. . .

QUESTION: So it's very complicated that Israel has not refused to rule out the idea of striking Iran's nuclear facilities if provoked in any way. Now, where would the U.S. stand if Israel does decide to go after Iran?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, what we have tried to do is engage in diplomacy in a very vigorous way in order to reassure the international community, including all states, that Iran's nuclear program was for peaceful purposes. Unfortunately, we haven't had the kind of response we were hoping for from the Iranians. As you know well, President Obama made it absolutely clear with lots of political opposition that if he reached out his hand and if Iran reciprocated, we could talk about anything and everything. Then came the election, then came the crackdown on peaceful dissent, then came demonstrations, and the turmoil inside Iran is continuing until today.

We very much supported the return to the P-5+1. We - the United States had not been a full participant, but we are now. And we supported the International Atomic Energy Agency's proposal to Iran that their highly enriched uranium be shipped out and then returned to refuel the Tehran research reactor. They had first agreed in principle, and then I think because of internal disputes, they backed off from that, raising a lot of questions about what their true intentions are. Obviously, the secret facility at Qom was revealed. They now say they want 10 or 20 new nuclear power plants.

It's not confidence building, let us say. And I think the international community really still wants to engage with Iran, but people are going to now turn to other routes like more pressure, like sanctions to try to change their mind and their behavior.

QUESTION: Is the U.S. being forced to act less unilaterally, having to turn to its NATO partners because of, for example, the shortfall in troops in Afghanistan, because of the need to act together on more of these issues you've discussed?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, but that's part of our diplomatic philosophy. We want to work with others. There are - there's not a problem in the world that the United States can solve alone, but I would quickly add there is not a problem in the world that can be solved without the United States. So we want to create coalitions. We want to find common ground with people. There are many things we could go off and do unilaterally, as the prior administration certainly demonstrated. That's not our chosen path. We would prefer to take some more time, to be more patient, to bring people together to make the case.

For example, at the Board of Governors at the IAEA, the vote that was accumulated condemning Iran, calling for Iran to act, was shocking to some people because it was so unified. It wasn't just the United States. It was Russia, it was China and many other countries. That's because we have spent time listening and working hard to create this common ground and these common interests, and we've done it out of a sense of mutual respect. We respect and admire so many other cultures and societies. I think the President's made that clear time and time again.

But we do feel like at a certain point, the international community must speak with one voice, and we think that time has come with respect to Iran's nuclear program.

. . .