the un security council reflects this view. we will pursue denuclearization on the korean peninsula vigorously. so we have not come to a conclusion that north korea will or should be a nuclear power. given their past behavior, given the belligerent manner in which they are constantly threatening their neighbors, i don't think there's any question that that would be a destabilizing situation that would be a profound threat to not only the united states security, but the world security. north korea also has a track record of collaboration that makes it unacceptable for them to be accepted as a nuclear power. they have not shown in the past any restraint in terms of exporting weapons to not only state actors, but also nonstate actors. so what we said is that there is a path for north korea to take. in which they are joining the world to community, becoming integrated in the world economy, able to feed their own people, able to provide prosperity for their people. i know that the republic of korea welcomes that kind of neighbor. an

>> my view is they would be inclined to cooperate strongly with the un security council resolution. the new resolution would, if adopted, create new enforcement opportunities within the security council itself. >> in recent days, it has appeared that after threats to south korea, commercial and establishments, 6 miles from the dmz, the cooperation on north sides, they relented that pressure. is that your observation? what observation can you give in terms of south korea/north korea? >> i am not sure i understand what you are referring to, with regard to the industrial loan. there have been a number of conversations between the north and south for some time. we follow those with interest and we would be happy to get back to you as to where those are going. >> that may well be the name of the site. because it appeared at a moment when north korea was very aggressive with regard to south korea. there were some talks and negotiations proceeding. it was interesting in view of the other measures. >> my impression is that is correct. i find it of some interest and it will demonstrate a will

i raised this concern because the un security council resolution which passed in 2006 appeared to be a strong multilateral tool that banned atomic explosions and long-range missile launches, imposed limited financial sanctions. but the measures have been widely ignored, rendering the multilateral effort to flow. what steps are we taking to ensure this resolution does not have the same fate? >> one of the things that would be provided by this new resolution assuming it is adopted, is the sanctions committee will have an enhanced mandate to focus on compliance, investigations and outrage and a panel of experts would be established as under other sanction regime is to support the committee's effort to monitor implementation. is obvious that for the u.s. a position of urging all you and members to comply fully with this new resolution will be a very important part of our response to what north korea is doing. sanctions resolutions are useful and important largely to the extent to which they are implemented. i very much believe we will push to ensure that other countries implement these r

of their country through proliferation, what ambassador rice negotiated in the past at the un security council is part of it. it is also a stepped-up role in ensuring that we're cutting off any potentially harmful financing. in this case, we have been fairly explicit with the north koreans about the responsibilities they entered into that we expect them to live up to. i think today's action demonstrates the seriousness of what we intend to do to address it. >> was any consideration given to the kind of reactions -- >> obviously, a lot of stuff is factored in. you can assume that we have taken that into account and decided the best thing going forward or the actions taken today and the continued monitoring of what is going on. >> the have any more details on the ambassador's trip? >> we have some stuff from last week that i can get you on some of his stops. >> rather than getting to win or loss, would you describe the mission as a success or failure? >> i know that for political reasons to g-- >> there is progress being made. obviously, the security situation has improved. at the present obama

. >> we're very concerned and that is why we work with our colleagues on the un security council with south korea and japan to come up with a real, tough resolution. >> so far, north korea has done everything it said it was going to pre >> and not surprise. >> they said they would launch missiles, they did. now they're saying they're going to weapon is a nuclear weapon and enrich uranium treated you have any thought that is what their rights to do consider your knowledge --. do you have any thought considering your knowledge that they will follow through? >> they showed incredible unity among the security council of with south korea and japan. we're growing to be focused on implementing that resolution. beyond that, north korea knows what it has to do. north korea needs to give up all of this its rhetoric, a belligerent actions, and return to the six party talks unconditionally. >> with respect to those talks, today the secretary meets with the president of south korea in the blair palace later this afternoon. if things get dramatic and they keep separate from these nuclear missiles.

later explain that most people might argue that is what happened, that's if is the un general assembly when the security council has studied the situation and said we can't go forward, the divisions are growing and we have to temporarily come up with other solutions because the fighting is going on and, at that point* he might say we can put up a decision for filed with the trusteeship but that was to be temporary. at any rate, where an austin would give a speech to the when that knocked the rug out from under truman and gave a speech that was widely interpreted to be that he announced in the mid march speech we are now going to go back to supporting trusteeship and not supporting partition and this is when austan said in a famous quote to the state department pulled the rug out from under me today, they made me out to be a double cross sir, a liar he called a special cabinet meeting and was a furious. clearly the state department was trying to do things to make the reversal of policy a real yvette. -- yves fined. epstein said again a great conspiracy is brewing in washington. he saw it for what it was a conspi