. . .
QUESTION: Thank you. After Iran claim of advancing uranium enrichment yesterday, the Secretary said today that we need strong steps in the Security Council because (inaudible) occurred (inaudible) just international community on this issue. What will be this strong steps?
MR. MCCORMACK: Well, we shall see what those strong steps are. I can tell you what they won't be. I can tell you that it won't be another presidential statement. So we are -- as the Secretary said, we are now working with our partners in the international community, continuing the consultations that we, I guess you could say began in Berlin at the P-5 + 1 ministerial level meeting about what the diplomatic next steps are. There are a range of diplomatic options available to the international community and we're going to be talking to members of the Security Council, members of the EU-3 about what those diplomatic next steps might be.
Now as the Secretary pointed out, that it was important for the credibility of the international community that the Security Council act and that the Security Council take strong actions, because as we have seen once again when faced at a crossroads with a choice between cooperation or confrontation, that this regime has chosen confrontation with the international community. So it is our view that in order to try to get the regime to change its behavior, to walk back where it is on its nuclear program, to engage in serious and constructive negotiations with the international community and to abide by its international commitments that the international community must bring diplomatic -- more diplomatic pressure to bear on the regime.
We have followed a steady course of increasing that pressure on the regime. They have reacted to that increasing diplomatic pressure with continued defiance. So it is now up to the international community to send a strong clear message to the Iranian regime that that continued defiance will not be tolerated and we are going to be looking at how to express that in -- what diplomatic next steps we take.
Sue.
QUESTION: Could you provide a sort of a range of what those steps could be? It could range from sort of visa restrictions to financial sanctions at one end to targeted military strikes at the other end.
MR. MCCORMACK: I think I'll stick to the course that we're on, and that is the diplomatic course. And there are a range of various options. I've seen a lot of news reports about steps that the EU may be considering that relates to visa restrictions, travel restrictions, various kinds of sanctions. I'm not trying -- I don't want to steer you in the direction of one particular course of action at this point because that's the point of consultations and we are engaged in those consultations. The Secretary spoke with Director General ElBaradei, who will be taking a trip to Tehran. And you can talk to the Director General about what his message is, but I think it is safe to say that he is going to be underlining the message that the IAEA Board of Governors has sent to Iran that it must suspend its enrichment programs and it needs to come back into the mainstream and into compliance with its international obligations.
Now, on the diplomatic front for our part, Under Secretary Burns has been in contact with his counterparts, EU-3 counterparts. He will be traveling next week to a prescheduled meeting of the G-8 political directors. Now, that meeting was intended to prepare the member-states of the G-8 for the G-8 summit, but Iran will be on the agenda of discussion for this particular meeting, certainly given Iran's recent announcement. And I'm not going to rule out any other meetings that he may -- that Under Secretary Burns may participate around or in the run-up to that G-8 political directors meeting. But we don't have any --
QUESTION: You've got one meeting that you envision with the political directors or do you imagine him traveling around?
MR. MCCORMACK: There's the G-8 political directors meeting which is going to be in Moscow. That'll be next week. Now, I'm not going to rule out any other meetings that Under Secretary Burns may have on the margins, around or as part of that G-8 political directors meeting. So we'll keep you up to date on that, Barry.
QUESTION: This discussion that the Secretary had with ElBaradei, was that the second one in three days?
MR. MCCORMACK: Yes. It was this morning.
QUESTION: This morning. Okay.
QUESTION: Are they still meeting on occasion to pursue what Assistant Secretary Rademaker had to say in Moscow today about Russia failing to fulfill all sorts of obligations; for instance, removing tactical weapons? We haven't removed ours, all of ours anyhow, but 90 percent is gone.
MR. MCCORMACK: I saw --
QUESTION: I mean --
MR. MCCORMACK: I saw the remarks, Barry. I don't have any particular information that that will be part of a G-8 discussion. I'd be happy to follow up to see if it will be part of that discussion or what the -- or follow up to his meeting in Moscow --
QUESTION: Or if the Secretary will elevate the complaint into something.
MR. MCCORMACK: I'll be happy to check for you, Barry.
QUESTION: Thanks.
MR. MCCORMACK: Yeah.
QUESTION: Can we go back?
MR. MCCORMACK: Yeah.
QUESTION: Can we stay on Iran?
MR. MCCORMACK: Yeah, we can.
QUESTION: Has the Secretary made any other calls --
MR. MCCORMACK: No.
QUESTION: -- or talked to anybody besides --
MR. MCCORMACK: No. She --
QUESTION: Does she have plans to this afternoon?
MR. MCCORMACK: I would expect -- I don't know about this afternoon, Charlie, but I would expect over the course of the next several days that she'll have calls with some of her counterparts on this -- on these topic -- on the topic of Iran. I don't have any calls scheduled that I can give to you right now, but I'll try to keep you up to date on it.
QUESTION: Look, you're not being specific -- fair enough -- about the steps, but you're saying strong steps. So do you pursue this with confidence that there will be unanimity on the Security Council or are you steeling yourself for some version of the schism that you've had over Iraq? In other words, there are people out there -- analysts have talked to some them -- who are concerned about the risk of taking -- trying to take steps that others don't sign on to and then you sort of weaken yourself because your alliance is, so to speak, is not firm and Iran knows that, sees that. What I'm trying to say, isn't there a risk here? Because they weren't even crazy about -- some of them -- about a presidential statement, which is nebulous enough or low-key enough.
MR. MCCORMACK: Well, what's important, Barry, is that the matter is in the Security Council now and so there are many potential steps that the Security Council can take. But the primary issue is that Iran's nuclear program and what the international response to Iran's continued defiance of the international community will be resides in the Security Council. It also resides in the IAEA, but it is also in the Security Council and that is a qualitatively different step than any other international organization. That particular forum is really at the summit of these international fora in which these kinds of questions are considered.
Now, the Secretary talked about the fact that it was important for the Security Council to act, to take strong steps in order to maintain the credibility of the international community in confronting these kinds of threats, and that's what this is. It is certainly a threat to stability in the Middle East, a threat to stability in the world -- Iran's potentially obtaining a nuclear weapon. So the question is how to deal with that. Certainly the security -- we have pursued this question through the IAEA. We have pursued it through the IAEA, also to the Security Council, and I expect that those -- that we will push along with our diplomatic colleagues for strong steps. At this point, we're not going to get into what exactly those strong steps are.
I would also point out to you that -- and again, I refer you to the EU for specifics, but you've seen news reports that they themselves are considering what steps they might take. So our focus right now, Barry, is going to be on the Security Council and encouraging the member-states of the Security Council to look at what Iran has done not only within the past few days but its continuing record of defiance and obfuscation and, frankly, flouting its -- flaunting its defiance of the international community.
QUESTION: There are suggestions too by people in the field who care about this stuff and follow it that perhaps you ought to take steps to strengthen the IAEA. It has just limited authority. It can do just so much. It can say here's what you're supposed to do and you guys aren't doing it, so will you -- is there any way you can bring pressure to bear by making the IAEA a little more powerful?
MR. MCCORMACK: Well, President Bush has talked about this. He, back in, I believe it was 2004, in a speech at NDU talked about a whole set of different proposals that would have the net result of strengthening the role of the IAEA. But that is a medium- to long-term solution. We are right now confronted with an Iranian regime that appears to be determined to proceed along the pathway to developing a nuclear weapon. So while you can continue and work on efforts to strengthen the IAEA, to strengthen the international nonproliferation regime, you also have to take some steps in the near term, diplomatic steps in the near term, to confront the Iranian defiance. Our hope would be that the international community acting and coming together, acting in concert to confront the Iranian regime's defiance would also reinforce whatever else you're doing to strengthen, over the long term, the IAEA as well as the larger nonproliferation regime.
Teri.
QUESTION: Would anything less than sanctions qualify as strong measures in -- or strong steps, in the Secretary's view?
MR. MCCORMACK: I'm not going to constrain that particular phrase by saying anything other than we know what it should not be, and that is not another presidential statement.
QUESTION: But what about just another resolution?
MR. MCCORMACK: Again, Teri, I'm not going to -- at this point, I'm not going to try to bound what it is that she said, what she said in terms of the diplomacy.
QUESTION: Is it -- just one more. Is a presidential statement a strong step?
MR. MCCORMACK: We have, through the course of our diplomacy, gradually sought to ratchet up the pressure. The presidential statement from the Security Council sent -- it did send a strong message, a strong message that the Iranian regime sought to -- well, not sought to, actually did defy.
We'll see what the reaction will be to stronger diplomatic steps. That has been the course of our diplomatic strategy. We have acted with some urgency over the course of the past year to build a consensus. There is now a consensus that Iran should not be allowed to obtain a nuclear weapon. It's a long way from where we were just a year ago.
So we have acted in a focused manner. We have brought more and more states into a consensus that Iran can not be allowed to obtain a nuclear weapon. And we have taken what we believe are the necessary diplomatic steps to reinforce that consensus, to bring more countries onboard to that consensus, and to bring more and more diplomatic pressure on the Iranian regime.
Now, as I said, when confronted with the crossroads of cooperation or confrontation, they chose confrontation once again. So where -- the international community, as the Secretary said, must act with strong diplomatic steps to meet that choice and to urge the Iranian regime to try to make a different set of choices and to not isolate themselves, not isolate the Iranian people, have to underline the fact that any steps that the diplomatic community -- that the international community has taken on the diplomatic front and may take in the future are not designed to punish the Iranian people. It is -- they are designed to try to get the Iranian regime to change its behavior. And I think it's important that the Iranian people understand just where -- down which pathway their current regime is taking them. It's a pathway of increasing isolation.
Yes, Libby.
QUESTION: Yesterday, you said you couldn't confirm any of the technical aspects of what the Iranians said they have accomplished. Are you in any further position to do that today and if not, when can we expect to hear how far along they've really come?
MR. MCCORMACK: I don't have any update for you and as this unfolds, I'll try to keep you updated on -- to the best of my ability on what we can share with you on our assessment of exactly what it is that they -- what it is that they actually did.
QUESTION: Do you share the view of some that said that this is a milestone for the Iranians?
MR. MCCORMACK: Libby, I'm not an expert in centrifuge technology or the nuclear fuel cycle. I do know enough about it to say that the -- they did take a step forward in terms of the -- introducing the uranium hexafluoride into a centrifuge cascade and producing something from that. I can't tell you exact -- I can't confirm for you exactly what it was that they produced, how long it took them to do that, what the purity of what they produced was and confirm for you the level of enrichment and the number of centrifuges in the cascade. I don't have the answers to those questions. But you know, the Iranian Government has in the past followed through on what it said it would do. It has been relatively straightforward in after the fact saying that it has taken certain steps. So I think at this point you have to take it at face value, although I can't confirm the technical aspects for you at this point.
QUESTION: One more on this?
MR. MCCORMACK: Yeah.
QUESTION: Does the U.S. consider the Russian proposal as still being on the table if Iran now said it wanted to look at that more seriously?
MR. MCCORMACK: Well, they haven't up till this point and, you know, you'd have to -- you would have to ask the Russians whether -- what their level of frustration with the Iranians is at this point and whether or not the proposal is still active. Certainly the idea of at a certain point the Iranians being able to have access to civil nuclear power but not necessarily the fuel cycle or to be able to produce its own fuel. I think that certainly that is something that as a matter of principle the international community has laid out there as an option.
But since the Russian proposal was put on the table, we have -- we are now dealing with a different situation. We are now dealing with a situation where Iran has eroded its level of trust with the international community to an even lower level, if in fact that was possible, and they have to now work to rebuild that level of trust. They have, you know, over the course of two years pursued this strategy, this diplomatic strategy where they've tried to distract, obfuscate, deceive, lie, stretch out the diplomacy as long as they could and, you know, the EU-3 hit its limit in terms of its patience with those tactics and called the Iranians on those tactics. I think the Russians have expressed -- I'm not sure a similar level of frustration, but certainly a high level of frustration with Iranian behavior.
So right now the issue is, you know, not what might be on the table for the Iranian regime. The question is: Will Iran act to actually rebuild -- start to rebuild that trust that they have really eroded to the level of nonexistence? And so it is incumbent upon the Iranian regime to act and the IAEA Board of Governors laid out a roadmap, the presidential statement laid out a roadmap, for how the Iranian regime might start doing that.
QUESTION: Okay. But just -- as far as you're concerned, it would still be acceptable for the Russians to negotiate --
MR. MCCORMACK: I don't think -- I frankly don't think it's the issue. The issue is not, like I said, what proposals may have been on the table prior to Iran's actions over the past couple of months. I think what the issue now is -- is Iran, and what it will do to act in order to start to rebuild that level of trust.
. . .
QUESTION: I just wanted to go back to Iran. It took three weeks to come up with a kind of a wishy-washy presidential statement that obviously has had zero impact and it's likely that it's going to take maybe several months before the Council could agree and everybody could reach a consensus. Is it possible that the U.S. could sort of unilaterally make some decisions about Iran and impose sanctions or could you go -- or could you join up with the EU-3 and it could be an EU-3 plus U.S. --
MR. MCCORMACK: There are certainly a number of different possibilities. We are focused on the Security Council. You heard the Secretary just this morning talk about the importance of the Security Council taking strong steps when it next convenes to consider this issue, which I think will be around the end of the month. I don't know if they'll convene exactly on the 28th. I know that's when Dr. ElBaradei's report is due both at the IAEA and the Security Council, so I would expect around that time the Security Council would convene and we would certainly, as you heard from the Secretary, urge the Security Council to take strong steps.
As for the United States, the President has previously spoken to this. We're, as he put it, sanctioned out, nearly so. There's very little latitude in that regard with respect to the United States. Others have a much greater degree of latitude to act with regard to certain actions, whether that's from visa restrictions to economic sanctions. So the short answer to your question is we have really, I think, relatively little latitude of action although I would expect that there is some remaining on the diplomatic front, and for others it's much greater.
QUESTION: And more on the military front?
MR. MCCORMACK: I'm talking about diplomacy.
QUESTION: Does the U.S. feel that yesterday's announcement places a lot more urgency on the need to act or is it the sense that you still have months and months to go where negotiations can go on in trying to determine what to do to crack down?
MR. MCCORMACK: Well, the Secretary's view of this has never been that diplomacy is an end in and of itself, that the process was an end in and of itself. The diplomacy and the process of multilateral diplomacy is a means to an end, and that is to try to get the Iranian regime to change its behavior. So her view has never been that this is something that just turns into a talkfest about the issue without acting. So I think we certainly took note of what the Iranians said they did yesterday and we would expect the international community would do the same. That is why she came out this morning and said it was important for the international community to take strong steps.
QUESTION: Sean, are you less than happy -- apparently, Riyadh has asked the Russians for help to prevent the U.S. military striking in Iran and their former Ambassador, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, has just met them in Moscow. Could the Saudis be more helpful and other countries in the region to settle this, just as the EU has met with the Iranians?
MR. MCCORMACK: Look, I'll let countries in the region speak for themselves about their level of concern regarding Iranian behavior across a variety of fronts, including pursuit of a nuclear weapon. As for this particular exchange between Moscow and Riyadh, I don't have any information for you on it. In terms of the military option which has come up several times during this briefing, getting questioned about the military option, the President two days ago, the day before yesterday, spoke very clearly on that issue and I don't have anything to add to it.
. . .