AP Reporter: Isn’t State Dept. Meant for Diplomacy, Not Likening Allies to Apartheid?

LEE: "To go back to the secretary's comments on Friday -- come at this from two ways. One, do you, or does he at least acknowledge that using a term like apartheid is offensive to a lot of Israelis and pro-Israel supporters?"
PSAKI: "Well, I think his meaning of any comment he makes is his support for a two state solution and his belief that it's hard to see how the parties can prosper without it."
LEE: "I understand, but us of -- using this word, the a-word I guess we can call it, is kind of a touch-button issue for many in the pro-Israel community, including -- and many Israelis. Is the Secretary aware of that?"
PSAKI: "Matt, I think many officials have used similar phrases that have been reported, and I think he's aware of that as well."
LEE: "You mean many Israeli officials. How about American officials who are supposed to be -- you know, you guys are supposed to be the neutral, you know, the arbiter, the honest broker here. Are you aware of any other current American official who have used 'apartheid' while they were in the middle or while they are still trying, maybe near the end of a negotiation?"
PSAKI: "Well Matt, he certainly didn't say 'is.' He said --"
LEE: "Right, I'm not saying he said that it is. We'll get to that in a second because that's the other side of the coin here. But he did use the word -- unless I'm mistaking you, your explanation. Does he understand that using that word -- whether he said 'is,' 'was,' 'maybe,' 'could be,' 'definitely will be,' 'definitely won't be' -- that that is a loaded term that's going to cause a lot of angst and a lot of indignation, you know, whether one believes that indignation is faux or not."
PSAKI: "We're certainly all familiar with the term, but I don't have any other commentary for all of you on --"
LEE: "All right, from the other side of the coin, the other perspective here, which is that Palestinian perspective here. There are a lot of people who are pro-Palestinian who would argue that in fact Israel is now an apartheid state. You're saying that the Secretary does not now believe that. Can I ask you why he does not share the views the pro-Palestinians?"
PSAKI: "Because he believes that Israel is vibrant democracy with equal rights for it's citizens."
LEE: "Right, but it is also an occupying power, correct?"
PSAKI: "We're all familiar with the circumstances in the region."
LEE: "OK. And people -- not every person who lives under Israeli authority is not an Israeli citizen with equal rights, is that correct?"
PSAKI: "Matt, we're all familiar with the reasons why we are, why he has been so, putting so much effort into pursuing a peace process. But that doesn't change his view on Israel currently."
LEE: "Right, but you do accept that there are people who live under Israeli administration, under Israeli authority, who do not have equal rights, correct?"
PSAKI: "I don't think I'm going to analyze this further."
LEE: "Look, the secretary is getting it from both sides. The pro-Israel people are furious that he would even deign to utter the word, the a-word, even if it was referring to something happening in the future, or possibly happening in the future. The other side is upset that the secretary is not using it, using the a-word to describe how Israel is right now. Give that, given that circumstance, you acknowledge that is the situation, right? OK. Was using the word smart? Does the secretary understand that using that word is going to give him a lot of grief?"
PSAKI: "I'm just not going to give any analysis on that Matt."