. . .

QUESTION: Yeah. Can you give us an update on your secret program to assassinate Iranian nuclear scientists? (Laughter.)

MR. DUGUID: I believe we have responded to this sort of question earlier today. The idea, the discussion, the charge that the United States had anything to do with a murder in Tehran today is absurd.

QUESTION: Did --

MR. DUGUID: Yes?

QUESTION: What is your best guess as to why the charge would be made in the first place? Are they grasping at straws?

MR. DUGUID: I'm not going to guess on this instance or other instances where charges are hurled about willy-nilly. The fact remains we are working within prescribed diplomatic channels to engage the Government of Iran on their behavior. Their nuclear program is of particular concern to us, as you know, and that is what we are working with the government on.

Yes, please.

QUESTION: This particular group that says they are responsible for it, the Royal Association of Iran, in the past, they have said that they're based in Los Angeles. Is this something that the U.S. is looking into?

MR. DUGUID: I am unaware that this group before - as coming up here has made any claim whatsoever. I will look into it and see if I can get back to you on anything. The fact remains the charges that the United States has any connection with this murder in Tehran is absurd.

. . .

QUESTION: The charge is both absurd and false; correct?

MR. DUGUID: Yes.

. . .

QUESTION: What kind of sanctions the P-5+1 political directors will discuss on Saturday in New York?

MR. DUGUID: Well, I don't know that anybody's given in exact detail the agenda for the next P5+1 meeting, which will take place towards the end of this week. What will be discussed, of course, is ideas that any of the partners have on how we can get Iran to live up its international obligations, on which of the two tracks needs to be pushed at this time. We will be looking at specific measures, of course. I think we will bring our ideas to the table, as well as our other partners, and discuss those. But let's let the meeting take place first before we start talking about what it is that they may come up with. This is going to be a very long process. We are starting our discussions. They will be deliberate. They will be deliberative. And we'll move on from there.

QUESTION: But this has already been a very long process. Numerous years. How much longer is it going to be?

MR. DUGUID: We will continue -

QUESTION: And in the meantime, while you guys have been talking away and chatting and not getting anywhere on the sanctions issue, the Iranians have continued to enrich. How much longer?

MR. DUGUID: The Iranian nuclear program has continued, and we have continued to oppose it. It is our goal to get Iran to live up to its international obligations. To do that, we feel that the two-track approach is the best approach. We will continue to work at it as long as it takes to achieve the objective. And we will continue to look at both tracks, and seriously look at both tracks, in order to better target not only whatever sanctions might be effective but also to look at those other incentives. We have a very good deal on the table right now with the TRR. We continue to say that Iran should accept that deal and help build the confidence that we all need to accept that its nuclear program is, as it says, for peaceful means and not otherwise.

Jill.

QUESTION: Gordon, the Secretary the other day talked in general terms about the approach that the United States has right now concerning sanctions, and she was saying that there was a small leadership group. She seemed to be implying, or at least we inferred, that it was the Revolutionary Guard Corps. Could you expand - I mean, was that what she was talking about and is the policy now, or the approach, strategy of the United States to zero in specifically on that group?

MR. DUGUID: Our policy right now is to have a P-5+1 meeting and talk through a range of options and ideas with our partners and come to some conclusions after that on which we might be able to move forward. The Secretary's remarks stand for themselves. I don't think I need to go into them any further in advance of the meeting. I'm sure that following the meeting, we may have something to say.

But I do want to reiterate that this is a start of the process that we are going to deliberate. We are going to have more meetings of the P-5+1, and we are going to continue to look for a satisfactory resolution to getting our goals met as far as Iran's nuclear program is concerned.

QUESTION: But just in general, you know, the debate always is if you have sanctions they could hurt average people, and if you target it, then you get the people who might be most --

MR. DUGUID: And our - and we - and I do agree, and we do agree. Our differences are not with the people of Iran. Our differences are not with Iran having a peaceful civilian nuclear program. Iran's international obligations would allow it to have a peaceful civilian nuclear program to provide energy. Iran's behavior heretofore has not built any confidence that their stated objectives mesh with what we've seen on the ground.

We need to get to a point where we do have confidence that what they say they are doing is exactly what they are doing. In order to do that, they need to live up to their agreed international obligations so that we can verify those things that they've been saying.

. . .

QUESTION: Just one more on Iran, please. So twice you've said this will be a very long process, it will be deliberative, this is the start of a process, so, you know, it's going to take a while. However, as - when we got around New Year's Day, we were seized with the idea that this was a deadline and that the President made this a priority and there was a sense of urgency about it. Does this mean that there was no real deadline, that this is just going to continue to go on as it has for a long time?

MR. DUGUID: No, Jill, I wouldn't characterize it that way at all. We do have a sense of urgency. We do want to stop Iran from developing a nuclear weapons capability. That is an urgent matter, but it's not one to be approached in a headlong rush. Now, I know that you can say we have been at this for some years. That is true. We will go about it in a deliberative way in order to produce effective results.

. . .