Clinton says Jerusalem a matter for Israelis, Palestinians to decide together

WASHINGTON, D.C (Press Release)–Following is a partial transcript of an interview that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gave on Friday to Riz Khan of Al Jazeera television:

QUESTION: The European Union, with a prompt from Sweden, has put forward a plan for East Jerusalem to be a capital for a Palestinian state. Obviously, it’s met resistance from Israel. Will you back the European initiative or do you have to back Israel?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, no, what I do is back the parties, that all of the final status issues have to be decided by the parties. I mean, any of us on the outside can have our opinions, can look like we’re agreeing with one or the other. But at the end of the day, representatives of these two people must sit at the same table and make the agreement. Certainly, Jerusalem is on the table. It needs to be on the table. Back when my husband was negotiating, it was front and center. And I think that all these final status issues have to be, once and for all, decided by the parties, with the rest of us around the edge saying, okay, if you take that risk for peace, we’re going to help you, and if you take that risk for peace, we’re going to help you. But if they don’t reach an agreement, it doesn’t matter what anybody else says.

QUESTION: So it’s very complicated that Israel has not refused to rule out the idea of striking Iran’s nuclear facilities if provoked in any way. Now, where would the U.S. stand if Israel does decide to go after Iran?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, what we have tried to do is engage in diplomacy in a very vigorous way in order to reassure the international community, including all states, that Iran’s nuclear program was for peaceful purposes. Unfortunately, we haven’t had the kind of response we were hoping for from the Iranians. As you know well, President Obama made it absolutely clear with lots of political opposition that if he reached out his hand and if Iran reciprocated, we could talk about anything and everything. Then came the election, then came the crackdown on peaceful dissent, then came demonstrations, and the turmoil inside Iran is continuing until today.
We very much supported the return to the P-5+1. We – the United States had not been a full participant, but we are now. And we supported the International Atomic Energy Agency’s proposal to Iran that their highly enriched uranium be shipped out and then returned to refuel the Tehran research reactor. They had first agreed in principle, and then I think because of internal disputes, they backed off from that, raising a lot of questions about what their true intentions are. Obviously, the secret facility at Qom was revealed. They now say they want 10 or 20 new nuclear power plants.

It’s not confidence building, let us say. And I think the international community really still wants to engage with Iran, but people are going to now turn to other routes like more pressure, like sanctions to try to change their mind and their behavior.

*
Preceding provided by the U.S. State Department