. . .
Q: Can you give us any details on Iran?

A: With respect to Iran, Ms. Clinton reiterated the American position that has already been expressed, that is, the wish to engage in dialogue and the importance of the role of the U.S., Germany, the U.K. and France.

Mr. Kouchner and Ms. Clinton also recalled the important role that could be played by Russia and China in reestablishing the E3+3, the format of current talks.

There was very clearly a wish to work together to continue and enhance cooperation and discussions on Iran.

. . .

Iran / Nuclear issue

Q: What is France's position on a direct dialogue between Washington and Tehran?

A: We totally support a direct U.S. dialogue with Iran. We ourselves have a direct dialogue with Iran. It would be strange for us to be reticent toward others engaging in direct dialogue with Iran.

Q: On Wednesday there was a meeting of political directors in Germany, where they expressed the unity of the Six on the Iranian issue, on every point.

A: A direct dialogue is not incompatible with the process engaged thus far, nor with the Security Council resolutions, nor with the multilateral approach toward Iran.

Q: There was talk earlier of a process that included the 3+3 or the 5+1. Now there's talk of 4+Russia and China. Are there two speeds within this process?

A: No. There's a 5+1 or E3+3 process, which still exists. Yesterday in Washington. . . the importance of Russia's role in discussions with Iran was underscored, for obvious reasons, such as the program to supply fuel to Busher.

China is also very important in this process.

. . .

Q: Are you considering new sanctions against Iran?

A: Sanctions were mentioned in the general discussion on Iran. The strategy of our dialogue with Iran, whether direct or multilateral, cannot be separated from the sanctions issue. We always operate on a complementary two-track basis combining firmness and dialogue.

Q: Is the process oriented more toward dialogue or more toward firmness?

A: It is based on both principles. There's an important player in the E3+3, the United States, which until now had no direct dialogue with Iran. It seems-but it's up to the new U.S. administration to tell you this-that there is a desire for direct dialogue. That doesn't change the approach defined by the Six, which led to the Security Council resolutions that are now being fully implemented.
. . .

Q: Since the Iranian elections are five months off, is there any talk of waiting before further pushing this issue in the Security Council?

That was part of the discussions.