. . .
QUESTION: Is there any change in the basic procedure, which is we're waiting for a report from ElBaradei, we get the report, talk at the UN about what to do about it?
MR. MCCORMACK: Here's the timeline as I understand it, Barry. We had the meetings in Moscow, G-7, G-8, P 5+1. There are going to be continuing discussions at the political director and other level in the run-up to April 28th. April 28th is the date on which the IAEA will deliver a report to the Board of Governors, as well as the Security Council at the same time, about Iran's nuclear activities since the last time the Board of Governors met.
I would expect shortly thereafter that the Security Council would meet to consider the report and also to meet to consider what diplomatic next steps to take. I am not aware of any move to call for, in that interregnum, a meeting of the IAEA Board of Governors.
QUESTION: Are the Security Council --
MR. MCCORMACK: Teri.
QUESTION: Are Security Council -- I mean, no meetings are on the agenda between now and then, as far as you know, on Iran?
MR. MCCORMACK: I would -- you know, I can't preclude that at the Security Council, they're -- as part of their daily business they may -- they might not discuss Iran. It could -- it might just be part of the daily flow of business at the UN. But in terms of calling a Security Council meeting specifically to talk about the IAEA report and what diplomatic next steps, I expect that would be at the beginning of May, after the April 28th report.
QUESTION: Can we talk a little bit about Nick's meetings, wrapping up Nick's meetings? And he says that he thinks there's been progress because almost every country is now considering some sort of sanctions, but it doesn't seem that he came away with any greater hope that the Russians and Chinese have changed their position on it. Can you update us?
MR. MCCORMACK: Well, you know, I don't have much to what he said in public on the topic. I would expect that the discussions will continue over the next couple weeks on this topic. I think the -- certainly, the momentum is shifting in the direction of the international community taking strong diplomatic steps and that would mean sanctions. How do you accomplish that and under what aegis do you do that? One of the things I think certainly we'll be interested in talking about at the Security Council is a Chapter 7 resolution. And that would allow -- that would have the force of international law. It would call upon -- it might call upon Iran to heed the call of the international community as it laid out in the previous presidential statement, which again, doesn't have the force of international law, but it reflected a consensus of the Security Council.
So there are a lot of different options at the -- diplomatic options at the disposal of the international community. I think that you are seeing a clear move in the direction of sanctions, of increasing the pressure on the Iranian regime to get it to change its behavior.
QUESTION: Including the veto-wielding countries as well? Can you say specifically that you see a shift in the position of Russia and China towards sanctions?
MR. MCCORMACK: I'm going to let them speak on their own behalf where they stand on that question. We are certainly focused on work in the Security Council. But as Nick's discussions in Moscow indicate, certainly other states can also act on their own. They can act as groups as well. That doesn't preclude working through the Security Council and certainly that remains a focus of our efforts as well as the focus of many others in the international community. But individual states also may act on their own.
Debbie.
QUESTION: On the Chapter 7 resolution question, is it true that Nick failed to get agreement from the P-5 to pursue a Chapter 7, regardless of what it includes?
MR. MCCORMACK: Right. Again, I have to go back. I want to rewind the tape to before the Moscow meetings. These meetings were not intended as gatherings where you were going to come out with agreements. They were designed to really further discussion on and refine the discussion and bring into higher relief the various options that are at the disposal of the international community. So the idea going in was certainly not to come to agreement on all of these issues. These are tough issues and these are weighty matters, so it will take a little bit more discussion.
That said, we believe that it is time for the Security Council to act and we believe that that time to act will come shortly after the IAEA presents what I would expect would be a very straightforward report about Iran's nuclear activities and which would also include a discussion about their claims to have performed enrichment.
Dave.
QUESTION: In terms of a cup half empty and -- or half full, Iran appears to have come up with an idea for this technical pause in enrichment. Is that in any way in advance? It seemed in a way they're being responsive.
MR. MCCORMACK: A technical pause? I'm not sure I know what that means.
QUESTION: They offered to, at least for some period, halt their --
MR. MCCORMACK: It's clear what they need to do. It's laid out in the IAEA Board of Governors statement.
Teri.
QUESTION: What did you think of the last-minute arrival of an Iranian delegation in Moscow yesterday to hold talks with the EU-3 countries? And does the United States think that that option still has legs?
MR. MCCORMACK: In terms of the EU-3?
QUESTION: Mm-hmm.
MR. MCCORMACK: Well, they themselves said that the negotiation had reached a dead end. As for the meeting, I think that was up to the EU-3. I don't think it yielded anything in terms of the Iranians coming forth in a serious way to meet the core demands of what the international community has asked of them. So as a matter of form, I think the EU-3 met with them. In terms of the substance, I have not heard any reports that would indicate there was any substantive change as a result of the meeting. You know, it was their decision to meet. We didn't -- you know, we certainly didn't meet with them.
. . .