Clinton on Iran: Transparency or Sanctions

(CBS)  Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on "Face the Nation" the United States and its allies would only accept full transparency of the Iranian nuclear system or Iran would face additional sanctions.

"If we don't get the answers that we are expecting and the changes in behavior that we're looking for, then we will work with our partners to move towards sanctions," she said during an interview pre-taped on Friday.

CBS News' Harry Smith, sitting in for Bob Schieffer, asked Secretary Clinton what she meant this summer by "crippling sanctions" which would face Iran should diplomacy fail.

Clinton said that they are still "exploring" how to broaden proposed sanctions and that the current sanctions program is "leaky."

She also noted that multinational discussions on sanctioning North Korea has produced some consensus on how to deal with rogue nations.

On October 1 the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council - Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States - and Germany will hold talks with representatives of Iran over that nation's nuclear ambitions.

Iran, she said, has present "convincing evidence as to the purpose of their nuclear program. We don't believe that they can present convincing evidence that it's only for peaceful purposes, but we are going to put them to the test on October 1st."

Secretary Clinton said that the only acceptable response from Tehran to ward off additional sanctions would be for Iran to open up its nuclear system to extensive investigation.

"Words are not enough," she said. "They're going to have to come and demonstrate clearly to the international community what they're up to."

Clinton said that it is "hard to accept" that the covert uranium enrichment facility plant disclosed by leaders of Great Britain, France and the United States Friday is for "peaceful purposes," as Iran argues, given that the facility's existence had been hidden from nuclear regulators, thus raising suspicions.

"One has to ask, if it's for peaceful purposes, why was it not public? Why was the fact of it not generally known through our working with partners to discover it?" she asked.

In discussions about Iran, Clinton repeatedly brought up Russia and President Medvedev, who spoke in support of sanctions against Iran Friday, after being informed by President Obama this week about the existence of the previously-secret nuclear facility.

Smith asked the secretary whether Russia is really "in tune" with the United States on this.

Yes, she replied, reiterating that the six countries in talks with Iran are "all in agreement, saying that we expected answers from Iran."

Alluding to Moscow's recent announcement that it would not deploy missiles on its border with Poland after President Obama announced he was killing the Bush-era missile defense system, and Medvedev's criticism of Tehran on Friday, Clinton also said, "in working closely with Russia, sharing information, that they have been quite helpful this past week."

[littleleers]

I don't know what the answer is but more sanctions is cowardly and a cop out. Sanctions don't work. Just look at Cuba, North Korea, and Iran....the government grows stronger while "the people" grow weaker. Sanctions strengthen a tyrannical government!

Good luck IAEC....this will be a showdown at high noon between peaceful nations and a crazed Iranian tyrannical government.

[gboyd41]

It appears to me a significant number of Obama supporters here can't spell. However, this does not suprise me in the least.

[stn_sage]

gboyd41, and an even GREATER number of Obama non-supporters can't spell, either! So what! Do you have anything relevant to say about the article?

[stuart-johns]

I would LOVE to see Hillary take on Palin in a debate!!! My that would be great to see Palin humiliated. And maybe Rowdy can join in and be humiliated too.

[NewYork-Joey]

hungry1968-16

I forgot to mention, how did you like the NY football Giants beating the Cowboys at the opening of your billion$ stadium ?

[hungry1968-16]

by jimmyc1955 September 28, 2009 6:52 AM EDT

That is what we should be fighting - people who use children as bombs to kill other children.







So an extremist blowing himself up on a bus killing children is a "bad thing", but Israel's military targeting schools and hospitals killing children, is acceptable?!?

[hungry1968-16]

by ffoulkes-2009 September 28, 2009 2:02 AM EDT
Yes, hungry...Sworn Enemy. AhmaNutJob has sworn many times to be our enemy...thus sworn enemy.







Okay, I'll play along.

Where and when did Ahmadinejhad make this alleged threat, or vow to be our enemy?

Please post a link.

[hungry1968-16]

by jimmyc1955 September 28, 2009 6:59 AM EDT
And when would it be the right time? When Iran tests their first nuclear weapon? When the launch their first missle at Tel Aviv? When suitcases full of plutonium are all over the globe?






I don't care if Iran gets nukes or not, I don't care if they test them or not, and I really don't care if they attack Israel or not.

I'm FAR, FAR more concerned with Pakistan's nuclear program, than I am with Iran's.

There are ACTUAL TERRORISTS in Pakistan.

[scallywag12]

What a waste of space. The only thing Iran will understand is all out war. Sanctions are an empty threat and they have been for years. Our government is wasting precious time by threatening these arrogant jerks. I say hit em and hit em hard and fast. Rip that place a new @ss hole and then sit down and see if they want to talk. I for one am sick of them and our worthless government.

[tmittelstaed]

Sounds good, we will put you at the front of the infantry column going in to that country.

[armik80]

Iran resistance revealed in 2002 Natanz enrichment facility West gave mullahs time instead of resolute policy . Instead of confronting Iran rgm West collaborated with it in suppressing its opposition that revealed Natanz.

[armik80]

maryam_rajavi:Containment of rgm's threat has1& only1solution: recognition of Iran ppl's resistance&uprising 4 democratic change in Iran