FULL REMARKS: Secretary Rubio Answers Questions in India

Department of State on X official account2026-10-21

FULL REMARKS: Secretary Rubio Answers Questions in India

Posted on X 2026-10-21 by @StateDept · View on X →

The video says (transcribed automatically):

On Wall Street Journal reported that Elon Musk is the one who made the decision to throttle Starshield and catch Ukraine on guard Is this something you were aware of? Can you... Starlink Starlink and Starshield. Okay. Again there's just all this confusion These are two separate programs okay? Starlink is a commercial Starlink is the receivers you put on the roof of your house and you use for energy It's used for commercial purposes It's not a military system although it could be used in order to guide drones and things of this nature and so forth And then Starshield is different It's a unique defense product that is sold and operated through the Department of War as an example. It's two different items and it's important to distinguish one from the other I have not seen the Wall Street Journal reporting because I have not read it I know that we're not So I'm not familiar with the story that you're referring to But Starlink is a private company They have a contract. They have contractual terms upon how that technology can be used the important point is we cannot direct A private company as to the decisions they make or not make. What I can tell you with certainty is the President of the United States nor anyone in our system ever requested that any changes to that system be made and, and, and that's what we said repeatedly I don't know what the story reflects but that is the case Isn't, even if it's a private company I mean this obviously is vital national security infrastructure for Ukraine Isn't this something that the US US National Security Advisor should have been given a heads up on before? Well again I'm not going to comment on what we knew that they might or might not do Suffice it to say that the reporting out there was that somehow the United States government was denying them something they needed in order to defend their country That's, that's not true. That's not accurate the and and for leaders in Ukraine to continue to represent that is also not accurate I would also say and again, I I harp back on this statement that was made a few days ago I don't know who this official was in the Ukrainian government that went around saying that a bunch of people had died as a result of what America was denying them Not only are we not denying them and it's not true how many millions of people have been saved because of what America's already provided No country in the world has done more to help Ukraine over the last four and a half years than the United States including under the Trump administration And that continues to be the case but ultimately what the president wants here is an end to this war That's what he's focused on Mr. Secretary, regarding the system in question you said it's inaccurate to say that the administration told SpaceX to throttle its service but you're not ruling out that the US government if I understand correctly knew about this decision Well, we've seen the public reporting on it We've seen the Ukrainians reporting that they were no longer able to use basically the internet Yeah I'm not aware that we knew about this decision beforehand. I certainly but it's irrelevant. The bottom line is that that is a that is governed by a private commercial contract as to the how their stuff can be used and what speeds they allow it to be used at And so we'll continue to engage on the matter but the reporting initially was that somehow this was part of a directive from the United States government. And I'm just here to tell you as I've said repeatedly from the very beginning and the president has made clear at no point did he say deny them the use of this system because I'm trying to punish them or teach them a lesson That's just not accurate. And that's what I've been addressing repeatedly What do you mean it doesn't mean there's no foreknowledge? I understand your question You're not just because the president doesn't tell them us do this doesn't mean it wasn't discussed Well, I, again, I don't the president has nothing to do with the decisions that are made by Starlink and Starshield and by Mr. Musk. That's a private company The president doesn't run that company and can't direct that company to do anything I'm not aware of any foreknowledge nor anyone, but again the reporting was not about foreknowledge I'm telling you there was no foreknowledge but beyond it, Even if there was we don't control what a private company how they decide their product can be used Now, they're in a contract with the United States military like Starshield, that's a different matter because that's something we are purchasing and using for our use. But in the case of Starlink we're arguing something, it just, it just makes no sense the argument that people continue to make that somehow we had foreknowledge or directed it It's not accurate that we somehow knew about this ahead of time or directed it in any way Sure, do you, expect, And by the way I'm sorry, by the way we're no longer going to be defensive about this topic okay? Because with the United States if it were not for the assistance of the United States including under the Trump administration there would be no Ukraine right now Ukraine as a sovereign state would not exist That doesn't mean the bravery of the Ukrainian fighters should not be highlighted, because they have absolutely very bravely and fought for their country and done extraordinary things with the aid that's been provided to them standing up to a much much larger country But let's be very clear there There would be no Ukraine today were it not for the assistance the United States has supplied Ukraine in the billions of dollars Going back to the Biden administration and and going and through this administration as well do you expect Foreign Minister Lavrov to come to the G20 summit or Foreign Minister summit in Atlanta? Well the Russians are invited to be a part of the G20. The president made that decision so obviously they're going to be represented at each of these summits I don't know if he himself is coming I expect he might I think he told us he was in the last time we engaged with him So they're part of the G20 and, so they'll be, they'll be at that meeting and I know obviously there's the potential that Putin might come to the one in Miami as well although we don't have confirmation on that Secretary, about the, your meet your final remaining meeting here in India with Reliance are you looking for anything specific from them in terms of an investment commitment or number or something about them changing you know what they do in terms of business regarding taking on more Venezuelan crude or making a greater investment in the US? Anything specific along those lines? Well, perhaps. I mean, we'll see how the meetings go Obviously, that's something That, it depend-- on the energy field the the Department of Energy will be very involved in on the details of any specific ask I think for us it's more an opportunity to see their operations and have a broader discussion about their presence globally at a time in which energy is featuring prominently in many of the geopolitical decisions that are being made. This is a very large and prominent energy company They also have a pretty large investment already in the United States they have extensive refining capacity As I highlighted to you yesterday this is a company for example that has the capability to refine the heavy crude that's produced in the Western Hemisphere including from Venezuela So I'm sure that's a topic we'll discuss And it's, it's, and I think through our conversations we'll hopefully identify other opportunities to partner and work together Mr. Secretary, I was staying on on India, but on a different subject There are many protests from the opposition and students here in India and the UN experts have criticized the crackdown by the, well, the UN experts, yeah, my favorite the UN experts are the oxymoron do you have a comment on those protests in- No it's a domestic political matter I mean I'm not going to get involved in their politics I mean, they haven't... This is a democracy they have elections here so well I'm not going to opine on their domestic political matters We have protests every day in the United States cause we're I mean people view protests, I mean, obviously I'm not talking about the riots like what you're seeing in Europe where they're vandalizing and breaking into things and burning down buildings I'm not talking about that But in many ways the fact that people are out there expressing themselves I'm not talking about India and any country in the world has designed that this is a country where there's political discourse and so forth and differences of opinion So the fact that you you just said a moment ago as part of your question the opposition, where that there's no, for example, like there in Cuba there is no opposition like that can actually go out and do anything without going to jail and and, and being oppressed or and exiled So, but I we're not going to comment on internal political matters that that's for the Indian and people to decide and navigate Sir, there were reports in Qatari media that Qatar and Pakistan had put forth a new proposal to Iran for the US and Iran to come back to the negotiating table Are those reports accurate? Is this something? I think there's a number of countries that have been engaging over a period of time with Iran floating proposals. Ultimately any proposal that's offered By any country in the world look, we welcome mediation efforts Obviously these are countries that we have strong alliances and partnerships with in the case of Qatar in specific they've been involved on this topic for a very long time I understand that Field Marshal Munir was actually in Tehran yesterday But in the end any decision on what would be acceptable is on is in the hands of the President of the United States. And I think he's been abundantly clear at the core of all of this is something very simple to understand is the United States will not support any deal that creates a pathway for Iran to ever have a nuclear weapon As long as President Trump is in office they will never have a nuclear weapon In reports that Wyckoff is presenting Putin with an updated proposal from the US side for a peace deal to end the war in Ukraine Can you, share any information on the details of that? No, I'm not going to I mean, I, so Steve was in I believe he just left Norway but he met with Zelensky And, so I think they floated some ideas He wanted to go there first he's on his way to St. Petersburg My understanding he might even be underway as we speak And I think he'll share some ideas This is how, you know, this is how this works right? You have to sort of see what the other side would be open to and then you bring it to the other side and see if they'd be open to it and start to sort of narrow the gaps and the differences between the two sides This is a very difficult negotiation I don't need to tell you that And at its core ultimately, has been the differences over Donbass I mean, I don't try to oversimplify this because this is a complex war for a lot of different reasons But at the core of all this has been that part of Donbass that Russia demands but has not been able to take in the battlefield and that Ukraine currently holds And it's done so very bravely and against all odds and against many predictions Remember, people predicted this war would be over in five days and we're going on five years and a lot of that is credit to the fighters in Ukraine and their bravery and how hard they have fought That said the fight now is really concentrated on what happens in the remainder of Donbass and and so I think there's been some creative ideas that have been put out there about how to resolve that difference but obviously it has to be one in which both sides will have to agree to give up on something and that's always very difficult conversations to have I think for Ukraine the predominant desire is to ensure their long-term security and safety so that they're never reinvaded or reattacked in the future And so Steve is conditioning those ideas He met with Zelensky a few hours ago my understanding from the what the information he provided to me and the readout I got from it is that it was positive nothing unexpected, nothing surprising and, and he'll now, armed with those ideas be able to go to Saint Petersburg and and share them with the Russian side and let's see if we can make some progress but as I said I mean, these things Are complex and they, this, this is a if this was an easy war to solve it would have been solved a long time ago Mr. President, if, are you hopeful that the the Russian will release those minor yeah I don't comment on that other than to say that we think Mr. Hubbard should be released as soon as possible We've made that ask of the Russian system on a consistent basis and we remain hopeful that that that will happen but that's, beyond that I'm not going to comment on that right now But let me just give him one last one. This poor guy He never gets questions Go ahead Last week, the president, pushed out Ambassador Guilfoyle from Greece, after the reports, alleging unethical behavior the next day you sent a message to remind State Department employees globally about the standards that you hold them to in terms of obeying rules regarding ethics gifts, all of the rules and structure of the State Department imposed globally Are you concerned that the kind of issues that we saw with Ambassador Guilfoyle go beyond her personally or there, there could be other No First of all, let me say that message that went out just happened to go out the next day but it had been something that we had I had ordered to go out like weeks in advance For whatever reason, the somebody who works for me couldn't get it out on time because we asked them to do that weeks and weeks and weeks ahead of time So but this is a message we've sent out multiple times. It's just a constant reminder of people who they work for. They work for the government of the United States they work for the people of the United States and we expect everyone in our department to do so not just in accordance with the law but with the higher standards possible Our ability to Dramatically represent this country is undermined and is and is, sabotaged If there's any implications that what you are doing and I'm not talking about Kimberly in specific anybody, you are undermined when when anytime there's the notion that somehow what you are doing is somehow in your interest but not in the interest of the country So we it's not the first time we've sent that message. That is something we repeatedly do because to me it's a very important principle of how we do our work It just happened to go out the day after but that is something that frankly had been drafted and that I had ordered sent weeks in advance and unfortunately did not go out when I wanted it to go out for whatever reason. But but it won't it probably won't be the last time that a message like that is sent It's something we just constantly remind people of just to, to to set the right culture and standards Okay? Thank you, guys

Open the full analysis →

What the model flagged

Analyzed 2026-10-22 00:01 UTC.

Findings may include language that is quoted rather than the speaker's own, and the model over-reads ceremonial language (tributes, anniversaries) as persuasion. Check each finding against the original.

No techniques were flagged.