. . .

QUESTION: On Iran, can you give us a kind of update on where you understand things to stand with the talks between Larijani and Solana and any discussion of a temporary suspension during the negotiations that's been reported about?

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, the last part first. No surprise, you've heard it from us before, their suspension for suspension. If they meet -- if they have a verifiable suspension, the United States will be at the table. Secretary Rice committed to be at that first round of meetings or that first meeting. We haven't seen that yet. We don't have an answer that meets the criterion laid out in Resolution 1696 and previously in the IAEA Board of Governors. We hope that the answer is yes, and that there's a positive answer and that they suspend.

Mr. Solana has not heard that from Mr. Larijani at this point. I believe that they have a meeting scheduled for sometime this week. Those meetings have been delayed several times along the way. They were supposed to meet during the U.N. General Assembly I think last week or the week before. So we'll see. We certainly hope the answer is positive, but we have not heard a positive answer. And as you've heard from Secretary Rice, we are willing to give this a little bit of time. We're not saying how much at this point, but time is quite limited.

QUESTION: When we talk about suspension for suspension, is there -- are you working with the Europeans who -- and Solana, who are working with Larijani, on a formula for this suspension such as do you have to have a complete suspension before the talks could start? Because some of the reports out there suggest that, you know, that you may be able to come to some kind of agreement that's satisfactory to both sides; whereas, the Iranians make some kind of gesture that they have started all the suspension might have not started but the talks could continue.

Is there a kind of formula here or you have to see a complete suspension before those talks would start?

MR. MCCORMACK: A couple of things. One we're in close contact with Mr. Solana as well as the other partners in the P-5+1. Second, the United States will not be at the table for any negotiations absent a suspension as outlined by the IAEA and the Security Council. That means it has to be a verifiable suspension. And suspension means suspension which means suspension. There is a definition listed, I think, in the IAEA Board of Governors' statement from several months back. So it's very clear what needs to happen. We're speaking for ourselves, we won't be at the table absent a verified suspension.

QUESTION: Just one more on this. Would you agree to have the Europeans begin talking with the Iranians before you would join the talks, or is it all or nothing in terms of these issues?

MR. MCCORMACK: The fact of the matter is the Europeans are talking to them. And Mr. Solana is talking to them. I believe at the first and -- the first and the subsequent meetings that Mr. Solana had after the Paris agreement that there were a number of other representatives that were there. There's been sort of -- has not been a set number of people on the European side or the P-5+1 side. But, you know, for example, political directors from various countries have accompanied Mr. Solana. I expect that that would probably continue if Mr. Solana does actually have this meeting with Mr. Larijani.

QUESTION: Can I follow up on this?

MR. MCCORMACK: Mm-hmm.

QUESTION: Is there any reason to believe that The Washington Times report is accurate that Iran is close to an agreement with the Europeans to undertake temporary suspension of their uranium enrichment and therefore clear the way for talks with you guys? Do you have reason to believe that's true?

MR. MCCORMACK: You know, I guess an accurate answer to that question would involve having very clear and accurate insight into the decision-making process of the Iranian regime which we don't have. We'll see. We can only judge them on what it is that they do. They have -- I have heard some hopeful statements from the Iranian Foreign Minister, for example. We'll see if those are borne out. We certainly hope that the answer is, yes; we will suspend. We will verifiably suspend in order to get to negotiations. That's what we want. That's certainly our preferred course of action here. But we are fully prepared along with the other members of the P-5+1 to go down the track of sanctions if that, in fact, is not the answer.

QUESTION: But the flip side is not -- I mean, I realize the Iranian decision making is opaque at best for you guys. That said, you also have much clearer -- much more transparent exchanges with the Europeans. And I wonder if you have heard anything from them to suggest that this report is true; that the Iranians are close to saying yes on the temporary suspension.

MR. MCCORMACK: I think -- you know, Arshad, you just don't know the answer to the question until you have the definitive answer. And there can be hopeful signs, there can be good atmospherics, there can be various permutations of proposals floated formally, informally, in those discussions. But until you have a concrete answer, a definitive answer one way or the other, you know, you're just not going to know.

Yeah, Libby.

QUESTION: How close are you guys on possible agreement on a first round of sanctions? I mean, I know the political directors have been meeting all along. Is there agreement on what to do in the first round once, you know --

MR. MCCORMACK: I don't think we have that nailed down yet. But Nick Burns, our Under Secretary for Political Affairs, is speaking -- in some contact with his colleagues in the -- from the world of political directors in the P-5+1 talking about this. The last time I checked in with him he said that they were making -- they were making progress on that but they haven't nailed it down finally.

QUESTION: Does the U.S. has specific -- I mean, does the U.S. have a clear idea of what it wants when it comes to the table?

MR. MCCORMACK: Yeah, sure, we do. I'm not going to, at this point, share that with you guys as we're negotiating with the other members of the P-5+1 at this point. You know, suffice it to say that however, if we do get to this point of a sanctions resolution, it might not look exactly like a resolution that we ourselves drafted and we're wholly responsible for. But it will be something that is acceptable to us and it will be acceptable and conform to our approach of trying to gradually ratchet up pressure on this regime to get it to change its behavior.

Yes, Michel.

QUESTION: Sean, the Secretary said yesterday that the United States is considering new sanctions on Syria.

QUESTION: Can we stay on Iran for a moment?

MR. MCCORMACK: Sure. Let's stay on Iran.

QUESTION: Did -- the story Arshad cited also suggested that perhaps Iran would like to do any suspension more quietly than you might be willing to accept, in other words for public consumption in order to save face? And are you aware of any requests Iran might have made to the Europeans to not be very public in announcing any suspension?

MR. MCCORMACK: A couple of things. Look, you know, they can call it whatever they want. I mean they could call it a ball of wax. But if it's a suspension, meaning the facts on the ground say that it is in fact a suspension and that is verified by the IAEA, they can call it whatever they want.

So it's the facts on the ground that matter to us, whether or not those facts conform to and meet the standards laid out by the IAEA. And you know, again, for us to be at the table for negotiations, that suspension has to be verified and you all know the conditions for our going to the table and we would, of course, restate what those conditions are, that you have to meet the standard of suspension for us to be at the table. So you would certainly know if we ever got to that point and we were at the table that there would be a suspension.

But as I said, they can call it whatever they want as long as it meets the terms and conditions that are laid out.

QUESTION: Do you think it's conceivable in your view to verify it in a secret way? I mean are you open to sending, IAEA inspectors in and not publicly announce it, or do you feel like it has to be a publicly verified thing and you have to be able to -- I mean can you do it secretly?

MR. MCCORMACK: I suppose that that becomes very tricky because it would have to be verified by the IAEA. And I suspect that you guys would soon find out if, in fact, that happened given your skill and prowess in tracking down these matters.

But again, -- you know, again, if we showed up at the table, you would know why. We would be there because there was a full suspension. And you know, the Iranians may want to call it something else, I don't know, which is -- doesn't really matter frankly what you call it as long as the facts on the ground meet the standards laid out and the requirements laid out by the Security Council and the IAEA Board of Governors.

. . .