here's a picture of north korea right after kim ill son died in july 1984. you see the we've been -- weeping north koreans. now look at the skies. you have the grey skies which are a symbol of the changing times on the world stage. in other words, norge kim jong-il inherited a situation that was more difficult than his father had. this was the message the propaganda put across because they knew with a famine coming they could see the salmon on the horizon, they knew they could not present kim jong-il as the kind of all round figure who is just as good as economic growth as military matters. they knew they had to disassociate him from the whole economic problems as quickly as possible. they did this through the military first policy. the message of which was basically kim jong-il saying to his people, you know, i'd like to keep feeding you, but the threat from the diocese has never been greater than it is now. so i'm going to be traveling around the country visiting military bases 24/7. in the meantime, you just have to feed yourself. this is interesting becau

but actually this image has an appeal on the people of north korea. ust to make sure i'm not reading anything into these pictures. because north korean propaganda is not so. when they want to make a point they come right out and say it. so they do say literally our great mother, general kim jong-il. that's not all they call him of course but they do call him on occasion father leader as well. he's also been referred to as the parent increasing and also his paternal qualities are at the forefront. he is worrying about whether the soldiers are one of, whether they are eating enough insulin. he is not in educating figure. the party is also referred to quite literally as the mother party. this is the attitude that is expected of north korean citizens. i cry out for ever in the voice of a child. mother, i cannot live without mother. one of the signs that's held up during parades is we cannot live away from his breast, ending kim jong-il. so the symbolism really could not be more explicit. so here is pretty much at the top have the motherland. then you have

technology china, iran, libya and north korea. the extent to which he did this, as a so-called rogue agent is disputed. he claims he did it. there are also allegations that he offered nuclear technology to iraq, egypt and syria. we can only see his legs, was pakistan's chief of army staff, general musharraf. he overthrew sharif in a military coup. also there that day were the head of the pakistan air force and navy and the top bureaucrat. a retired general at the pakistani military defense. reportedly the prince, his son and the saudi delegation were shown around the enrichment plant, saw the missiles asemmabilitied on the same site. they were shown some nuclear weapons. you will recall that in the previous year, 1998, pakistan successfully test-fired the missile, a copy of the north korea -- and tested two atomic bombs. apparently, the conversation that day went something like this. khan, jokingly to the prince, if you want, you can take a few weapons with you. the prince said if pakistan has them, it is like we have them. khan,

markets would be impeded in any way if they continued to support the iran and north korea nuclear program they really are supporting it, although the rhetoric is on the other side. as long as we try to persuade these countries that they ought to change their policies because they do not yet understand what is in their national interest, i think we're doomed to failure and a willingness to bargain and threaten and make concessions dooms us to a world in which iran and north korea have nuclear-weapons and that will be very dangerous world. >> you were paying attention to the president's remarks and meetings in prague and the signing of a new treaty. as far as the sanctions go, in terms of the russian response, are you confident that there will be any meaningful u.s. sanctions and that the u.s. and russia together will convince china and other countries to go along? >> it is a long way from truly meaningful sanctions. even our administration is talking about smart sanctions. the idea is that we will have sanctions that do not hurt the iranian economy. why would the iranian government give up

we need to build on this success but beyond iran and north korea.this means looking for a clandestine nuclear programs and also trying to understand leadership motives and decisions, and it wants nuclear weapons. they do not have the tools or resources of our intelligence community for major member states, but inspectors often have access and information member states don't and may be able to connect the dots in ways that member states can't. we should continue to help the and i e a in building its schools and make as routine as possible the sharing of information. the inspectors need not only more information but more authority. the administration is right in encouraging more countries to sign the additional protocol. but rather than just trying to run up the number of countries that have signed the administration needs to focus on those key countries that have refused and i would argue president obama has an important discussion to have with egypt and brazil in the margins of the nuclear summit. third, the united states should step up internationa

that's wht special exemptions for iran and north korea. that's smart but it sounds very familiar. it sounds like the axis of evil, another peace of evidence that bush was right. >> any situation where you would envision the u.s. using a nuclear weapon? >> eleanor, it doesn't matter. you don't take any option off the table. >> okay, ladies, hold on. mort? >> it's certainly going to create a lot of intent for people who develop biological and chemical weapons because that's going to be, shall we say, the weapons du jour. i actually happen to be in favor of reduction of nuclear capabilities than weaponry. a lot of them are old weapons, old rockets. i'm not sure they serve quite the same purpose. >> we're doing that. >> but it's -- >> not only that, but when bush, who favored some of this reduction as well, i might add, but he had three exceptions. one is for biological and chemical agents and for a very major conventional attack. so you keep at least that option. so in a sense, not understanding that gates was opposed to that elimination of that. >> the ambiguity? >> yeah. >> do you

in contrast, north korea and iran have signed the nonproliferation treaty and so they're in the category of violator. i would say that for israel to sign the nonproliferation treaty at a time when iran is able to envile yate it with immunity might be creart to their national security interests. it is interesting that those states that are saying that israel should sign the treaty are not doing anything effective to make sure that iran lives by the treaty and are not even suggesting that pakistan sign the treaty. i think that the future long-term existence of pakistan is not being placed in doubt, where there is a considerable worldwide effort to expel israel and wipe it off the map. >> and what about the prime minister's decision not to come? >> i don't know what motivated that decision. but if by not coming he avoids this effort to try to force israel to sign the npt while pakistan doesn't and iran signs it and violates it, if by not coming he can avoid pressure to be in that situation i would understand. i would hope that his nonattendance has nothing to do with this recent flap about

we need to build on the success, but look beyond iran and north korea. this not only means looking for kind is the nuclear programs, it also means trying to understand leadership motives and decisions that could cause a country to decide that it wants nuclear weapons. i.e. investigators to not have the tools or resources of our intelligence community or those of other major state. but 80 inspectors often have access to information that member states talent and maybe able to connect the dots in ways that member states can't. we should continue to help the iaea and building its investigative skills and tools and make as routine as possible the sharing of information. the inspectors need not only more information, but more authority. the administration at us right us write encouraging more countries to sign the iaea's additional protocol. rather than just trying to run up the number of countries that have signed, the administration needs to focus on those key countries that have refused to date and i would argue president obama has an important discussion t

. >> i think that the npr has a very strong message for both iran and north korea. whether it is in declaratory policy or other elements of the npr, we essentially carve out states like iran and north korea that are not in compliance with npt. basically, all options are on the table when it comes to countries in that category, along with non state actors who might acquire nuclear weapons. if there is a message for iran and north korea here, it is -- if you're going to play by the rules, then we will undertake certain obligations to you. that is covered in the npr. but if you're not going to play by the rules, then all options are on the table in terms of how we deal with it. >> on page 33 of the report -- and it tends to protect u.s. forces or partners or allies -- translate this to the middle east. does this mean that if iran attacks israel or the gulf states with conventional or nuclear weapons, the u.s. would attack them? >> i'm not going to go down a hypothetical road. >> on the alert status, why does that remain unchanged when so many other things are changing

if there is a message for iran and north korea, it is if you are going to play by the rules and join the international community, we will undertake certain obligations to you. if you are not going to play by the rules, if you are going to be a proliferate hr, all options are on the table. >> one of the goals of an enhanced regional architecture is to ensure that any attempts to protect u.s. forces or allies will be planted with a -- and enhanced ability. if iran talks -- if a brand attacks israel, would the u.s. attack? >> i would not go down the hypothetical road. >> the alert status, what does that remain on changed? did you tell us a bit more about how the presidential decision making process will be changed under the review? >> there are some changes that we made in command and control that tighten things up and give the president more time for decision. what was the first part? >> military alert. >> frankly, we feel like the situation is a satisfactory one at the current one. we have no armed bombers sitting at the end of runways any longer. we have our icbm's are all targeted r

policy or other elements, we essentially carved out states like iran and north korea that are not in compliance with mpt and all options are on the table when it comes to countries in that category. if there is a message for iran and north korea here, it is that if you are going to play by the rules and join the international community, we will undertake certain obligations to you. if you are not going to play by the rules, going to be eight proliferater, all options are on the table. >> page 33 talks about the goals of an architecture ensuring that any attempts [inaudible] translate to the middle east, does that mean if iraq attacks israel for the gulf states with a conventional or nuclear weapon, the u.s. would attack to blunt them? >> i am not going to go down a hypothetical road on that with you. >> why does the alert status remained unchanged when other things are changed? did you tell us more about how the presidential decision making process will be changed? >> there are provisions and the experts can get into it with you but there are some changes that we have made in command

the fact that iran and north korea have not responded makes our case in a way. if you look at north korea, for example, we now have a very clear understanding with the other members of the six-party talks led by china, that north korea cannot be permitted to just go on its own course, that it has to be pressured to come back into this framework to try to get to the denukization of the peninsula. with iran, a lot of countries were on the sidelines. their attitude was, the united states are hurling insults, they're not really willing to have any diplomatic engagement. we said, okay, fine, we're willing. we stretched out our hand. the president made extraordinary efforts. it was the iranians who refused. that has brought more people to the table. we have unity in what's called the p5-plus-1, they are meeting in new york as we speak to begin the hard process of coming up with the language of a resolution. >> you don't think the u.s. would have to go it alone on sanctions before going to the united nation sns. >> no, i don't. >> you say there's been all this unity. t

this is a huge, diplomatic coup for north korea. ed arab emirates chose south korea to buy reactors from. it didn't choose france and it didn't choose the united states. so this is south korea moving into the spt light in a very positive way, and in the security and nonproliferation issues. >> sharon squasoni, of the prevention program at cisi, the center for strategic and international studies. i wanted to get the full plug in there. >> and our suzanne malveaux at the white house. we will continue to follow the nuclear summit throughout the morning and the afternoon. >>> she hipped her adopted son back to russia unaccompanied and unannounced. a tennessee mother's decision is causing outrage in moscow and now russia is threatening to stop u.s. adoptions. more on that straight ahead. que. coup a coup.back to russia unacd unannounced. a tennessee mother's decision is causing outrage in moscow and now russia is threatening to stop adoptions. it will send top officials to russia this week to urge them not to do that. a lot of fallout fro

you know, having nuclear weapons should make you look more like north korea and who wants to be north korea? you have to convince these countries it doesn't buy you influence. we can't discern there can't discern there would be a nuclear arms race. and any nuclear arms race may take a long time and be confusing and hard to recognize. there could be surprises, too. i think we have to work to prevent a nuclear arms race from taking even if nuclear arms in iran. they been working on it for a long time and they're really going to be successful. but i think what we've seen over the last, certainly since the time i've been at the iaea as we seem to have now mastered the technology, thanks to a.q. khan about an rich technology. a.q. khan defense about centrifuges so if you cannot want them to figure figure out how to do it. but they cannot -- they can't enrich uranium at the level required if you wanted to have a large effective civil program, but they can enrich it well enough that they want to produce, you know, the salamat nuclear weapons. and were also very confident coming iaea is, we a

who wants to be north korea? you have to tell these countries it doesn't buy you prestige and influence. we can't assume there would be a nuclear arms race. and it may take a long time and may be confused. and may be hard to recognized. there could be surprises, too. but i think we have to work to prevent a nuclear arms race from taking -- even if iran gets nuclear weapons. iran has been working on a for a long time. you ask yourself are they really going to be successful? but i think what we've seen, you know, over the last certainly the time i've been at the iaea is, you know, we've seen -- they have now mastered the technology. thanks to a. q. khan about how to enrich technology. a. q. khan has given them bad centrifuges and it's taken them a long time to figure it out. they can't enrich uranium at the level required if you wanted to have a large effective civil program. but they can enrich it well enough if they want to produce a small amount for nuclear weapons. and we're also very confident, the iaea is and

everybody has work to do including the united states. >> in that context, we talk about this terms of north koreand iran and weapons programs, but a lot of the nuclear material in the world is research, medical research, we have issues with the canadians to our north and within the borders of the united states. how much is the technology of this business, the necessary nuclear business changed in the last ten years or so so that you can now go to these people and say you don't need to do it this way anymore because you can get what you need in a safer way? >> i think the ukraine's commitment announced today is an example. here is a country that is now committed to eliminate all of its highly enriched uranium and it's going to move to its low enriched uranium for its nuclear reactors, we hope other states are going to move that direction, that's one of the technologies that's providing us an avenue to try and mobilize the global community to follow if you will, to shift gears away from highly enriched uranium and those kinds of materials that present a greater danger. >> those who are -- those in

and the last thing you want to do, as an ethnic korean in north korea is say i'm an american. that to them is just baffling, and the reports i heard was he had been severely beaten while in north korean custody. . . perfectly happy to let him go in response for something. >> coming close to lining up a question here that asks about kim jong il, i always turn those around. can you give us an understanding about the name? >> it can be translated as becoming the sun and kim jong il can be translated as the true sun. these names are not particularly symbolic for the north korean people because they stopped using chinese characters in their ridings on wouldn't read too much into those names. you can look at the etymology of certain words but we are not really conscious of them in daily life. in korean families the names of the suns will often be quite similar so the first chinese character of the children's first name will all be the same one which is why the pictures i showed you are all quite similar. >> what about the daughter's? >> their names are different. >> do they take the

and with respect to north korea.view is come and this i think the administration is bent over backwards in terms of its engagement policy and recent policy. it up to russia and china to step up, two-man out and come up on the front and do what they should have done long time ago under the terms of the npt, and that is stop assisting iran and north korea, build ballistic missiles or nuclear weapons. i can't say it any simpler than that. and as someone who has pushed very hard for the refined oil sanctions bill that is in congress, who has testified before 30 legislatures on domestic and has talked about stewart lee become a think as a national hero who should get a congressional medal of freedom, because of the work is done in terms of treasury taking money away from people as is now clear, if we do to the iran's central bank what we did to the north korean bank, we can bring down the regime in iran. mable people disagree with the there. i think we can. that to me is the test. and not the namby-pamby sanctions that we

. >> i actually think the review has a very strong message before both iran and north korea. whether it is in declaratory policy or other elements of the review, we essentially carve out states like north korea and iran that not in compliance and all options are on the table when it comes to countries in that category, along with non- state actors who may acquire nuclear weapons. if there is a message for iran and north korea, it is if you are going to play by the rules and join the international community, we will undertake certain obligations to you. if you are not going to play by the rules, if you are going to be a proliferate hr, all options are on the table. >> one of the goals of an enhanced regional architecture is to ensure that any attempts to protect u.s. forces or allies will be planted with a -- and enhanced ability. if iran talks -- if a brand attacks israel, would the u.s. attack? >> i would not go down the hypothetical road. >> the alert status, what does that remain on changed? did you tell us a bit more about how the presidential decision making process will

i say that because of north korea. we hear so many reports about north koreans have been cell phones and other forbidden technology in that nation. a lot more information is coming out. >> that is right. in the case of north korea, as has been reported, the border with china does get an opportunity for some people in north korea to access wireless networks that they otherwise would not be able to. there is a lot of evidence in the public domain that says that in places where there are borders and were wireless signals do not necessarily recognize a natural border, there are opportunities for people to get information and content to the other -- that others cannot. a lot of this comes down to will. if the government has the will to shut down its networks, then it is very hard to work around that. one thing secretary clinton said in her internet freedom speech on january 21st was that we were not just going to sit back and allow this. forgetting about iran for a moment, but thinking about this globally, it is very importa

north korea. some art strategic. these centers all have differences in approach because of the challenges that they face and the missions that they have but they have eight full sharing of information and a close connection to -- a full sharing of information and a close connection to policymakers. sharing of information, more than anything else, is what would make this department a real game changer. information is a legacy, a gift, that the framers gave to the nation. intelligent reform is really just a means to an end. it enables a policy that effectively supports national security action. it means keeping the country safe, secure, and a haven for development in the 21st century. if we can truly create a more perfect union out of the components of the intelligence community, we will eventually be able to not only create a patchwork, but removed the seems -- the seams. the motivation behind all of our discussions here today is not just what is best for us or the intelligence community, but what

why has that not happen with north korea? >> i will not give you a full dissertation on north korean behavior. i think it is fair to say that north korea has chosen a path of severe isolation that has been extraordinarily damaging to its people. it is our hope that as pressure builds for north korea to improve its economic performance, for example, to break out of that isolation, that we will seek a return to the six-party talks and we will see a change in behavior. sanctions are not a magic wand, as i said. unfortunately, nothing in international relations is. i think that the approach we have taken with respect to north korea makes it more likely for them to alter their behavior. had there been no consequence whatsoever to them testing nuclear weapons, it would not be the same. >> given the goals of this conference and your administration, why did -- why does it appear as if pakistan is playing by different set of rules. they have not signed on to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. should there be more pressure internatio

caller: is relates to iran and north korea. should our policy uniform in dealing with both countries? . guest: that is a good question. both are obviously countries of concern because of their interest in proliferation. the reason they are being treated differently is their history. iran is in the middle east. it is not as far along in its program as north korea, which has already detonated several weapons. of course, north korea as the history of the korean war. they are two different situations, but what they have in common is potential proliferation. we take that seriously. both of them i believe have parallels to the cuban missile crisis. crisis. president kennedy was confronted with the choice of an emerging nuclear threat, in terms of them placing missiles in cuba, at the same time that he raised pressure on the soviet union, he made it clear that he could open up channels of negotiations to allow for a grateful -- graceful exit for them, taking into account the interest of both sides. host: you start with a map looking a

of north korea.ation of the corrine peninsula. there's a clear path for north korea to move, to accomplish that goal. in doing so north korea can benefit from improved relationships with united states and international community but obviously number three is the failure to take that step over many years and its reluctance to i obligations that north korea itself and agreed. >> in 2005, there are consequences and ramifications or number three as a billiard to act. in our nuclear posture review, we have taken account of our concerns on nonproliferation and clearly you have to clear cases that replied to our global concerns. north korea being one and iran the other. if north korea has concerns about what's in the nuclear posture review they actually control what happens next. and i come back to the six party process, if they take the steps to denuclearization than they have no concern and nothing to fear from the nuclear posture review that we released. >> related to that can you confirm that iran, nort

and i say that because of north korea. we're hearing so many reports about north koreans now along the border with china having cell phones and other forbidden technology in that nation, but a lot more information is coming out. >> guest: that's right. so, you know, in the case of north korea as has been reported, you know, the border with china does give an opportunity for some people in north korea to access wireless networks that they otherwise wouldn't be able to. you know, there is a lot of evidence and a lot of evidence in the public do main that says -- domain that says, you know, particularly in places where there are borders and where wireless signals don't necessarily recognize a natural border, there are opportunities for people to get information and content that they otherwise can't. but if a government -- a lot of this comes down to will. if a government has the will to completely shut down its networks, then it's very hard to work around that. now, one of the things that secretary clinton said in her internet

. >> you did make an exception to north korea and iran. explain to me what that means. >> well, because they're not in compliance with the nuclear nonproliferation treaty. so for them, all bets are off. all the options are on the table. >> "this week" with abc's senior white house correspondent jake tapper. >> senator kyl, you are concerned about president obama

you have to look at iran and syria and north korea.ou have to be ready for all of those and you have to address it would offensive capabilities and defensive as well. the stability question is -- maybe it is too soon to say that we have been made more in danger to. it is not too soon to say that they are asking the wrong questions and therefore, one has to wonder if they're going to get the right answers. >> and i asked to pose a question myself to admiral monroe? -- can i ask to pose a question myself to admiral monroe? one of the things that is absolutely explicit in the npr is that we cannot live for the foreseeable future, at least as long as this president is going to be alive, with the nuclear weapons be have? they have laid out some sort of exotic explanations of the ways in which they're going to try to maintain that, replacement, refurbishment, reuse. but you are in the business of insuring that nuclear weapons work. i would ask from a professional expert point of view to assess the probability of success of being able to have

the united states might even use nuclear weapons preemptively against such states like iran or north korea or syria. if i had written a posture review, i would have gone a bit further. i would say sole purpose, in addition to sole purpose, it led to the united states -- that the united states in any instance would use nuclear weapons first. i do not think there is any plausible scenario where u.s. nuclear weapons would be used for anything accepted terence. i think not going all the way to a sole purpose declaration, the statement in a sense undermines the credibility of the u.s. of the conventional deterrent and it still potentially could give states incentives to acquire nuclear weapons to, in a sense, safeguard themselves from the potential of the u.s. first strike, so i went on further. host: about 2600 estimated warheads in russia right now. about 2100 -- 2126 in the united states and falls down considerably from there. what does it mean today? guest: i think we have seen a precipitous drop at the end of the cold war, the total number of nuclear-weapons that the u.s. and russia has be

north korea has sentenced an american teacher to eight years of hard labor. and ordered him to pay a $7,000 fine actor he got illegally into the country. he is the fourth u.s. citizen to be detained since last year. finally, work continues at a mine in the west virginia. rescuers have gotten a response to possible survivors. the blast killed 25 and left four missing. it is the worst u.s. mining accident in over two decades. >> first lady, michele obama focusing on fighting childhood obesity, sits down to date with the studentcam winner of honolulu. his documentary was on childhood abuse. others will join the conversation from around the country. it will be live at 11:00 a.m. eastern. >> this week on c-span 2, a special primetime presentation. tonight the following offers. -- authors. it all begins at 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span2. >> i know what the challenges, and we are in a unique position to go to war. when the policy makers in the washington to develop a roadmap so that we can get it done. >> something about energy policy would like to talk about on your

this is a posture review designed to drill down a bit on places like north korea and iran and to demonstrate to countries around the world -- as i said earlier, if you live up to those obligations, you will enjoy the benefits of being an active responsible member of the international community. >> is it true that the initiation was considering a blanket no use policy a few weeks ago? >> i was not in the 150 or so meetings. >> [unintelligible] >> i will say this. we obviously have bombers that are no longer on alert. we have a sea-based missiles that do remain on alert status. our forces are configured in such a way that a retaliatory strike does not need to be launched at the first detection of a foreign launch. the nuclear posture review proposes that we consider a series of options that extend presidential decision-making time by extending control apparatus around those nuclear weapons and that we open discussions with russia to reduce the possibility of either an accidental launch or a false detection of a launch. >> use this is a version of a deal? >> the president believes that this giv

nor is north korea. which claims to already have nukes. india, and pakistan are taking part in this meeting. but each is making weapons-grade plutonium as fast as it can as a deterrent against the other. but that's another story. and that is not on the agenda for this week in washington. a group points out 19 countries have eliminated nuclear materials within their borders. not reduce, not secured, but they have actually eliminated it. on the same hand, the same group reports more than 18 known cases of loss or theft of weapons grade nukes around the world, with all of that in mind, i want to bring in jim walsh, researcher with the security studies program at m.i.t. he joins me today from back in my hometown of washington right now. and jim, let me start off with a very basic question here. there really are two different levels of concern when we talk about nukes right now, right? we're concerned about the notion that we have countries out there that have nuclear powers, that they might become the victims of a rogue government. and the que

we're going to ice late north korea and iran. we're going to break out of the proliferation system. so we think it's very much in our interest to do that as it relates to our cooperation with russia, we feel like we're making good prong that the president and president medvedev spent a lot of time talking about that we think we're making good progress but we're not taking anything for granted on that either. the negotiations up in new york are ongoing. the cooperation we're getting from russia in afghanistan in terms of transiting lethal equipment through russian air space is proceeding at pace. but we're not going to taking anything for granted. worry going to keep pushing this through as it relates to iran, afghanistan and north korea and a range of other issues. >> do you have a firm commitment one way or another from china it will support sanctions at the u.n. security council? >> again, i'm not going to get ahead of the negotiators up in new york or the negotiations that are going up at the capital. what i do know is this, wolf, we worked very closely with our chinese friends o

north korea broke out. it join the nonproliferation treaty in 1992 but was already breaking now before it started, so it has much less constrained. iran is the only one that made that commitment and hud international and for vacation but it would not be making nuclear weapons and send -- and had international implications it would not be making nuclear weapon went against that. i would think farms raise pressures would be between saudi arabia -- the arms race pressures would be between saudi arabia and egypt. if persia has nuclear weapons, and arab state will need it, and the question is between saudi arabia and egypt. which is the one that gets the status and prestige first? i think that attention would be very strong. >> i will come to bill schneider afterwards. >> there was a regional security conference in december. general petraeus attended, and general petraeus made cryptic remarks about security architecture, and the impression he seemed to be getting was that the united states and other countries we

by north korea, which would pour over into both china and south korea. so if we're going to deal with china on these issues, we have to first of all, i think as joshua implied, we've got to listen to china, we've got to listen to their concerns. and then we have to be willing to help think through those concerns from their perspective. looking at it from their perspective, we may not end up agreeing with them, we may end up disagreeing but we have to listen carefully to what they're saying if we want them on board. and they have to be on board if we're going to solve either iran or north korea without a terrible conflict. >> the fact is, we have a laundry list of these problems: iran, north korea, currency. they're only going to escalate. the chinese are going to be doing more and more things that americans start to perceive as a threat to american national interest. i think there's a view-- and it's a mistaken view-- that you'll fix this problem by tactically addressing each one of these things. we just guarantee oil from saudi arabia to replace the oil

i say that because of north korea, hearing some reports about north koreans on the border with chinahaving cellphones and other forbidden technology in that nation but a lot more coming out. >> guest: that's right so in the case of north. as has been reported with the border with china does give opportunity for some people in north korea to access wireless networks that otherwise wouldn't be able to. there is a lot of evidence and in the public domain and says particularly in places where there are borders and where wireless signals don't necessarily recognize actual border, there are opportunities for people to get information and content otherwise can't but if a government -- a lot comes down to will. the government has the will two completely shut down its net marks -- networks that it's hard to work around that. one of the things secretary clinton said in her internet freedom speech on january 21st was we weren't going to just sit back and allow this to happen so forgetting about iran but thinking about this globally, it's important to remember there are literally dozens of count

iran and north korea are the only states we might target a don't have nuclear weapons or a significant nuclear.... >> brown: did you see these definitions are important changes. >> i do. here's the difference particularly when compared to the previous nuclear posture view done in the bush administration. that saw expanded missions for nuclear weapons. we were going to use these things to go against bunkers, trucks, mobile targets, unexpectedly military developments. they wanted low-yield weapons, reliable replacement weapons. it was an expansion of the goals and mission. this is night and day. this is exactly the opposite. this is what the military wants. they see these weapons as basically obsolete with fewer and fewer rationales, reasons for existence. fewer and fewer places where they would actually use them. if we shrink their roles, shrink their numbers we build up the kind of international cooperation we need to go after the real threats. that's what's going to happen next week with the security summit. secure the nuclear materials and build up the barriers to stop other states f

iran and north korea developing enrichment capabilities. it's very low bash entry for for these types. the only strategy is to go after the material. the national security council. said if we can secure all the material, we can essentially solve the problem of nuclear terrorism. whether or not you believe this is the goal. the closer we get the lore the risk of the material falling in the wrong hands. >> is there more material today than the height of the cold war? host: yes. there's countries that continue to publish it. there's no good way to say for sure how much is here or there. the bottom line is this material is largely a legacy of the cold war. this dove-tails into what the president is doing with russia to lower the amount of nuclear warheads and the signing of the star treaty in prague and with president obama's promise to work toward as world with no nuclear weapons and dove tails with the national posture review that the redefining of america and how we think of nuclear weapons. all goals are to get these things out of the hands

host: we believe, a research -- north korea has less than 10. guest: very small number of nuclear weapons. gnorth korea was a party to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty until 2003, and then chose to withdraw from the treaty. they have developed nuclear weapons not in compliance with the rules of the nuclear nonproliferation treaty. . host: everett, republican line. caller: i have to disagree with the guest today. i think that the nuclear weapons are a vital part of america's national security armaments. i think that if the united states were subject to a dirty bomb attack, we should reserve the right to use nuclear weapons to protect the country. secondly, if israel were attacked, we should reserve the right as well. we have a longstanding policy of not giving up the right to use nuclear weapons. obama's policy is a radical departure. i disagree with your attitude about the cold war. the cold war was a legitimate defense against a tyrannical power and i do not understand why you do not have a belief that the united states was doing the right

iran and north korea. we'll take an in-depth look at the conference and what leaders expect to aclompish in our second half hour. >>> russian investigators say there were no technical problems with the plane that crashed in heavy fog. officials are trying to learn more about what caused that plane to go down, killing president lech kaczynski and others. coming up, we'll have a live report from warsaw. >>> and developing now, the vatican making it clear that bishops and other high-ranking church officials should report incidents of priest sex abuse to police. dawna friesen is covering the story from london. is this new or not? they're saying that this has been policy. >> that's right. well, and it seems like something so obvious it shouldn't have to be spelled out, that if somebody is suspected of the crime, the police should be contacted. the vatican says it has been the policy and that this guidance that's been posted today nearly makes it public to lay people for the first time recording the entire churc

if there is a message for iran and north korea here, it is, if you're going to play by the rules andernational community, we are under certain obligations to you. if you are not going to play by the rules, if you're going to be a proliferator, then all options are on the table in terms of how we deal with you. >> any attempt to attack u.s. forces, our partners or allies will be blocked by nuclear capabilities. does that mean that if iran attacked israel with eight nuclear weapon, the u.s. will be able to respond in kind? >> i am not going to go down that hypothetical road. last question. >> could you tell us a little bit more about how the presidential decision making process will be changed under the npr? >> there are some changes we have made in command and control that tighten things up and also give the president more time for a decision. >> as far as the military alert? >> friendly, we feel better the situation is -- frankly, we feel that the situation is a satisfactory one at the current time. we have no armed bombers and sitting at the end of runways. our icbm's are all target

there is a message for iran and north korea here.t is, if you're not going to play by the rules, if you're going to be a proliferator, then all options are on the table in terms how we deal with you. >> reporter: and diane this announcement comes just two days before the president sign as nuclear disarmament treaty with russia and a week before he hosts a summit here in washington, d.c. the president believes his argument to other countries that shea should disarm will be made disarmer if the u.s. is seen as leading in those areas. diane? >> a nuclear policy week ahead. thank you, jack. >>> in iraq, violence in baghdad a series of seve bombs tore through apartment buildings in the city, another blew up a market, killing at least 50 people, injuring more than 80. u.s. and iraqi officials blame today's bombing spree on al qaeda insurgents, saying the attacks were carefully coordinated and took time to plan, with terrorists renting apartments to plant the bombs. >>> back in this country, airlines keep figuring out ways to tack on fees,

[applause] >> and the critical nucleolar concerns of our time would be north korea because they have nukes, and iran, because they want nukes. so yes we can kowtow to enemies, criticize allies, vacillate, bow, dither, yes we can, but somebody needs to tell the president that just because we can does not mean that we should. [applause] >> so now they're resizing that 2008 slogan for 2010 and having just rammed through a more than $2 trillion health care takeover, flying around the country now on this taxpayer-funded victory lap, proclaiming proudly yes, we did, well, you know, i wouldn't be so quick to slap that one on a butcher sticker, not just yet, because i think a lot of common sense conservatives can relay some slogans that the majority of americans like a lot better than that, like repeal and replace. and -- >> [applause] >> the bumper sticker, how that hope an change thing working for you now? or my favorite, don't retreat, reload, and that is not a call for violence. [applause] >> that, of course, meaning take an opportunity to engage in debate and to vote, it's not a call fo

iran, north korea, other states. the world's got to treat the nuclear threats that we face with a much greater sense of urgency than we have in the last few years. >> in addition to attending the summit, president obama will host one on one meetings today with china's president, jordan's king, and the leaders of malaysia, ukraine and armenia. >>> teens and young women who regularly drink alcohol have a higher risk of benign breast disease in their 20s which is a leading risk factor for breast cancer. that's according to a study of 9,000 young women published this morning. those who reported drinking at least six days a week were at the highest risk. cut alcohol consumption to avoid the disease. >>> federal regulators are considering a second fine against toyota for failing to notify the government about defective accelerators in a timely manner. they say because the accelerator pedals involved in the recall exhibited two separate defects, two separate remedies may be necessary. toyota has already been fined a record

that means the united states could still target iran and north korea.cliff may, president of the foundations for defense of democracies. cliff, good to have you on tonight. >> good to see you, ed. >> you bet. is this a safe policy? it's an ambitious policy. we're going to reduce our nuclear some piles by 1/3. your thoughts on this. >> well, look, i think you made an important point early on when you said the goal is to have no nuclear weapons and the most concern i think we have right now are with iran which is trying to develop nuclear weapons. threatening to wipe israel off the map, threatening that a world without america is possible. and my problem is this does nothing to address the iranian threat by saying, hey, we're going to cut american nuclear weapons. we won't develop new nuclear weapons, and don't worry, we won't retaliate with nuclear weapons, in most cases even if you attack us with biological and chemical weapons. sounds to me unserious. >> the subject obviously was brought up today at the white house press briefing about what countries w

i don't think that, taking away the ambiguity in the nuclear power will scare iran or north korea. only resoluteness on the part of the commander in chief will do that. and the confusion in knowing who a terrorist is, whether it's someone flying into a detroit airport trying to bomb it at christmastime or what it's not being willing to try the 9/11 mastermind in the military court, that kind of confusion that senator lieberman talks about does not help us in dealing in a forth right and candid way with others who are dangerous. >> chris: senator lieberman, 30 seconds left and the president is holding a nuclear security summit here in washington in the next two days. he is meeting with the russian president, meeting with the chinese president in the next couple of days. do you have any sense that he is on the right track to get iran to stop? >> well, the summit is a good idea, because it's all about stopping the spread of nuclear weapons to non-state actors terrorist groups and criminal gangs. but look, we've been negotiating, the europeans have for three or four years with the iran

i believe that our ability to move forward already on sanctions with respect to north korea, intense discussions we are having with respect to iran, will increasingly send a signal to countries not abiding by their nuclear nonproliferation treaty obligations that they will be isolated. all those things will go toward sending a general message that we need to move in a new direction. i think leadership on that front is important. the last point i would make is, i would anticipate or approach the question about other areas of cooperation. our respective foreign ministers -- secretary of state hillary clinton and foreign minister lavrov have been heading a bilateral commission that has been working intensively on a whole range of issues. president medvedev and myself identified a series of key areas on the economic front, a trade relations, essentials for joint cooperation on various industries, how we can work on innovation and sparking economic growth. we already worked it gathered -- together closely on the g-20. i think we can build on that bilaterally. there are issues of counterte

a few scattered showers will to the north korea western pennsylvania, ohio, the panhandle of maryland- well to the north be a western pennsylvania, ohio, the panhandle of maryland. we do well to the north. western pennsylvania, ohio. we do well to the north -- well to the north. tuesday into wednesday, we are going to look for temperatures that will remain above average. that is at least until the cold front arrives. temperatures in the upper 70's. >> get that sunscreen out. amazing. >> a lot of people walking around with burnt foreheads. >> thanks a lot, steve. >>> coming up, seven >>> 7 is on your side tonight with a medical alert. women have a chance of 1/8 of developing a thyroid disorder in their lives, but it often goes undiagnosed, and tests are controversial. >> when she started dating a lot of weight, she got concerned -- when she started gaining a lot of weight. >> i was trying to eatealthy and exercise, but i just did not have the energy to do it. >> per doctor used conventional tests to check her thyroid levels, but they came back to normal -- her doctor. but linda continu

guest: iran is not invited, neither is north korea. these are problems states. and actually, the only two countries that are threatening to develop nuclear weapons. if we can solve them, then we can and the proliferation problem. host: and here is a tweet. guest: first, follow me on twitter. second, this is a leader that you cannot trust, but you have to deal with. you have to contain iran and one of the ways we contain them is to show the people of iran that we are not a threat to them, that we're willing to deal with them fairly and equitably with respect -- and you heard the president say this again today. but the other is to build a national coalition. iran will gain status if they see their policies are working and they lose status of your and your country's they have right now standing with them. -- be fewer and fewer countries they have standing with them. iran is a regime on the ropes. they are getting weaker, not stronger. interestingly, their nuclear program has actually/note -- slowed down somewhat. they're having -- has actually slowed down somewhat.