. . .
MIN. BARAK: Of course, the continuing Iran nuclear program is a central issue in our minds still and we -- and we do welcome a -- (inaudible) -- coordinated international effort to try to block this nuclear, military program. We have -- worried that the continuation of the nuclear Iran could destabilize the whole region and -- (inaudible) -- world order. And Israel remains in its basic position that no options should be removed from the table in spite of the fact that at this stage priority should be given still -- (inaudible) -- sanctions.

. . .

SEC. GATES: We had a good meeting, during which I reaffirmed the strong commitment of the United States to the security of Israel. As President Obama said in Cairo last month, our bond is unbreakable. We also discussed the regional security challenges we both face from terrorism to the threat posed by Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons.

. . .

Q Thank you. Mr. Secretary, you've previously spoken about the potential of a military strike on Iran. (Inaudible) -- in terms of a disaster -- I want to ask you, sir, what do you consider to be more of a disaster, a nuclear-armed Iran or -- (inaudible) -- to strike these facilities?

SEC. GATES: Well, there's no question that as Minister Barak said a nuclear-armed Iran would be profoundly destabilizing to the entire region and a threat to, certainly, to Israel and a threat to the United States and other states as well.

I think we are in full agreement on the negative consequences of Iran obtaining this kind of capability. I think we also agree that it is important to take every opportunity to try and persuade the Iranians to reconsider what is actually in their own security interests. And we're in the process of doing that, both in terms of the president's offer to engage with the Iranians, but also through sanctions to impose costs on for pursuing that course.

The other thing that we agreed is that the president's offer is not open ended. And we will deal with the situation at that time.

Q (Off mike) -- Associated Press

Q Mr. Minister, is the United States asking you to put your nation at risk if you hold back on a strike against Iran's nuclear facilities?

MIN. BARAK: I'm not sure if I fully understand.

Q Is the United States asking you to place your nation at risk if you hold back on a strike against Iran's nuclear facilities? And Secretary Gates, how long is it appropriate to ask Israel to be patient?

MIN. BARAK: May I answer first? I don't think that it makes any sense at this stage to talk about -- (inaudible). Our position is very clear -- (inaudible) -- we are in no position to tell the administration whether to -- (inaudible) -- engagement with Iran or not. But if there is an engagement, we believe it should be short in time -- (inaudible) -- followed by sanctions -- (inaudible). It won't take too much time to verify whether Iran is trying to keep -- (inaudible). And we clearly believe that no options should be removed from the table. This is our policy. We mean it. We recommend to others to take the same position. But we cannot dictate it to anyone.

SEC. GATES: I'd say that as I said earlier, the president has been quite clear that this is not an open ended offer to engage. We're very mindful of the possibility that the Iranians would simply try to run out the clock. I think that the president is certainly anticipating or hoping for some kind of a response this fall, perhaps, by the time of the U.N. General Assembly.

MODERATOR: (Off mike.)

Q (Inaudible) -- President Obama said in November, the end of the year -- (inaudible) -- in light of what's happening in Iran now, the rapid progress in the development of long-range missiles. Would it be something to consider -- (inaudible) -- the timetable the president has set?

SEC. GATES: I think based on the information that's available to us that the timetable that the president has laid out still seems to be viable and does not significantly increase the risks of -- (inaudible).

MIN. BARAK: (Speaking in Hebrew.)

Q -- (inaudible) -- looking forward to serious results. We were expecting more serious sanctions -- (inaudible) -- Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter -- (inaudible).

MODERATOR: Thank you. Last question, Elizabeth Yu, New York Times

Q This past week, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton talked about a defense umbrella over the Middle East. What shape would that really take and would it be a nuclear defense pact along the lines of what we have with South Korea, Japan.

SEC. GATES: Well, there are a number of paths that we are following an effort to try and get the Iranian government to reconsider what appears to be its intent to develop nuclear weapons, the economic sanctions that Minister Barak spoke of are clearly one of those paths.

Another path on the diplomatic and security side is trying to persuade the Iranians that their own security interests are diminished by their policies, not enhanced. And that their security actually -- they would be better off without a nuclear weapons program, partly because it would be destabilizing, partly because it might set off an arms race in the Middle East. But also through our efforts to further develop our bilateral and multilateral security relationships with our friends and allies in the region that we've been working on for the last two years or so in terms of maritime surveillance and air and -- (inaudible) -- defense and missile defense, capabilities in the region, the additional capabilities we put in the region for missile defense.

But the work that we are doing with a number of Gulf states in trying to enhance their security and our mutual security are part of the umbrella -- (inaudible).

. . .