the iaea report their conclusions new and important. out in the iaea is more concerned about iran than the american intelligence community. the basic facts that underly this report were known to the u.s. government five or six years ago and provided to the iaea some years later. the point being that our decision makers for a long time had known this and not acted on it effectively. >> greta: will this light the u.n. on fire? >> oh come on. >> greta: the united states is trying to get a fourth round of sanctions. we've got russia saying they will go along. china, a huge problem. at least now it does seem that this has been escalated. each day we are getting a step closer to this bomb. >> it takes away the cover that countries like russia and china would like to hide behind. and signals a change to the agency. the previous director elbaradei repressed some of these conclusions the new director general has allowed come out i think it is important. when you contrast this with the 2007 national intelligence estimate that said iran had given

a source tells fox news the iaea is waiting for a formal response. u.s. officials and others say the iranians need to be specific. >> put it in writing. tell the iaea. iran said so many things in the last few months. >> this comes when the u.s. is looking to racket up sanks against the iran regime. hillary clinton was urgi urging sa sanctions. >> if they feel at the end of the day there is light at the end of the tunnel. >> and the iranian government is looking for new protest. next week marks the anniversary of the iranian revolution. threats of opposition figures is a sign that they are not taking chances. the green movement protesters say they will use the day to attack the regime. >> i know on february 11, the world will witness that the green movement is not there. >> er ttehran offered an olive branch. the release of three americans held since last summer by iran in exchange for the release of iranians held by the united states. washington today saying no dice. bret? >> bret: greg palkot live in london. thank you. elsewhere around the world, three a

germany, france, great britain, and the united states also was a good deal and that the director of the iaea said was the right thing to do and that iran should accept. that indicates to us that despite their posturing that their nuclear power is only for civilian use, that they in fact continue to pursue a course that would lea to weaponization. >> you may be thinking that we have heard this before. this would be the fourth round of sanctions against iran, so how much of an impact could they have? the point i put to the bbc state correspondent. >> it is a question that a lot of people wonder what impact the sanctions will have as they do get a pro teary what impact does it have on the people of iran? is it going to make their lives more difficult? is it really going to deter the armenians from pursuing nuclear ambitions. nonetheless, the united states and its allies and increasingly also countries like russia feel it is important to send a clear message to iran that it cannot continue on this path, and a half that the world sees increasingly as one leading to a nuclear iran. iran says that

united states, russia, france and iran to finalize the iaea proposal. i had the privilege to lead the u.s. delegation to those and i can tell you they were pragmatic and earnestly focused on opposing iran's humanitarian needs in a manner that could also start to build international confidence in iran's nuclear intentions. we have even offered to facilitate iran's procurement through the world markets of the medical isotopes its citizens need. regrettably, iran's leaders apparently prefer to reject the most responsible, cost effective and timely actions to ensure access to medical isotopes in order to advance their nuclear program. iran's response to her engagement efforts have not been encouraging. and so while the door to iran is not closed, the president made clear last week that we are now working on developing a significant regime of sanctions that will reflect how isolated iran as from the international community. at this time, the international community must speak with one voice on the imperative for iran to meet its responsibilities and obligati

so then not taking the iaea up and its partners up on a very commonsense offer leaves quite frankly the believe that iran has other ideas. that's why -- and i would say this. the reactions -- the actions of iran have led the world to be more unified than at virtually any other point in the past many years. they have made actions through their statements. our partners in the p-5 plus one will look forward to taking those next steps. >> [inaudible] >> well, you saw yesterday the treasury institute, some sanctions on the irgc, and obviously the next phase in this, the president talked a few days ago, this is a multifaceted -- and there are more phases to this including the united nations. >> followings up on that. why should iran -- disobey what the united states and the anne anne and the p-5 want with respect to the move from treasury yesterday. >> jake, as you said, the president is working through and with our partners on making that happen. this is not going to happen like in times square when the ball hit zero. this will take some important time. but understand this, jake, our allies

based on an iaea regulations, they are obliged to provide us with the fuel.should just say they do not want to give us a pool. what are you setting conditions and claiming that you want to hamper iran from making an atomic bomb? they even step beyond this. . >> we told them that the iranian nation will never give in to bullying her remarks and illogical remarks and has no fear. we told them we told them that the fuel for the reactor is going to produce medicine for 800,000 people. the fuel is running out. we do not have much time. we have obtained the fuel and for this reason we told them we only have two or three months. you just right -- if you just provide us with the fuel, that is okay, but if you do not, we are going to produce the fuel ourselves. either give us 20% fuel and receive the money or get the fuel and receive 3.5% fuel instead and that was the generous proposal, but once again the lost their chance. we are aware of what they think and and they thought the iranian nation has been weakened. we told them if you do not get the fuel, we're going to

in richmond at 20% is what the united states and the iaea, and its partners recommended, so patientsould have access to these isotopes. iran cannot continue to operate the trr at its current pace. not taking the iaea and its partners on a common-sense offer, it leads the world to believe that iran has other ideas. that is why -- and i would say this -- the actions of iran have led the world to be more unified than virtuallyÑi at any other point in the past few years. they have brought forward, through their actions, through their statements, our partners in the p5 plus one are moving forward to take those steps. >> [unintelligible] >> you saw yesterday, the treasury institute, the sanctions on the irtc. the next phase of this, the president talked about the multifaceted. there'll be more faces, -- phases, including the nine nations. >> [unintelligible] why should the leaders of iran -- [unintelligible] >> look, jake, as you said, the president is working with our partners on making that happen. this did not happen in times square when the ball hit zero. this is going to take some imp

iaea says they may be working on a nuclear warhead as we speak. resentment toward even-hand defense in the region. if we insist they are free of nuclear weapons, we have to disarm everyone, friend and foe alike or it will add fuel to an incendiary cause. and joe says we have all just entered a more dangerous situation. so much for diplomacy. we need to support the movement within iran that is looking to change the power structure, but at the same time increase sanctions. with have to let it known that we are friends to the iranians, but not the leaders or the government. and terry says that the iran has called for nuclear states to disarm and for the middle east to be a nuclear-weapons-free zone. has this happened? do they have a right to protect their country? i know the guy running the country is crazy, but he does have a point. and margie says, i wish our government would bite the bullet and deal with israel's nuclear program, which is illegal an unregulated. if you look at the problem from the iranian's point of view, they need nuclear bombs t

the director of the iaea said was a good deal and that iran should accept.o us that despite their posturing, their nuclear power is only for civilian use, that they in fact continue to pursue a course that would lead to weapon is asian. that is not acceptable to the international community, not only to the united states. we're moving on. if you want to accept the kinds of agreements with the international community that lead you down a path of of being a member of good standing, then we welcome you. if not -- >> by deciding to do what they did it? >> if not, the next step is sanctions. they have made their choice so far although the door is still open. what we will be working on over the next several weeks is developing a significant regime of sanctions that will indicate to them how isolated they are from the international community as a whole. meaning that there will -- we are going to be looking at a variety of ways in which countries indicate to iran that their approach is unacceptable. the united nations will be one aspect of that broader effort. >> [in

>> well, i think in terms of a formal assessment, we'd defer to the iaea.an p jw(hr' con$i with iaea inspectors and tried to advise them on what they are trying to do. we believe that any step to further enrich uranium to 20 percent is a violation of their obligations under the under a number of un security council resolutions, and we think that they should come back and constructively engage in a process where we can would help them provide whatever their needs are within a civilian nuclear program while reassuring the international community about their intentions regarding their overall nuclear ambitions. but these ongoing statements and ongoing actions are counterproductive and they really call intoçó question whether iranian claims that their intentions are peaceful are, in fact, true. david. >> there's some reporting about yesterday's events in iran analysts, i guess you might say, conclude that the protest movement may be kind of fizzling out, given what happened yesterday. i was just wondering whether you had a take on it. >> well, i'm not sure it'

there's also a story in the "new york times," some others as well, looking at the former head of the iaea the agency that is responsible for inspecting nuclear facilities in the international atomic energy agency as it's called, its former leader, mohammed al baradei, rrning to egypt, getting a welcome. in fact, there's a photo there showing supporters of el baradei gathered at the airport as he returns to egypt, and this is in light of talk at least of a possible run for its leader, its president. they write -- host: it was not clear that mr. baradei would run for president, and if he did, whether he would be able to do so. amendments limit who has the right to run, and at the moment, the doctor does not appear to meet the cry year at that. he has said he will consider running if the election is free, fair, and under the supervision of the judiciary and in the presences of the international observers. criteria the leadership here has rejected in the past. springfield, georgia, good morning. mike on our independent line. host: good morning. -- caller: good morning. as far as professional

uranium position and this is exactly where the agreed framework had stumbled when you look at the iaeaability to get the special inspections necessary to clear the delta a tree with north korea declared it actually produced in the way of plutonium and what the iaea and others thought they might have of which was a few dozen grams of plutonium versus kilograms weapons worth and so the six-party talks process had run its course as far as it could go and north korea could sense it wasn't going to get a lot support for liberal verification regime and this is after the president of a north korea from the terrorism list and then the whole issue what type of access will we have on the ground becomes central and i would opined at that point of korea makes the decision that is going to embark on this path with a new administration to demonstrate leon it's a nuclear power, to demonstrate early on you have to pay attention to us, to demonstrate early on it has been strategic capabilities and they were probably thinking, too if the administration is committed to dialog will not walk into such a di

and this is exactly where the agreed framework had stumbled when you look at the iaea is ability to get the inspection ready to clear the delta between what north korea had declared it actually produced in the way of plutonium and what the iaea and others thought they might have had, which was a few brands, a few dozen grams of plutonium versus kilograms, weapons worth. and so, the six-party talks process had run its course as far as they could go. and north korea could spend to really listen going to get a lot of support for a liberal verification regime. and this is after the president in north korea from terrorism and then the whole issue of what type of action but we have on the ground becomes central. i would've prine at that time north korea makes a decision that it's going to embark on this path with the new administration bitterly on its nuclear power. to demonstrate early on-q have to pay attention to us, to demonstrate early on as the strategic capabilities and are probably thinking to as the new administration is so committed to dialogue, why not walk into such dialogue with

on the other hand, we believe that iran, on the basis of the iaea rules has the right to peaceful use of nuclear energy and we believe this issue should best be solved through diplomatic means so as to maintain peace and stability in the gulf region and in the middle east. we believe that iran has not totally shut the door on the iaea proposal on nuclear fuel supply to the tehran research reaction. and we believe it is very important to have on the ground of p5 plus one dialogue. we hope on the basis of the proposal put forward by c-5 plus one and a package deal proposed by the iranian side somehow a mutually acceptable formulae can emerge. there are chances for us to explore. so china's view is very clear, in order not to complicate the situation, it's better for us not to concentrate on consultation and dialogue. so as to achieve a satisfactory solution. let me say that many, many countries see china as a force for peace and stability and development. we have one fifth of mankind. we're not saying that only one fifth of the mankind -- their views should be taken good care of. but at

therefore, our armed forces and the iaea must remain confident of global forces and content.as a 2010 judy are states, the united states faces a complex and uncertain security landscape in which the pace of change continues to accelerate. al qaeda remains the most significant terrorist right to the united states to al qaeda's propaganda, attack planning and support of the taliban and accounting networks continues. the group still pursued chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear materials for attacks. al qaeda affiliates continue to extend the terrorist group reached and brand. al qaeda in the arabian peninsula is growing in size and is broadening its repertoire of attacks. once focused mainly inside algeria, al qaeda in the lands of the islamic grabe is conducting once in other countries. levels in afghanistan increase our share while security declined because of an increasingly capable insurgency. the governments inability to extend security throughout the country and insurgent access to sanctuaries in pakistan. originally concentrated in a polished and dominated south

the iaea might know, the inspectors might know why, but they don't report this. they respect. this is a legitimate commercial activity, and so they protect what they would consider trade secrets. there might be a variety of reasons. we have some evidence that in the past russians have sold uranium, i mean aluminum that is critical to the manufacture of the tubes that was not as good quality as it was supposed to have been. after a couple years the centrifuges wear out after stress. we don't know that, but we do know the number of centrifuges is going down. what this means is that if you think there is some point where we have to go, we will be get passed we are forced to action, let's say for the sake of argument. the best thing to do is go and bomb the facility, whatever that point is, we are approaching it 4-5 times more slowly than we were a year ago. the clock is ticking more slowly. we are still living in the same direction. we have more time for negotiations. more time for sanctions, more time for diplomacy. let me just close by saying there is this question about iran h

it is a choice that they are making by their failure to take action once the iaea has shown that they are not complying with un security resolutions. >> mousavi has apparently said in the last couple of days that the green movement will not abandon its peaceful fight until the people's right preserved. peaceful protests are iranians rights, as they are in any country. are you confident that this approach is not going to damage that counter revolutionary force? >> you have to make a judgment, and the message we have to send is that iran has a duty to respect human rights and the right to peaceful protest of its citizens. everybody u.s. seen pictures coming out of iran about what has happened to people who have been demonstrating is shocked by the way the regime has dealt with these peaceful demonstrations. but i think one has to take a balanced judgment about the future, and it must be this -- that iran has been in defiance of united nations, evidence has emerged continuously about how they are trying to process a nuclear weapons program under the cover of a sillier -- of a civil nucle

our european friends may talk about the importance of the iaea, but nobody is deceit. at the u.s. cannot stop this, nobody can. if north korea keeps its program, other countriesnkára)@h turkey, maybe others will get nuclear weapons, and the risk of proliferation will continue dramatically. the multilateral system of international organizations is powerless. facing with the hard men that run countries like iran and north korea. and these hard men who have outnegotiated the united states time and time again know that in the current administration they don't have an equal partner. they've got something they think they can roll. basis and are going to continue to act on that basis. when you look at these critical areas that we have talked about , the administration is projecting weakness in a very substantial way. it is important that we look at otherÑi issues that will develop over the next several years, because of the danger is even broader than in the field of terrorism and proliferation. at some time this year, probably sooner rather than later, the administration will announce a

and this is exactly where the agreed framework had stumbled when you look at the iaea is ability to get inspection ready to clear the delta between what north korea had declared it actually produced in the way of plutonium and what the iaea and others thought they might have had, which was a few brands, a few dozen grams of plutonium versus kilograms, weapons worth. and so, the six-party talks process had run its course as far as they could go. and north korea could spend to really listen going to get a lot of support for a liberal verification regime. and this is after the president in north korea from terrorism and then the whole issue of what type of action but we have on the ground becomes central. i would've prine at that time north korea makes a decision that it's going to embark on this path with the new administration bitterly on its nuclear power. to demonstrate early on-q have to pay attention to us, to demonstrate early on as the strategic capabilities and are probably thinking to as the new administration is so committed to dialogue, why not walk into such dialogue with the

and this is exactly where the agreed framework had stumbled when you look at the iaea is ability to getinspection ready to clear the delta between what north korea had declared it actually produced in the way of plutonium and what the iaea and others thought they might have had, which was a few brands, a few dozen grams of plutonium versus kilograms, weapons worth. and so, the six-party talks process had run its course as far as they could go. and north korea could spend to really listen going to get a lot of support for a liberal verification regime. and this is after the president in north korea from terrorism and then the whole issue of what type of action but we have on the ground becomes central. i would've prine at that time north korea makes a decision that it's going to embark on this path with the new administration bitterly on its nuclear power. to demonstrate early on-q have to pay attention to us, to demonstrate early on as the strategic capabilities and are probably thinking to as the new administration is so committed to dialogue, why not walk into such dialogue with the g

we are the purchasers, and based on the iaea regulations, they should provide us that unconditionally. it is a tradition that if you want to order a commodity if you are actually the one who set the condition. they acted in opposite way here. it is the hegemonic nature. they insisted first you should give us the fuel. we're going to take the fuel, and later we are going to provide you the fuel, and they started to go on with attitude. the fuel aware of and some wall emperor from manufacturing a nuclear bomb. this is the literature of the prolongs to the era and the bush era. our response wasn clear. we said, we do not trust you. they started is engaging in propaganda. they issued a resolution, and once they tarnish the prestige of the agency do to their expansionist policies. they are obliged to provide us with the fuel. if they do not want to give us the fuel, they can say they do not want to give us the fuel. why are you claiming you want to hamper iraq from making an atomic bomb? they even said beyond this is thought through the propaganda by the media, they thought they weakened t

i think i would depoliticize this issue and really move it to only the sort of the do mine of the iaeacy that is strictly about monitoring verification and depoliticized issues. that's what i would do to defrive iranian state of using this issue as a form of national pride and that sort of thing. i guess the other thing i would do is we have seen as you mentioned, secretary clinton's comments have certainly indicated a shift in policy of the obama administration if in fact her comments reflect and we assume they do. i think that we're sort of now back to the bush doctrine on iran to some degree. talking in somewhat inflammatory rhetoric about the system. even though she is right. the islamic revolutionary guards do have power in iran today. as president, a lesson maybe we have learned about iran is despite efforts to determine a new policy of engagement, we're sort of back to square one. >> madam president, would you continue your position and poke them in the eye or think maybe more diplomatic or humane responses to iran are needed? >> i think as long as there is political instability

we are the purchasers, and based on the iaea regulations, they should provide us that unconditionallyition that if you want to order a commodity if you are actually the one who set the condition. they acted in opposite way here. it is the hegemonic nature. they insisted first you should give us the fuel. we're going to take the fuel, and later we are going to provide you the fuel, and they started to go on with attitude. they said they wanted to take emperor from manufacturing a nuclear bomb. this is the literature of the prolongs to the era and the bush era. our response was clear. we said, we do not trust you. they started is engaging in propaganda. they issued a resolution, and once they tarnish the prestige of the agency do to theirxd expansionist policies. they are obliged to provideçó us with the fuel. if they do not want to give us the fuel, they can say they do not want to give us the fuel. why are you claiming you want to hamper iraq from making an atomic bomb? Ñi-- iran from making an atomic bomb? they even said beyond this is thought through the propaganda by the media, the

and again the letter that's gone to the iaea from the french, the russians and the americans i think outlines a united position and dealing with iran. thanks guys. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> with your wildest imagination, if you're writing fiction you could not have made this story up. >> next, former secretary of state madeleine albright joins the college president of wellesley, columbia and spellman to discuss ways that women can be prepared to lead in education industry and government. this is just under an hour and 40 minutes. [applause] >> well, good afternoon everybody. i'm not used to sitting down to deliver welcoming remarks. it feels a little strange to be in an armed chair. but well come to all of you this afternoon for this conversation with secretary albright on higher education's role and responsibility in global affairs. this afternoon's event is held under the auspices of the college's newly established madalyn covel albright, 59 institute for global affairs. the albright institute represents a renewal and extension of wellesley's commitment

our european friends may talk about the importance of the iaea, but nobody is deceit. at the u.s. cannot stop this, nobody can. if north korea keeps its program, other countries in east asia will get a nuclear weapons. if iran gets nuclear weapons, other countries in the region, saudi arabia, egypt, turkey, maybe others will get nuclear- weapons. the risk of proliferation will continue dramatically. the multilateral system of international order reason -- organization is powerless when faced with the dealing with countries like iran and north korea. >> they know that in the current administration they do not have an equal partner. they have somebody they think they can roll. they are acting on that basis and are going to continue to act on that basis. when you look at these critical areas that we have talked about , the administration is projecting weakness in a very substantial way. it is important that we look at otherÑi issues that will develop over the next several years, because of the danger is even broader than in the field of terrorism and proliferation. at some time this

france, great britain, and the united states all said was a good deal, and that the director of the iaea said was the right thing to do and that iran should accept. that indicates to us that, despite their posturing that their nuclear power is only for civilian use, that they in fact continue to pursue a course that would lead to weaponization. and that is not acceptable to the international community, not just the united states. so what we have said from the start is that we are moving on dual tracks. if you want to except the kinds of agreements with the international community that lead you down a path of being a member of good standing, then we welcome you. if not -- >> had they not responded, though? by deciding to do what they did? >> i am getting to that. if not, the next up is sanctions. they have made their choice so far, although the door is still open. and what we're going to be working on of the next several weeks is developing a significant regime of sanctions that will indicate to them how isolated they are from the international community as a whole. >> what you mean by re

indicated some sort of change in position of iran, then president mahmoud ahmadinejad should let the iaeanope. >> to topics, first toyota. i wanted to ask you about the president's transportation secretary today on the hill saying that the people who have toyota's should just stop driving them. since he said that was a misstatement, but i wonder if you can clarify what is the white house telling the millions of toyota owners across the country what to do? >> as you know, nhtsa, the department of national delete cushions the nation has been very active in making sure the americans are could save on the roads. they are forward leaning as it relates to toyota making sure they live up to the safety standards including encouraging them on the recall. as it relates to people who have toyota is now you should go to the experts at the department of transportation to know a lot more about the issue. but all americans should really get their cars to death if they think that they might have -- if they think that they might have a car that is part of the recall. and they should go get it checked out.

france, great britain, and the united states all said was a good deal, and that the director of the iaea was the right thing to do and that iran should accept. that indicates to us that, despite their posturing that their nuclear power is only for civilian use, that they in fact continue to pursue a course that would lead to weaponization. and that is not acceptable to the international community, not just the united states. so what we have said from the start is that we are moving on dual tracks. if you want to except the kinds of agreements with the international community that lead you down a path of being a member of good standing, then we welcome you. if not -- >> had they not responded, though? by deciding to do what they did? >> i am getting to that. if not, the next up is sanctions. they have made their choice so far, although the door is still open. and what we're going to be working on of the next several weeks is developing a significant regime of sanctions that will indicate to them how isolated they are from the international community as a whole. >> what you mean by regime

we believe thatñr iran has not totally shut the door on theÑi iaea proposal on nuclear fuel supply toal put forward by p-5 plus one and the package deal proposed by the iranian side somehowÑi a mutually acceptable formula can emerge. there are chances -- challenges for us to explore. china's view is very clear. in order not to complicate the situation, it's better for us now to concentrate on consultation and dialogue. so as to achieve a satisfactory solution. let me say that many, many countries see china as a force for peace and stability and development. we have 1/5 of mankind, we're not saying that only 1/5 of mankind should be -- their views should be taken good care of but at least we deserve a chance to express ourñr views on how thin should be run in the world. what we are trying to do, like other countries, is to improve on the international mechanism, on the ways to make sure that both the developed and developing countries will benefit from our cooperation in the future. so we are offering our views, but we have the modesty to listen to others. that's always been the tradi

france, great britain and the united states all said was a good deal and that the director of the iaeaaid was the right thing to do and that iran should accept. that indicates to us that despite their posturing that their nuclear power is only for civilian use, that they, in fact , continue to pursue a course that would lead to weaponization and that is not acceptable to the international community. we have said, if you want to accept the kinds of agreements with the international community that lead you down a path of being a member of good standing, then we welcome you. if not -- >> by deciding to do what they did -- >> if not, the next step is sanctions. they have made their choice so far, although the door is still open. what we will be working on over the next several weeks is developing a significant regime of sanctions that will indicate to them how isolated they are from the international community as a whole. >> what do you mean by sanctions? u.n. and others? >> we are going to be looking at a variety of ways in which countries indicate to iran that their approach is unaccepta

it is a choice that they are making by their failure to take action once the iaea has shown that they un security resolutions. >> mousavi has apparently said in the last couple of days that the green movement will not abandon its peaceful fight until the people's right preserved. peaceful protests are iranians rights, as they are in any country. are you confident that this approach is not going to damage that counter revolutionary force? >> you have to make a judgment, and the message we have to send is that iran has a duty to respect human rights and the right to peaceful protest of its citizens. everybody u.s. seen pictures coming out of iran about what has happened to people who have been demonstrating is shocked by the way the regime has dealt with these peaceful demonstrations. but i think one has to take a balanced judgment about the future, and it must be this -- that iran has been in defiance of united nations, evidence has emerged continuously about how they are trying to process a nuclear weapons program under the cover of a sillier -- of a civil nuclear program, and all the

our european friends may talk about the importance of the iaea, but nobody is deceit. at the u.s.ies in east asia will get a nuclear weapons. if iran gets nuclear weapons, other countries in the region, saudi arabia, egypt, turkey, maybe others will get nuclear- weapons. the risk of proliferation will continue dramatically. the multilateral system of international order reason -- organization is powerless when faced with the dealing with countries like iran and north korea. >> they know that in the current administration they do not have an equal partner. they have somebody they think they can roll. they are acting on that basis and are going to continue to act on that basis. when you look at these critical areas that we have talked about , the administration is projecting weakness in a very substantial way. it is important that we look at otherÑi issues that will develop over the next several years, because of the danger is even broader than in the field of terrorism and proliferation. at some time this year, probably sooner rather than later, the administration will announce an

>> in terms of a formal assessment we would defer to the iaea inspectors hoping to advise them on what they are trying to do. we believe that any step to further enriched uranium to 20% is a violation of their obligations under a number of even the security council resolutions. -- a number of u.n. security council resolutions. we think they should come back where we can help them provide whatever their needs are within a civilian nuclear program while reassuring the international community about their intentions regarding their overall nuclear ambitions. these ongoing statements and actions are counterproductive. the really college question whether iranian claims to remain peaceful arcanum -- are, in fact, true. >> analysts conclude that the protest movement might be fizzling out given what happened yesterday. i was wondering whether you had a take on that. >> i am not sure it has fizzled out. what you saw yesterday was a draconian steps by the iranian government to suppress the people of iran and their right to assemble freely and voice their concerns about their own government and it

indeed when the head of iaea said that the end there is no evidence of a nuclear program vice presidentbeen difficult given all his back rent because some who seem to have been convincing on this score. >> understanding the point you're making i don't believe it is correct. if you look at the iraq survey group report now and this report -- we will get to the detail of a bit later but this report is very, very important indeed because what is effectively is what blix could have produced saddam cooperated with him. and what the report shows is the extent to which saddam retained his nuclear and chemical warfare intent and intellectual know-how. now, what saddam could have done perfectly easily is provide the proper documentation and he could have cooperated fully and interviews -- >> if you look at the report one of the problems of the iraqi said gotten themselves into is when they dismantled a lot of this they had not maintained proper documentation so you were almost in the audit trail problem here indeed jack straw freest this when he was talking about what was there and this goes back

the iaea report gave us one more piece of evidence to present to dodging countries -- doubting countries are making the argument in public that china's dependence on oil from the gulf should cause it to make a strategic calculation to support sanctions. in the absence of pressure that changes the iran and efforts to obtain a nuclear weapon, there will be an arms race in the gulf. that will further destabilize the gulf. it could lead to conflict which could dramatically undermine the delivery of oil from the gulf. our argument, joined by other countries, to china is that if you are concerned about your market access to the arabian gulf for oil, then you should join the rest of the world in sanctions. we were very successful when nobody thought we could get time on board for the north korean sanctions. even today, the south africans stopped the ship bound for chicagthe congo because we got e international community behind us. a lot of people are joining us to convince china to join with the rest of the world. >> thank you so much. >> that you, senator boxer. senator menendez? >> a politica

if those comments indicate a change in position for iran, then president ahmadinejad should let the iaea know. >> two topics. first i wanted to ask you about the president of transportation and secretary on the hill saying people that people who have toyotas should stop driving them. he said that was a misstatement. can you clarify? what the white house helping the millions of toyota owners out there across the country to do? >> well, for starters, as, you know, nitza, the department of transportation has been very active in making sure americans are kept safe on our roads. as it relates to toyota, making sure that they are living up to safety standards. including encouraging them on the recall. as relates to people who have toyota's new, go to experts at the department of transportation that know more about issue. all americans should get their cars checked out if think they might have a car that's a part of the recall, get it checked out. get it fixed it it if it is. >> is there a procedure in place for potential conflict of interest in terms of commenting on other karl calls and safet

once the iaea have shown they are not complying with the u.n. security resolutions. >> musab has said the green movement will not abandon their rights until the people's right have reserved peaceful protest as they are in any country. are you confident this approach is not going to damage that revolution force? >> i think you have to make a judgment 37 and the message that we have to send is that iran is a duty to respect the human rights is the right to peaceful protest of it's citizens. i think everybody who's seen pictures coming out of iran about what has happened to people who have been demonstrating is shocked by the way the regime has dealt with these peaceful demonstrations. but i think one has to take a balance of judgment about the future. and it must be this. this iran has been in defiance of the united states. evidence has emerged continuously about how they are trying to possess a nuclear weapons program under the cover of civil nuclear program. all of the evidences and materials that they are trying to bring together. that would no

for too long the iaea's technical assistance and cooperation programs have been underfunded. international nonproliferation efforts face an uncertain future. iran and north korea are our primary concerns, but potential nuclear flash points remain between india and pakistan. and the security of fissile material while improving remains a vital concern. in order for the iaea to be best positioned to confront proliferation efforts in north korea and iran, as well as monitor the peaceful nuclear energy programs in countries around the world, its budget needs to reflect this growing portfolio. u.s. leadership in nonproliferation is essential. a fully funded iaea will complement u.s. efforts to combat proliferation at this critical time. these investments in our national security are substantial, but there is no greater threat than that of nuclear terrorism. we must remain vigilant and doing everything we can to ensure is that terrorists do not get their hands on weapons of mass destruction. the nonproliferation measures mentioned above all help to address this threat. to keep ameri

i seen in the last report that the new head of the iaea is highly important because it shows that international agencies can, if the will is due, call the state and stop all these gymnastics about what the evergreen and is doing. if they make implosion, the experiments on heavy metals, with the array of simultaneously activated detonators and if they're working so intensively by the two@ n)@ rbrb in such a delicate corner of the world. if iran will not be stopped from moving there, and it will reach a certain point nuclear military capability and iran will close its eyes and see what it needs. a nuclear iran means the end of any long proliferation regime. so olivia and another two or three members of the middle eastern community will feel compelled to reach nuclear capability as well. and we open the door for any state to as a nuclear ambition to understand that it is drunk enough mentally to defy any kind of from the world it will admit nuclear capability. i don't think that the iranians have most examples, probably some certain example of how easy it could be to try and defeat the whole world