Remarks by Acting Deputy Department Spokesperson Mark C. Toner on Iran Meeting (Excerpts)

January 20, 2011

Weapon Program: 

  • Nuclear

. . .

MR. TONER: Just a very quick update, a very quick announcement. You've probably all seen the statement that Under Secretary for Political Affairs William J. Burns will be leading the U.S. delegation as it joins our P-5+1 partners as well as Iranian representatives in talks beginning today in Istanbul, Turkey. We seek to launch a meaningful and practical process that addresses the core issues with Iran's nuclear program. As the P-5+1 has consistently made clear, we are committed to holding Iran accountable to its international obligations and will continue to do so until Iran takes tangible steps to resolve international concerns with its nuclear program.

. . .

QUESTION: Okay. On Iran, with Burns going there, realistically what are you looking to accomplish at this point? And could you give us an update on that proposal that was around last year for the fuel swap? They made some comments apparently with the Russians about no need for a fuel swap if they can fuel the reactor with 20 percent that they have already enriched.

MR. TONER: Right. Well, I think we're looking forward to the, obviously, these discussions tomorrow. What we've tried - what we want to see occur here is the - or evolve here is a meaningful and practical negotiation process. So this is - again, we had the meeting in Geneva in December. We now have the meeting in Istanbul, and we're thankful, in fact, to the Turks for hosting this meeting. These are small, incremental steps. We're not expecting any big breakthroughs, but we want to see a constructive process emerge that leads to Iran engaging with the international community in a credible process and engaging and addressing the international community's concerns about its nuclear program.

QUESTION: So you're really just at the stage of defining those talks rather than any substance?

MR. TONER: Well, I mean, it's - let me be clear. I mean, we're there to talk about Iran's nuclear program and to engage with them on that. But I don't want to get out in front of the meetings tomorrow, and I also don't want to create any illusions about what they might lead to. What we want to see is a real process. We had the meetings last year, and then we had a pause, a significant pause. And so what we want to see is a process emerge that leads to progress, frankly.

Yeah, go ahead, Christophe.

QUESTION: It's on Iran.

QUESTION: Please.

QUESTION: Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, arrived in Istanbul today and said that the lifting of sanctions should be discussed during this meeting - the possibility of lifting the sanctions.

MR. TONER: Well -

QUESTION: Do you think the time is right?

MR. TONER: Well, I think that UN Security Council Resolution 1929 stipulates what Iran needs to comply with in order to have those sanctions lifted, and those are quite clear.

Yeah, go ahead Arshad.

QUESTION: When you say - and you don't need to read the language again - but the language about the meaningful and practical process - do you mean, when you use the term "process," you mean you want a series of meetings? I mean, is it fair to interpret it that way?

MR. TONER: Yeah, I mean, absolutely. I think what we want to see is, again - last year's initial meeting led to a significant pause. We then pursued the sanctions track. We were successful in getting Resolution 1929 passed. That led to efforts by individual countries to toughen those sanctions. We think they've had an effect. We're now back. We've had one meeting. We're in the second meeting now. I think we're just taking a step by step incremental approach and not -

QUESTION: When you said "last year's meeting" you meant - I suspect you meant -

MR. TONER: Not - yeah, right.

QUESTION: -- the October, 2009 meeting in Geneva?

MR. TONER: Precisely, thank you.

QUESTION: And then what - is there any possibility of reviving the so-called TRR proposal -

MR. TONER: You asked about that as well. Sorry.

QUESTION: -- albeit modifying it to capture (a) the low-enriched uranium that has been produced since you initially made that offer in '09, and (b) to address the nearly 20 percent uranium enrichment that Iran says it has done since that. Is there any possibility of reviving that or is that dead from your point of view?

MR. TONER: No, I think our approach would include practical, tangible steps to build confidence on both sides. That's always what the TRR proposal has been, a confidence building measure. And we believe that obviously, as you just said in your question, it would have to be some kind of updated arrangement. But we're willing to discuss that in greater detail.

QUESTION: Do you plan to discuss it? Is that something you plan to bring up?

MR. TONER: I don't know if we're planning to bring it up. We're willing to discuss it. Let me put it that way.

QUESTION: Okay.

QUESTION: But, Mark, when you say "confidence building measure," is that all it is? I mean, isn't there also a - or was a technical reason for doing that, to get enriched uranium out of the country, enrich it outside of the country?

MR. TONER: Right, but it's -

QUESTION: I mean, it sounds like -

MR. TONER: But it's a relatively small step. And again, it's - what we're trying to - again, just to reiterate, what we're trying to do is begin with small steps, build a process, and build a constructive process that leads to real, tangible results. And ultimately, the onus is on Iran to address the international community's concerns about its nuclear program. That's the ultimate goal. So if the TRR can be useful, some kind of updated approach can be useful, then we're willing to talk about it.

QUESTION: Just to make sure, is it - so - but the issue is basically dead in the water at this point - the TRR?

MR. TONER: No, I thought I said that we'd be willing to talk about --

QUESTION: Yeah, but I mean realistically you'd be willing to talk about it. But they're basically saying we don't need it.

MR. TONER: I don't know what the Iranians are saying about it, frankly. I mean, there's a lot of pre-meeting posturing, but I don't know what's --

QUESTION: Just to be clear, you're willing to talk about it, but it would indeed have to be updated to reflect --

MR. TONER: Absolutely. Yes.

. . .