Department Press Briefing – July 2, 2025

2:13 p.m. EDT

MS BRUCE: Hi, everybody. Welcome aboard. Nice to see you. Okay, good. Of course, a few announcements here at the top as well. I’m Tammy Bruce, the spokesperson. Thank you all very much for being here.

This week the Trump Administration and the Department of State achieved significant milestones: advancing peace, strengthening U.S. partnerships, and realigning foreign assistance to better serve American interests.

The Quad – a partnership between the United States, India, Japan, and Australia – held their foreign ministers meeting here in Washington, D.C., right here at the State Department. These officials, representing 35 percent of the world’s combined GDP, advanced an ambitious agenda to enhance collective security and economic resilience. Quad countries agreed to expand maritime law enforcement, cooperation across the Indo-Pacific, reinforcing their shared commitment to uphold international law and freedom of navigation.

They also launched the Quad Critical Minerals Initiative, a landmark effort to diversify and secure global supply chains in strategic sectors, ensuring our economies remain resilient against coercion.

I can also announce the completion of a major foreign assistance reform effort. Secretary Rubio remarked that the U.S. Agency for International Development will no longer implement foreign assistance programs going forward. The Department of State will take the lead on administering foreign assistance programs with a mission that directly advances our national interest, accountability, strategy, and efficiency. This restructuring puts U.S. taxpayers and American priorities first, marking a new chapter in global leadership.

Tomorrow, President Trump will headline the kick-off of America 250 at the Iowa State Fairgrounds, launching a year-long celebration of our nation’s 250th anniversary under the banner, “A New Era of American Greatness.” The America 250 national tour will bring community-focused celebrations to all 50 states and U.S. territories.

Finally, this week, Americans around the world will join in celebrating our nation’s independence. July 4th is a time to reflect on the freedoms and liberties we all cherish, and we wish everyone a safe, happy, and meaningful Independence Day.

And with that, we will take your questions – the imperial “we,” the individual “I”. All right, everyone.

Yes, sir. Go ahead. I know, just slip through there. Go ahead, sir.

QUESTION: Yeah, sorry, just a quick question on Iran. Iran announced today that it’s suspending its cooperation with the IAEA. I would like —

MS BRUCE: Surprise.

QUESTION: I would like to have your thoughts about – comment on that.

MS BRUCE: I have a few. Yes. We, of course, do have a little bit to say in that regard. First of all – and I want to get this correct here – it is – we’ll use the word “unacceptable” – that Iran chose to suspend cooperation with the IAEA at a time when it has a window of opportunity to reverse course and choose a path of peace and prosperity. Iran must cooperate fully without further delay.

Prior to the – as will the shutting down of your phone. That has to proceed without delay. (Laughter.)

Prior to the United States successful military operation, Iran was amassing a growing stockpile of highly-enriched uranium for which there was no credible, peaceful purpose, and it was the only state pursuing producing high-enriched uranium – up to 60 percent – that does not have nuclear weapons. Iran must fully comply with its safeguards agreement required under the NPT, including by providing the IAEA with information required to clarify and resolve longstanding questions regarding undeclared nuclear material in Iran, as well as provide unrestricted access to its newly announced enrichment facility.

We look forward to further detailed reporting from the IAEA about this. It is worth repeating, as we’ve made tremendous strides to this through Donald’s Trump’s leadership: Iran cannot and will not have a nuclear weapon. The President has said this repeatedly; the Secretary of State has said this repeatedly. We have repeated it from this podium. And at this juncture here it is, of course, again, unacceptable that Iran is choosing to suspend cooperation with the IAEA. And answering there your question.

Daphne, yes.

QUESTION: Thank you. On this final ceasefire proposal for Gaza that Trump has said Israel has agreed to, does it include provisions for Israel pulling out of Gaza?

MS BRUCE: What I am going to – the President had a message about that from last night, and I’ll read that for you so we just get this on the record here.

From the President, Donald Trump: “My Representatives had a long and productive meeting with the Israelis today on Gaza. Israel has agreed to the necessary conditions to finalize the 60-Day CEASEFIRE, during which time we will work with all parties to end the war. The Qataris and Egyptians, who have worked very hard to help bring Peace, will deliver this final proposal. The Qataris and Egyptians, who have worked very hard to help bring Peace, will deliver this final proposal. I hope, for the good of the Middle East, that Hamas takes this Deal, because it will not get better — IT WILL ONLY GET WORSE. Thank you for your attention to this matter.”

As far as your question about the details, I won’t go into the details of what’s in the proposal.

QUESTION: Hamas has said that Israel must pull out of the enclave. How does the administration plan to reconcile this? Is that addressed in the proposal?

MS BRUCE: I will not give you the details of the proposal, and we’ll find out, but I think the President’s message is clear. This is one that has to be accepted because it will only get worse if they don’t.

Yes, ma’am.

QUESTION: Thanks, Tammy. A White House official told our colleagues that the Trump Administration has paused certain weapons shipments to Ukraine. What was the State Department’s role in making this decision to pause these weapons shipments, and are you concerned about the advantage it gives to the Russians?

MS BRUCE: Well, traditionally, of course, I mean, our wheelhouse here is diplomacy. We don’t make decisions about the shipping of weapons or the managing of weaponry during war. We have the Department of Defense. I would refer you to them when it comes to this kind of a decision.

At the same time, we’ve got a few things I can say to you regarding this. It remains, as you might imagine, worth repeating, a priority of President Trump to bring the Russia-Ukraine war to an end through a durable, negotiated settlement, starting with an immediate ceasefire. And of course, just repeating – referring you to the Department of Defense for more information regarding that situation regarding weapons. Anna Kelly, a White House spokesperson, also has noted this decision was made to put America’s interests first following a DOD review of our nation’s military support and assistance to other countries around the globe. The strength of the United States Armed Forces remains unquestioned; just ask Iran.

Also, from a statement by Eldridge — Elbridge Colby from the 2nd, which was yesterday, at the DOD, that the Department of Defense, quote, “continues to provide the President with robust options to continue military aid to Ukraine.” At the same time, the department is rigorously examining and adapting its approach to achieving this objective while also preserving U.S. forces’ readiness for administration’s defense priorities.

QUESTION: Can I quickly ask on GHF? The State Department announced last week that you had approved $30 million. Has any of that money been disbursed yet? And if so, how much?

MS BRUCE: It has – it has been fully approved. It has not been disbursed. There is a process, as you all might imagine, in the building regarding the disbursal of any funds, and when that happens I will let – you guys will be the first ones to know.

Andrea Mitchell, yes, ma’am.

QUESTION: I just wanted to note before I ask my question the passing of one of your predecessors, Richard Boucher, who served six secretaries of state, was an esteemed diplomat and a very highly respected spokesperson in this department.

MS BRUCE: Yeah. Yes.

QUESTION: And we were there when he was leaving (inaudible).

MS BRUCE: Yes – yes.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MS BRUCE: All right, thank you, Andrea.

QUESTION: I want to ask you about the passing of USAID, the demise of USAID, being absorbed into the State Department in a very different fashion. According to The Lancet, a highly respected British medical journal, USAID was responsible for saving 90 million lives over the course of two decades.

MS BRUCE: American aid was responsible for that, Andrea; I’ll correct you right there. USAID was an element of the United States Government disbursing taxpayer funds around the world for humanitarian aid for a variety of different projects. It was the United States Government – and is, when it comes to the aid – not a department, but the nature of what this government —

QUESTION: It’s under the —

MS BRUCE: — under various administrations, had approved. Let’s keep that in mind.

QUESTION: Can I – can I continue?

MS BRUCE: Yes, please do, but I wanted – that’s a very – it’s something worth correcting.

QUESTION: And former President Bush, who was responsible for PEPFAR, with bipartisan majorities in Congress for years, suggested that the saving of 25 million lives from antiretroviral drugs is – on HIV/AIDS as well as tuberculosis – is something that the USAID staff – because he sent this to the USAID staff in a video, and he said that you should be proud of it, and God bless you all for what you did. So I just wanted to ask you about how it is going to be reconstituted, because the – the Secretary’s writing on Substack describes it as wasteful and not fulfilling U.S. goals in broad categories, and it is very – it’s contrary to what Republicans and Democrats –

MS BRUCE: Well –

QUESTION: — have said in Congress for years.

MS BRUCE: Yes, not – it is – inevitably it grew into something that was beyond what it was meant to do. There’s clearly some very good options and aid that was delivered, and that aid was maintained, but what we found was something that was unacceptable. We’ve been discussing this transparently from the beginning of the Trump Administration and Secretary Rubio’s State Department, that this – and I’ll – I guess I’ll have to repeat that there is the past, things that happened in the past, certainly aid that went out that was beneficial that has been maintained, and other aid that was not in line with America’s priorities or what, certainly, the Trump Administration and the Rubio State Department felt was appropriate. So they’ve taken action in that regard.

It is also what I’ve said repeatedly – is even though the mechanism has changed because it grew – it grew unable to function in a manner where even auditing was something – that was easy to do. There was a refusal to allow an auditing at the beginning of this administration. There was a sense that it was some independent organization, not something associated with the United States Government. All of that is absurd. It led to, yes, a dramatic action to look at and to review and to audit the entity. We’ve done that. A great deal of aid has remained. A great deal has been suspended or cut entirely. It fit well within the nature of needing to reform the government as a whole via the President’s executive order to do so, and to save money.

I’ll repeat again: Samantha Power, the last USAID director under the last administration at the end of 2024, complained in public statements that when she started only 7 percent of aid money that was assigned to various projects and groups made it to its intended destination, and that’s because of bureaucracy and layers of contractors. And she was proud that she got it up to 10 percent. All of us would agree that that’s unacceptable and that even if you do cut the amount of money that’s going out, it doesn’t mean that the services get cut. It doesn’t mean that the benefits get cut. It could in fact mean more services, more benefits, with less bureaucracy, with services getting directly to the people who need it.

QUESTION: Can you just —

MS BRUCE: I’ll – you stated a number of things that I think are unfortunate, and the American people deserve to hear an answer. Because we’ve also described – you asked how will this look now. With this reorganization, it fits within a framework of making sure that people assigned to those regions – and we have those; that’s called bureaus here – people who are assigned to look at the nature of what’s happening in a certain region of the world, they’re the experts in that regard. That foreign assistance for that region will now sit with the bureau assigned to that region as opposed to some massive bureaucracy, not even housed in our building, dealing with countries and regions separately without dealing with the experts here who understand what those regions might need. It will be more efficient. It will be more effective. We are not ending foreign aid. We are making it more nimble. We are operating at the speed of relevancy to making sure that the millions and billions of dollars that we spend on aid get to where it is meant to go.

There is nothing to be proud of when 90 percent, according to Samantha Power, is not even making it to the people to whom it was promised. These are promises. Donald Trump makes promises, and he keeps them – promises made, promises kept. We will be doing that also now with foreign aid. With the new structure of how this will be working, we are – of course, it is in our DNA – we exist in large part because of the nature of what America stands for as a beacon of hope for the future, for the world. We’ve died on that principle, we live on that principle, and we are giving foreign aid on that principle. But it will be functional, it will be auditable, we will know where it’s going, and we will see results.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MS BRUCE: All right. Yes, sir.

QUESTION: Thank you, Tammy. I have two questions on Ukraine. I want to press you a little bit more. I know you referred to the Defense Department.

MS BRUCE: Yes.

QUESTION: But the Ukrainians here appear to have learned about it from the media this morning. Is there any reason behind the failure when it comes to communicating this to the Ukrainian allies?

MS BRUCE: I would – I would argue that that is not correct. Obviously, perhaps some Ukrainians heard about it in the news. Our communication lines with Ukraine have always been robust. They – while it was not – well, I will not discuss to – who delivered the news, but that is a conversation clearly that is something that occurred because of the importance of this project to the United States. We have been Ukraine’s biggest supporter – emotionally, militarily, financially – and there’s a reason for that. At the same time, as we’ve also said and the President has said and the Secretary, that we in fact have got to make sure – because we have a global front of what matters to America, and that’s why we’ve been asking our European partners and allies and friends to also chime in because of the nature of the fronts that we are always dealing with around the world, and that is sometimes a decision.

At the same time, the DOD statement made clear that they have robust options as we continue to work to assist Ukraine when it comes to the options that they might have. That’s from the DOD. And I don’t doubt that. So we should, I think, be cautious about judging the nature of what has just occurred considering our commitment that remains for the country of Ukraine.

QUESTION: Point taken, Tammy. But the President from the get-go made it clear that his America First foreign policy objective when it comes to Russia-Ukraine war is to end the killing. And these are defensive weapons that Ukraine used that for —

MS BRUCE: Oh, yes.

QUESTION: — that very reason: to end the killing of Ukrainians by the Russians. How do you square that circle?

MS BRUCE: Well, it is – it’s not – one doesn’t need to complete the circle or square it. Our commitment hasn’t changed. The nature of how we’re able to make that commitment is going to be based on what is best for America First. It is the President’s point of view, his guiding hand about the nature of what needs to occur. And it is certainly two nations at war, and America has made a huge difference in that regard and the President still has worked to have people at the table, that this can only be solved diplomatically – that, of course, is the State Department’s wheelhouse – and that that’s what he wants. He has made several remarks returning to this now with the Israel-Iran situation at least managed. And this is not something that the President is not addressing. It is clearly on our plate all the time, and certainly he has specifically referred to the nature of the continued slaughter. It is unacceptable. It is a horrible dynamic – the targeting of civilian areas. The world knows this. This has been something that’s been discussed. The President has expressed his fury over this issue, and that has not changed. So again, be cautious as things move along from day to day.

Yes, sir.

QUESTION: Thank you, Tammy. Just going back to Gaza, I know you said you didn’t want to go into details, but can you perhaps —

MS BRUCE: You can ask; I might not answer. But yes.

QUESTION: Well, I’m going to ask if you can perhaps speak more broadly then about what gives President Trump so much optimism that he can get the deal through within the next few days, especially given that the parties are still so far apart, with Hamas saying it wants Israeli forces out while Israel say it wants an end to Hamas.

MS BRUCE: Yes.

QUESTION: So there’s just a lot of daylight still between the – between those two parties

MS BRUCE: Well, is there?

QUESTION: Well, can you speak more broadly about that?

MS BRUCE: Well, but you see, we should not – you’re presuming a great deal, which people do have to presume because the details of something like this of course do remain with the negotiating partners, the leaders of nations. What you can tend to see in the media often is just simply not true or wishful thinking. But whatever it is, what I think we all have noticed – and this is not giving away anything – is that the Middle East changed a couple of weeks ago very dramatically. It changed forever. And the work of the President of the United States – thank God for him – is going to make sure that this is not a lost opportunity. We can say this simply by having watched him most of his adult life in some capacity, but certainly with what he’s given up and sacrificed to be the leader of this country.

So the Middle East changed dramatically. This is the – an opportunity in the midst of this new world to make a different kind of decision. He is optimistic. The President is very honest. Sometimes he’s pessimistic, and he’ll let people know. It’s – again, he’s a transparent man, which sometimes can be unusual. We’re not used to always hearing it, but it’s extremely helpful. So while I don’t know the detail of what makes him optimistic, I know to trust him. I know to not second guess him. I know to – that we understand that he’s in the midst of something that can change every day. That’s also not lost on him.

But the changes that he’s been able to bring about has been brought about by the power of his personality and leadership, along with the support of an American Government that is in line and embraces what he wants to accomplish. I think that is why he’s optimistic. It is – seems to be a different tone. I hope it works, of course. Again, these are all fluid situations. But he knows things that we don’t, and I look forward to finding out if it’s this week, if it’s next week, but I’m grateful that he’s the one making the decisions.

Nadia.

QUESTION: Thank you, Tammy. Just to go back to the Middle East, is the 60-day ceasefire proposal – was it the same one that Mr. Witkoff proposed to both parties, which includes releasing 10 hostages, 15?

MS BRUCE: I can’t speak to that, one way or the other. I won’t give you details regarding that.

QUESTION: No details at all?

MS BRUCE: No, no. I’m sorry, I can’t.

QUESTION: Okay. Just now you just condemned the attacks on civilians in Ukraine.

MS BRUCE: Of course.

QUESTION: Yesterday there was an attack on a beach café in Gaza, where 24 civilians were killed, including our colleagues – a female journalist was killed as well. Does United States condemn the killing of civilians and targeting of Gaza?

MS BRUCE: Well, we have always – one of the reasons why we do what we do is because no one wants to have civilians killed, either in a terrorist act, in war. One of the things the President has repeated, as has Secretary Rubio, is that the carnage has to stop. We have decried the killing of civilians throughout every conflict that exists. At the same time – it’s why war is hell; it’s why we want something more than – a ceasefire is important, but it can’t be back and forth. There has to be a durable end to all of these conflicts.

So we mourn like everyone, of course, the killing of civilians, with whomever it is that’s engaging in these conflicts. But that is why we’re so committed to Gaza, to Israel’s right to defend itself. We were as horrified by October 7th and the slaughter of those civilians. This is why it has to end. There is aggressive actions where if you’re – in war where if you’re defending yourself, and these are civilian areas, it’s horrible enough; and it’s another to deliberately target civilians for the sake of it. And those are the monsters that we are trying to stop and that the world has tried to stop for generations now.

So this is why our work continues in Gaza, why the ceasefire is important, and why the end of war and the status quo that so many people have grown rich from has got to end.

Said.

QUESTION: Thank you, Tammy.

MS BRUCE: Yes, sir.

QUESTION: WHO, the World Health Organization, said that 112 Palestinian children – many of them are newborn and so on – are sent to whatever remains of the hospitals because of malnutrition, it said, because the aid is just not getting through. And my question to you is that: Is that basically a statement or evidence that the aid that has been going in is not enough and is not sufficient, that maybe it ought – the aid ought to be the responsibility of those —

MS BRUCE: Yes.

QUESTION: — who have had a great deal of experience in doing this, and consistent with whatever – with all the international organizations that have stated to that effect?

MS BRUCE: Well, two parts I’ll answer that. First of all, there is one entity that has gotten food and aid into the Gaza Strip, and that’s the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. We know this. This has been a fact of the matter. And that’s – I think we’re now up to 56 million meals distributed. So we – it’s still within a war zone. It’s – we had a ceasefire that Hamas broke.

I would say on the other issue, when it comes to the horribleness of what happens in a war zone, in this case in Gaza it is occurring because Hamas refuses – it broke a ceasefire on October 7th. It broke another ceasefire that was attained for the Gaza Strip. It is now refusing, at least up to this point, prior to the change in the Middle East, to continue to agree to another ceasefire. They maintain their firearms. They are maintaining hostages, people they’ve kidnapped.

And so, yes, it is horrible, and it’s something that we are working to stop. But I would say regarding aid – just make an admission here. It will never be enough. There will never be enough aid going into a war zone. There – no matter how many depots the GHF, the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, sets up, it will not be enough, because the only way you have a normal life with enough aid and enough food and being able to live your normal life is in an area that is not at war, being held hostage by a terrorist group.

So to attempt to normalize the environment that is under this horrible cloud of terroristic monsterism, of the slaughter of innocent people – the using of people as human shields, the using of hospitals as a cover for your operations, the using of schools as a cover for your operations – it is obscene; it is inhuman. So it will – what we do in the midst of that environment will never be enough. And it is – it is a key, though, to unlocking a door to get to a point where you can have a ceasefire, assisting those who are held hostage by the terrorists, and being able to get to a point where you actually have a ceasefire, removing those who do not abide by the ceasefire, and then begin to build a genuinely different future for the people in that area. What a concept.

So we do our best. We know it will never be enough because the situation is obscene and unusual and unnatural. But we will do it until we also then move to change that situation for the better.

QUESTION: On Quad?

MS BRUCE: Back to you, and then to you, sir.

QUESTION: Two topics, Tammy. Thanks so much. Number one, with all the developments with Iran in Syria and Gaza, it’s been quiet, thank goodness, on the Israel-Lebanon front, but still some work to do there. What are the challenges that remaining – remain at this point in disarming Hizballah, enforcing Resolution 1701?

MS BRUCE: Well, you would – I would direct you to the Israeli Government in that regard. I think the thing that has changed the Middle East beyond, of course, the damage to the – well, the destruction, the obliteration of Iran’s nuclear facilities, is the personality in power that is exhibited by Donald Trump and what he is willing to do, what the American Government and military is capable of, and as a reflection of our genuine commitment for change – after exhausting all diplomatic options – is that he will do what else is necessary to achieve peace. That is something as a message to the entire Middle East, including to our allies and to those who have stepped up as an example regarding the Gaza Strip, the regional partners there willing to step in and help make a difference for the future there.

So the biggest issue – and again, for specifics you’d have to speak to the Israeli Government – but for us, we made that decision last year in November without knowing how it would need to be applied. But it’s also because of the American people that we’re able to send this message to the world that we are still here, we are still the team you can count on. America matters, we know it, and we’re going to defend our country, which is what needs to exist in order to have this hope for the future.

QUESTION: Tammy?

MS BRUCE: All right. Yes, Eric.

QUESTION: Thank you, Tammy. I wanted to ask about – I understand the decision on which weapons to provide to Ukraine being one taken at the Pentagon. But from a diplomacy standpoint, does pausing the weapon deliveries for Ukraine make it more difficult to get Russia to come to the table in terms of a peace agreement or a ceasefire because it somehow relieves potential pressure on them?

MS BRUCE: That is a very good question. But it’s good that it’s not going to be a factor because we haven’t paused sending weapons to Ukraine. This is one aspect, one situation, one event that has been changed. As you heard from the DOD, there are multiple robust other options and efforts regarding the Ukrainian situation with weapons. Again, I don’t speak for the DOD. I’d refer – I can only refer to their statement and to what they’ve stated very bluntly. The President has also indicated his remaining commitment regarding Patriot missiles. This is not – I will reinforce this – this is not a cessation of us assisting Ukraine or of providing weapons. This is one event in one situation, and we’ll discuss what else comes up in the future. But be wary of painting too broad a brush there.

All right.

QUESTION: Another? Sorry.

MS BRUCE: One more?

QUESTION: You just a few minutes ago put out a statement about the – about Secretary Rubio’s phone call with the foreign minister of Mexico, Juan Ramón de la Fuente, in which they spoke about issues relating to transnational crime, terrorist organizations, of which the Mexican cartels were declared on the – in the first days of this administration —

MS BRUCE: We were busy. We are busy. Yes.

QUESTION: (Laughter.) I was wondering if you could talk about the importance of the relationship with Mexico, but in particular the designation by the Treasury Department of Mexican banks that were involved in money laundering and whether that was part of the discussion between the Secretary and his counterpart.

MS BRUCE: Well, other than what was on the readout – for Americans watching this, you too can see the reports of phone calls and meetings that we have. We put out things called readouts which give some detail of a phone call, not everything. It’s not a transcript. But you can go to state.gov – here I go – and you can subscribe. And you have a lot of different options. You can get statements by the Secretary, you can get schedules, you can get just all kinds of things, and I encourage everyone to do that.

But I would say that it’s clear that we have an excellent relationship with Mexico. We have, and they’ve been very helpful regarding the border. The conversations are good. Of course, we’ve made some designations which helped this country but also the world in recognizing certain foreign terrorist organizations for being such, and certainly criminal cartels. So it’s – I won’t give you any more details about the call than what was publicly distributed, for the most part, but I can tell everyone that our relationship is excellent and this, of course, is part and parcel of the Secretary’s theory regarding diplomacy, is that it’s about people and it’s about relationships, and we reinforce that all the time.

I have a feeling I will never again hear from Matt Lee —

QUESTION: Yes, you will.

MS BRUCE: — if he – if I don’t call on him, because you seem to – maybe it’s you have a shoulder issue that you can’t raise your hand. Did you have, like – I had torn rotator cuff surgery once and it was very difficult to raise my hand.

QUESTION: Well, actually, I do have a bruise on my elbow.

MS BRUCE: Well, that’s because you’re sitting with your elbows on the table, not raising your hand. What can I do for you, sir?

QUESTION: Well, actually, I have a very easy question. Is – do you know, is the Secretary going to be joining the President and Prime Minister Netanyahu at the White House on Monday? Or does he have other plans?

MS BRUCE: The Secretary’s schedule I can’t discuss at this point. Sorry. It is – it was an easy question and an easy answer.

QUESTION: Okay.

MS BRUCE: Is that the depth of it?

QUESTION: Yeah.

MS BRUCE: All right, sure.

QUESTION: On the Quad.

QUESTION: Middle East.

MS BRUCE: All right, now wait. Hold on one second.

QUESTION: Quad.

MS BRUCE: You, sir, and then you’ll go. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Question on Iran. As you mentioned, Iran’s nuclear program has been shattered by the U.S. and Israeli attacks —

MS BRUCE: Has been, past tense. But yes – but go ahead.

QUESTION: The Iranian foreign minister has asked for assurances from the U.S. that there will be no attack on Iranian soil if the talks are going to be resumed, if there’s going to be a resumption of talks between Iran and the U.S. What’s the U.S. stance on this?

MS BRUCE: Well, again, I’m not going to get ahead of my skis here and preview for you what the Secretary or the President might decide because it certainly is in the President’s hands. You heard my remarks regarding their rejection of the IAEA and those – that situation. Of course, that is unfortunate, and again it’s a very bad decision. So they seem to be – not surprisingly – making bad decisions, but it’s going to – the President, as we’ve seen, is also a very generous man, and he cares about all the people and he knows Iran can be great again. And yet that’s going to be up to the Iranian people. But so far I can’t discuss what they may or may not do in that regard. But it’s – well, I’m sure we’ll hear from the President as well.

All right, yes, ma’am, in the back.

QUESTION: Thank you very much. I have a question on the West Bank. Israeli Justice Minister Yariv Levin today said that the time has come to annex the occupied West Bank. Do you have any reaction to this? And what is this administration’s position on a potential Israeli annexation of the West Bank?

MS BRUCE: Well, I think that is specifically something that the White House would be able to answer for you, but I also know that our position regarding Israel, the choices it’s made, is that we stand with Israel and its decisions and how it views its own internal security.

QUESTION: And is the two-states solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict still an official policy of the U.S. Government?

MS BRUCE: What I can say there is that President Trump is realistic about the current state of affairs. Clearly, Gaza is an uninhabitable place. It needs to be rebuilt with the help of Arab partners, and I think he has said previously that the nature of what has happened and what we have to get to – we don’t have a ceasefire yet. Hopefully that will change. But that is getting quite ahead of the dynamic in general, so that is what the President’s focused on.

QUESTION: On the Quad.

MS BRUCE: All right. Yeah, sir, there, and then we’ll go to you, sir. But go ahead.

QUESTION: Yeah, thank you, Tammy. Two questions, the first one on Israel. Is this department or the U.S. Government trying to have any direct talks to Hamas or just going through the Qatari and the Egyptians (inaudible)?

MS BRUCE: I won’t discuss the nature of the choices in a diplomatic effort like this.

QUESTION: Okay. And the second one: If – does this department believe that there’s not going to be any potential ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine maybe until after the summer? Looking at Putin positioning 50,000 troops on the border —

MS BRUCE: Well, again, I’m not going to – I’m not going to speculate, but the commitment I know by President Trump and the Secretary is that things have to happen quickly. We’ve seen deadlines set. We’ve seen statements regarding waiting weeks versus days for the parties to do some – certainly for Russia to give an indication whether it was serious or not. So the – we are not an administration, obviously, that is going to let things go for months or a year, but I certainly am not going to speculate on what the timeline might be for a ceasefire, which the President stays focused on.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MS BRUCE: All right. And you, sir, in the – yeah, the beige jacket. Yes, sir.

QUESTION: Thank you. How does the State Department Iraqi — interpret Iraqi prime minister statement that this agreement between Baghdad and Washington could undermine the relationship between both sides?

And can you comment on —

MS BRUCE: We’re going to – we’re going to have to take that – we’re going to have to take that back. But go ahead for a second one.

QUESTION: Can you comment on reports that Iraq has moved to accelerate a radar system deal with South Korea in light of recent regional developments?

MS BRUCE: We’re going to take that back as well, if you don’t mind, sir. When we say – again, for Americans watching – when we take something back, we get an answer for that reporter, and we get the answer right back to you, sir. And we will do that, for sure.

QUESTION: On (inaudible).

MS BRUCE: Yes, go ahead.

QUESTION: Thanks, Tammy. I just want to come back to USAID, given that the official closure of it happened this week.

MS BRUCE: Sure.

QUESTION: Will State – will the administration be releasing a breakdown of how much it has cost to shut down USAID for the taxpayer to be able to see that? For example, how much does it cost to bring some 2,000 USAID officers back from the field to the U.S., including their family members? How much does it cost to pay – to do payment settlements for contracts and grants? How much does it cost to sever local staff?

MS BRUCE: I love that there’s no questions about how much things cost.

QUESTION: No, but I mean –

MS BRUCE: We are not used to those kinds of questions. I would – while I am not – I don’t direct the nature of the choices that are made about what’s conveyed, but I think that what obviously has underlied all of this, and what we know when it comes to the saving of money, is that we are saving Americans a lot of money. And I know it’s going to be in the interest, as I will argue, to share with the American people, and we tend to share how much money we are saving them.

Now, in the midst of us doing our work, there’s also expenditures. There always is. So it costs money to run this building, as we are also saving money in other ways with things that were wasteful programs. So we will – certainly the American people will see the results of – the fruitfulness of this work.

QUESTION: Will that part be public or not?

MS BRUCE: Well, I think certainly, as they’ve been public in the past – certainly the Trump Administration is public about money that’s already been saved through a variety of work, including DOGE’s work – I don’t know how that will look, and I’m not going to get ahead of that. But I would think that yes, obviously, going to be proud of the nature of the money that is saved and in order to make sure the American people know what that effort has gotten to us.

Yes, ma’am, in the pink.

QUESTION: Two questions. First question about the aid delivery to Gaza. Since there were so many Palestinians killed or injured during – getting this, is GHF looking at all into another dynamic, another way to deliver aid into Gaza?

And the second question: President Trump said many times that he wants – he has another vision for the Middle East.

MS BRUCE: Yes.

QUESTION: He wants a permanent solution for Gaza. This is a deal for 60 days. Is this – could we look at this as a – he is laying the ground for a permanent ceasefire in Gaza, or is this just another attempt?

MS BRUCE: What he does, he does because he expects it to work and it leads to what he wants to accomplish. This is – in any dynamic, and certainly in this framework, as we’ve even said about Russia and Ukraine, you can’t discuss anything else until the shooting stops. You – you can’t discuss what will – what the peace will look like until you stop killing people. That’s, clearly, I think, a very basic dynamic.

In this case, of course, I think that there is – when you – we’ve got to get a ceasefire, and then you can begin to look at what the next steps will be. And if there’s a ceasefire, obviously, it’s elements that everyone has agreed to, which would also then lead to what President Trump’s vision is at the end. It’s – obviously, that will be peace. It’s not going to be the world’s longest ceasefire. It’s going to be peace that’s achieved fundamentally by the changes on the ground, which we have already seen implemented over the last couple of weeks.

QUESTION: And the aid?

MS BRUCE: And the —

QUESTION: And the aid?

MS BRUCE: Oh, the – well, again, we’re dealing with – I’ll just say this one more time. We’re moving aid into a live war zone. It still exists because Hamas will not put down its weapons, won’t stop killing people. It’s – it has an interest in the aid getting to the people – it has an interest in that to stop. Their strength has been to control the food, to steal the food, to use food as – to make money, to use food to keep the Gazan people at bay, reliant only on them. It is dangerous to have people who are getting food, who are getting their meals, who realize that something else can help them other than the monsters who have been running their lives. So they have an interest in creating a horrible environment. It is a war. I think, considering we’ve got, again, 56 million meals to date, and that – but that is a dynamic – I would suspect that, like with every endeavor, there is adjustments that are made based on the situation. I don’t have those details, but considering the success so far we should all be proud of the nature of what’s happened as we continue, because it will not be enough to go to a ceasefire, and then to a durable peace, as guided by President Donald Trump.

All right. Yes, sir, you in the red tie, and this will be it.

QUESTION: Thank you. (Inaudible) with VOA Persian. A question: Are you able to confirm reports that Americans have been arrested trying to leave Iran?

MS BRUCE: I do. And I’m glad you asked that, because we heard about that very early on. So while I – we can’t remark on individual reports, of course. We have long warned U.S. citizens not to travel to Iran and that is especially true now. Anyone with a U.S. connection in Iran, including dual U.S.-Iranian nationals, are at significant risk of arrest and unjust detention by the regime. If you are not currently in Iran, do not go. If you are in Iran, please see our most recent security alert and make plans to safely depart. We understand that the Iranian American diaspora in the U.S. may especially feel the need to go. We are not immune from that desire – you go visit family members or loved ones. Do not go. Don’t do it. You cannot help your loved ones from jail. So I think that’s our position. I appreciate the question and that’s going to be it for today.

All right, everyone. Have a wonderful Independence Day, Fourth of July. And we will see you – I’ll be here next week, Tuesday and Thursday, for more. And remember, state.gov. Whether you’re at home, here as reporters, sign up for all of our alerts and also keep an eye on things, as Eric does, with the readout of the Mexican phone call there.

Thank you, everyone.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MS BRUCE: Thank you, and I hope your shoulder is – it gets better, Matt.

(The briefing was concluded at 2:57 p.m.)

# # #