by the U.S. taxpayer —
MS BRUCE: Well let’s not – I’m sorry.
QUESTION: Well —
MS BRUCE: I respect you too – enough to know —
QUESTION: But I’m asking an accountability question.
MS BRUCE: — to not project something that serious and saying “probably.” Let’s leave that out. My goodness.
QUESTION: The vast – okay, the vast majority of weapons that are used have been supplied by the United States, courtesy of the U.S. taxpayer. So there is a very strong accountability issue for the American Government. So, on this instance, has there been any internal process to look at what happened and to see whether it was within the laws of war?
MS BRUCE: Well, obviously, there’s many internal processes. I’m discussing with you a suggestion about who to reach out to, who has the answers for you. And that is due to the fact that – more than aware – of course there’s internal processes, which I will not be discussing with you because of the nature of them and the importance of the diplomatic work that is continuing to this day to stop that carnage.
QUESTION: Is there an internal process on this particular incident?
MS BRUCE: I am not going to discuss the details for you. I’m not going to do that, and I think you know, and I appreciate you need to ask the question, but we’re in the midst of not just any conflict but one that we have stood by and worked on and spoken and dealt with – everyone from the beginning of this administration – to stop – special envoys, the President, the Secretary, food aid, the coverage, my comments here from the podium. Yes, I mean, it’s clearly something that the Trump Administration has spoken with about directly. It is clearly a major consideration for this administration. That has not stopped. And it is not something any of us asked for, let alone the Gazan people.
But yes, we’re working on and dealing with, well, many things that might not be —
QUESTION: And just can I – just on the Human Rights Report, just a quick question. You talked about new issues, new areas of concern for the administration, one of which is censorship. On the UK and on countries in Europe, this has been a big theme. In the report you talk about censorship of ordinary Britons becoming increasingly routine in the last year, and one of the cases relates to the killing of three young girls when there was online speculation, which was false, that it was carried out by an asylum seeker. There was then very serious incitement of violence against asylum seekers in the UK, leading to very, very violent incidents, and people were prosecuted for that. It’s a criminal offense to incite violence and racial hatred in the UK.
Your report seems to be suggesting that it’s a human right for people to have the freedom to carry out this incitement on American social media platforms. Is that what is a new principle in in this report?
MS BRUCE: I would ask everyone to go and read the reports for themselves and come to their own conclusion about the nature of where we stand. We’ve been very vocal about the issue of censorship, people being able to speak their mind. But it also can’t be distilled into a couple of sentences that project a particular political point of view. I say, for context, read the reports yourselves.
All right. And now, yes – yes, ma’am.
QUESTION: Thank you very much, Tammy. Appreciate – I have two questions. The Russia’s Kremlin noted that North Korean troops will continue to be stationed in Russia, even if the war between Russia and Ukraine ends. Do you think this will be an issue in the upcoming negotiation between President Trump and President Putin?
MS BRUCE: Well, first, again we’ll answer this specifically is that this is not a negotiation that is happening on Friday. And I do know that there is a very specific – well, I won’t know exactly what – where the conversation goes. Of course, none of us can know that, except for the two men involved. But we know that, of course, the topic is Ukraine.
All right. We are going to move on here. Yes, Shaun.
QUESTION: Thanks. Best of luck in the future, and thanks for doing these briefings. We appreciate you having them.
MS BRUCE: Of course. My pleasure – most of the time.
QUESTION: Most of the time. Well, maybe not —
MS BRUCE: Yes.
QUESTION: Could I actually continue with what Tom was asking?
MS BRUCE: Sure.
QUESTION: You mentioned the Human Rights Reports and the Human Rights Report, that (inaudible) is politically biased in the past, and censorship is something that you’ve taken up. Why is this a human rights abuse in your view? I mean, Secretary Rubio has himself said that the United States is going to monitor social media of people coming to the United States, that they should keep it open. He’s revoked visas on accounts of statements that people have made. Why in this case – in the case of UK, in the case of Germany, in the case of France – why is this a human rights violation?
MS BRUCE: Well, I can tell you that we consider freedom of expression to be a foundational component of a functioning democracy. Societies are strengthened by free expression of opinion, and government censorship is intolerable in a free society. Freedom of expression does remain under threat in many parts of the world, as outlined in the 2024 Human Rights Report. Governments continue to use censorship, arbitrary or unlawful surveillance, and restrictive laws against disfavored voices, often on political or religious grounds.
And no matter, really, how disagreeable someone’s speech may be, criminalizing it or silencing it by force only serves as a catalyst for further hatred, suppression, and polarization. That’s why.
QUESTION: Sure. Thanks for your response. Could I just pursue that, though? In the case of the UK in particular – and in the case of Germany because of its history – incitement is considered something that’s – could be criminally liable. Does the United States see that as absolutely wrong that the – for example, for the UK to say that this is a public safety issue if people might attack migrants because they falsely think —
MS BRUCE: Well, again, I – as I’ve said at the start, I’m not going to go into the details of what is found or discussed in each of the country reports, and I’m going to leave it at that.
All right. Yes, ma’am, there in the green. Thank you.
QUESTION: So, Israel was recently accused of killing Sayfollah Musallet just over a month ago, one of the dozens of Palestinian American Israeli – Israel has illegally detained or killed. Mohammed Ibrahim is the most recent case, a Palestinian American teenager from Florida, who now has scabies while in Israeli detention. Mohammed’s family is in Palestine right now attempting to free him. What is the Trump Administration doing to release him and other U.S. citizens from Israel’s illegal detention?
MS BRUCE: Oh, thank you for that. I’m not, as we’ve had to say before, going into the details of actions we’re taking diplomatically, what negotiations might exist. We certainly are aware of those reports and there’s really no higher concern for the State Department than the safety and well-being of American citizens.
Said.
QUESTION: How can you let —
MS BRUCE: Yes, Said, please. Said, go ahead, please.
QUESTION: Thank you, Tammy, and best of luck, and maybe we’ll run into you outside – in the stakeout outside the —
MS BRUCE: That I would be so lucky if I saw you again.
QUESTION: — the Security Council on Tuesday. I’m going to be there, yeah. (Laughter.)
MS BRUCE: I’m looking forward to it. I will get you on the Amtrak.
QUESTION: I will definitely be there for sure. (Laughter.)
MS BRUCE: Thank you, Said.
QUESTION: My question to you – my question to you regarding the —
MS BRUCE: Yes, sir.
QUESTION: It’s been since the 1st of August since Envoy Witkoff went in to survey the situation and basically come up with some sort of a conclusion on the aid situation, how you allow more aid in. One, did he submit – has he submitted yet an assessment on what should be done? And second, is – I think it was raised just a little while ago here. Is there a consensus that the centers should be increased, considering that the four centers now came to replace 400 centers? So, if you could share with us any new information on this, we would appreciate it.
MS BRUCE: Well, I can tell you that Special Envoy Witkoff and Ambassador Huckabee, they did – they spent hours inside Gaza to assess the situation, as you’ve noted. Witkoff and Huckabee saw firsthand the incredible and important work of the GHF, what they’re doing to provide assistance to civilians. Again, I think we’re close to 120 million is the new number for GHF.
During the visit, both were briefed on the regrettable dynamic of UN assistance trucks getting looted upon entry into Gaza. Keep in mind they went there – the President wanted a firsthand report of what was happening. We’re all reliant on and your work is always very good, mostly, about what’s happening on the ground, but getting reports in directly from individuals was important to him.
I can also tell you, which is I don’t think reported in the news, civilians in Gaza thanked the United States for providing assistance to the GHF, which they receive at no cost, obviously – I think we presume that, but to confirm, at no cost – compared to the UN assistance, which, when it is not stolen or looted, is then subject, many of you might know or perhaps you do – is subject to extortionary taxes by Hamas authorities.
President Trump wants to alleviate the suffering of the people in Gaza at the hands of Hamas because he’s a humanitarian. We’re seeing this in him. Frankly, his commitment to the country exposes that to us as well. And he has committed to remaining involved and helping to facilitate the aid situation, to build upon GHF’s work, and to help Gazans obtain the critical access to food and aid that they need. And I would say that it is GHF and the President and many others, including at this podium, calling for more people to participate in this process.
QUESTION: Just a quick follow-up, if you’ll allow me. The White House said that they inherited this Gaza war from the Biden administration and so on. And that Hamas just refuses whatever suggestion that’s been submitted to it. Is this an indication that the administration is actually pulling its hand out of being involved in any future negotiations?
MS BRUCE: No, I think it’s an indication of a transparent government that shares things with the American people and the world when it comes to their opinion. President Trump has been the best example of that, and then we’re watching the nature of the choices they make. It’s clear with Ambassador Huckabee and Special Envoy Witkoff, that visit, the nature of the President’s continued remarks, our remaining in play in that region when it comes to stopping the carnage, getting the ceasefire, ending all of this, enough to where people do begin to wonder, “All right, what’s next?”
Now, we’re not going to wonder about that until the carnage ends, but the fact that for the first time in generations people are asking what is next? What can we do? Who will be in charge? How is that going to look? Now, we – again, we’re not going to engage in that or answer it. But the fact that it can be asked tells you how far President Trump has moved this motion here.
Yes, sir.
QUESTION: Thank you, Madam Bruce. First of all, my congratulations on your new job. I believe that your new role at UN will make America great again. Ahmad —
MS BRUCE: It’ll hopefully make the UN great again.
QUESTION: Thank you. Ahmad Shahidov, journalist from Azerbaijan.
MS BRUCE: It’s a great institution. Thank you.
QUESTION: First of all, as an Azerbaijani journalist, I want to sincerely thank the United States and its leader to all the effort they have made to bring peace to the South Caucasus. On August 8 at the White House, the U.S. helped Azerbaijan and Armenia sign a historic peace agreement, and President Ilham Aliyev has even suggested that President Trump deserves the Nobel Peace Prize for his role in this achievement.
Can you please share the State Department’s view on this new peace situation in the South Caucasus? Because Russia and Iran have made statements showing they do not support this peace plan, and even some Iranian officials have said that they will try to stop this Trump corridor, Trump route. What will the United States do if Russia or Iran try to block or sabotage this new peace route?
MS BRUCE: Well, as you I think know, I’m not going to speculate on what we may or may not do with certain actions. The world knows to take President Trump seriously. This arrangement, this deal, is important to him. They were at the White House. This matters to this administration. It matters to the world. I can say that as some people may not even know because it doesn’t get coverage, these two neighbors have been in conflict for decades. I think it’s over 35 years now, with countless lives lost and generations scarred.
While many have tried – we have to say the Europeans, the French, and Putin and even Biden – only President Trump was able to successfully bring this to – these two countries together to agree to this historic peace. So I think what the world knows is that he is committed to longstanding, durable peace between countries regardless of how long the conflicts have lasted or the hostility has lasted. And that commitment, as we’ve also seen – he’s a realist, it’s based in diplomacy, but he’ll do what he needs to do to make the most of being the President of the United States and stopping the wars.
Yes, sir, in the pink.
QUESTION: Thank you, Ms. Bruce. Regarding the Human Rights Report, for example, Israel has been reduced from last year to this year 103 pages to 9, for Russia 101 to 41. And you’ve mentioned this readability, but some media outlets have claimed that this paints an inadequate picture for some of the countries. So how has the Human Rights Report maintained its mission to educate Americans and the rest of the world that they are getting an accurate picture of these nations?
MS BRUCE: Well, accuracy should not be considered a part of volume. You can have something very, very accurate and have it be in – with fewer words, in fewer pages. It’s a matter of the nature of the commentary. This is also about the vision and the point of view – the America First philosophy – for the President of the United States. So we went through this a bit with foreign aid, this idea that more foreign aid means more aid. We haven’t seen that over the years. The more we’ve given foreign aid, the more the need increased. If more foreign aid meant it solved the problem, the need for foreign aid would go down. That was never the case. So this is – again, the nature of the suggestion that too much government, giant reports, money that goes out that we can’t even really track, there’s so much of it, is not a signal of success. It’s a signal of some kind of waste or at least something that could be done better. So it’s – I would say when it comes to judging this it is a very good first experience even though, again, it’s reduced from the original report that the Biden administration had crafted; that, in my work, of course, also sometimes less is more. And I would say that that’s the case here as well.
QUESTION: Thank you.
MS BRUCE: All right. Yes, ma’am.
QUESTION: Thank you, Tammy. Two on Gaza, if I may. They’re both related. Correct me if I’m wrong, but there hasn’t yet been any U.S. funds that have gone out to the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. And —
MS BRUCE: I can correct that right now.
QUESTION: Okay.
MS BRUCE: Over half of the pledged funds have been distributed.
QUESTION: So, 15 million?
MS BRUCE: I can tell you over half.
QUESTION: Of —
MS BRUCE: That’s what I can tell you.
QUESTION: So, it was – 30 million was pledged, so you’re saying —
MS BRUCE: That’s correct.
QUESTION: Okay.
MS BRUCE: And I would also, though – as I think we’ve talked earlier, that the financial commitment – not that we should get stuck in that, but the commitment the United States has made overall is certainly perhaps hundreds of millions of dollars – the nature of special envoys, our diplomatic missions; the concentration of the Secretary, of the President, missions back and forth, the special envoys. It is – there – so there is many – it’s – there’s many moving parts of the commitment of this country. But in that particular instance, certainly tens of millions have been pledged. And we know that at least 50 percent – over half of that initial pledge – has been disbursed.
QUESTION: It’s gone out the door, essentially?
MS BRUCE: That is what I have been briefed on, yes.
QUESTION: And that’s in the wake of Special Envoy Witkoff’s visit to Gaza?
MS BRUCE: I can’t tell you the timeline. It was not sudden in that sense. We’ve mentioned before, for those of you new to the room, is that while there’s a pledge, which is important to note, there are still – there’s still vetting that has to happen, right? Benchmarks have to be met, dynamics that we look at because part of the point of the Trump Administration is how is the money being spent, is it being spent well, what is it accomplishing. Those benchmarks were in play here. So that started at the beginning. And what I can tell you right now at this moment without telling you about a space of time that’s what we have disbursed.
QUESTION: And just one quickly – thank you for that.
MS BRUCE: Yeah.
QUESTION: And one quickly on ready-to-use therapeutic food, which is also known as RUTF. As you know, that’s the food that is specialized and used to treat malnourished children. Your deputy, Tommy, had mentioned that the U.S. is giving some $93 million to helping supply that therapeutic food to African countries and Haiti. He mentioned that last week. Is the U.S. Government doing anything to help the likes of UNICEF and/or other aid organizations get more RUTF food into Gaza? The – like, UNICEF had said that RUTF food, their supplies of it are about to run out in Gaza. We’ve not been able to get an answer from the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation as to whether they even distribute that food for children who need it most in Gaza.
MS BRUCE: Well, I think the evidence of our structure working and having awards be distributed and announced for in this case a particular region – that 93 million – tells you that we are working on those aspects. As I mentioned when we first started the reform regarding our foreign aid that we weren’t getting out of the business of helping – that is at our core as Americans in this country. It’s a matter of the efficiency of it and the value of it, if it’s getting to the people on the ground who need it. We’ve had problems with how much, when you have an award, actually gets to the people who need it. What is the percentage of that at the local area?
So, while I won’t go into the details, of course – I think you know I won’t – about other awards that are discussed or what discussions are being had with NGOs or any other nonprofits that are involved, the fact of the matter is this is a part of what matters to the State Department. And as you know, we’ve had that one description of that one package of aid. And with everything happening in Gaza and our commitment to it, I look forward to seeing how else we’re expanding our assistance there.
Yes, ma’am.
QUESTION: Yeah. Thank you. On Gaza, Israel has been blocking foreign reporters from entering Gaza unless they are under Israeli military escort. Does the U.S. press Israel to allow foreign journalists, including American journalists by the way, to enter Gaza?
MS BRUCE: Well, we’re, of course, leaving that to the Government of Israel. We are not going to tell them what to do or inform them how to handle the decisions they’ve made. Just as, again, a reminder, that it is a war zone and countries are going to make decisions about who they allow in and who they don’t, and that’s up to Israel.
QUESTION: And on the killing of Al Jazeera journalists, came as Israel openly prepares to occupy Gaza City. Has the Trump Administration given the Israeli Government a green light for this widely condemned plan? Do you support or oppose it?
MS BRUCE: Well, I would say you should contact the White House regarding their posture and what the President has said or not said in that regard.
All right. Yes, at the end there.
QUESTION: Just a quick question on the Human Rights Report and then on Gaza. What would you – without getting into the specific reports for specific countries, what do you say to the perception that some of the watered-down reports appear to be for countries that have worked closely with the Trump Administration?
MS BRUCE: Well, I think that, obviously, President Trump is someone who’s been working with a lot of countries. He’s a man who’s very active, as is the Secretary. I would ask that people view this as an indication of our point of view in general, that there’s no country that is singled out for condemnation or singled out for praise. It’s the nature of the consistency of how – of our diplomats, how President Trump and Secretary Rubio view the nature of what’s happening in those countries.
It does look different. It is a different approach. Philosophically, the American people voted in an approach that Donald Trump had described to them, and this is – this happens, again, with every administration during the transition year when it comes to what matters to them and how they’re going to project their own point of view while also still making sure that Americans see the nature of what’s happening around the world, because it’s an important issue. And obviously, again, through our actions, I think we’ve demonstrated – more than perhaps the previous administration with their giant reports – we’ve demonstrated very clearly President Trump’s commitment to a world of peace and a humanitarian future where everyone can enjoy and look forward to the future.
QUESTION: Two more quick questions. The Secretary, when he was a senator —
MS BRUCE: I’ll take one more and then we’ll move on here.
QUESTION: Sure. When he was a senator he said, in 2017, that for the first time in a long time, the report would not be presented by the secretary of state, and he says, “I hope they reconsider.” Why isn’t he now, as Secretary of State, presenting the report to us today?
MS BRUCE: Well, I think what I’ve discussed here in general is that he cares about this issue. We see – we’ve seen him, in his Senate career and even his career in Florida and now as Secretary of State, committed to human rights every day. I think that certainly next year’s report is going to be a much more distinctive and clear framework of what matters to the Trump Administration.
But when it comes to the kind of rollout or the nature of how we’re presenting it, I’m here at the podium discussing it with you; it is released to the American public; it was released to what’s known – for friends watching at home – our bullpen, which are reporters who cover State and work from this building, attached to a variety of different platforms in the country and around the world. So I think that Secretary Rubio’s approach, his work speaks for itself when it comes to his personal commitment to these issues.
QUESTION: Can I just ask one on Gaza quickly?
MS BRUCE: No, we’re going to – we are going to move on. And let’s go to Eric, and then I do have a statement I want to make. This is my last briefing, and I appreciate all of you being so interested in all the issues.
Eric.
QUESTION: Yes. Thank you, Tammy, for the question. Wanted to ask – and not to remove any suspense from your statement at the end of the briefing. But in terms of —
MS BRUCE: You will be. (Laughter.) Keep going.
QUESTION: — the U.S. view on the United Nations, the role of the United Nations, we just last week passed the 180-day mark for the U.S. review of participation in international institutions. I assume that the announcement you have for the end of the briefing will make clear that the U.S. is not, at this moment, withdrawing from the United Nations. What is the argument or the view for – that the U.S. is putting forward at this point in the United Nations, in an America First world, the importance of the United Nations and the U.S. participation in it?
MS BRUCE: Well, I’m not going to speak directly to reports that have not been released regarding the review of international organizations from the State Department. But what I can tell you – and I think it is clear – is the President cares about NATO; he cares about the UN. He wants them to be as good as they can be. He wants NATO, as an example, to be the deterrent that it was meant to be – and you can only be a deterrent when you can respond to threats, as opposed to being an entity that gets involved in wars or helps people in wars.
And that’s, I think, the nature of what the President is focused on – about making America great again, the potential of this country. It’s not a slogan. It’s an action plan. And that’s what he sees – the world, his commitment to the world, what he’s doing on Friday, his commitment of his cabinet, of the Secretary. It’s clear what they care about. The United Nations is a part of that, and I’m honored to be mentioned in that context. But I have to say that the President’s approach has been very clear about his caring for the country and how the world operates and wanting everything to be the best it