. . .

QUESTION: Mr. Minister, a very specific question, the next question for both of you gentlemen.

First question is in terms of the F-16s, are we to understand that the numbers of F-16s are going to remain the same but it's a mix of old and new that's changing, or are the numbers going to change?

And my second question is in terms of putting pressure on Iran, Under Secretary Burns said, I believe it was last week, was urging countries to avoid the transfers of any dual-use or sensitive technologies to Iran. I was wondering if Pakistan has made that engagement.

And Under Secretary Burns, have you been satisfied in your conversations with the Minister on this question?

FOREIGN SECRETARY KHAN: As regards the specific details of this package, I'll give you the basic fact, which is that it is a scaled down request. But exactly what are the numbers involved -- what were before because these things keeping on getting revised. So what numbers we may have started with, I even don't know that and I have rough idea as to what we have requested now. So I'm really not in a position to make a comparison as to what was in our minds before and what it is that we have asked now, but it is a scaled-down, much scaled-down request and it is a mix, as I said, that this is no longer all new aircraft.

As regards to your second question, we are not, first of all, producers of any new or advanced technologies, so we do not have this kind of relationship with any other country. But I will say that we have now a very strong system of export controls and this has been made into a legislation and the list that we have on export controls they are consistent with the NSG guidelines and other international standards.

UNDER SECRETARY BURNS: We're actually going to be having a specific discussion of Iran when we leave here, a full discussion, and what I will certainly want to share with the Foreign Secretary is our expectation that tomorrow's report by Director General ElBaradei is going to have to be a strongly negative report, because Iran has not complied with the wishes, either of the UN Security Council or of the IAEA Board of Governors. And Iran this week made the extraordinary statement, the Supreme Leader of Iran, that nuclear technology produced by Iran would be made available to Sudan, which is a highly irresponsible country. That extraordinary statement, of course, followed the other very disturbing initiatives of the Government of Iran to seek -- to proceed on enrichment at the plant at Natanz.

The Iranians have crossed all the international red lines, and so this is now going to force a significant debate at the United Nations Security Council. There'll be a meeting of the Permanent Five political directors in Paris on Tuesday, which I'll be attending, to consult about the best way forward. But there's no question in my mind that we're going to have see a significant international response and that will be one of rebuke of the Government of Iran for its actions. And as I said last week and as Secretary Rice has said during this week when she's been traveling in the Middle East and Europe, a great variety of countries are going to have to consult about whether or not sanctions is the right way forward. The United States believes it is. There has to be a significant international diplomatic response to show the Iranian Government that this is not a cost-free exercise.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

FOREIGN SECRETARY KHAN: We are not part of the Security Council, so we would not be engaged in any discussions on this matter. But when I spoke earlier, I made our position very clear. We are against any result to use of force. We want that this matter should be resolved diplomatically. And in that, there are efforts already in hand and we hope that all those efforts will go through.

QUESTION: I am (inaudible) from Voice of America Television. My question to Secretary Burns, what role does Pakistan have, if any, in solving this Iran issue, either through diplomatic means or through force? And Secretary Khan, does the U.S.'s stand against Iran jeopardize the U.S.-India-Pakistan gas pipeline project?

UNDER SECRETARY BURNS: Let me just say that the United States has been pursuing a diplomatic path. Our President, Secretary of State have said many times that we're focusing on diplomacy. And over the past year, we've worked with the European governments, with Russia, with China, with India, with Pakistan, other countries to try to assert the possibility of a diplomatic solution. But for a diplomatic solution to be achieved, Iran has to begin to listen to the international community.

You had this extraordinary situation now where the entire IAEA Board of Governors voted by a very large majority to rebuke Iran and to tell it to suspend its nuclear programs. That was followed by a presidential statement of the United Nations Security Council, the most authoritative international body in the world. And you're going to see a very vigorous debate in New York at the Security Council in the first half of May about what additional steps the Security Council should take.

And so we're a permanent member of the Security Council. We're focused on that diplomatic track and it's been encouraging to see the number of countries who have stepped forward to deliver that basic message to Iran. And that is you can't try to achieve a nuclear weapons capability against the wishes of the international community. There is great international unity on that issue.

There are very few countries defending Iran. I think Syria has. I believe Venezuela has. Other than those two, I haven't found -- Belarus has also defended Iran. So those three countries are the only ones that I know of that believe and that are arguing that Iran should have the right to achieve a nuclear weapons capability. All the rest of us and that vote in the IAEA was extraordinary because Egypt and Sri Lanka and many of the African and Latin American countries all voted together with the Permanent 5 members of the Council. The Iranians need to begin to reflect that there is going to be a cost to what they are doing.

FOREIGN SECRETARY KHAN: Yeah. As I made it really clear, our position on the Iranian issue, one other aspect to that position is that we strongly emphasize that all parties, particularly Iran because it's also a member of the NPT must abide by their international obligations. As regards, the gas pipeline, Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline which basically a project which is conceived in the context of the huge energy needs that Pakistan has in the future and also the Indian market also has those needs. So it is -- basically we perceive it like any other agreements that Iran has for supply of oil and gas to -- they have very large number of countries, the Europeans, the Japanese, the Chinese. The -- almost every country has a certain agreement with Iran for supply of oil and gas. So basically we look at this project in that context.

MODERATOR: Elise.

QUESTION: Under Secretary Burns, Elise Labott with CNN. Under Secretary Burns, I know efforts right now at the UN on the Iran nuclear issue in trying to put pressure on the regime, either through a resolution or perhaps a coalition of other countries, but to what extent has the Bush Administration given up on the hope that the regime of President Ahmadi-Nejad will actually end its nuclear ambitions and that it's probably necessary to pursue -- more efforts to transform the regime through your democracy programs and programs of that nature? And Foreign Secretary, to what extent does Pakistan feel that the regime of President Ahmadi-Nejad is a threat to peace and national security? And should efforts of transforming the regime to a more democratic country be pursued? Thank you.

UNDER SECRETARY BURNS: Well, our policy, of course, is very much broad-gauged, where we're operating with a wide circle of international friends to try to stop Iran from achieving a nuclear weapons capability. We have tremendous international support in the effort to try to convince the Iranians that they ought to end their central banking role for international terrorism in the Middle East and to stop their support for Hezbollah and other terrorist organizations.

We are concerned, as are a number of the Arab countries in the Middle East, about an increasingly aggressive Iranian foreign policy in the region of the Middle East. And finally, as you know, we have put forward to the Congress a request for funding that would allow Voice of America and Radio Farda to broadcast more frequently a greater number of hours per day into Iran. We want to bring Iranians here on scholarships. We certainly want to support, at the grassroots level, the building of a democratic government in a country -- in Iran. That's the basis of the $75 million request that President Bush and Secretary Rice have sent to the Congress.

So we have a broad-gauged policy and it's necessary, because Iran is challenging peace and stability in the international arena in the Middle East in a number of areas. And we think it's important to pursue all of these avenues and we are doing that and we've got -- I'm happy to say I think we have bipartisan support in our Congress. And equally importantly, these ideas are gaining increasing resonance around the world. It is impressive to see the number of countries that are now beginning to speak out about Iranian support for terrorist groups and impressive to see the number of countries that are beginning to think about a response, an economic response on the former sanctions against Iran.

So we're encouraged that there is an international coalition that's building and we are at the heart of that coalition and we have not given up hope that there can be a diplomatic solution to the problem of Iranians -- Iran's search for nuclear weapons and we're determined to pursue that as aggressively as we can.

FOREIGN SECRETARY KHAN: Well, I think part of your question was also addressed to me.

QUESTION: Do you see the regime of President Ahmadi-Nejad specifically as a threat to peace and national security? Should there be a broader policy of transforming the regime?

FOREIGN SECRETARY KHAN: Yeah. As regards to transforming regimes, let me make it very clear that Pakistan has a very simple policy. We are not in the business of transforming, changing regimes anywhere. So that is not something that we conceive as -- see as part of our policies. As regards to the second part of -- the first part of your question, we want friendly relations with all our neighbors. We want a friendly environment in our region. Iran is a very important neighbor of Pakistan. So we hope that they would be -- of course, resolve all the problems that they have, especially this issue and we hope that the international community will be able to resolve these issues with Iran. But as far as Pakistan is concerned, as a neighbor and a country which has a very longstanding good relationship with Iran, we wish them well and we also want to have, as I said, peaceful involvement and friendly relations with all our neighbors.

MODERATOR: We have time for one more.

QUESTION: There are two things, one to Mr. Burns and the other one to Mr. Khan. One -- this one is about Iran. There is sort of a concerted belief that America will not take any actions against Iran because of two reasons. Number one, if it does, it will bog down U.S. troops in Iran for years and number two, it will create so much instability, globally, that you will not be able to tackle with it.

And the other question is, of course -- either of you can answer -- about the de-hyphenating your relationship with India -- the de-hyphenation of a relationship with India and Pakistan. You do that, but that does not change the situation in the region on the ground, that your nuclear agreement with India has created a deep sense of insecurity in Pakistan. How would you reassure the Pakistanis that this is not something that is going to hurt them?

UNDER SECRETARY BURNS: Well, first of all, as you know, our relationship with India is to build a civil nuclear power and it's to try to give the Indian people a chance to have energy, electricity production to fuel the very rapid economic growth in that country and to accommodate the expansion of the economy that has to take place, particularly in rural areas. So I think the people of Pakistan should be reassured that this program does not speak at all of support for the nuclear weapons sector of the Indian nuclear industry, but to the civil power sector. And that is going to be positive. It's going to be positive for the Indians. And I think our overall relationship with both Pakistan and India is going to be a force for stability in the region, quite frankly.

The United States is friends with both countries and we are very pleased to see the positive evolution in relations between Pakistan and India. And I said to the Foreign Secretary today it's our great hope that that will continue and that's our expectation as well. So I think the people of Pakistan can be very much reassured about that.

FOREIGN SECRETARY KHAN: Well, we, of course, also welcome U.S. role for -- in the interest of stability and peace and security in South Asia. But when it comes to security, we also understand our own responsibility as a sovereign country and naturally, in case there are trends which, in any manner, create an imbalance which requires some kind of measures on our part, then as I said earlier, that we would never be oblivious of the requirements of our security. As in the past, we have been taking steps in order to ensure that there is a deterrence which remains established and this deterrence has, in fact, been helpful for maintenance of peace in the region. 2002 was a case in point. So similarly, we understand the importance of it and we will continue to make efforts, if such efforts are needed, to maintain that deterrence.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much.

UNDER SECRETARY BURNS: Thank you.

FOREIGN SECRETARY KHAN: Thank you.