. . .

QUESTION: On Iran and reports that they are - they have now announced some of the locations for the 10 new nuclear sites they plan to build, including some that will be built inside of mountains that would presumably defend them against aerial strikes, do you have any reaction to that - to their decision to go ahead with this?

MR. TONER: Well, under four United States[1] Security Council resolutions, Iran is prohibited from undertaking any enrichment-related activities, and it's already in violation of UN Security Council resolutions mandating that it suspend its enrichment activities. So any additional enrichment facilities or enrichment to higher levels would only compound its existing violations. It goes without saying that it's more fuel on the fire and that they continue not to meet their international commitments.

QUESTION: Are you concerned that former U.S. representative to the UN John Bolton --

QUESTION: Wait. I have an Iran question, actually.

MR. TONER: I think he's got an Iran question, too.

QUESTION: On Iran. John Bolton was suggesting that Israel ought to strike before the end of this month. Is that something that is a concern in the State Department?

MR. TONER: I have no comment on former - or Ambassador Bolton's comments.

QUESTION: So Russia made an announcement late last week that they would be helping Iran - shortly helping Iran bring the, I think, Bushehr nuclear reactor online. And NPR quoted P.J. as saying basically this is not a big concern for the State Department. But last March when the Russians made the announcement during Clinton's trip to Moscow, she said that without reassurances from Iran, that they could have peaceful civil nuclear energy, that this would be a premature move opening the reactor. So I wonder if you have any - what's changed between - obviously, you haven't gotten the reassurances, so why the change in position and --

MR. TONER: Well, again, I don't know that - I don't know what context P.J.'s remarks were used in. I mean --

QUESTION: I could give them to you.

MR. TONER: But I don't think the two of them are mutually exclusive. Bushehr is a civilian nuclear project and so - and it actually proves that they don't need to build indigenous enrichment facilities. And actually it provides a model that we've extended - the P-5+1 has extended to Iran.

QUESTION: Right, but you've changed your position. I mean, in March, Secretary Clinton said this would be a premature decision. Have you gotten reassurances from Iran that they would -

MR. TONER: Well, I just - well, let me finish, Ben.

QUESTION: I'm sorry.

MR. TONER: So, however, the Secretary's remarks are also valid in the sense that we continue to have concerns about their failure to meet with their international commitments and to seek enrichment of uranium. So Bushehr in and of itself is unconnected to their enrichment activities.

. . .