ac

JANUARY 17, 2024

Statement from National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan on the
Terrorist Designation of the Houthis

STATEMENTS AND RELEASES
 

Over the past months, Yemen-based Houthi militants have engaged in unprecedented attacks against United States military forces and international maritime vessels operating in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden. These attacks fit the textbook definition of terrorism.  They have endangered U.S. personnel, civilian mariners, and our partners, jeopardized global trade, and threatened freedom of navigation. The United States and the international community have been united in our response and in condemning these attacks in the strongest terms.

Today, in response to these continuing threats and attacks, the United States announced the designation of Ansarallah, also known as the Houthis, as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist.  This designation is an important tool to impede terrorist funding to the Houthis, further restrict their access to financial markets, and hold them accountable for their actions.  If the Houthis cease their attacks in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden, the United States will immediately reevaluate this designation.

The designation will take effect 30 days from now, to allow us to ensure robust humanitarian carve outs are in place so our action targets the Houthis and not the people of Yemen. We are rolling out unprecedented carve outs and licenses to help prevent adverse impacts on the Yemeni people.  The people of Yemen should not pay the price for the actions of the Houthis.   We are sending a clear message: commercial shipments into Yemeni ports on which the Yemeni people rely for food, medicine and fuel should continue and are not covered by our sanctions.  This is in addition to the carveouts we include in all sanctions programs for food, medicine, and humanitarian assistance.

As President Biden has said, the United States will not hesitate to take further actions to protect our people and the free flow of international commerce.

###

-------------------------

------------------------------

On 19 October 2023, Yemen's Houthi movement initiated a series of attacks, targeting Southern Israel and the ships in the Red Sea it claimed were linked to Israel.

During the Israel–Hamas war, the Houthi movement in Yemen, aligned with Hamas, launched attacks targeting Israel. They employed missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), some of which were intercepted by Israel over the Red Sea using the Arrow missile defense system, (another missile was intercepted in space, making it the first instance of space warfare in history according to Israeli officials); others fell short of their targets or were intercepted by the United States Navy, the French Navy and the Israeli Air Force.

They have also fired on merchant vessels of various countries in the Red Sea off the coast of Yemen, in the Bab-el-Mandeb strait, a chokepoint of the global economy, precipitating the US-led Operation Prosperity Guardian.

Houthi military spokesperson Yahya Saree announced that any ship destined for Israel was a "legitimate target" and that they will not stop until the Gaza Strip is supplied with food and medicine. Ships not destined for Israel have primarily been the ships targeted and the targeting has been described as "indiscriminate".

------------------------------------

The Houthi movement is a Shiite militant organization which controls northern Yemen and is supported and funded by Iran.  Houthis have been accused, particularly by the governments of US and UK, of acting as an Iranian proxy. In August 2018, a United Nations document had revealed that the movement is also supported and funded by North Korea via Syria after a meeting between a Houthi member and a North Korean government official. The movement's slogan is "God is the Greatest, Death to America, Death to Israel, Curse the Jews, Victory to Islam."

Following the outbreak of the Israel–Hamas war, Iranian-supported militant groups across the Middle East, including the Houthis, expressed support for the Palestinians and threatened to attack Israel. Houthi leader Abdul-Malik al-Houthi warned the United States against intervening, threatening retaliation with drones and missiles.  In order to end the attacks in the Red Sea, the Houthis demanded a ceasefire in Gaza and an end to Israel's blockade of the Gaza Strip.

------------------------------------------

Houthi weapons come mainly from Iran. They are known to use surface-to-surface missiles, artillery rockets, loitering munitions and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs).  They have several missiles and UAVs capable of reaching Israel from Yemen:

Toufan – a surface-to-surface missile, with a range of 1,800 km (1,100 mi).

Cruise missiles – from the Iranian Soumar family, with strike ranges of about 2,000 km (1,200 mi).

Quds-2 missile – supposedly with a range of 1,350 km (840 mi) but made to strike Israel.

Samad-3 and Samad-4 – UAVs/loitering munitions with ranges of 1,800 km (1,100 mi)+.

Wa'id drones – similar to Iran's Shahed 136, loitering munition with a range of 2,500 km (1,600 mi).

JANUARY 11, 2024

Joint Statement from the Governments of Australia, Bahrain, Canada, Denmark, Germany, Netherlands, New Zealand, Republic of Korea, United Kingdom, and
the United States

STATEMENTS AND RELEASES
 

Recognizing the broad consensus as expressed by 44 countries around the world on December 19, 2023, as well as the statement by the UN Security Council on December 1, 2023, condemning Houthi attacks against merchant and commercial vessels transiting the Red Sea, our governments issued a joint statement on January 3, 2024, which called for the immediate end of illegal attacks and warned that malign actors would be held accountable should they continue to threaten lives, the global economy, and the free flow of commerce in the region’s critical waterways. Despite this strong warning, attacks in the Red Sea have continued, including the launch of numerous missiles and one-way attack aerial vehicles against ships in the Red Sea on January 9, 2024, including U.S. and UK vessels.  On January 10, 2024, the UN Security Council passed UNSCR 2722, which also condemned these attacks and demanded that they cease.

In response to continued illegal, dangerous, and destabilizing Houthi attacks against vessels, including commercial shipping, transiting the Red Sea, the armed forces of the United States and United Kingdom, with support from the Netherlands, Canada, Bahrain, and Australia, conducted joint strikes in accordance with the inherent right of individual and collective self-defense, consistent with the UN Charter, against a number of targets in Houthi-controlled areas of Yemen.  These precision strikes were intended to disrupt and degrade the capabilities the Houthis use to threaten global trade and the lives of international mariners in one of the world’s most critical waterways.

The Houthis’ more than two dozen attacks on commercial vessels since mid-November constitute an international challenge. Today’s action demonstrated a shared commitment to freedom of navigation, international commerce, and defending the lives of mariners from illegal and unjustifiable attacks.

Our aim remains to de-escalate tensions and restore stability in the Red Sea, but let our message be clear: we will not hesitate to defend lives and protect the free flow of commerce in one of the world’s most critical waterways in the face of continued threats.

###

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

JANUARY 11, 2024

Statement from President Joe Biden on Coalition Strikes in Houthi-Controlled Areas in Yemen

STATEMENTS AND RELEASES

Today, at my direction, U.S. military forces—together with the United Kingdom and with support from Australia, Bahrain, Canada, and the Netherlands—successfully conducted strikes against a number of targets in Yemen used by Houthi rebels to endanger freedom of navigation in one of the world’s most vital waterways.

These strikes are in direct response to unprecedented Houthi attacks against international maritime vessels in the Red Sea—including the use of anti-ship ballistic missiles for the first time in history. These attacks have endangered U.S. personnel, civilian mariners, and our partners, jeopardized trade, and threatened freedom of navigation. More than 50 nations have been affected in 27 attacks on international commercial shipping. Crews from more than 20 countries have been threatened or taken hostage in acts of piracy.  More than 2,000 ships have been forced to divert thousands of miles to avoid the Red Sea—which can cause weeks of delays in product shipping times. And on January 9, Houthis launched their largest attack to date—directly targeting American ships.

The response of the international community to these reckless attacks has been united and resolute. Last month, the United States launched Operation Prosperity Guardian—a coalition of more than 20 nations committed to defending international shipping and deterring Houthi attacks in the Red Sea.  We also joined more than 40 nations in condemning Houthi threats. Last week, together with 13 allies and partners, we issued an unequivocal warning that Houthi rebels would bear the consequences if their attacks did not cease. And yesterday, the United Nations Security Council passed a resolution demanding the Houthis end attacks on merchant and commercial vessels.

Today’s defensive action follows this extensive diplomatic campaign and Houthi rebels’ escalating attacks against commercial vessels. These targeted strikes are a clear message that the United States and our partners will not tolerate attacks on our personnel or allow hostile actors to imperil freedom of navigation in one of the world’s most critical commercial routes. I will not hesitate to direct further measures to protect our people and the free flow of international commerce as necessary.

###

-------------------------------------

JANUARY 12, 2024

Letter to the Speaker of the House and President pro tempore of the Senate consistent with the War Powers Resolution (Public Law 93-148)

PRESIDENTIAL ACTIONS
 

Dear Mr. Speaker:   (Dear Madam President:)

Since at least November 2023, Yemen-based Houthi militants have engaged in a series of attacks against United States military forces, including ships and aircraft, and against maritime commercial shipping, operating in the Red Sea, the Bab al-Mandeb Strait, and the Gulf of Aden.  These attacks pose a threat to the safety of United States forces and commercial ships and their crews, regional political and economic stability, and navigational rights and freedoms.  On January 9, 2024, the Houthi militants perpetrated their largest attack in the Red Sea, with multiple unmanned aerial systems, anti-ship cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles targeting United States and United Kingdom Navy vessels.  On January 10, 2024, the United Nations Security Council adopted a resolution demanding the Houthis immediately cease all attacks.  The Houthi militants continue to pose a threat of future attacks against United States forces and military vessels and against other maritime traffic in the region.

On January 11, 2024, at my direction, United States forces as part of a multinational operation alongside the United Kingdom, with support from Australia, Bahrain, Canada, and the Netherlands, conducted discrete strikes against facilities in Yemen that facilitate Houthi militants’ attacks in the Red Sea region.  These facilities include air and coastal surveillance radar sites, unmanned aerial system launch facilities and launch sites, and cruise and ballistic missile facilities and launch sites.  The strikes were taken to deter and degrade Houthi capacity to conduct future attacks and were conducted in a manner designed to limit the risk of escalation and avoid civilian casualties.  I directed the strikes in order to protect and defend our personnel and assets, to degrade and disrupt the ability of the Houthi militants to carry out future attacks against the United States and against vessels operating in the Red Sea region, and to deter the Houthi militants from conducting or supporting further attacks that could further destabilize the region and threaten United States strategic interests.

I directed this military action consistent with my responsibility to protect United States citizens both at home and abroad and in furtherance of United States national security and foreign policy interests, pursuant to my constitutional authority as Commander in Chief and Chief Executive and to conduct United States foreign relations.  The United States took this necessary and proportionate action consistent with international law and in the exercise of the United States’ inherent right of self-defense as reflected in Article 51 of the United Nations Charter.  The United States stands ready to take further action, as necessary and appropriate, to address further threats or attacks.

I am providing this report as part of my efforts to keep the Congress fully informed, consistent with the War Powers Resolution (Public Law 93-148).  I appreciate the support of the Congress in this action.

                                      Sincerely,

                                    JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

JANUARY 12, 2024

Background Press Call by Senior Administration Officials and Senior Military Official on Developments in the Middle East

Via Teleconference

8:15 P.M. EST

MODERATOR:  Hello, everyone.  Thanks so much for joining us tonight for the call.  As a reminder, this call is on background.

Joining us tonight we have [senior administration official], who will be referred to as a senior administration official, as well as [senior military official], who will be referred to as a senior military official.

We’ll have our speakers deliver some remarks at the top, and then we’ll take some of your questions.  This call is not under any embargo but it is on background.

So with that, I’ll turn it over to [senior administration official].

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Great, thanks.  And thanks, everybody, for being here.

Today, in response to ongoing and escalating Iranian-enabled Houthi attacks against commercial shipping transiting the Red Sea, the armed forces of the United States and the United Kingdom, with support from Australia, Bahrain, Canada, and the Netherlands, conducted joint strikes against Houthi-controlled areas in Yemen.

This action is aimed specifically to disrupt and degrade Houthi capabilities to threaten global trade and freedom of navigation in one of the world’s most critical waterways.

The target selected focused specifically on Houthi missile, radar, and UAV capabilities, the capabilities that are essential to the Houthis’ campaign against commercial shipping in international waters.

This collective response follows one of the largest Houthi attacks in the Red Sea to date earlier this week.  On Tuesday, January 9th, nearly 20 drones and multiple missiles were launched in multiple salvos directly against U.S. ships.  This attack was defeated by the U.S. and UK naval forces working jointly as part of Operation Prosperity Guardian, the defensive coalition established last month in response to these attacks.

If not for this defensive mission, we have no doubt that ships would have been struck, perhaps even sunk, including, in one case, a commercial ship full of jet fuel.

These reckless attacks have directly affected the citizens and cargo and commercial interests of more than 50 countries.  Over a dozen shipping companies have now rerouted vessels around the Cape of Good Hope, increasing shipping and insurance costs and impacting the global economy.  That is why we have seen broad consensus from countries around the world condemning these attacks as an unprecedented threat to global commerce.

As you saw this week, the U.N. Security Council issued a resolution condemning “in the strongest terms” — and that’s in quotes, “in the strongest terms” — the now more than two dozen attacks against commercial vessels since November 19th, as well as condemning those who would provide arms and assistance to the Houthis in these attacks, with the primary supplier being Iran.

This resolution also took note of the right of states to act to defend their vessels in accordance with international law.

So today’s collective action comes against a broad diplomatic backdrop and global condemnation of these ongoing attacks, including, as I mentioned, the largest attack to date just three days ago, specifically targeting U.S. vessels.

As I said at the top, the Houthis, with Iranian support, have targeted over 20 merchant vessels since November 19th, launching dozens of drones, cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles across the Red Sea.  At least three ships have been hit.  And we’ve been — we’ve had extremely close calls, such as a ship, as I had mentioned, carrying U.S.-owned jet fuel that the Houthis targeted last month.

I’ll run through briefly some key moments from this period.

On December 1st, the U.N. Security Council condemned Houthi attacks in the Red Sea and underscored the importance of the freedom of navigation.  That statement called on the immediate end to attacks.

On December 18th, Secretary Austin announced the establishment of Operation Prosperity Guardian, the 22-country defensive coalition, organized under the umbrella of the Combined Maritime Forces and the leadership of Coalition Task Force 153, to help defend against Houthi threats in the Red Sea.

On December 19th, 44 countries issued a multilateral statement condemning Houthi interference with navigational rights and freedoms in the Red Sea.

The President, President Biden, has been deeply engaged in these developments throughout this period on a near-daily basis through Jake Sullivan and our national security team.  He directed the initial diplomatic response and then the formation of Operation Prosperity Guardian as a defensive measure.  The President spoke to the issue with leaders around the world, including our partners in Europe and in the region.

On the morning of New Year’s Day, following attacks on a Denmark-owned ship called the Maersk Hangzhou, and the direct engagements by U.S. forces to repel that attack, the President convened his national security team to discuss options and the way forward.

The President directed his team to accelerate the pace of work at the U.N. in New York, to keep building out the multilateral coalition — multinational coalition for potential military action, and to refine the possible targets of such action.

At that meeting, the President directed his team to further develop military options should they be required, but to first issue a final warning statement together with close partners and allies.

Two days later, on January 3rd, the United States and 13 other countries that represent some of the world’s largest shippers issued a multilateral statement, warning that the Houthis will bear the full consequences of any further attacks against commercial vessels in the Red Sea.

That brings us to Tuesday, January 9th, where, again, we saw one of the largest Houthi attacks in the Red Sea, with nearly 20 drones and three missiles shot down by the U.S. and UK naval forces in an attack that was directly targeting a U.S. commercial vessel with U.S. military vessels alongside it.

As soon as that attack was defeated, the President again convened his national security team and was presented with military options for a collective response together with close partners.

At the end of that meeting, the President directed Secretary Austin to carry out this response, which led to the strikes that took place this evening.

Again, this collective action was conducted by the United States and the United Kingdom, with Australia, Canada, the Netherlands, and Bahrain providing additional support.  It has also been endorsed by countries that joined the warning statement of January 3rd, including Denmark, Germany, New Zealand, and the Republic of Korea.  And we expect more supportive statements to come in overnight.

I’ll close with a word on how this action relates to the broader tensions in the Middle East region.

As yesterday’s U.N. Security Council resolution outlined, as well as the broad consensus that I mentioned earlier in this briefing makes clear, this is an issue about global commerce, the freedom of navigation, and threats to commercial vessels and international waterways.

The United States has carried a special and historic obligation to help protect and defend these arteries of global trade and commerce.  And this action falls directly in line with that tradition.  That is clearly reflected in both our National Security Strategy and the National Defense Strategy.  It is a key conviction of the President.  And it is a commitment that we are prepared to uphold, acting together with partners and allies as we have done today.

The Houthis claim that their attacks on military and civilian vessels are somehow tied to the ongoing conflict in Gaza.  That is completely baseless and illegitimate.  The Houthis also claim to be targeting specifically Israeli-owned ships or ships bound for Israel.  That is simply not true.  They are firing indiscriminately on vessels with global ties.  Most of the ships that have come under attack have nothing whatsoever to do with Israel.  And even if they were — even if that were not the case, it is no justification for these illegal attacks in international waterways.

At bottom, these actions present a threat to us and to the entire world.  And our actions are focused on the dangers posed to the lives and crews of these vessels and the stability and security of global commerce throughout international waters.

The targets we selected were focused specifically on Houthi capabilities, as my DOD colleague can brief in fuller detail, and there is no intent to escalate the situation.  The aim is to degrade the ability of the Houthis to continue carrying out these reckless attacks.

Thank you.

MODERATOR:  We’ll now turn it over to our next speaker.

SENIOR MILITARY OFFICIAL:  Thank you.  Thank you, [senior administration official].  I will keep my remarks brief — I imagine there’s a high number of folks here on the phone — so that we can get into questions.

As [senior administration official] mentioned, this was a joint strike conducted by the militaries of the United States and the United Kingdom, with non-operational support from Australia, Canada, the Netherlands, and Bahrain, targeting Houthi-controlled facilities in Yemen.

The strikes were launched from air, surface, and subsurface platforms, and destroyed multiple targets in Houthi-controlled areas of Yemen.  We conducted the strikes with a variety of manned aircraft from the United States Navy, United States Air Force, and the UK.

Precision-guided munitions were used to destroy the targets and also to minimize collateral damage.  Let’s emphasize that these strikes have no association and are complete and separate from Operation Prosperity Guardian, which is a defensive coalition currently comprised of 22 countries operating in the Red Sea, Bab el-Mandeb, and the Gulf of Aden.

The U.S. and UK forces that participated in these strikes remain well prepared to defend themselves as well as to continue to contribute to the defense of maritime traffic and other military vessels as part of the coalition in the Red Sea, Bab el-Mandeb, and Gulf of Aden.

And with that, I think we can move to questions.

MODERATOR:  Great.  Thank you so much.  Our first question will go to Aamer Madhani with the Associated Press.  Aamer, you should be able to unmute yourself.

Q    Hello.  To what extent has this degraded the Houthis’ capability to continue to carry out these strikes?

And then secondly, the President’s statement notes that the strikes were carried out with the support of Australia, Bahrain, Canada, and the Netherlands.  Can you detail what support those other countries provided?

And finally, were other countries asked to actually help carry out the strikes, and did only the UK agree?

Thank you.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  So I’ll address the very last part of the question and I’ll turn the rest to my Pentagon colleague.

We’re not going to get into all of our consultations operationally that we’ve conducted with a range of partners and allies.  The list of countries that were involved and participated in the strikes has been made public.  Beyond that, I’m not going to speak to other countries that were consulted.

But you will see, and I think already have seen, broad support for the actions taken by countries around the world.

SENIOR MILITARY OFFICIAL:  Thank you, [senior administration official].

With regard to the first question and to the extent to which we’ve degraded Houthi capability, due to operational security and, you know, the vulnerability of revealing any intelligence sources, I can’t give you an exact percentage aside to say that the aim of these strikes was very clear from the start and from the President, and it was to remove capability for the Houthis to target maritime vessels, whether they be commercial or military, in the Red Sea, Bab el-Mandeb, and Gulf of Aden.

So I would characterize it as significant.  And, unfortunately, due to operational security, I can’t give you an exact percentage.

With regard to the contributions of our coalition partners, I can tell you clearly that the UK participated materially with fighter aircraft that actually participated in the strikes.

As to our other partners, I would refer you to them and allow them to reveal what their level of support was.

MODERATOR:  Thank you.  Our next question will go to Natasha Bertrand with CNN.  You should be able to unmute yourself.

Q    Hi there.  Thanks for doing this.  So a couple of questions.  First, the Houthis are now claiming that they have already launched retaliatory attacks on U.S. and UK warships in the Red Sea.  Have you seen signs of that?  Is that happening right now?

Secondly, can you just go back to what you said about the attack on Tuesday, where you said that these missile and drone strikes were specifically targeting a U.S. vessel and other U.S., I guess, Navy assets were in the vicinity?  How do you know that this was a U.S. vessel being targeted specifically?  And what vessel was it?  Was it a commercial ship?

Thanks.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Thanks.  Maybe I’ll start, and then I’ll turn it over to my colleague again.

On the Houthi response, I will let the Pentagon speak to what they have seen as they’ve observed the situation since the strikes took place.  But what I would say is that while we fully expect this action to diminish the Houthis’ capability and degrade it, and certainly over time to reduce their capacity and propensity to conduct these attacks, we would not be surprised to see some sort of response.  I’ll let my colleague describe, again, what we’ve seen up till this point.

When it comes to the attack that took place the other day, there were U.S. vessels, both naval vessels and commercial vessels, operating in the same rough area.  The attack came in directly in the direction of those ships.  So I will let, again, my Pentagon colleague speak to exactly what we think was being targeted.  But again, those attacks were defeated and defeated at some distance from those ships — both drones, ballistic missiles, and cruise missiles.

SENIOR MILITARY OFFICIAL:  Thank you, [senior administration official].

To the first question on the Houthi response, as of right now, we have not seen any direct retaliatory action directed towards our U.S. or other coalition members in the Red Sea, Bab el-Mandeb, or Gulf of Aden.  We remain prepared, of course, to defend ourselves.  But we have not seen a response from the Houthis at this time.

With regard to the second question on determining which vessels are being targeted, again, you’re talking about extremely professional crews with their — with exquisite equipment.  They’re able to detect, track, and determine nearly precisely, you know, where these weapons are headed.

In the cases where they are not, then they still pose a threat based on the capability of the particular weapon.  They fall certainly within an obligation to defend themselves and those around them.  So they’re more than able to determine that they’re being targeted.

MODERATOR:  Thank you.  Our next question will go to Jennifer Rubin.  You should be able to unmute yourself.

Q    Thanks very much for doing this.  Two questions.  One, although Iran obviously supplies and provides intelligence to the Houthis, do you have any evidence to suggest that they were alerted before or gave any kind of approval?

And secondly, is there any economic, diplomatic, or other action contemplated directly against Iran, who is the Houthi sponsor?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  So I’ll speak to the first part within the limits of what I can say, you know, given sources, methods, and the fact that we’re speaking obviously publicly on this.

We have been quite clear about the fact that Iran is a primary, if not the primary, enabler or supporter, sponsor of the Houthis and that Iran has been involved operationally in the conduct of these attacks.  They provided information and intelligence to the Houthis.  They provided the Houthis the very capabilities that they have used to conduct these attacks.  So we believe that they have been certainly involved in every phase of this.

And in terms of consequences on Iran, we have a longstanding and deep pressure campaign that the United States has conducted against Iran over a number of years, including related to their activities in Yemen and their sponsorship of other proxies around the region, other proxies who have conducted attacks on U.S. forces.

And I’m not going to telegraph any additional future actions, but suffice it to say we do hold Iran responsible for the role that they have played with the Houthis and with the other groups in the region that have conducted attacks against U.S. forces, and have made them aware of that.

MODERATOR:  All right, next question will go to Jennifer Jacobs with Bloomberg.

Q    Thanks, guys.  Couple things.  There was a report that an embassy in Iraq was hit.  Can you say if you know if that’s true or false?

And then on Israel, can you say what the assessment is on whether Iran will react by calling for renewed attacks on Israel?

And then third thing, on the target list, can you say how many days or how many weeks it took CENTCOM to drop the target list?

Thanks.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  I’ll leave the last question to my Pentagon colleague.

On Iraq, I’ve seen nothing to indicate any activity along the lines that you just described in Iraq.  Obviously, things unfolded in real time, and I’m now in a room talking to you all.  But when I walked out of my office 15 minutes ago, I had no such information.  So I guess I’ll leave it at that.

In terms of attacks against Israel, I guess suffice it to say Iran sponsors a number of groups that conduct attacks on Israel on a daily basis, obviously starting with and including Hamas, with whom Israel is engaged in an armed conflict right now in real time in Gaza, but also including Hezbollah, including Shia militia groups in Iraq and Syria, and obviously including the Houthis.

So we have no reason to believe that there is anything related to this that we’re seeing that is imminent, but nor would we be surprised if the sorts of attacks that Iran has sponsored, to the condemnation of much of the world, continue.

SENIOR MILITARY OFFICIAL:  With regard to targets, clearly, each of our combatant commanders across the globe is responsible for maintaining a wide variety of response options.  Some of those response options would include the kinetic targeting of particular locations and capabilities.  It’s no different for the Houthi threat in Yemen.  So the commander of Central Command has routinely maintained a series of response options.

For these particular targets, due to operational security, I cannot reveal the exact amount of time that it took to develop.  I can only confirm that as a course of action, each of our combatant commanders maintain response options to include kinetic operations on a variety of targets as necessary.

MODERATOR:  All right, last question.  We’ll go to Nick Schifrin.  You should be able to unmute yourself.

Q    Thanks very much, guys, for doing this.  To the senior military official, basic questions.  Can you give us any more sense of how many targets there were across how many cities?  And do you have an early assessment on whether the strike was successful or caused any collateral damage?

And for the senior administration official, a Western official tells me this was on the menu of options for strikes, this was around the higher end.  Wondering if you’d be willing to agree with that.

And given what you said about expecting more attacks, do you have confidence you can degrade Houthi capabilities but less confidence you can deter future attacks?

Thanks.

SENIOR MILITARY OFFICIAL:  Thanks, [senior administration official].  Yeah, I’ll talk to the first question.

As far as the number of targets and the assessment of the success of the strikes, as well as any collateral damage, those specifics will be forthcoming.  So I refer you to Central Command for those as they come out here in the coming hours and days.  But I don’t have those exactly right now.

I can reemphasize to you that these targets were very specifically selected for minimizing the risk of collateral damage.  We were absolutely not targeting civilian population centers.  We were going after very specific capability in very specific locations with precision munitions.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Thanks.  So, in terms of where this falls on the menu of potential options, what I will say is what my Pentagon colleague said: This was a significant action and conducted with every objective and every expectation that will degrade in a significant way the Houthis’ capability to launch exactly the sorts of attacks that they have conducted over the period of recent weeks.

You know, as to whether this will merely degrade or also deter, I guess I can’t do better than what the President has said, which is that he will not hesitate to direct further measures to protect our people and the free flow of international commerce as necessary.

So this may well not be the last word on the topic.  And when we have more to say and more to do, you will hear from us.

MODERATOR:  Thanks, everyone.  That’s all the time we had.  As a reminder, this call was on background, attributable to a senior military official and a senior administration official.  There’s no embargo on the call so you’re free to report.  Thanks so much.

8:36 P.M. EST

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

JANUARY 04, 2024

Background Press Call on Recent Attacks by the Houthis

Via Teleconference

(January 3, 2024)

4:17 P.M. EST

MODERATOR: Thanks, everyone, for joining. Happy New Year. And thanks for joining the call to discuss the recent attacks in the Red Sea by the Houthis.

As a reminder, this call is on background, attributable to a senior administration official, and it is embargoed until the conclusion of the call.

For your awareness, not for your reporting, on the call today we have [senior administration official].

With that, I’ll turn it over to you to kick us off, and then we can take some questions.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Great. Thanks, everybody. Happy New Year.

I’m going to talk a little bit about the statement that was issued today with 13 of our very close allies and partners. But I’ll give a little bit of a background, including the events over the weekend in the Red Sea.

So, first, obviously, I think you’ve all been tracking the dangerous and unlawful reckless attacks by the Iranian-backed Houthis against commercial shipping in the Red Sea. And since November 19th, Houthi rebels from Yemen have attacked commercial vessels 23 times. They’ve been using a combination of anti-ship ballistic missiles — for the first time anti-ship ballistic missiles have been used anywhere, let alone against commercial ships — land attack cruise missiles, unmanned aerial vehicles, and fast boats.

I have to say up top: The Houthis claim illegitimately that this is somehow tied to the situation in Gaza or something. But first of all, that is a completely illegitimate justification in any case, as the U.N. Security Council has also recognized in its statement on December 1.

But regardless, the attacks the Houthis are launching into the Red Sea are as indiscriminate targeting ships, most of which have had absolutely no connection whatsoever to Israel, including the incidents that just happened over the past weekend, which I will get to.

So, in response to this, we have had a significant diplomatic effort. I mentioned the U.N. Security Council, the first statement they had on December 1st. There’s also action in the U.N. Security Council as we speak, in New York. A statement on December 19th, joined by 44 countries all around the world issued by foreign ministries. And on the military side, on December 18th, of course, we formed a defensive naval coalition called Operation Prosperity Guardian with a number of countries from around the world, now with naval assets operating in coordination with us and the U.S. Navy and U.S. naval forces in the Red Sea.

So I can talk a little bit about that. But I think the significance of Operation Prosperity Guardian, which has now only been in place for really about two weeks, I think you saw the events over the weekend demonstrated the effectiveness of what is a coalition to help defend and protect shipping in the Red Sea.

So you may have been tracking this, but I can just go through these events very briefly.

On December 30th, the USS Gravely shot down two anti-ship ballistic missiles in the Red Sea. These anti-ship ballistic missiles were targeting a Singapore-flagged, Denmark-operated and Denmark-owned ship, the Maersk Hangzhou. And I would just note that Singapore and Denmark both joined the statement today, which I’ll get to.

The Singapore-flagged, again, Denmark-owned/operated container ship requested assistance. And our ships, two ships, the USS Gravely and the USS Laboon, responded and, as I mentioned, shot down two anti-ship ballistic missiles. Again, this is totally unprecedented, both the use of anti-ship ballistic missiles, let alone U.S. naval forces shooting them down when they’re traveling Mach 5. And, you know, this is an incredibly serious situation, and the level of professionalism of our naval forces and our sailors is truly extraordinary. So that was on December 30.

Over this past week, I’d say Jake Sullivan was with the President and briefing the President regularly, almost in real-time, as these events were unfolding.

The next day, on December 31st, the same ship, the Maersk Hangzhou, was attacked again by Yemeni forces in fast boats in what appears to be either a hijacking attempt or potentially a suicide attack — fast-boat attack against the ship and attempt to sink the ship. The launching of anti-ship ballistic missiles, of course the day before, a clear attempt, it seems, to sink the ship.

U.S. helicopters from the USS Eisenhower responded, and also the Gravely and other ships were in the area. They were fired upon by these fast boats’ return fire. U.S. force helicopters with crew-served weapons — I’m sorry, let me just go back. The small boats fired upon U.S. helicopters with crew-served weapons and small arms. U.S. naval helicopters returned fire in self-defense, sinking three of the four small boats and killing the crews. The fourth boat fled the area. And there was no damage to U.S. personnel or equipment.

Again, I just want to call out the extraordinary professionalism of our forces operating in the Red Sea.

The President convened his national security team on the morning of New Year’s Day to talk about, again, the entire situation in the Red Sea, to discuss options and discuss a way forward.

I’m not going to get far ahead of the outcomes of that meeting, but one of them was what happened today. So, the President asked for an effort to talk to allies and partners with a statement that would very clearly — very clearly send a warning to the Houthis that they will bear full consequences and responsibility for any further attacks against commercial vessels in the Red Sea.

So the statement that issued today from 13 countries around the world, including from Europe, North America, Asia, and the Middle East, and this grouping of states — Australia, Bahrain, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Germany, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, Singapore, the UK, and of course, United States — includes some of the world’s major shipping countries and, I think, speaks to the global impact of the Houthi actions.

I have to say this is happening in the Middle East, but we would respond to this type of threat anywhere around the world that is central to our national defense strategy and our national security strategy. And it is about international shipping — the protection of international commercial shipping lanes.

Today’s warning, as I mentioned, builds on the express consensus of countries around the globe. These ongoing attacks are a clear violation of international law, a threat to global commerce.

As for the warning — that the Houthis will bear full res- — full — will bear the consequences should their attacks in the Red Sea continue — we will let the statement speak for itself. I think it is very clear.

And I thought the ability for us to pull together these countries with such a clear and definitive statement in a fairly short amount of time, and building on the diplomatic and military work that had been done to date, we just wanted to draw attention to this, given the serious situation that we are confronting and that we were prepared to respond to, again, in order to protect global commerce and the freedom of navigation.

So with that, I will turn it over to questions. Again, I thank you for joining the call.

MODERATOR: Thanks. We’ll now turn it over to questions. If you’ve got a question, you can use the “Raise Your Hand” function here on Zoom, and we’ll get to you.

Our first question will go to Andrea Mitchell with NBC. Andrea, you should be able to unmute yourself.

Q Thank you so much. The statement that you issued today was a very tough one in the coalition, obviously. So is that it? Would there be another warning if there’s another incident? Would you wait for an incident to respond, or would you take preemptive action? You know, are there any rules of engagement that you can share as we approach a really serious threat to international shipping? Thank you so much.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Andrea, thank you. Again, I’m not going to get into rules of engagement or any anticipatory further action. I would just say that I don’t — I would not anticipate another warning. I think this statement speaks very much for itself.

And we have acted defensively. And again, I think it’s a very clear warning. We’re going to let the statement stand for itself, and I’m just not going to get ahead of the process from here.

MODERATOR: Thanks. Our next question will go to Michael Gordon. You should be able to unmute yourself.

Q Thank you. Have the Houthis been warned, through diplomatic channels in recent weeks, to desist from these sorts of attacks? What has been their response, if there have been such private warnings? And is the coalition prepared for a sustained military action, as the Gaza conflict is likely to drag on for some while and the Houthis, wrongly or rightly, have linked their actions to that conflict?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Thanks, Michael. It’s a good question. I think, not surprisingly, I’m not going to talk about any private communications or private warnings one way or the other. And I also can’t speak for the actions or conduct of the Houthis.

What I can say is they have chosen to take action that affects global commerce. And this is, again, central to our national defense doctrine, national security strategy, entirely separate and distinct from anything else going on in the Middle East. This is the sort of threat that we would build coalitions to help confront.

I would just also note that every country makes its own decisions. So in terms of the defensive coalition and Operation Prosperity Guardian, a number of countries that are part of that coalition, their flags are public, some of them are not. And also, I think in any additional measures that might be taken, that we will act in concert with different collections of countries as we see fit.

But in terms of the private communications, I think it’s safe to presume, obviously, we do a lot behind the scenes, but I’m just not going to talk about on the call.

MODERATOR: Thanks. Our next question will go to MJ Lee. MJ, you should be able to unmute yourself.

Q Hey, thank you so much. You were saying earlier that you wouldn’t get into too many details just on rules of engagement, answering Andrea’s question. I just wondered whether there are any actions that at this point the U.S. would say it absolutely would not take on this front because they would be seen as too escalatory.

And then also, just on the U.S.’s recent sinking of the Houthi boats, which was the first time that the U.S. has killed their fighters since the attacks began in the Red Sea, is it fair to say that if the Houthis sort of continue down this path, that this kind of action will continue?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I would say, in terms of escalatory, as I mentioned, these attacks started on November 19th, and we have pursued a very deliberate diplomatic campaign, a very deliberate economic campaign including sanctions, and a very deliberate defensive military campaign.

So I think we are not working to act in any way in an escalatory manner. We are acting — working to act in self-defense in order to protect global commerce and international shipping.

As for the Houthis who were killed in the incident on December 31st, I would just — they were killed in the process of trying to hijack a commercial vessel and firing on U.S. military forces. So it was a very clear act of self-defense. And surely in any situation like that, our forces know what to do. They have the authorities to do exactly what they did in that incident. And if that happened again, we would probably do the exact same thing.

MODERATOR: Thanks. Our next question will go to David Sanger. You should be able to unmute yourself.

Q Thanks. Two quick follow-ups on these. First of all, your concern about attacking the missile emplacements or other arms in Yemen itself we’ve all been told was a concern that the truce between the Saudis and Yemen would be imperiled by that. Was that the only concern? Was that the only consideration that you’ve had along the way?

And just to clarify on the rules of engagement that led to the killing of the 10 fighters on December 31st, I assume that it wasn’t their attack on the ship that led to the three boats being sunk, that instead it was the direct firing on the U.S. forces that changed the nature of it. But if that is wrong, please tell us.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: David, on your second, I want to be a little bit cautious of what I go into. But we do have self-defense authorities for ships under certain flags. So we do have the ability to defend ships, particularly ships that are being attacked.

So, on December 30th, of course we shot down anti-ship ballistic missiles. And on December 31st, we confronted what appears to be a hijacking attempt or, as I mentioned, what might also have been a suicide fast-boat attack to try to sink that ship. So we responded, but we were also fired upon. So it was a very clear case of self-defense as well, just in terms of self-defense against our own forces.

On your question on the Yemeni civil war, look, these are really distinct things. I mean, what’s happening here is a threat to the Bab el-Mandeb, which is a major commercial shipping route; about 60 percent (inaudible) trade will go through that passageway.

And so as we would do, again, anywhere around the world, if you just read our national defense strategy and our core defense doctrine, we would be acting in a similar way, building partnerships with coalitions and — building coalitions with partners and allies, exactly as we’re doing here.

On the Yemen civil war, we have worked for three years to wind down that war. And basically, the civil war inside Yemen has effectively come to a halt. I don’t think there’s really been any fighting since March of last year, when the truce — when the U.N.-brokered truce went into effect. And that is something that we continue to support. We do not want to see the Yemen civil war reignite. And of course, we are in very close consultations with our partners throughout the Gulf, including the Saudis, on this.

But I really do think this is a different — this is just a different issue. This is about a threat to a major commercial shipping route, which is really distinct from the actual Yemeni civil war.

So we will act accordingly — again, consistent with our national defense strategy and national security strategy — when it comes to protecting international shipping, in coordination with coalitions and partners. We also still continue to support the efforts to wind down the Yemeni civil war, which has been such a horrific civil war. And we’ll continue to be in full cooperation with the U.N., Saudis, and others on that process, together with Hans Grundberg, the U.N. envoy.

MODERATOR: Thank you. Our next question will go to Nadia. You should be able to unmute yourself. Nadia, you may be muted. We can’t hear you.

Next up we’ll go to Steve Holland. You should be able to unmute yourself.

Q Hi there. Who is arming the Houthis? And what can be done to stem the flow of weapons to them?

And secondly, do you have any update on who was responsible for the bombing at the funeral of Soleimani?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Steve, Iran is arming the Houthis. And we have worked with (inaudible), through interdictions and other mechanisms and means, to confront and frustrate and try to stop that trade. So, but that has been ongoing.

The Houthis also have a lot of domestic capacity in terms of producing some of their own weaponry, again, with Iranian enabling and support. So I think that is very clear and it’s very much a part of this larger picture, which we’re very cognizant of and taking into full account as we work to, again, protect this very vital, critical shipping lane in the Red Sea.

I think John, from the podium, might have spoken a little bit to what happened in Tehran today. I think it’s — you know, just based on the MO, it does look like a terrorist attack as a type of thing we’ve seen ISIS do in the past. And as far as we’re aware, that’s kind of, I think, our going assumption at the moment.

MODERATOR: Thank you. We’ve got time for just a couple more. Hiba Nasr, you should be able to unmute yourself.

Q Thank you, Eduardo. Hi. I wanted to ask Steve question, so I want to follow up. What’s your message — what’s the kind of messaging are you sending to Iran? Are they responding? What they are justifying the continuation of support of weapons for the Houthis?

And my second question: Now there are reports, not confirmed yet, but there are reports of the killing of an official — Hezbollah official in south Lebanon. This comes the second day after the killing of al-Arouri in Beirut. Are we approaching a regional war here, a second front, on a large scale? Thank you.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Yeah, on the first question, on the Houthis, I think I answered in response to David’s — or to Steve’s question about Iran’s very clear role in enabling the Houthis. Of course, Iran claims that they do not have a role in this, and that’s just simply, obviously, not true. These are anti-ship ballistic missiles. They’re not the types of capabilities that the Houthis are able to have on their own. It’s very clearly coming from Iran. So I think that picture is very clear.

I think Iran tries to hold — kind of pretend it has a bit of a hands-off posture when it comes to its proxies around the region, but that is not the way that we view it. I think the picture here is very clear. And again, we will work consistent with our defense doctrine when it comes to protection of international shipping, particularly in the Red Sea. It’s a very serious — a very serious situation, and it is a global problem, which is why you have seen the response, I think, from so many countries all around the world.

I would say, on Arouri, obviously that was — I don’t want to get too far ahead of that, obviously, but he was on our most-wanted list — I think a $5 million Rewards for Justice, given that he has American blood on his hands, and a very senior member of Hamas. And the very senior members of Hamas must be held accountable, and he was held accountable. I think I’ll leave it at that. But in terms of that incident, it was very clearly, precisely targeted on Hamas.

The situation on the northern border with Israel and in southern Lebanon is something obviously we are in close consultations with the Israelis about. We have worked, from beginning of this crisis, to try to contain the crisis to Gaza. I know Nasrallah gave a speech today. I’ll let Hezbollah speak for itself. But I think from everything that we can tell, there is no clear desire for Hezbollah to go to war with Israel and vice versa. However, the border — the tension on the border is there because Hezbollah is firing across the border regularly at the Israelis, and the Israelis obviously return fire.

We support a diplomatic resolution to the northern border tension, and that’s something that we’re working on regularly with the Israelis and also in contact with the Lebanese. And I just met with the Lebanese foreign minister about an hour ago, and we have a diplomatic effort underway, when it comes to that issue, to try to help resolve some of the tension there. But I don’t want to — I think I’ll leave it at that.

MODERATOR: Thanks. Our next question will go to Missy Ryan. You should be able to unmute yourself.

Q Thanks, Eduardo. Thanks, [senior administration official]. Just to ask a little bit more directly, could you just address the criticism that has come from some people on Capitol Hill, including the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, about, you know, the Biden administration being “weak” in dealing with this Houthi situation? The implication is that the U.S. could be striking directly against the Houthis. Could you address that directly?

And then secondly, what do we conclude from the fact that some of them, as closest allies in the Middle East, are not part of this statement that we had today or the Prosperity Guardian initiative? Thanks.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Yeah, look, if you look at the action we’ve taken, we will act very forcefully when it comes to any threats against our people or our interests. We’re also going to do so in a very smart way that does not potentially draw us in deep to a situation that actually plays into the hands of some of these proxy groups.

But I would just point to the airstrikes we did on Christmas Day — three very strong airstrikes against Hezbollah in Iraq — and our ability to organize a grouping of partners with a statement we did today with a very serious warning to the Houthis, in addition to Prosperity Guardian and an awful lot of steel that is now in the water, working in concert with the U.S. Navy in the Red Sea.

So, you know, these things do take some time to put together. If someone has some shortcut option, again, I’m all ears. But we consult with Congress all the time. And I think we have provided pretty detailed briefings about what we’re doing and how we’re managing this.

On the Middle East, I would — it’s a good question. But, you know, this is — again, this is not really about the Middle East. This is about the protection of one of the major commerce routes of the world in the Red Sea and Bab el-Mandeb.

If this was happening, again, anywhere else in the world, we would be acting the same way. And I think we want to keep it kind of distinct from the question that David asked about the Yemeni civil war and some of the other tensions in the region. That’s really not what this is about.

So we’ve been focused on building a coalition of global partners. And again, the statement today includes Japan, Singapore, Australia, New Zealand, Canada. But also Bahrain, which is the headquarters of the Fifth Fleet, is also a member of the statement today and also a member of Prosperity Guardian.

I would say through our naval task forces in the region, Task Force 153, the kind of regional task forces, our partners in the Middle East, and those navies work hand-in-glove with us every single day.

But this specific threat is a global challenge. It is something that the United States, again, central to our defense doctrine, is what we do. And we are prepared to work with partners and allies around the world, again, to help protect these shipping lanes.

MODERATOR: Thanks. Our last question will go to Aamer Madhani. You should be able to unmute yourself.

Q Sorry, I think I hit that by mistake. My question was asked and answered.

MODERATOR: Okay, let’s then go back to Nadia. You should be able to unmute yourself. The last question.

Q Thank you, Eduardo. Thank you, [senior administration official], for doing this. Actually, one of my questions was asked, but let me ask you another question. There was a report that the Israelis have been asking the administration to keep USS Gerald Ford in the Mediterranean, yet you withdrew it. Was that out of confidence that there is no measure escalation, despite all this assassination that we’ve seen recently? Do you feel confident that what you have now is enough toward any larger scale of any regional war?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Yeah, so I’ll be very direct on your question. No, the deployment of the Ford out of the Mediterranean is actually being replaced and augmented, in many ways, by additional capabilities, including Marine expeditionary unit destroyers. And I think John might have spoken to this from the podium today.

We still have the Eisenhower Carrier Strike Group operating in the region. Again, part of that strike group was responsible for the effective response on December 31st. And the amount of military force we have in the region is quite significant and is ready to respond to any contingency.

And when it comes to containing this overall conflict, we are prepared — again, through a combination of deterrence and being ready and with a very forward military presence in the Middle East region since this crisis began, which continues to this day — we are prepared for all contingencies. Of course, we hope, through diplomacy and other means, to contain the crisis to the extent we can. But we are prepared for all contingencies.

And I would say the Ford had been deployed, I think, for a year or so, and so it was time for it to come home. But we augmented the capability with additional assets in the Mediterranean. And then, of course, in the Arabian Gulf and elsewhere, we have significant naval and air assets that are ready to respond to any contingency throughout the region.

So I think that’s the — I’m sorry, did you ask a second question, or was that one question?

Q My second question was about the Saudis. So do you believe — just to follow up on that, do you believe that if there is any military attack against the Houthis, do they still have the incentive to go ahead and sign this deal end of the year? Well — I mean, sorry, not end of the year. We’re talking about this coming few months. Do you think they still have the motivation to do it regardless? Because some worried, as I think David Sanger’s question was indicating, that the Saudis were worried that if any attack or any escalation or a military confrontation with the Houthis, that might have some kind of reaction inside on the peace process, internal peace process in Yemen?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Yeah, I think I’d answer it the same way. These truly are distinct problems. So this is about a response to international commercial shipping. And I think the overall arc of the Yemeni civil war and the violence there is being dealt with in a way, I think, diplomatically and quite effectively. Again, that process has been going on for some time, really since the U.N.-mediated truce went into effect in March of 2022, with a lot of diplomatic effort from the United States.

And I think we are — again, we talk to the Saudis almost every single day at multiple levels, including other partners in the Gulf. And the one reason that we’ve been very focused on building what is truly a global response to this particular problem, just — I know I’m repeating myself here, but it’s just true — this is a global challenge. It affects shipping all around the world.

I would just make a point: The Houthis pirated a commercial vessel called the Galaxy Leader, which is still holds, along with its crew members. They’re being held hostage by the Houthis. And that crew is from the Philippines, Bulgaria, Ukraine, Mexico, and Romania. Again, just to put kind of a sense of the global dimension of this problem, over 40 countries around the world have been directly impacted by these attacks in the Red Sea.

So it truly is of a very different order and character than the Yemeni civil war, which we have been in deep — a deep diplomatic process with the Saudis and others in the region to bring that war ultimately to a close. So I think that’s the way to kind of think about those two problems.

I would also just — I want to add one thing, because there were a couple of questions on Hezbollah and our commitment to try to work, even as we maintain a very significant deterrent posture in the region, to work for a diplomatic resolution, if one can be found. But my colleague, Amos Hochstein, will be in Israel, I think as early as tomorrow, working on that. And of course, we have Secretary Blinken heading out to the region. I think he leaves tomorrow night, as well, for stops in a number of capitals and including, of course, Israel.

So, again, thank you very much for the call. And, again, thank you for the time.

MODERATOR: Thanks, [senior administration official]. And thanks, everyone, for joining. As a reminder, this call was on

background, attributable to a senior administration official, and the embargo is now lifted.

Thanks again, and have a great rest of your day.

4:48 P.M. EST

DECEMBER 27, 2023

Statement from National Security Advisor Sullivan Welcoming Appointment of Sigrid Kaag as UN Senior Humanitarian and Reconstruction Coordinator for Gaza

STATEMENTS AND RELEASES
 

Yesterday’s announcement appointing Sigrid Kaag as United Nations Senior Humanitarian and Reconstruction Coordinator for Gaza is an important step as we continue to work with the UN as a critical partner in the delivery and distribution of life-saving humanitarian assistance in Gaza. The United States is the largest financial supporter of the humanitarian assistance efforts to support Palestinian civilians who are caught in the middle of the conflict between Israel and Hamas. We welcome Ms. Kaag’s leadership and look forward to working together closely to increase the flow of aid into Gaza, and ensure safety and security for the aid delivery and the humanitarian staff providing the life-saving support to those in need.

###

--------------------------------------------

Israel-Hamas war started on 7 October 2023 – present (2 months, 3 weeks and 3 days)

which Israel, Palestine, and Lebanon (spillover fighting in the Red Sea, Syria and Iraq)

Palestinian militants breach the Gaza–Israel barrier and attack southern Israel on 7 October

Israel retaliates with airstrikes and initiates a blockade of Gaza on 9 October.  Israel orders Palestinians to evacuate northern Gaza, including Gaza City, on 13 October.  Israel launches a ground invasion of Gaza on 27 October.  Israel begins the siege of Gaza City on 2 November.  Israel and Hamas implement a four-day ceasefire agreement (later extended to seven days) from 24–30 November.

-

BREAKING: UNRWA EXPOSED with support for Hamas;
IDF's Relentless Operations
TBN Israel: Dec 30, 2023

TBN Israel's Yair Pinto reports from the frontlines of the Israel-Gaza War while on active duty with the IDF. Pinto reveals new details about UNRWA's involvement with Hamas, from teachers' indoctrination to aiding the terrorist group. Additionally, he discusses the IDF's relentless pursuit of Hamas operatives and their success in neutralizing terror infrastructures. Stay up-to-date with the latest developments here on TBN Israel.

--------------------------------------------

DECEMBER 26, 2023

Readout of President Biden’s Call with
Amir Sheikh Tamim Bin Hamad Al-Thani of Qatar

STATEMENTS AND RELEASES
 

President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. spoke today with Amir Sheikh Tamim Bin Hamad Al-Thani of Qatar. The two leaders discussed the urgent effort to secure the release of all remaining hostages held by Hamas, including American citizens. The leaders also discussed the ongoing efforts to facilitate increased and sustained flows of life-saving access to humanitarian aid into Gaza.

###

----------------------------------------------

DECEMBER 07, 2023

Readout of White House Meeting with Israel’s Chair of
the Civil Commission on October 7 Crimes by
Hamas Against Women and Children

STATEMENTS AND RELEASES
 

Yesterday, Assistant to the President and Director of the Gender Policy Council Jennifer Klein, as well as other senior officials from the Gender Policy Council and the National Security Council, met with Dr. Cochav Elkayam-Levy, Chair of Israel’s Civil Commission on October 7 Crimes by Hamas Against Women and Children. From the earliest days of the conflict, the Biden-Harris Administration has been deeply concerned by the horrific reports of sexual violence used by Hamas against Israeli women and children as part of the October 7 attacks. As President Biden has again underscored, the world cannot look away from the accounts by survivors and witnesses detailing the brutality of that day.

During the meeting, Dr. Elkayam-Levy spoke about her work to gather testimony and document evidence of the events of October 7 and develop a comprehensive accounting of gender-based violence committed by Hamas. The group discussed the imperative to unequivocally denounce sexual violence by Hamas, and the need for broad commitment across the international community to hold perpetrators accountable and support survivors. Director Klein reiterated the President’s commitment to exercising all financial, diplomatic and legal tools to address sexual violence in conflict, and the ongoing efforts by the Administration to secure the release of the women and girls that continue to be held as hostages by Hamas.

###

----------------------------------

DECEMBER 05, 2023

Readout of National Security Advisor to
the Vice President Phil Gordon’s Trip to Israel

STATEMENTS AND RELEASES
 

Following the Vice President’s meetings with Arab leaders in Dubai on December 2, she directed her National Security Advisor, Dr. Phil Gordon, to travel to Israel December 4-5 to update Israeli officials on her meetings and continue our intensive consultations with Israel on the conflict with Hamas. Dr. Gordon will visit Ramallah, the West Bank on December 6 for meetings with senior Palestinian Authority officials. In Israel, Dr. Gordon met with President Isaac Herzog, War Cabinet Member Benny Gantz, National Security Advisor Tzachi Hanegbi, Minister for Strategic Affairs Ron Dermer, observer in the War Cabinet Gadi Eisenkot, and opposition leader Yair Lapid.  

Throughout his meetings, Dr. Gordon reiterated the Biden-Harris Administration’s resolute support for Israel’s right to defend itself in the face of the Hamas terrorist threat. He discussed Israeli military objectives and operations in Gaza and underscored the importance of adherence to international humanitarian law and the imperative of increased efforts to deliver humanitarian assistance and protect civilians. Dr. Gordon emphasized that Hamas is a barbaric terrorist organization and that no nation could accept the threat Hamas poses, and that we support Israel’s legitimate military objectives. Dr. Gordon underscored that the Biden-Harris Administration will continue to pursue every effort to secure the release of all hostages held by Hamas terrorists, including Americans. Dr. Gordon discussed the situation in the West Bank and expressed our concern with steps that could escalate tensions, including extremist settler violence.

On day-after planning, Dr. Gordon outlined the principles that the Vice President and the Biden-Harris Administration have publicly laid out and discussed efforts on reconstruction, security, and governance in Gaza after the phase of intensive fighting ends. Dr. Gordon made clear that the Palestinian people must have a meaningful political horizon and reiterated our commitment to a two-state solution. Dr. Gordon also discussed broader dynamics in the region and U.S. efforts to deter aggression and help prevent regional escalation.       

###

#