. . .
QUESTION: On Iran. Looking forward to Wednesday and the ministers meeting in Paris, do you think you're going to get an answer from them by then?
MR. MCCORMACK: We'll see. We'll see. Mr. Solana is scheduled to meet with the Iranians tomorrow, tomorrow morning, I believe. We'll see. We'll see what pathway we end up going down at this point, the positive pathway or the negative pathway. The choice is essentially there for the Iranians to make and we hope that they provide a yes to Mr. Solana, that they are willing to meet the conditions that the international community has laid out. And I would point out, conditions that are not the United States. These are conditions that they had already agreed to with the European Union.
We hope that they say yes because that is the way into negotiations. There's a proposal on the table. But what it is, it's a proposal for negotiations. If, in fact, the Iranians do meet those conditions and stop all enrichment and reprocessing related activity, that opens the doorway to negotiations. And we have laid out what is -- the EU-3 and Mr. Solana on our behalf, the P-5+1 has laid out what our basically opening position would be on those negotiations. So we hope that it is, in fact, a positive response. We'll see what they say.
QUESTION: But tomorrow you should know how they prepare -- how they --
MR. MCCORMACK: They've had six weeks. They've had six weeks to respond to this specific proposal. It's a month and a half. We think that any government could, in this period of time, make the decision that, yes, we do want to engage in negotiations, we will meet these conditions. It doesn't -- that six weeks, the P-5+1 isn't asking them to come up with a final negotiated solution to the issue. What they are asking is give us a yes or give us a no in terms of meeting these conditions, give us a yes or give us a no to go down the positive pathway or the negative pathway. That's what's before them. It's not to come up with a final negotiated solution. That's what negotiations are about. This is about coming to the table. Are they willing to come to the table? And we'll see what the answer is.
QUESTION: Well, what happens if they don't give you an answer tomorrow?
MR. MCCORMACK: We'll see. We'll see what happens when they actually provide an answer and the ministers have a time to assess what it is that they've heard.
James.
QUESTION: When this proposal was originally presented to the Iranians on June 6th, the Secretary and others in the Administration, with great fanfare, made it clear that the Iranians had a period of weeks not months in which to make that decision and provide that response. Is that still the position of the United States Government and the allies in the P-5+1? Do the Iranians still have weeks not months or has their window shrunk at all given that six weeks have passed?
MR. MCCORMACK: It will have been six weeks at the end of the week. By my count we're not into months yet, so we're still into weeks.
QUESTION: So they will get more time, is what you're saying?
MR. MCCORMACK: We're going to -- they're going to -- they're supposed to provide Mr. Solana an answer tomorrow. The ministers are going to be meeting in Paris on Wednesday to consider what it is that they hear from the Iranians.
QUESTION: Would it be accurate to say, and tell me if it isn't so then I won't say it, that --
MR. MCCORMACK: Are you sure? (Laughter.)
QUESTION: Yes, to all things. That the patience of the P-5+1 partners is running out?
MR. MCCORMACK: James, I think that, look, I would only say that they have had plenty of time. They have had plenty of time to consider the question that is before them, and I tried in response to Libby's question to lay out exactly what it is that is before them, what is the choice that's before them. I think any reasonable person would say six weeks is quite long enough to consider that.
And I would also point out too that certainly even before this -- this isn't a new subject -- the Iranians had been thinking about this and talking about this issue for two years. They've been thinking and talking about it for two years with the EU-3 as their negotiating partners. Finally, the EU-3, out of frustration, sadly, said, "We've reached the end of the line in terms of our ability to engage constructively with the Iranians. They've made agreements, they've broken agreements, and we can't do this any longer." So we now have the P-5+1 that is trying to provide the Iranians with a choice to end -- really to discern, has the Iranian Government made that strategic choice; what are their real intentions here.
And I think that their answer will certainly be illustrative in demonstrating what their real intentions are, if they -- if their intentions really are a peaceful civilian nuclear program that benefits the Iranian people, then there is that possibility that exists down the positive pathway. So we'll see what their real intentions are, whether it's that or whether it is, in fact, that they intend to seek to develop a nuclear weapon, which is what we suspect has been their intention.
QUESTION: Is not the fact that it has taken six weeks and you haven't received a definitive reply evidence of their intentions?
MR. MCCORMACK: I'm not going to try to read anything into it at this point. I would only say, James, they've had plenty of time. They've had plenty of time at this point to provide an answer to the question that was put before them.
Sylvie.
QUESTION: They repeated today that they would give an answer by the end of August. Would it still be weeks and not month?
MR. MCCORMACK: That would appear to me to be weeks -- I mean, that would appear to me to be months. Well, it would be weeks too, but it would be months as well.
QUESTION: So it would be months.
MR. MCCORMACK: That would be months.
Yes.
QUESTION: If they say that they're prepared to do it at the end of August, why not just say, "Okay, you know, give us the date and after that, you know, agree to a deadline," at which point they'll give it to you, if they say that they're going to give it to you at the end of August?
MR. MCCORMACK: Right. Elise, you know, you can -- like I said, they've been working on this, thinking about it with the international community for two years; six weeks on this specific proposal, but essentially, you know, two years. You think that that is -- that would be long enough. Certainly, you know, they want to play kick the can down the road on this, they want to string the international community along while they continue to make progress on their nuclear program. Well, the international community says, "No, we're not going to play that game," so provide an answer to us. It's a very clear choice here. We have -- the international community has provided a very constructive and attractive offer. It allows the Iranians to realize their stated objectives potentially, via the negotiating table. And at the same time, begin to build up again that level, that degree of trust with the international community that they have really essentially worn down to nothing with their repeated statements that they were going to cooperate and then their failure to cooperate. So it provides the Iranian Government many potentially very attractive opportunities and certainly very attractive opportunities for the Iranian people. So we'll see. I mean, we'll see what their answer is going to be.
. . .