. . .

QUESTION: Last week in her speech, Secretary Clinton warned Latin American countries that relations with Iran could have consequences. And Venezuela's Hugo Chavez says he regards that statement as an overt threat. I'm wondering do you - does the Department see that as a threat? And can you let us know what kinds of consequences the Secretary may have been talking about? Are those consequences with bilateral ties with the United States?

MR. KELLY: Well, I think I'm going to let the Secretary's words speak for themselves. I think what we're all talking about is the need for unity in the international community in sending a very clear message to Iran that they need to abide by the wishes of the international community to make their nuclear energy program more transparent, and to engage with us as we've offered to do, and implement a very reasonable proposal that was made in Vienna, which would help us raise that level of confidence in the real intentions of their program, at the same time helping the Iranians with their own humanitarian needs.

And I think that we're still focused on our dual-track approach, a willingness to engage, but also at the same time, also looking at other options, what we call the pressure track. And I think we've seen that Iran has had a very difficult time coming up with a positive answer to this very reasonable proposal of the IAEA. And you've also seen what the President has said is that we're willing to give them some time. The engagement door will remain open. But the longer they take to get to yes on our offer of engagement, the more we're going to look at the pressure track. And I think that all countries should be aware of that.

QUESTION: So in the case of, for instance, she mentioned specifically Bolivia, which presumably, doesn't have a big hand in Iran's nuclear program, what kinds of consequences does Bolivia face if they just are being friendly with Iran generally?

MR. KELLY: Well, you're asking me to get into the specifics of what kind of options we would look at under the pressure track, and I'm just not prepared to do that right now.

QUESTION: Can I just follow up on that real quick?

MR. KELLY: Kirit, yeah.

QUESTION: Has there been anything over the past week or so, or even the last couple of days, that has led you to believe Iran might take you up on the LEU offer? And can you tell us if there's a P-5+1 meeting in the cards in the next week or so?

MR. KELLY: Regarding the first question, the short answer is no. I mean, I don't think we've seen much to really give us much encouragement that they will accept this very reasonable proposal of the IAEA.

Regarding a P-5+1 meeting, I think that it's been decided that because of scheduling difficulties, that it won't be possible this year. I think that they will - they look forward to continuing to consult, as they do on a frequent basis, the political directors of the P-5+1. I would expect that they will continue to consult and probably have one more type - consultation probably by telephone before the end of the year.

QUESTION: End of the year or end of the week?

MR. KELLY: I think by the end of the year, not necessarily by the end of the week.

QUESTION: So who has the scheduling difficulties of each of the six parties?

MR. KELLY: Well, I think - well, we were ready to do it. I'm just - I'm not going to comment on what other countries may have had the scheduling difficulty.

QUESTION: China or Russia?

MR. KELLY: Again, I'm not going to comment on who may have had the difficulty.

QUESTION: Some of the other powers don't consider it as big a priority as we do?

MR. KELLY: I'm not going to comment on that, Desmond. We are unified in our need to send a clear message to Iran that they have to oblige - or abide by their obligations.

QUESTION: They just can't find the time?

MR. KELLY: I'm sorry?

QUESTION: They just can't find the time before the end of the year?

MR. KELLY: Well, no, they will find the time. Whether they can all come together in one place, I think - there's a lot of traveling involved and a lot of scheduling, and telephone conversations are a lot easier to organize.

Yeah, Jill.

QUESTION: But Ian, this is a high priority. I mean --

MR. KELLY: Absolutely.

QUESTION: -- we all know that there is a deadline that the President is talking about by the end of the year --

MR. KELLY: Mm-hmm.

QUESTION: -- for Iran to do what the world community wants it to do. So can we expect that there will be some type of movement quickly at the beginning of this coming year?

MR. KELLY: Well, I think - first of all, I think that the - as I suggested, I think that the political directors of the P-5+1 do still need to consult, and I think that will happen. It's just not going to happen with the meeting. And no one has set a specific timetable for looking at other options. But the President's made clear that his - that we will be looking, or shifting our focus more and more to the pressure track as Iran is unable to come up with a good answer.

QUESTION: What do you mean, no one set a specific timetable for looking at other options?

MR. KELLY: Well, the end of the year --

QUESTION: The guy who lives down the road has set one.

MR. KELLY: The end of the year. Is that what you mean, Matt?

QUESTION: Yeah. Is that not specific?

MR. KELLY: Well, that's - yeah, okay, fair enough. He hasn't given a date certainly, but - well, I guess December 31st is the date. Okay, your point is taken.

. . .