Clinton interviewed by CNN's Candy Crowley

Sunday Secretary Clinton sat down with CNN's Candy Crowley and took part in a really great, long interview.

Topics discussed ranged from, of course, Haiti, including Bill's role, Afghanistan and Pakistan, North Korea and Iran, all the way to the Super Bowl and Chelsea's Wedding dress.

Here is all is below taken from a fellow Hillary fan's YouTube page. Worth the watch!!

Click below to read the FULL transcript:

QUESTION: First of all, thank you so much. It's an honor to have you on this first show. I wanted to talk to you first about the past month. We have seen a would-be terrorist frighten a lot of people on a plane over Detroit, we have gotten Usama bin Ladin's tape, and we have now been warned by the U.S. Government that it is certain that there will be an attempted attack on the U.S. or on Americans in the next one to six months. Is there a reason Americans should not look at that and think the risk factor is up?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Candy, first of all, congratulations on your new show. I really wish you well. You have a lot to contribute to Sunday morning television.

I think what's fair for Americans to think is that we have had a continuing threat from al-Qaida and related terrorist organizations over many years now. It hasn't gone away. We have contained it. We've worked very hard to do so. But over the last six months, we have seen attacks foiled, people arrested and charged, so that you have to be constantly vigilant. And that's what everybody working in this government at all levels attempts to do.

In the last month, because of the high-profile attempt on the airplane, people's attention became very focused. But a bin Ladin tape is nothing new; it comes and goes depending upon when he decides to do it. But I think it's really important for people to just go along with their daily lives. I mean, you can't be deterred or discouraged or fearful about what's happening, and we just have to do everything we can to keep America safe.

QUESTION: Can you give me a feel for is the risk higher, is al-Qaida stronger now than a year ago?

SECRETARY CLINTON: It's very difficult to make that kind of assessment because they've always been plotting against us. I was a senator from New York on 9/11. I was honored to serve the people of New York until I took this job. I thought about it every day. I got intelligence every day, somebody was thinking about that or we picked up information about a plot there. So to me, who has followed this very closely since 9/11, I don't see them as stronger, but I see that they are more creative, more flexible, more agile. They evolve. They are, unfortunately, a very committed, clever, diabolical group of terrorists who are always looking for weaknesses and openings, and we just have to stay alert.

QUESTION: If they're more agile and more clever, are there more of them? And doesn't that sort of add up to more risk?

SECRETARY CLINTON: I don't know if there are more of them. We have certainly degraded their capacity in Afghanistan and Pakistan. We know that. As the President said the other night, we have killed and captured a significant number of al-Qaida's top leadership as well as people in the Taliban organizations in Afghanistan and Pakistan who cooperate with them.

We see some new areas of threat emanating from Somalia and Yemen. But whether that's now in the cumulative greater, or whether because the numbers in Afghanistan and Pakistan have decreased, it's about the same but with the unfortunate fact that they are committed to killing and destroying innocent people in their own countries as well as around the world, including the United States.

QUESTION: While we're in that region, let me ask you about Afghanistan. U.S. troops cannot get out of there unless there is a stable Afghan Government. Hamid Karzai, as of this point, does not have a full cabinet. They are now trying to bring in not just foot soldiers, bring them back into the fold, not just Taliban foot soldiers, but some higher-ups. Do you have any doubt in your mind that Hamid Karzai can get his act together and put together a stable government?

SECRETARY CLINTON: I think that the strategy that the United States and more than 44 countries are pursuing in Afghanistan obviously requires that we have a good partner in President Karzai and the Afghan Government. That doesn't mean that we'll always do what he wants or he will always do what we want, but we do expect to see a level of competency and capacity.

QUESTION: Have you seen it?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes, actually, there are areas of very positive cooperation. He may not have a full cabinet, but the cabinet members he has are people who many of us view as honest and effective, productive. We work with them on a daily basis - the defense minister, the finance minster - people who are really producing results for Afghanistan.

I've spent a lot of time with President Karzai, most recently about a 90-minute one-on-one conversation in London. I think he has really stepped up since his second inaugural address. He laid out a roadmap there. He is trying to follow that roadmap. But I always remind myself that, what, five or six years into a new nation that has no history of democracy, let's be realistic about the kind of support that this new government and the president needs. So I think we have to put this into a more balanced perspective. It's neither as bad or as good, just like most of life and most of the situations I deal with around the world. And I think we have developed a much stronger understanding and partnership in the last year going forward.

QUESTION: So no doubts that Karzai is the man to pull this together?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, he is the president of the country and I very much respect the authority that he has. He has asked for help, most recently at the London conference, but he also has his own ideas, as do the Afghan people. So in any relationship with any country, think of some of our oldest allies like France or England, you're not always going to get 100 percent agreement, but you work with the leaders and you work with the people. We're not yet turning the corner, but we are sort of inching our way forward to being able to do so. So I think, on balance, we are in this with people and countries who are committed to the same outcome.

QUESTION: Shall we leave the Karzai doubt question on the table?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I mean, I don't agree with any other single leader in the world. I mean, I don't - I mean, obviously, we have a lot -

QUESTION: I just think that's a little different from are you a little worried that he's not going to be able to pull this off. And I pursue it only because that's the only way U.S. troops are going to get pulled out.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, but see, I think that we have looked at President Karzai through a lens that is not rooted in reality. I mean, we do business with leaders all the time, some of whom are great American allies, that have a lot of questions raised about them. But we do an assessment: What's in the best interest of America? What's in our national security? What advances our interests and our values? What keeps Americans safe?

And so why should we take one leader out and put him apart from all the other leaders we deal with and raise all those doubts, instead of saying, look, we've got work to do and we're doing it. We are doing it day by day and I think we are making progress.

QUESTION: I wanted to bring your attention to something that President Obama said in his inaugural a little more than a year ago: "We will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist." Has Iran unclenched its fist?

SECRETARY CLINTON: No.

QUESTION: How about North Korea?

SECRETARY CLINTON: No, not to the extent we would like to see them. But I think that's - that is not all to the story. Engagement has brought us a lot in the last year. Let's take North Korea first and then we'll go to Iran.

In North Korea, when we said that we were willing to work with North Korea if they were serious about returning to the Six-Party Talks and about denuclearizing in an irreversible way, they basically did not respond in the first instance. But because we were willing to engage, we ended up getting a very strong sanctions regime against North Korea that China signed onto and Russia signed onto and right now is being enforced around the world.

QUESTION: Did the extended hand of the U.S. help in any way that you can point to?

SECRETARY CLINTON: It did. Because we extended it, a neighbor like China knew we were going the extra mile and all of a sudden said you're not just standing there hurling insults at them, you've said all right, fine, we're willing to work with them. They haven't responded, so we're going to sign on to these very tough measures.

Similarly, in Iran, I don't know what the outcome would have been if the Iranian Government hadn't made the decision it made following the elections to become so repressive. But the fact is, because we engaged, the rest of the world has really begun to see Iran the way we see it. When we started last year talking about the threats that Iran's nuclear program posed, Russia and other countries said, well, we don't see it that way. But through very slow and steady diplomacy, plus the fact that we had a two-track process - yes, we reached out on engagement to Iran, but we always had the second track, which is that we would have to try to get the world community to take stronger measures if they didn't respond on the engagement front.

QUESTION: I want to turn to Haiti for a minute. We're in there with a lot of people. They're doing a lot of talking, and what they're finding is Haitians saying we wish the American Government would come in here and take over because they don't think their government is capable in the post-rescue period of rebuilding Haiti. What's wrong with that idea?

SECRETARY CLINTON:Candy, I'm very proud of what not only our country has done, both our military and particularly our civilians and our new USAID Administrator Raj Shah - everybody has just stepped up and performed admirably. So have other countries. This has been a global response. But the fact is there is a legitimate government with authority in Haiti despite the -

QUESTION:A really weak government.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, the fact is that we were working with them before the earthquake. One of my goals as Secretary of State, which the President agreed with, was for us to work with that government and try to help them implement a national development plan. And we had spent a lot of time on that. In fact, what's so tragically ironic is that, literally, the night before the earthquake, on PBS there was a - the NewsHour had a long segment about the progress that was being made in Haiti under this very same government. Unfortunately, all of that was upended by the earthquake.

What we're doing along with our international partners is to work with the Haitian Government so that there is a mechanism for coordination. They have to be part of it because they have the legal authorities. Unless a government or a bunch of governments is going to occupy Haiti, which would have all kinds of very unfortunate implications, we have to help support the Haitian people and their government. There's a lot of talk going on, a lot of conference calls flying back and forth, the trip that I made to Montreal for the conference, and I'm confident we're going to come up with a system.

QUESTION: UN envoy to Haiti, you may know, is Bill Clinton.

SECRETARY CLINTON: I do know.

QUESTION: I'm just curious how that works exactly. Does he give you reports? Does he call up and say, "Hello, Secretary of State?" (Laughter.) And really, who's the boss here?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, he was appointed, again, months and months ago and was working on the private sector. He had brought hundreds of business people from around the world to sign contracts to employ people in Haiti. And now he's been asked by Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to continue and enhance his role because of the earthquake.

He talks to the people who I work with. He doesn't - it's not me. It's Raj Shah and Cheryl Mills and all the other teams.

QUESTION:He doesn't say, "Give me the big Kahuna here?"

SECRETARY CLINTON: No, I mean, he talks to people who are really working on this 24 hours a day. Obviously, we talk about it, too. We have a special place in our heart for Haiti, having gone there during our honeymoon many years ago. And it's a place that is captivating. The people are so resilient and they deserve so much better than what they've gotten over their history. And I think Bill is committed, as I am, to doing everything we can.

QUESTION: If you were to say to the American people this country is the most dangerous to Americans and to the U.S., where is that country?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Candy, in terms of a country, obviously, a nuclear-armed country like North Korea or Iran pose both a real or a potential threat.

QUESTION:And you're convinced Iran has nuclear -

SECRETARY CLINTON: No, no, no. But we believe that their behavior certainly is evidence of their intentions. And how close they are may be the subject of some debate, but the failure to disclose the facility at Qom, the failure to accept what was a very reasonable offer by Russia, France, and the U.S. through the IAEA to take their uranium, their low-enriched uranium and return it for their research reactor. I mean, there's just - it's like an old saying that if you see a turtle on a fencepost in the middle of the woods, he didn't get there by accident, right? Somebody put him there. And so you draw conclusions from what you see Iran doing.

But I think that most of us believe the greater threats are the transnational non-state networks, primarily the extremists, the fundamentalist Islamic extremists who are connected - al-Qaida in the Arab Peninsula, al-Qaida in Pakistan and Afghanistan, al-Qaida in the Maghreb. I mean, the kind of connectivity that exists. And they continue to try to increase the sophistication of their capacity, the attacks that they're going to make. And the biggest nightmare that any of us have is that one of these terrorist member organizations within this syndicate of terror will get their hands on a weapon of mass destruction. So that's really the most threatening prospect we see.

QUESTION: When you look at the biggest success in the past year for the open hand, where is your - I mean, the Middle East is still pretty much a mess despite some really bright minds over there trying to work it out. We've talked about Iran and North Korea and others. Where is there success of specifically engagement?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Again, I would say that this has been a very successful year for the following reasons. First, it's almost hard to remember how poorly much of the world viewed the United States when President Obama came into office. And both his election and his persona, combined with the approach we took of seeking to find the basis for engagement on mutual respect and mutual interest, has really created a much more open, receptive atmosphere. We are working in many difficult situations in every continent, but I think we're being received in a positive way, which gives us a better chance to find common ground.

Now, I am fairly realistic about foreign policy, and countries don't just give up what they view as their interests in order to make nice with you. It takes a lot of effort. But I really feel that the engagement was the first stage. We had to change the mindset of not just leaders but of their populations. We are moving toward a new nuclear arms treaty with Russia, something that has been a high priority with us. We have reset our relationship. The Russians have been very positive in discussions about sanctions on Iran and on many other important matters. I'm not sure that would have been predicted a year ago. We do have a very comprehensive engagement with India, with China, with other big countries, from South Africa to Turkey to Brazil, and we are working together on areas of mutual interest or where the United States can be a facilitator.

So I think that when I look back on this past year, I see a lot of positive trends. Now, this year, 2010, has to be a year of implementing and building on the positive foundation that we've built.

QUESTION: A quick question on healthcare, which seems to be stalled, which - and that's probably the best we can say about it. Are you getting a little deja vu watching this? (Laughter.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, it's really hard. It is a complex issue that touches everybody about which both people and interests have really strong feelings. But I haven't given up yet and I know the White House hasn't given up and I don't think a lot of the members of Congress have given up, so I'm not sure that this last chapter has been written.

QUESTION: Have you called anybody on the Hill or have you talked to the White House? Are you dispensing the wisdom of your time trying to figure this out?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, when I'm asked, I am very happy to respond. I mean, it's not anything I have direct responsibility for, but I've had a number of conversations and both in the White House and on the Hill and with others who are playing a constructive role. And I, like I think many Americans, hope that there can be a positive outcome.

QUESTION:So I want to do a quick lightning round with you. First of all, Colts or the Saints?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Oh, I don't answer football questions because, to be honest, I don't follow it. Now, if my husband were sitting here, he would give you a very long exegesis as to why one team was better than the other, but I'll just leave it to see what happens at the Super Bowl.

QUESTION: In between talking about Haiti, he doesn't say I need you to root for -

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, no, because neither of them are our teams. I mean, there's not a New York team. I mean, so we're just interested observers.

*QUESTION:* Who are watching the game with or are you on the phone with foreign leaders?

SECRETARY CLINTON:Well, if they call me, I'm on the phone with them. Otherwise, it'll be my family.

QUESTION:And finally, just as the mother - recently the mother of a groom, as the mother of the bride, have you found that dress yet?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, if you don't tell anybody, Candy, we're still looking. Yeah, and it's a new status for me being an MOTB, but I'm very proud to have that status.

QUESTION:Good luck on the search. That's all I have to say. As you know, it's -

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you. But your son - you didn't have to go buy a dress, so that's good. That was not part of -

QUESTION: Exactly. So no Chelsea dress either.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I don't have a dress yet, no, and Chelsea doesn't either. But we're working on it.

QUESTION: Well, good luck. And do you think it's - which is harder, Middle East peace or negotiating this wedding? (Laughter.)

SECRETARY CLINTON:Well, I'd probably call it a draw about now. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: Well, good luck with both, actually.

SECRETARY CLINTON:Thank you.

QUESTION: I really appreciate your being here.

SECRETARY CLINTON: And good luck to you.

QUESTION: Thank you so much. I appreciate it.

SECRETARY CLINTON: You're welcome. Read entire post

Secretary Hillary Clinton draws a hard line on Nuclear North Korea and Iran

This morning at 11:00 am EST, Secretary Clinton delivered a Major Policy Speech on Nonproliferation to the United States Institute of Peace. She presented the Obama Administrations “Diplomatic Blueprint” that included language covering these topics: confronting Proliferators, insuring that all nations abide by the rights and obligation of the Nonproliferation Regime, intent for negotiating a new treaty with Russia to reduce the US nuclear arsenal, and undertaking a review of the role of nuclear weapons in the United States defense strategy. This event was held at the Renaissance Mayflower Hotel in Washington, D.C.

She got quite a few headlines for her speech when she drew a clear line on U.S. relations with North Korea as well as Iran.

The Secretary said that while the Obama administration is interested in talking with Pyongyang, the United States will not normalize relations with North Korea until it abandons its nuclear weapons program.

Thwarting the nuclear ambitions of North Korea and Iran is critical to shoring up the nonproliferation regime. Within the framework of the six-party talks, we are prepared to meet bilaterally with North Korea, but North Korea’s return to the negotiating table is not enough. Current sanctions will not be relaxed until Pyongyang takes verifiable, irreversible steps toward complete denuclearization. Its leaders should be under no illusion that the United States will ever have normal, sanctions-free relations with a nuclear armed North Korea.

Together with the other permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany, the United States is pursuing a dual-track approach toward Iran. If Iran is serious about taking practical steps to address the international community’s deep concerns about its nuclear program, we will continue to engage both multilaterally and bilaterally to discuss the full range of issues that have divided Iran and the United States for too long. The door is open to a better future for Iran, but the process of engagement cannot be open-ended. We are not prepared to talk just for the sake of talking.

Read her full remarks here or watch below:

Later in the day the Secretary also held meetings with William Hague, Member of British Parliament and Shadow Foreign Secretary as well as attending a Bureau Briefing on Counter Terrorism at the State Department. Read entire post

Hillary Clintons Monday Bilateral and Iran Videoconference

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton held a joint press availability with His Excellency Nasser Judeh, Foreign Minister of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan on Monday, August 3rd.

Read the full text of their remarks here or watch below:

In addition to this meeting, as you probably saw from the previous post, Monday morning Secretary of State Hillary Clinton hosted a secure video conference with 20 State Department officials worldwide on Iran.

State isn't really releasing much information, not to my surprise, but what little info I do have I got from an article over at ForeignPolicy.com.

Participating in the call was acting Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Jeffrey Feltman, Jillian Burns, the former head of the Iran-watching post at the U.S. Embassy in Dubai, who is now an Iran advisor in the State Department Office of Policy Planning, and Todd Schwartz, the director of the State Department's Iran office, and other members of that office.

They are reporting that getting everyone at State together and involved in the Iran effort together is something the Secretary has wanted to do for a long time.

During the call she thanked them for being the eyes and ears of the U.S. government on Iran, especially in the extraordinary weeks and months since the election. And the people gave her their take on the current situation. The final consensus was that the administration's calibrated remarks on the election and its aftermath have been just the right tone, and right balance.

One participant called the election a "tectonic" shift in Iran. The consensus was also that the election and its aftermath have basically led Iran to focus on its internal politics rather than any of its bilateral or multilateral relationships, including with the United States.

When Hillary was asked about Iran at a press conference later with the Jordanian Foreign Minister Nasser Judeh Monday, she said

"We've made it very clear that we wish to engage with the Iranians in accordance with President Obama's policy to discuss a broad range of issues. That would be a bilateral channel, which we have communicated to the Iranians. And we continue to engage in multilateral channels...

I held a videoconference this morning with a number of our diplomats around the world who have expertise with respect to Iran. And we discussed what they saw happening, what they thought would be the responses coming from the Iranian Government, what was going on inside Iran. So we're not prepared to talk about any specific steps, but I have said repeatedly that in the absence of some positive response from the Iranian Government, the international community will consult about next steps, and certainly next steps can include certain sanctions."

Read entire post

Highights of Hillary Clinton's Foreign Policy Address at the Council on Foreign Relations

Today, at 1:00 p.m. Secretary Hillary Clinton gave her very much anticipated Foreign Policy Address at the Council on Foreign Relations. Pantsuit Status: Beautiful, Blazin' Blue! Elbow Status: Sans Sling!

So, I was no where near a tv or a computer (not including my iphone) when her speech began so I called in to the conference call and listened in on my phone. Which was super cool! Like listening to Hillary Clinton talking on my phone is a bit unreal...

I think it was a great speech in which she touched on very important issues that have been raised in the media. There are so many conflicts going on in our world right now, this was a great way to lay out the U.S.'s plan for dealing with ALL of the issues.

I will start with the Secretary's opening remarks:

"Shortly before I started at the State Department, a former Secretary of State called me with this advice: Don’t try to do too much. And it seemed like a wise admonition, if only it were possible. But the international agenda today is unforgiving: two wars, conflict in the Middle East, ongoing threats of violent extremism and nuclear proliferation, global recession, climate change, hunger and disease, and a widening gap between the rich and the poor. All of these challenges affect America’s security and prosperity, and they all threaten global stability and progress.

But they are not reason to despair about the future. The same forces that compound our problems – economic interdependence, open borders, and the speedy movement of information, capital, goods, services and people – are also part of the solution. And with more states facing common challenges, we have the chance, and a profound responsibility, to exercise American leadership to solve problems in concert with others. That is the heart of America’s mission in the world today...

The question is not whether our nation can or should lead, but how it will lead in the 21st century. Rigid ideologies and old formulas don’t apply... President Obama has led us to think outside the usual boundaries. He has launched a new era of engagement based on common interests, shared values, and mutual respect. Going forward, capitalizing on America’s unique strengths, we must advance those interests through partnership, and promote universal values through the power of our example and the empowerment of people.

First, though, let me say that while the ideas that shape our foreign policy are critically important, this, for me, is not simply an intellectual exercise. For over 16 years, I’ve had the chance, the privilege, really, to represent our country overseas as First Lady, as a senator, and now as Secretary of State... And all that I have done and seen has convinced me that our foreign policy must produce results for people.

These are the people – hundreds of millions of them here in America and billions around the world – whose lives and experiences, hopes and dreams, must inform the decisions we take and the actions that follow. And these are the people who inspire me and my colleagues and the work that we try to do every day."

There is SO SO much to go over in her speech, there is no possible way I can rewrite all she has said here, so here are the highlights.

On the new policy of outreach and alliance-building:

"We want to reverse the spread of nuclear weapons, prevent their use, and build a world free of their threat. We want to isolate and defeat terrorists and counter violent extremists while reaching out to Muslims around the world. We want to encourage and facilitate the efforts of all parties to pursue and achieve a comprehensive peace in the Middle East. We want to seek global economic recovery and growth by strengthening our own economy, advancing a robust development agenda, expanding trade that is free and fair, and boosting investment that creates decent jobs. We want to combat climate change, increase energy security, and lay the foundation for a prosperous clean-energy future. We want to support and encourage democratic governments that protect the rights and deliver results for their people. And we intend to stand up for human rights everywhere.

Liberty, democracy, justice and opportunity underlie our priorities. Some accuse us of using these ideals to justify actions that contradict their very meaning. Others say we are too often condescending and imperialistic, seeking only to expand our power at the expense of others. And yes, these perceptions have fed anti-Americanism, but they do not reflect who we are. No doubt we lost some ground in recent years, but the damage is temporary. It’s kind of like my elbow – it’s getting better every day."

She acknowledges two issues at hand:

"First, no nation can meet the world’s challenges alone. The issues are too complex. Too many players are competing for influence, from rising powers to corporations to criminal cartels; from NGOs to al-Qaida; from state-controlled media to individuals using Twitter.

Second, most nations worry about the same global threats, from non-proliferation to fighting disease to counter-terrorism, but also face very real obstacles – for reasons of history, geography, ideology, and inertia. They face these obstacles and they stand in the way of turning commonality of interest into common action.

So these two facts demand a different global architecture – one in which states have clear incentives to cooperate and live up to their responsibilities, as well as strong disincentives to sit on the sidelines or sow discord and division."

On Israel-Palestinian:

"Now I’m well aware that time alone does not heal all wounds; consider the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. That’s why we wasted no time in starting an intensive effort on day one to realize the rights of Palestinians and Israelis to live in peace and security in two states, which is in America’s interests and the world’s.

We’ve been working with the Israelis to deal with the issue of settlements, to ease the living conditions of Palestinians, and create circumstances that can lead to the establishment of a viable Palestinian state. For the last few decades, American administrations have held consistent positions on the settlement issue. And while we expect action from Israel, we recognize that these decisions are politically challenging.

And we know that progress toward peace cannot be the responsibility of the United States – or Israel – alone. Ending the conflict requires action on all sides. The Palestinians have the responsibility to improve and extend the positive actions already taken on security; to act forcefully against incitement; and to refrain from any action that would make meaningful negotiations less likely.

And Arab states have a responsibility to support the Palestinian Authority with words and deeds, to take steps to improve relations with Israel, and to prepare their publics to embrace peace and accept Israel’s place in the region. The Saudi peace proposal, supported by more than twenty nations, was a positive step. But we believe that more is needed. So we are asking those who embrace the proposal to take meaningful steps now... By providing support to the Palestinians and offering an opening, however modest, to the Israelis, the Arab states could have the same impact. So I say to all sides: Sending messages of peace is not enough. You must also act against the cultures of hate, intolerance and disrespect that perpetuate conflict."

On Iran:

"We watched the energy of Iran’s election with great admiration, only to be appalled by the manner in which the government used violence to quell the voices of the Iranian people, and then tried to hide its actions by arresting foreign journalists and nationals, and expelling them, and cutting off access to technology... These actions

We know very well what we inherited with Iran, because we deal with that inheritance every day. We know that refusing to deal with the Islamic Republic has not succeeded in altering the Iranian march toward a nuclear weapon, reducing Iranian support for terror, or improving Iran’s treatment of its citizens.

Neither the President nor I have any illusions that dialogue with the Islamic Republic will guarantee success of any kind, and the prospects have certainly shifted in the weeks following the election. But we also understand the importance of offering to engage Iran and giving its leaders a clear choice: whether to join the international community as a responsible member or to continue down a path to further isolation.

Direct talks provide the best vehicle for presenting and explaining that choice. That is why we offered Iran’s leaders an unmistakable opportunity: Iran does not have a right to nuclear military capacity, and we’re determined to prevent that. But it does have a right to civil nuclear power if it reestablishes the confidence of the international community that it will use its programs exclusively for peaceful purposes.

Iran can become a constructive actor in the region if it stops threatening its neighbors and supporting terrorism. It can assume a responsible position in the international community if it fulfills its obligations on human rights. The choice is clear. We remain ready to engage with Iran, but the time for action is now. The opportunity will not remain open indefinitely."

Read the full text here or watch below: Don't miss the full Question and Answer section here! Read it, Read it!

Read entire post

Did Hillary Clinton urge Obama to take a harder stance on Iran?

Today the Washington Times has reported, and many many people and news resources have tweeted and blogged, that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton urged President Obama for two days to toughen his language on Iran before he did so. The reports say that administration officials said she was surprised when he condemned Iran's crackdown on demonstrators last week.

At the news conference on June 23, Obama said he was "appalled and outraged" by Iranian behavior and "strongly condemned" the violence against anti-government demonstrators. This language is much stronger than what Obama had been using before. Everyone was taking a softer line, expressing "deep concern" and calling on Iran to "respect the dignity of its own people."

The juicy story is that behind the scenes Secretary Clinton had been advocating the stronger U.S. response, but the president resisted. When he finally took her advice, the aides said, he did so without informing her first.

I am always a little skeptical about statements like that last line because first of all, the officials who spoke on this ask that they not be named due to "discussing internal deliberations." If they should not be named due to "discussing internal deliberations" then maaaaaybe they shouldn't be "discussing internal deliberations." Hm, just a thought. And second, both the White House and the State Department declined to comment publicly on Secretary Clinton's "private advice" to President Obama and their internal communications.

The article continues to say that State DID have some knowledge that Obama was going to talk tough because the language was sent to the State Department a day earlier. A second "official" was quoted saying, "The White House sent over the actual language he'd use if he chose to take that line for folks to review and weigh in on, which State did."

The Times reports that Secretary Clinton agreed with the president's earlier take on Iran, not wanting to appear to be interfering in their internal affairs to further provide ammunition to the regime, which tends to blame the United States and other Western countries for any unrest. But she thought it was time to get tougher after the June 20 killing of a young woman, Neda Agha-Soltan, on a Tehran street, officials said.

Read the full Washington Times article for yourself here.

Read entire post

No to hot dog diplomacy!

Friday, June 26th, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton meet with Bahraini Crown Prince Sheikh Salman bin Hamad bin Isa al-Khalifa at the State Department. They were doing the lefthanded handshake because of Hillary's cast.

After this meeting, Hillary headed over to the White House to attend the President’s expanded bilateral, joint press availability and working lunch for Her Excellency Angela Merkel, Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany at the White House.

I love the black framed glasses, the sling, and the Secretary's "official arm rest pillow."

After, the meeting the President and the German Chancellor urged Iran to end violence against protesters and underscored their commitment to prevent the Islamic state from developing a nuclear weapon.

Merkel called the crisis playing out on the streets of Iran “horrifying”, while Obama refused to give in to Iran President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s demand for an apology for allegedly interfering in the elections and subsequent mass protests.

“I don’t take Mr Ahmadinejad’s statements seriously about apologies, particularly given the fact that the United States has gone out of its way not to interfere with the election process in Iran... I would suggest that Mr Ahmadinejad think carefully about the obligations he owes to his own people... And he might want to consider looking at the families of those who’ve been beaten or shot or detained.”

Merkel emphasised that universal rights of freedom of expression should apply to Iranian citizens and called on the government to respect human rights.

“The Iranian people need to be given the right to peaceful demonstrations, the Iranian people have the right to have their votes counted and the election results substantiated."

Earlier this week, Secretary Clinton ordered all U.S. embassies and consular missions to rescind July 4 Independence Day party invitations sent to Iranian diplomats. When it comes to Iran, Clinton is putting and end to the "hot dog" diplomacy.

This whole hot dog thing was an attempt by President Obama to reach out to Iran with a classically American invitation: celebrate July 4 with hot dogs and hale fellowship at United States embassies worldwide.

On Wednesday, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, who had authorized diplomatic posts earlier this month to invite Iranians to their Independence Day parties, sent out a cable rescinding the invitations.

“Unfortunately, circumstances have changed, and participation by Iranian diplomats would not be appropriate in light of the unjust actions that the president and I have condemned.”

Embassies that had already invited Iranian diplomats were instructed to disinvite them. The State Department spokesman, Ian C. Kelly, said he was not aware of a single diplomat who had R.S.V.P.’d, anywhere in the world sooo, not so sure that the Iranians were up for the celebrations anyways.

Robert Gibbs, White House press Secretary, said, “July 4 allows us to celebrate the freedom and the liberty we enjoy: freedom of speech, freedom of liberty, freedom to assemble peacefully, freedom of the press. So I don’t think it’s surprising that nobody has signed up to come.”

Read entire post

Hillary Clinton and freed journalist Roxana Saberi

Journalist Roxana Saberi, recently freed after four months in an Iranian prison, met today with Secretary Clinton and expressed thanks for the support she received during her confinement. Hillary said:

"Well, we are absolutely delighted and obviously, relieved to have Roxana home safely, to have her parents here with us. This was a matter of great concern to our country, certainly to the Obama Administration, to me personally, not only as Secretary of State, but as a mother. And my heart went out to Roxana and to her parents every single day.

We are just grateful now that she is free and is able to be back in this country. There were so many people who were working on her behalf, praying for her, speaking out all over the world. And it’s just a great moment for me to welcome you here."

Saberia told the press that she "gained a lot of strength and hope and didn’t feel so alone anymore" after hearing the support she had. "It’s wonderful to be back in the United States. I’m very proud to be an American, just as I’m proud of my Japanese and Iranian heritage. It’s wonderful to be back. Thank you. Thank you so much."

Read their full exchange here or watch below:

Read entire post

Hillary Clinton Demands Israel Halt Settlements

Today Secretary Clinton met with Foreign Minister Ahmed Ali Aboul Gheit of Egypt at the State Department.

The Secretary said this during their appearance before the press:

"We just had a very good working lunch with the foreign minister, General Suleiman, and the delegation from Egypt. I had the opportunity to thank them for their commitment to working with us and strengthening and deepening our bilateral relationship, and for the leadership that Egypt is showing on both regional and global matters.

I asked them to extend our thanks to President Mubarak and others in the Egyptian Government who are working to resolve conflicts and bridge divides. And I assured them that President Obama and I are fully committed to a comprehensive peace in the Middle East, to a two-state solution, and that we regard Egypt as an essential partner in helping us to realize that vision.

We appreciate the leadership that Egypt has shown in recent months, including convening the convention in Sharm el-Sheikh that I attended, as well as undertaking sensitive mediation among various parties in the region. I know that the President is looking forward to his trip to Cairo next week and the opportunity to speak about America’s relationships, not only in the Middle East and not just in the Islamic world but to people everywhere about what our common concerns are and how to seek common ground and realize our common objectives. And I look forward to continuing to work with the foreign minister and others in the Egyptian Government to address the full range of bilateral and mutual concerns."

Also during their remarks to the press, Secretary Clinton urged Israel in blunt terms to completely halt settlements on land that Palestinians claim as part of a future state of their own.

"He (Obama) wants to see a stop to settlements _ not some settlements, not outposts, not 'natural growth' exceptions," Clinton said, referring in the last case to population growth on existing Israeli settlements in the West Bank from births and from allowances for adult offspring of settlers to buy homes near their parents.

"We think it is in the best interests (of the peace process) that settlement expansion cease," Clinton added, with Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit at her side.

"That is our position. That is what we have communicated very clearly. ... And we intend to press that point."

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is putting settlements at the center of his talks with Obama at the White House on Thursday, and he has said he won't resume peace talks without a freeze. Hillary had dinner with Abbas this evening. Read their full remarks here or watch below:

Read entire post