"QUESTION: -- boycotts of Israel are not helpful, it just raises a giant flag when you look at Jo’s question, when the entire world, with the exception of two – one other country thinks that your boycott/embargo of Cuba is wrong and unhelpful, why it is that you have this position that that’s okay, but then something to display – another country trying to display its displeasure with Israelis – Israeli policy, that that’s not helpful. I don’t – if you – what I don’t understand is, if you believe that the settlements are – that settlement activity is illegitimate yourself – and by you, I mean the United States --
MS. HARF: Yeah.
QUESTION: -- how is it that you can – how is it that you oppose other people who share that view taking some kind of action to demonstrate their unhappiness or to protest that that --
MS. HARF: Mm-hmm. Well, each situation is different, obviously, when we’re talking about how to respond policy-wise when we disagree with policies in one country. I think part of the nature is the across-the-board boycott of Israel on some of these issues, certainly. Again, I’m happy to check with our folks, Matt. I think a trade embargo in Cuba is obviously very, very, very different than boycotts of Israel that we do not believe are the way to resolve these issues. We don’t think it’s helpful to the process. We believe that these issues need to be discussed between the two parties, and that’s how we’re going to get some resolution on them; not through boycotts of Israel.
QUESTION: Okay. So --
MS. HARF: I’m happy to see if there’s more analysis. I’m sorry. I just --
QUESTION: Okay, but – no, no, no, I understand. But I just –
QUESTION: (Inaudible.)
QUESTION: Hold on. Hold on, Lesley. One more thing. How do you suggest that other countries or people, other groups, should demonstrate their unhappiness with another country’s – in this case, Israel’s – policy? If not through a peaceful action like a boycott, what should they do? I mean, this is not just something --
MS. HARF: I think we speak out very clearly when we don’t agree with Israel’s policies, and what – that we don’t think the settlements are legitimate. We say that very clearly and make that very clear, and work with the parties to get resolution on these issues through final status negotiations. That’s how we think we should help resolve these issues that are really underneath the boycott issue.
QUESTION: Okay. But by your own admission, your speaking out against this particular policy hasn’t had any effect.
MS. HARF: I don’t think I’ve ever said that.
QUESTION: Well, let’s put it this way. You speak --
MS. HARF: I think that’s your analysis.
QUESTION: You speak out about them, and the Israelis keep doing it. Is that not correct?
MS. HARF: Well, I think you’re making a broad generalization. You have no idea what the impact always is of our private diplomatic discussions and what would’ve been done differently if we hadn’t had those discussions.
And I am actually am on a time schedule, so we need to --
QUESTION: So you’re saying that you think that the Israelis would be doing more of this if you hadn’t been doing those --
MS. HARF: I’m saying I wouldn’t make any assumptions, Matt, about the kind of leverage we have."
MS. HARF: Yeah.
QUESTION: -- how is it that you can – how is it that you oppose other people who share that view taking some kind of action to demonstrate their unhappiness or to protest that that --
MS. HARF: Mm-hmm. Well, each situation is different, obviously, when we’re talking about how to respond policy-wise when we disagree with policies in one country. I think part of the nature is the across-the-board boycott of Israel on some of these issues, certainly. Again, I’m happy to check with our folks, Matt. I think a trade embargo in Cuba is obviously very, very, very different than boycotts of Israel that we do not believe are the way to resolve these issues. We don’t think it’s helpful to the process. We believe that these issues need to be discussed between the two parties, and that’s how we’re going to get some resolution on them; not through boycotts of Israel.
QUESTION: Okay. So --
MS. HARF: I’m happy to see if there’s more analysis. I’m sorry. I just --
QUESTION: Okay, but – no, no, no, I understand. But I just –
QUESTION: (Inaudible.)
QUESTION: Hold on. Hold on, Lesley. One more thing. How do you suggest that other countries or people, other groups, should demonstrate their unhappiness with another country’s – in this case, Israel’s – policy? If not through a peaceful action like a boycott, what should they do? I mean, this is not just something --
MS. HARF: I think we speak out very clearly when we don’t agree with Israel’s policies, and what – that we don’t think the settlements are legitimate. We say that very clearly and make that very clear, and work with the parties to get resolution on these issues through final status negotiations. That’s how we think we should help resolve these issues that are really underneath the boycott issue.
QUESTION: Okay. But by your own admission, your speaking out against this particular policy hasn’t had any effect.
MS. HARF: I don’t think I’ve ever said that.
QUESTION: Well, let’s put it this way. You speak --
MS. HARF: I think that’s your analysis.
QUESTION: You speak out about them, and the Israelis keep doing it. Is that not correct?
MS. HARF: Well, I think you’re making a broad generalization. You have no idea what the impact always is of our private diplomatic discussions and what would’ve been done differently if we hadn’t had those discussions.
And I am actually am on a time schedule, so we need to --
QUESTION: So you’re saying that you think that the Israelis would be doing more of this if you hadn’t been doing those --
MS. HARF: I’m saying I wouldn’t make any assumptions, Matt, about the kind of leverage we have."
