But first, news about
Iran
in this morning's newspapers. The
New York Times
reports they may be closer now to producing a
nuclear weapon
than originally thought. It comes as the chief international weapons inspector arrived in
Tehran
last night and met this morning with
Iran
's president,
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
. Was it -- what does it all mean for the administration's efforts now to negotiate with
Iran
? Here with us live, the
U.S. ambassador to the United Nations
,
Susan Rice
.
Ambassador
Rice
, welcome.
MS. SUSAN RICE:
Thank you. Good to be with you.
GREGORY:
Let's get right to this
New York Times
reporting this morning. This is what the article actually says. The headline: "
Report Says Iran Has
the
Data
to Make a
Nuclear Bomb
.
Senior
staff members of the
United Nations
nuclear agency have concluded in a confidential
analysis that
Iran
has acquired `sufficient information to be able to design and produce a workable'
atom bomb
. The report by experts in the
IAEA
stresses in its introduction that its conclusions are tentative, subject to further confirmation of the evidence, which it says came from
intelligence agencies
and its own investigations. But the report's conclusions, described by senior European officials, go well beyond the public positions taken by several governments, including the
United States
." First off, does the
U.S.
concur with these conclusions?
MS. RICE:
Well,
David
, I'm not going to get into characterizing the substance of a
confidential report
or our own intelligence. But suffice it to say, our whole approach is predicated on an urgent need to prevent
Iran
from obtaining a
nuclear weapons
capacity. And that's why a united
P5+1
last week presented
Iran
with a very plain choice: Prove to our satisfaction that their program is, as they claim, for peaceful purposes and open up their facilities to inspections, freeze their
uranium enrichment
program, commit, as they have done, and follow through on that commitment to provide fuel for enrichment outside of the country or face real pressure and consequences.
GREGORY:
But they have the know-how to make a bomb.
MS. RICE:
I'm not in a position to characterize that report or our own intelligence. But the point is whether they have it now, whether they seek it or whether they will obtain it down the road, we are very focused on preventing that from occurring.
GREGORY:
Well, why can't you say when you think they're going to have it or if they have it now?
MS. RICE:
Well, there are various assessments and they don't all align. But the point is we share the concern that an
Iran
with
nuclear weapons
would pose a great threat to
U.S.
national security
and the security of, of allies and partners in the region. And that is why we're very determined to take the steps necessary to prevent them from obtaining that capacity.
GREGORY:
But given this report, given that the president has talked about a deadline of September, what is the deadline for
Iran
to either put up, to negotiate away its
nuclear potential
or face consequences?
MS. RICE:
Well, we're very much in a, a
period
of intense negotiations now. What happened last week was a constructive beginning, but it was only a beginning,
David
. And the onus is now squarely on
Iran
to adhere to the commitments it has made. If it doesn't, time is short. We're not interested in talking for talking's sake, we're not interested in interminable negotiations. They have to demonstrate conclusively that their program is for peaceful purposes.
GREGORY:
You talk about these -- the potential for consequences. You won't negotiate indefinitely. The question is how much leverage does the
U.S.
really have?
Charles Krauthammer
, critical of the approach, saying, "Look, you don't have
China
and
Russia
really on board." This is what he wrote in an opinion piece on Friday: "Do the tally. In return for selling out
Poland
and the
Czech Republic
by unilaterally abrogating a missile-defense security arrangement that
Russia
had demanded be abrogated, we get from
Russia
...what? An oblique hint, of possible support, for unspecified sanctions grudgingly offered and of dubious authority -- and, in any case, leading nowhere because the Chinese have remained resolute against any
Security Council
sanctions. Confusing ends and means, the
Obama
administration strives mightily for shows of allied unity, good feeling and pious concern about
Iran's nuclear program
-- whereas the real objective is stopping that program. This feel-good posturing is worse than useless, because all the time spent achieving gestures is
precious time
granted
Iran
to finish its race to acquire the bomb." Is this a cat and mouse game?
MS. RICE:
No.
Look
, this is a very serious process where we are together aligned with the
P5+1
-- that's
Russia
,
China
,
France
,
Britain
,
Germany
and the
United States
-- presenting
Iran
with a very stark choice: Either they give up their
nuclear weapons
program conclusively to our satisfaction, or they will face additional pressure. That is the agreed position of the
P5+1
. Now, it's, it's true that
Russia
and
China
have historically resisted sanctions, but we have moved
Russia
and
China
in a very constructive direction just recently on
North Korea
, where we now have in place, with their unanimous support, the toughest
Security Council
sanctions on any country in the world. We are united in presenting this choice to
Iran
, and
Iran
new -- now has the responsibility either to adhere to its obligations internationally or face that pressure.
GREGORY:
What, what crippling sanctions are you considering? What kind of pressure against
Iran
if they don't comply?
MS. RICE:
There are a range of, of sanctions,
David
, under consideration. There are those that we might pursue multilaterally in the context of the
Security Council
, there are others that we could do outside of the
Security Council
with partners in
Europe
and elsewhere, and then there are those that we can take by ourselves unilaterally. There's a wide range.
GREGORY:
Economic sanctions
?
MS. RICE:
Economic and otherwise. But that is one option. But right now we are in a
period
of intense negotiations. It's not a, it's not an infinite
period
, it's a very finite
period
.
GREGORY:
So what's the
period
?
MS. RICE:
Well, we will -- we have some very important milestones that we are expecting...
GREGORY:
I know, but the president...
MS. RICE:
David
...
GREGORY:
The president has said September.
MS. RICE:
This -- no, the president said...
GREGORY:
And now you're saying a finite
period
. So what, what's the
period
?
MS. RICE:
The president said that we would take stock in September, and indeed we did. And we presented
Iran
with a very stark choice on
October 1st
. Now we have some deadlines that the
Iranians
themselves have committed to. They will meet
October 19th
at the expert level to discuss the
Tehran Research Reactor
. That's an important step.
ElBaradei
, the
IAEA
director, today confirmed that on
October 25th
the
Qom
reactor will be open to
IAEA
inspections. The
Iranians
have also said that they will come back to the table within the month of October. So we will look and see whether those steps are indeed fulfilled. If they are, that will indicate a degree of seriousness that we've not seen yet. If they're not fulfilled, then obviously we are in a two- track posture and we have the pressure track before us.
GREGORY:
You talk about engagement with
Iran
. Most Americans, when they think about a relationship with
Iran
, this is what they think about. They think about the hostage crisis back in
1979
. If I interview you a year from now, what would you like to be able to say about the
U.S.
relationship with
Iran
?
MS. RICE:
I'd like to say that we are on track to conclusively prevent
Iran
from obtaining a
nuclear weapons
capacity. You know, we've had many years,
David
, of drift, where we have refused to engage in negotiations, the
Iranians
have pursued their enrichment program unabated and we haven't been able to put in tougher sanctions. We're in a different place. We have unity among the
P5
, we have a clear opportunity here...
GREGORY:
Yeah, but the question I asked was about what's, what's the relationship the
U.S.
would like to have with
Iran
? What's the future look like?
MS. RICE:
Well, obviously the optimal outcome is an
Iran
without
nuclear weapons
, that is peacefully integrated into the
international community
, that no longer poses a threat to its neighbors, no longer supports terrorism, treats its people with respect and allows them to participate peacefully in a
democratic process
. That's the
Iran
we hope to see.
Iran
has, and the people of
Iran
have a tremendous history and a great opportunity to be much more constructive players in the
international community
or they face another choice, and that's up to them. But we hope very much that
Iran
would be in a position where it can be a responsible player.
“ ”