Department Press Briefing – March 17, 2025 – United States Department of State

Following this historic meeting, Secretary Rubio traveled to the G7 in Canada, where our partners expressed support for a swift end and a durable end to this conflict. And as we pursued peace, our nation also showed strength. Under the President’s direction, this administration invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to initiate the removal of hundreds of dangerous members of the Tren de Aragua, a vicious, violent Foreign Terrorist Organization, which has been threatening our nation, conducting irregular warfare, and terrorizing Americans.

We expect our sincere – we express our sincere gratitude to President Bukele of El Salvador for playing a pivotal role in this transfer. As Secretary Rubio said, once again President Bukele has shown he is not only the strongest security leader in our region; he is also a great friend of the United States.

Here’s the bottom line. Secretary Rubio’s State Department remains committed to advancing the national interests of the United States. Peace through strength is back. Not that we have a lot of things to discuss – and I see it all on your faces – but it is good to be back. Been away for, oh, I don’t know, 10 days now or so, but I’m looking forward to answering your questions. We will begin again with Matt Lee.

QUESTION: Thank you, Tammy. I had three process-y kind of questions, but for the sake of my colleagues – again, I know there’s a lot to ask – I’ll only – I’ll break it down to two; they’ll be very brief.

MS BRUCE: All right.

QUESTION: One, on the South African ambassador who the Secretary declared PNG on Friday —

QUESTION: — the South Africans seem to be a little bit miffed that they learned about this from a X post. And I understand there was a meeting at which a formal diplomatic note explaining this (inaudible) —

MS BRUCE: Yes.

QUESTION: Can you – what day was that, the meeting?

MS BRUCE: Well, it was the same day of the announcement.

QUESTION: So, Friday.

MS BRUCE: Yes. So, after Secretary Rubio made his decision, our senior-level diplomats convoked the South African embassy staff for an in-person meeting at the State Department. At this meeting, our officials delivered the official notification of Ambassador Rasool’s persona-non-grata status, and it was done.

QUESTION: Okay. And I understand that his privileges and immunities expire today, and that he has to leave by Friday?

MS BRUCE: That’s right. So, he has up – for these three days that passed, he’s had his privileges, but those did expire today, and he has – technically it’s a week from the notice, and so that expires now on Friday.

QUESTION: Okay.

MS BRUCE: He’ll need to be – he’ll need to be out of the country.

QUESTION: Okay. And then my second one is what you mentioned before on the AEA, the Alien Enemies Act. As you know, as this building certainly knows, there are several provisions that – or several criteria that have to be met in order to invoke this. One is there being a declaration of war with the country in which this force is from, or that the invasion or incursion or however you want to call it is being orchestrated or influenced by a sovereign state. Does the U.S. now regard Nicolas Maduro as the legitimate head of state of Venezuela? And secondly, if you do or even if you don’t, are Maduro and the state of Venezuela now covered by the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act?

QUESTION: No, this is a legal – this is a legal —

MS BRUCE: But I am also, beyond – in addition to that fact of referring you back to the White House and to DHS regarding this, this is in the courts, and as you know I’m not going to pontificate on or guess or muse about what’s going on with the courts at this point. So, it clearly – the White House has been very transparent. Karoline was very clear this afternoon about their approach. Clearly, they feel that this is something they want to litigate and they are going to and, for the good of the American public, it’s an important thing to do.

Everything we know that the Trump Administration is doing, certainly President Trump himself and his team, is in the interest of the United States.

QUESTION: I understand that —

MS BRUCE: And that’s why he was elected. People are —

QUESTION: Okay.

MS BRUCE: — excited about the nature of the actions that we are taking swiftly, and this is one of them. And we will see it play out in court, and that’s the extent of what I’ll say.

QUESTION: Okay. Well, my question is not about whether there is support.

MS BRUCE: So now there’s a third section. I thought you said you had to forgo the third part.

QUESTION: No, no, I’d just like to have an answer to the first question.

MS BRUCE: Sure. Sure.

QUESTION: Does the U.S. consider Nicolas Maduro to be the legitimate president of Venezuela, and is —

MS BRUCE: I’m not going to – I’m not going to discuss with you again a national issue that belongs both with the White House and the Secretary himself, so I’m not going to be able to remark on that.

All right. Based on the same dynamic here, I guess for the Americas, the situation, Andrea Mitchell, please?

QUESTION: This is related to immigration issue and —

MS BRUCE: Sure.

QUESTION: — and peace through strength.

MS BRUCE: Sure.

QUESTION: Does Secretary Rubio believe that if Afghanistan is among the countries that are – they’re on a list, a draft list, to be banned, that legitimate SIVs who were approved by the State Department during the fall of Afghanistan and the withdrawal should be a carve-out and that these people who helped the State Department, the CIA, the DOD can come and have refugee status?

And I do have a follow-up.

So, the premise, I have to say, I certainly can’t speak to because it’s not accurate. When it comes to the nature of Afghanistan and those who have helped us, the arrangements we have made already in the past, getting as many people from that conflict here, certainly those who have assisted us and worked with us, that’s been a policy and a dynamic that we’ve worked on from certainly even the previous administration, working to try to get that happening.

So, that’s not something that is – certainly I can talk about regarding something that doesn’t exist, but certainly when that review is done, we’ll have something that we can discuss.

QUESTION: Okay. Then let me ask you also —

MS BRUCE: Yes.

MS BRUCE: Well, I think what’s appropriate here is for me to not – this is, unfortunately, the nature of the State Department and what we do. When it comes to diplomatic efforts, whether they exist or not, the nature of legal frameworks for individuals, the privacy issues involved, that’s not something I can get into any detail about.

QUESTION: He has – he has spoken publicly, and his family have. Does he have consular access in the —

MS BRUCE: Well, that’s his – that’s his – that’s his – I think all of us have a right to speak and to be known, but we have a – we have a standard and a protocol here that we won’t discuss a private situation, a private case, certainly when it comes to diplomacy, diplomatic relationships between one country and another. I’m not going to go into those details.

All right. Shaun?

QUESTION: Thanks. Could I go back to South Africa, the ambassador?

MS BRUCE: Sure.

QUESTION: The Secretary, of course, had his – his X posted on Friday. Could you explain a little bit the reasons? It’s quite an extraordinary step. I was looking back, and if I’m not mistaken, even in the height of tensions with Russia there’s no expulsion of the ambassador and of PNG there. What is it? I mean, essentially this is the remarks that the ambassador made at a thinktank or at a conference —

QUESTION: – that were critical. What I’m getting at is: Should other ambassadors be on alert? Can they not criticize President Trump without fear of being expelled?

MS BRUCE: Well, I think it’s not about criticism. This was the equation of the President and the country with white supremacy. It was an allegation that casts such an awful light on the nature of the country, on individuals. It is – it is – I mean, if we don’t have a standard about the nature of someone who is in this country who is supposed to be a diplomat to help facilitate the relationship between two countries and that this is the standard of it – we deserve better. We want – we’ve had a decent level of diplomacy with South Africa.

There are some challenges. But you want people in each embassy who can actually facilitate a relationship. And these remarks were unacceptable to the United States – not just to the President, but to every American. It was – they were pretty much obscene when it came to the nature of what was – of what was alleged. And so that is, I think, at the very least what we should expect, is a standard of some respect – basic, low-level respect – if you’re in a position that is going to help facilitate any kind of diplomatic relationship with another country.

The – this particular individual certainly didn’t meet that standard, and it is a message to people of what America expects, what the President expects, what the Secretary of State expects, what this whole administration expects when it comes to treatment of the nation itself, and as a result, of the people in this country. And so that’s why it was done.

QUESTION: Sure, and just expanding on – South Africa today said that it wants to have a better relationship with the United States. Are you open to that? I mean, there have been other – the Secretary stayed away from the G20. Is – are you of the view that South Africa can repair the relationship despite the criticism that’s come from this building or the —

MS BRUCE: Well, they – I think the – both the President and the Secretary of State have made it clear what the problems are and what they have an issue with when it comes to South Africa. The unjust land expropriation law, as well as its growing relationship with countries like Russia and Iran; it has prompted – that’s what prompted the serious review of our South Africa policy, which continues to be underway. They have taken also, the South African Government, aggressive positions toward the United States and its allies, including accusing Israel – not Hamas – of genocide in the International Court of Justice, and reinvigorating its relationship with Iran to develop commercial, military, and nuclear arrangements.

So, this isn’t one just of demeanor or decorum, however they add into it. This is a matter of a nation that is – we’ve, again, made it very clear – taking steps that are not in the interests, the best interests of providing a safe, secure, more prosperous America, let alone the world, when it comes to the decisions they’re making.

So, all of this is under review, and – but obviously part of it is, within the diplomacy of it, is to encourage a change in policy and posture. Of course that would be the point. The point is to encourage a change. What I’ve seen with the trips with – we’ve made with the diplomatic adventures, of course, as well as the G7 summit in Canada, is the nature of the Secretary of State is to make things better for people. It is not to punish or to target people or countries. It’s a nature of changing policy and creating better environments for all of us. And I’ve seen that in motion in every dynamic, and that’s the case here with South Africa as well.

Nadia, yes.

QUESTION: Thank you so much, Tammy. Good to see you. I have a couple of questions. On Yemen first: What is the U.S. strategy regarding Yemen? Is it degrading the capabilities of the Houthis that they don’t pose a threat to U.S. interests? Or is it destroy them completely? Because there’s conflicting statements from U.S. officials saying, like, we’re not going to interfere with the civil war in Yemen.

MS BRUCE: Well, what we’ve seen, of course, in the past when it comes to the Houthis, it was a tit-for-tat strike. If the Houthis would be sending missiles or attacking both commercial and military ships, what the previous administration did is they would do one strike as a tit-for-tat dynamic. What’s happening now is a complete shift when it comes to the nature of why it’s going on, which is to stop the assault on the maritime traffic in that area. And it – up to this point there’s about 174 attacks on American naval ships, which is an extraordinary number of attacks. And this isn’t a situation that should be managed; it has to stop.

So, the message to the Houthis is if – this will end when you end the attack on both commercial and military ships in that region. So, it’s a maritime issue, and it’s meant to completely change the posture of the Houthis, and of course in conjunction in that dynamic with Iran; that the days of pinprick responses where we allow that to occur is over. It’s, I think, a pretty clear statement from the administration as a whole, as well.

QUESTION: Can I —

QUESTION: And on the visa thing, just quickly.

MS BRUCE: The visa, sure.

QUESTION: Can you – is the area clear when it comes to revoking visas for foreign students? Are you revoking visas for students who clearly support Hamas and shows literature that’s supporting Hamas, or is it also include students who support Palestine or the free – they say the freedom of the Palestinians, or showing sympathy with civilians in Gaza? Is that area very clear?

So, in this particular instance, there’s also, I know, a freedom of speech argument. But this is not about speech; it’s about actions. It’s about things that were done. And of course, I don’t want to go further because, also, this is within a court dynamic; America’s got the best courts system in the world, and there will be arguments on both sides, no doubt, regarding this. But it has to be argued. It has to be litigated. But the actions that we take and the decisions we make are not about content; it’s about actions that are occurring, and certainly in that particular case.

Yes.

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: Can I?

MS BRUCE: Go ahead.

QUESTION: Can I?

QUESTION: Hi, Tammy.

MS BRUCE: Hi.

QUESTION: Thank you. Just to follow up on the Houthis question. So, President Trump said every shot fired by the Houthis will be looked upon as a shot fired by Iran. So, we’re wondering if Houthis don’t back down, is the United States prepared to attack Iran or give Israel to do so?

QUESTION: Right. Just to follow up on a different topic, in that case.

MS BRUCE: Sure.

QUESTION: So, Voice of America – and Radio Free Asia is one of the outlets under Voice of America.

MS BRUCE: Mm-hmm.

QUESTION: They have written extensively on the oppression of Uyghur Muslims by Chinese authorities. Actually, their reports have raised awareness about the plight of Uyghurs, and this is a topic that the Secretary feels strongly about as well. We’ve just seen him last week impose sanctions on Thai officials over deportation of Uyghurs to China.

QUESTION: What does he think about the shutdown of this outlet? Does he support this decision?

MS BRUCE: Well, what you’re referring to, I think, is the VOA and some other outlets —

QUESTION: Correct.

MS BRUCE: — involved with the current – some budgetary changes and actions that have been taken. What I can tell you, like with all the aspects that are happening in this shift, is that it’s a fluid situation and I look forward to watching it unfold, as you do. I know you’re all reporters, and some reporters here in the bullpen have been affected. But the fact of the matter is this is serious business. It’s the business of government using taxpayer dollars. So, the same standard applies here. And of course it’s just happened. Kari Lake, as essentially the envoy within this framework, is someone that Americans know and trust, and I look forward to seeing how this unfolds. But, right now, it’s new. It’s a fluid situation, and we’ll have more for you as it unfolds.

All right. Please go ahead.

QUESTION: When you say “fluid,” could it be overturned, do you mean?

MS BRUCE: Go ahead.

QUESTION: Could I just follow up on Yemen and your assessment of the civilian casualties? Because you’ll know there have been reports of several. What’s your assessment on that?

All of the aspects of what the Trump Administration, what Secretary Rubio and everyone now in this new administration is focused on – and maybe it surprised people; it shouldn’t have – is peace, is to stop the wholesale slaughter of people; is to stop the chaos that reigns through certain regions, is to make sure – especially with certainly Ukraine and Russia, is to make sure – and everyplace where there’s conflict – that the people that are alive today might be alive tomorrow. And it’s imperfect. It’s not – it’s not something that any of us can sometimes predict the end result of. But this is an administration and a President and a Secretary of State who’s made it clear that this – if there is a hallmark, the hallmark is fighting for peace and an end to this kind of chaos that has destroyed Yemenis’ lives and it destroys, obviously, too many lives around the world.

Now, yes, sir. You’ve been waiting patiently.

QUESTION: Just – can I just follow up?

QUESTION: Thank you, Tammy.

MS BRUCE: Yes, sir.

QUESTION: Two quick questions on the Palestinian issue, one pertaining to Gaza. Aid has not been allowed in since the 2nd of March. The situation is very dire. I was wondering if you are really concerned about this, and especially this coincided with the beginning of Ramadan as well, where people need food and water and so on. I mean, it is starvation used as a method to pressure people. Is that – is that – isn’t that a war crime of some sort, internationally?

We also know that at this point, when it comes to the nature of what Envoy Witkoff has worked on and what all of us still focus on, is in fact what your concern is: making sure that there’s a situation on the ground that allows food to get to the people who need it, that allows aid to move through to the people who have been suffering because of the choices that Hamas has made throughout the years, and that is what we continue to work on. So, everyone – certainly it’s a concern, and that is why we continue to work to make sure that aid can get to the people who need it.

Yes, sir. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Can I just – can I get a follow-up?

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MS BRUCE: Yeah.

QUESTION: Question on Syria. The Syrian interim authority last Thursday approved a new constitution. It has granted likely no rights for the minority like Kurds and Jews in Syria, and has been rejected by these minorities, labeling it against the democracy. What’s the U.S. view on that constitution? And does anyone in this department connected with the new Syrian interim authority? Do you have any engagement with them?

QUESTION: But are the —

MS BRUCE: We’ll – I’ll see what we can do when it comes to the specifics of what you’ve asked for.

QUESTION: What about – what about the —

QUESTION: Syria. Syria.

MS BRUCE: Yes. All right.

QUESTION: I have another question on Iraq that – all right.

MS BRUCE: All right.

QUESTION: Yeah. This administration, including Secretary Rubio himself, has called the Iraqi Government to resume the I – Iraqi Kurdistan oil export and solve the U.S. oil companies’ issue that are working in Iraq, but this hasn’t happened. What’s the U.S. view on that? Are you urging the Iraqi Government to resume the oil export?

MS BRUCE: Again, I’m not – at this press briefing, I’m not going to go into international negotiations or diplomatic negotiations or thoughts that might be held by the Secretary of State. But we’ll see – when it comes to actions on that, it’ll be I think abundantly clear.

Yes, ma’am.

QUESTION: Syria. Thank you, Tammy. So Syria’s new government, along with regional countries such as Türkiye, Jordan, Qatar, and others, have been calling on the U.S. to lift the sanctions that was put in place during the Assad regime, and many view these sanctions as a significant barrier to stabilizing and rebuilding the country. Is the administration considering removing or maybe easing these sanctions?

QUESTION: (Inaudible) —

MS BRUCE: Yes, sir.

QUESTION: Thank you so much, Tammy. I appreciate you taking the question. Over the weekend —

MS BRUCE: Depends on what the question is, but go for it. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: Sure, fair enough. Over the weekend, the U.S. deported a Lebanese citizen who was a doctor at Brown University. I was wondering if you might be able to elaborate why.

QUESTION: And on violence – escalating violence in the West Bank, I guess are there any concerns amongst the – at the State Department over what we’re seeing in terms of Israeli actions in the north in Jenin and Tulkarm?

Yes, sir.

QUESTION: Thank you. Two questions, changing subject to South Asia. A few days before the elections, President Trump then as a candidate has – had spoken about – expressed concern about attacks on the Hindus in Bangladesh. Now that Secretary has been here for about 60 days, what is his assessment about the situation of Hindus in Bangladesh and what steps he is taking to address —

MS BRUCE: President Trump?

QUESTION: Secretary —

MS BRUCE: Well —

QUESTION: No, Secretary Rubio.

MS BRUCE: Well, again, we have – you’re talking about President Trump in certain aspects about how the nation and how his administration views the nature of what’s happening in another country.

QUESTION: In Bangladesh.

MS BRUCE: And Secretary Rubio, of course, follows through with his vision in the nature of the choices that are made in that regard. But when it comes to, again, negotiations, diplomatic considerations, and the conversations that those involve and what might happen, I don’t want to have a – I don’t want to presume here what the outcome will be. You don’t want me to either. I think that the best thing to do would be to —

QUESTION: Can I reframe the question?

MS BRUCE: I’m sorry?

QUESTION: Can I reframe the question? What is your —

MS BRUCE: Well, no, no, I’m – because I’m not – what I’m not going to answer is diplomatic considerations from government to government or attitudes and approaches when it comes to what’s happening in a certain country that belong within a diplomatic kind of conversation that clearly I can’t speak on in – or would I hypothesize about what might happen.

So, yes – yes (inaudible). Yes, ma’am.

QUESTION: Follow-up, ma’am?

QUESTION: Second question.

QUESTION: Follow-up?

MS BRUCE: Go ahead.

QUESTION: I have one more question.

MS BRUCE: Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you, Tammy. Just to follow up quickly on what Humeyra was saying about USAGM, Radio Free Asia.

MS BRUCE: Sure.

QUESTION: And the news broadcasters – because I think you’re going to get a lot of questions about this in —

MS BRUCE: Oh, I expect it. I got – I just got back into the country over the weekend. I thought, well, this’ll be discussed.

QUESTION: As you mentioned, it’s affected colleagues we know in the bullpen.

MS BRUCE: Yes.

QUESTION: Can you just clarify? When you say that you’re watching this unfold, do you know if this is something that could be reversed in terms of what they’re doing with USAGM?

QUESTION: No, no, I just —

MS BRUCE: And I know you know I can’t, and there’s – and I know I come from a background where that’s mostly what I did for a very long time. That I can’t do here.

QUESTION: Okay. So, my next question is about a – something different. The State Department, according to some reporting by The New Republic, terminated a contract to the Yale School of Public Health’s Humanitarian Research Lab. They were tracking evidence of Ukrainian children that have been abducted by Russia since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Some of that evidence was about to be – from their work – it was about to be transferred to European law enforcement officials. Can you comment at all on whether it is true that this grant was terminated and whether you have any other comment —

Yes. Yes, sir.

QUESTION: Thank you so much. I also have a question on Russia-Ukraine, but before that, let me follow up on Radio Free Europe quickly from different angle. This administration last month secured one of the reporters jailed in Belarus – was working for Radio Free Europe – and I want to give you credit for that. But given how strongly you feel about their cases, can you assure us that you will continue securing the release of Radio Free Europe reporters, one of them in Azerbaijan and other countries, even if you end up defunding them?

At the same time, this nation has to look – and I don’t think it’s anything to be ashamed of – look to the nature of how America is going to be able to remain strong and safe and secure and more prosperous so that we can continue to move through with foreign aid, with facilitating voices that normally other parts of the world would not hear. It is a part of democracy. And of course, you want every nation to have that kind of commitment as well when it comes to who is able to be heard. So that’s a commitment that stands. It is at the heart of this nation, and certainly that’s not going to be ending. The framework of certain things might change or how we facilitate them, but certainly not that commitment. And I think we’ve done a good job of that and we should all be proud of it as well.

QUESTION: Thank you. And my second question, Tammy —

MS BRUCE: How are we doing?

QUESTION: — on Russia-Ukraine – I was going – in terms of my original question.

MS BRUCE: Well —

QUESTION: Can you please comment on —

MS BRUCE: — I’ve clearly lost the bucket of issues here as we’ve gone from a few things back, but go ahead.

QUESTION: Very quickly, can you please comment on reports that the United States —

MS BRUCE: Yeah.

QUESTION: — pulled back from an international group investigating Russian crimes? What is the strategy there and what message are you sending to Russia, who continues actually committing crimes —

QUESTION: She was just asked —

MS BRUCE: Yeah.

QUESTION: — as we speak.

MS BRUCE: Yeah, it – look, this is – we’re going to be looking into a number of different things. That’s anecdotal. The nature – I’m not familiar with the nature of what happens so I’m not going to be able to speak to that.

Yes, right down the middle here. Yes, sir.

QUESTION: Thank you. Thank you so much.

QUESTION: I think it was me.

MS BRUCE: I think – yeah, the gentlemen in front of you, sir.

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

MS BRUCE: Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. Thank you, Tammy. Daniel Compatangelo for La7, Italian TV and prime-time media. So, we both were at the G7 the last week.

MS BRUCE: Yes, we were.

QUESTION: And the focus was Ukraine. So —

MS BRUCE: Yes.

QUESTION: — today in Europe there was a European Council. They met, the foreign minister, and they discussed about Ukraine and European Union proposals. So, it seems like there are – Europe is very divided right now. Like Italy, Spain, Ukraine – I mean, Hungary, and Slovakia are more aligned to Trump proposal. It’s not proposal but like plan, and the other ones – more lefties – are like want to keep giving aid – military aid to Ukraine.

MS BRUCE: Sure.

QUESTION: So, what is the – what do you – as a State Department, how do you guys will interact with the European right now? Are we going to go for the Trump plans or the European ones?

But what I’ve seen Secretary Rubio accomplish is remarkable and in different environments – environments where there’s negotiations between countries attempting to stop a war, a ministers meeting where they’re all aligned in some fashion or another and want to work together but have disagreements. It’s – I can say this, fortunately, having been there – is that it’s been his voice, and I’m proud as an American that it happens to be the American Secretary of State. It’s his voice that has brought conversations together, that has brought groups of people together. And we know this – this is why you need a State Department and why you need diplomats, because everybody is going to have different ideas. Everybody is going to think there’s a better way, and we all have investments in the nature of the outcome.

America is the strongest country in the world for a reason – all the combination of things we do, but mostly because we are a nation of merit and arguments and speech, and the ability for people to be heard and for all of us to have an open mind. That is what Marco Rubio brings to this debate, especially in Europe where there are disagreements. We will – and he expects to – win people over based on the merits of the arguments that we continue to make every day.

And I’m going to leave it there, everyone. I’ll see you Wednesday and Friday this week if you didn’t get enough. They’ll be more to talk about. Thank you everyone. I appreciate it. Have a great day.

(The briefing was concluded at 2:46 p.m.)

# # #