. . .
QUESTION: On Iran, a number of things to ask. First, have you seen the remarks by President Ahmadi-Nejad today about Israel and about Zionism and the Holocaust?
MR. MCCORMACK: Mm-hmm.
QUESTION: And what is your reaction to those remarks?
MR. MCCORMACK: Well, it's more reprehensible rhetoric from the President of Iran. This is the kind of rhetoric, I think, that has only added to the fears and concerns of the international community as it relates to Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons. This is -- if you think about it, you have the elected head of state calling for the annihilation of another state. That is not only, as I said, reprehensible but a source of grave concern for the entire international community. And I think that the other thing that this rhetoric does is it is an attempt to divert the attention of the Iranian people from the terrible record of this regime in terms of human rights, the terrible record of this regime in terms of the backsliding of democracy in Iran. It's an attempt to divert attention from a stagnating economy.
So I expect that this kind of rhetoric is only going to add to the concerns of the international community as we, in the coming weeks, grapple with this question of how to apply greater pressure to this regime to get them to change their behavior and to not allow them to develop nuclear weapons under the cover of a peaceful nuclear program.
Under Secretary Burns is going to be traveling to Moscow. He's going to have meetings of the P-5+1, as well as the G-8. These meetings are intended to start to tee up decisions for ministers and capitals about diplomatic next steps, real actions that the Security Council and that the UN can take to increase the pressure on the Iranian regime to get them to change their behavior. There are a number of different levers at the disposal of the international community. Those would include asset freezes, resolutions, Chapter 7 resolutions. It would include, potentially, sanctions. It would potentially include restrictions on the ability of some members of that regime to travel.
So these are all levers that are at the disposal of the international community. I expect, certainly, that sanctions would be a topic of discussion at the G-8 political directors' meeting. So I think that when they do bring up this topic of how to deal with the Iranian nuclear program, that this kind of rhetoric, which we can only assume represents the true policy intentions of the Iranian regime, will provide impetus for the international community to act in a strong, diplomatic manner with respect to Iran and to force them, through diplomatic leverage, to change their behavior.
QUESTION: Your willingness to speculate and specify some of the things that could be discussed at G-8 and P-5+1 and to talk about some of the "real actions" that could be taken -- your willingness to talk in those terms today, is that a function of those remarks or -- because I haven't seen you so willing to talk about what the range of response might be or what should be discussed, specifically, sanctions would be a topic of discussion, that sort of thing.
MR. MCCORMACK: Well, there are a couple of things. I wouldn't say it's directly related to those remarks. The Secretary, in the past, has talked in these terms and I think that as we get closer to the meeting and we develop the agenda and specific issue areas that we would like to look at, it's just -- it's a matter of timing as we get closer to the meeting. I think it's only natural that we start talking about the things that certainly, we would like to raise at these meetings, so I'm just trying to give you an insight into our approach to these meetings, how these meetings fit into the overall timeline.
The IAEA is scheduled to provide a report about Iran's activities on the 28th of April. I would expect that shortly thereafter, the beginning of May, that the Security Council will take up that report, as well as take up the question of what actions the UN is going to take. So that's sort of the progression over the coming weeks that we see.
QUESTION: Before my NBC colleague asks a brilliant question or two, I wanted to just finish with two more. Have you seen reports, too, that there's supposed to be a new round of talks involving the Chinese, the Iranians, and the Russians?
MR. MCCORMACK: I haven't seen that, no.
QUESTION: Okay. And my last question is about some remarks that the Russian Ambassador to the UN, Mr. Denisov, made earlier this week, in which he said there is no reason for punitive actions against Iran. He said there is no evidence of noncompliance with the nonproliferation regime. That's a verbatim quote; "There is no evidence of noncompliance with the nonproliferation regime." How can you regard Russia as a useful interlocutor or ally in these discussions if they do not see any evidence of noncompliance with the nonproliferation regime by Iran?
MR. MCCORMACK: Before responding to those remarks, I'd like to see what else he said around that, so -- I haven't seen that, so I can't provide a specific response to those particular remarks. But with regard to Russia, Russia doesn't want to see Iran have a nuclear weapon any more than the United States or Europe or the Chinese or any other state -- responsible state around the world. They're concerned about it, too. They put an offer on the table with the Iranians, how to meet the Iranian concerns while providing objective guarantees that they weren't going to try to pursue -- that they couldn't pursue a nuclear weapon under the cover of a civilian nuclear program.
So the Russians are very concerned about this and they're treating it in a serious manner. Have we had tactical differences on how to -- what specific steps to take? Yeah, we've talked about that, but the strategic objective remains the same. And I would expect, over the coming weeks, that we're going to have serious discussions with the Russians, as well as others, about what specific steps to take. I talked about a few of the areas that certainly, we are going to look into raising. I would expect the Russians would have their own points of view and we'll see what they have to say in Moscow and take it from there.
Libby.
QUESTION: I only wanted to know, had the Secretary heard from Dr. ElBaradei yet after his trip?
MR. MCCORMACK: Yes, she did talk to him, talked to him about an hour ago, and it was about a five to 10-minute conversation. Dr. ElBaradei gave a brief readout of his meetings and I -- you know, I don't want to get into too many of the details of the phone call, because I want to let him speak on his own behalf. I believe that he either has or will issue a statement about what he heard and saw in Iran.
But just in brief summary, the phone call -- Dr. ElBaradei did reaffirm that he sent a strong, clear message to the Iranian regime that it needs to comply with the just demands of the IAEA Board of Governors, which was outlined in the resolution that was passed.
QUESTION: He didn't seem too optimistic when he left there, I mean --
MR. MCCORMACK: I didn't get the impression that he heard anything new from the Iranians.
QUESTION: Did he confirm or was he able to verify this latest claim by the Iranians to have enriched uranium on a small scale?
MR. MCCORMACK: I don't think the IAEA has done that yet. I know that they plan to do an assessment of that. I don't think it's been completed, but I'm going to let them speak for themselves at that point. We, as a member of the Board of Governors, will get that assessment. I'd be happy, at the appropriate moment, to share what we know about it.
QUESTION: A new topic?
QUESTION: Sean, just one more.
MR. MCCORMACK: Sure.
QUESTION: Where was ElBaradei when the call went through?
MR. MCCORMACK: I don't know.
. . .
QUESTION: Sean, my question is that when the Secretary was testifying on the Capitol Hill before the senators on India and U.S. nuclear deal, some senator brought the issue of India-Iran relations. My question is that: Don't those senators get the clear message that India has voted twice against Iran on nuclear deal -- nuclear issue? And also, India is with the United States and European Union as far as Iran's nuclear weapons are concerned.
MR. MCCORMACK: Certainly, we're very -- we're quite gratified that India did vote with a majority of countries in the IAEA.
. . .