Below is the transcript of the interview:

Q: You met the PM (Abhisit Vejjajiva) yesterday?

A: I did.

Q: How did his British accent strike you?

A: Well, we had a very good discussion. It was broad-ranging and quite constructive. I started it of course by thanking Thailand which has been such a strong and very positive ally of us going back to 176 years. And then we talked about both what we are doing together-fighting HIV/AIDS, our military relationship, our fight against human trafficking- something I care deeply about; and then the regional work, particularly in light of the ASEAN meeting.

Q: When you mention Thailand in Washington these days, what is the image of Thailand? Is it a positive or a negative image?

A: I think that our relationship and our close partnership over the years give us a broad understanding of Thailand. So it is both a land of smiles and a place of vibrant democracy that perhaps sometimes its politics is as spicy as its food. We know that this would be an issue that people of Thailand have to work out by themselves. But we have great confidence in the vibrancy of your democracy and stability of your country.

Q: Is there a specific reason why you picked green (suit)?

A: Actually I consider this turquoise. Is that wrong? Well, it's funny because I know there are certain colors that I should not wear.

Q: You have been told that?

A: I have been told that. But that's alright because some of the colors don't look very good on me anyway. So I'm safe.

Q: For your trip to Asia and ASEAN, what's your key message to ASEAN because your predecessor Condoleeza Rice never gave much importance to this region?

A: The key message is that President Obama and I are giving great importance to this region. We not only have long-time friends and allies like Thailand, but we believe that the entire region holds such promise and potential. And that's one of the reasons why I came to Asia for my very first trip and why I'm back within six months to come to Thailand and to go to ASEAN in Phuket because we want a closer relationship not only country-to-country but regionally. There are a lot issues that US and Thailand can solve on their own. We have to deal with everything from pandemic disease to piracy and we've got to have a really good alliance of people who are willing to cooperate. I believe strongly that the United States has to be involved in this region. We have to work together to solve problems. We have to demonstrate our commitment and leadership. And that's the message that I want to send.

Q: What's the main difference between the Bush foreign policy and the Obama foreign policy, especially towards Asia?

A: Hopefully, the Obama administration will demonstrate that America is back and we are pursuing our foreign policy in accordance with our values and our interests as well as our high standards. It's important to me personally to recognize that there has been so much progress in many areas within Asia. And yet, we think there are so much work to be done. And we want people of Asia, not just governments but people, to know the United States is in it for the long haul and that we have been friends for some countries like Thailand and we are trying to broaden and deepen our relationship with other countries like China but that we are going to work hard to try to bring a sense of future possibility, where we can have more peaceful, prosperous and progressive region. And I think that's all possible. I really do. I believe that there is a great commitment to continuing to push forward in Asia. And yet, it's unclear exactly what form of that we will take. So the more we work in partnership that we stand up for each other and stand up for our interests, the better we can see the future unfold.

Q: Are you saying that you are refocusing on Asia?

A: Yes.

Q: What was the mistake that the previous administration did towards Asia that you intend to correct?

A: I don't want to go back to the past. That's over.

Q: A little of the past?

A: There was an important election held. And the American people made a very definite decision. And of course with President Obama, we have someone who has roots in Southeast Asia-the time that he spent in Indonesia which was very formative. So we'd rather still focus on what we can do going forward. Every country has to constantly be asking itself are we doing the best we can and are we making the right decisions. And in our case, when we came into office, it became clear that many of our friends in Asia felt like we hadn't been paying attention and we have been absent. I don't know it was that feeling here but we certainly have heard of that communicated. And the United Stated is uniquely, geographically positioned. We are both an Atlantic and a Pacific power. And I don't think you can do one and not the other because our interests, our alliances and our partnerships span the globe. We are not going to pretend or claim that we are the answer of every problem but we want to be a constructive actor in dealing with the major problems that confront Asia.

Q: What do you think is the biggest threat to the peace of the region at this moment?

A: The threat that I always worry about, first and foremost, is proliferation of nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction. And obviously we are concerned about North Korea and recent reports about perhaps their dealings with (what we call) Burma.

Q: You refuse to call it Myanmar?

A: We do. We would like to see the democracy made decisions about the future of a country. That has yet come to pass. We are very strongly in favor of putting pressure on that government, trying to make it clear that the future doesn't lie with those who would try to repress their people and limit the opportunities to very small ruling group. That is not in the interest of people of Burma or people anywhere. So we are worried about the transfer of nuclear technology from North Korea to Burma.

Q: So you are concerned about the close ties between North Korea and Burma? How seriously?

A: We are going to explore it in Phuket and talk to all the other foreign ministers who are there. We want to try to focus the attention by countries that have a direct relationship or shared border as Thailand does. So that there can be a united front against that ever happening. I'm not saying it is happening but we want to be prepared to try to stand against it.

Q: North Korea is the main focus of your talks this time. How serious is North Korea's threat to United States?

A: It's not a serious threat to United States. At this time its weapon's capacity and technological progress is not a threat to us but it is a threat to our other allies and if it continues it's a threat to further destabilisation in East Asia, and particularly Northeast Asia. We'll be talking about many important issues here at the ASEAN meeting. I'm very proud that I'll be signing, on behalf of my country, the treaty of Amity and Collaboration.

Of course the world of ASEAN is just beginning to explore other areas that there are first ever joint exercises in the Philippines to try to do better on disaster assistance. So we have followed agenda but the behavior and provocative reaction of North Korea raised issues because for example if North Korea pursues this nuclear program other countries are going to feel out of their own self-defense necessity they must also. That chain reaction is one of the reasons why in another part of the world we are concerned about Iran. If Iran requires another nuclear weapon then other countries in the Middle East are going to think that they have to have one, too. And pretty soon you have so many nuclear weapons, and not just in the hands of states, but also non-state act... and North Korea has been in proliferation of nuclear technology, we know that.

So we want to continue to put pressure. I must say that I'm very gratified that we have a united front and Asia are coming together in the United Nations passing an ASEAN security council resolution with real teeth to try to go after all the different institutions and individuals that are part of the proliferation network within North Korea and that support it outside.

So I think we are making progress in creating a strong responsibility in North Korea.

Q: Who actually gives more headache, Kim Jong-il, ......, General Than Swe, Osama Bin Laden...

A: They give me headaches all the time. You mentioned obviously some of the people who, I think, are playing a very negative role in the world and I have to worry about all of them, unfortunately.

Q: You said on ABC on Monday that North Korea is like an unruly child, seeking attention all the time. What do you mean?

A: Well, I think if you look at the behavior of North Korea in the last months and going back some years, it is hard to understand what their real objectives are, other than to try to get everybody to pay attention to.

And it's sad because when you look at the Korean peninsula, the progress success in South Korea the opportunities South Korea have demonstrated to economic process and academic achievement. And then just across the border a country that just can't feed itself, people are literally shrinking inside because they are malnourished. And they want the world's stage to watch the missile, accurately they want a satellite. To me it's sad because absolutely Korean people have so much potential but they badly governed in the North and it would be a wonderful change in attitude if the leadership in North Korea is less complete in a peaceful way. Let's see our students and ... students ....our business people and our business people... kind of competition we are seeing in Asia peaceful ... you know very aggressive and vigorous from time to time. That's how countries should be looking in the future and we are a long way since North Korea to do that.

Q: Talking about Burma, if Aung Sang Suu Kyi is not released would you be sorry to see Burma kicked out of ASEAN?

A: Well that's up to ASEAN.

Q: Are you going to encourage ASEAN to do that?

A: I think that it would be an appropriate policy change to consider because other countries in ASEAN, despite whatever happen in other countries they are up and down or they all have problems, they have made steady progress in democracy, human rights and economic prosperity that is broadly shared and that hasn't happened in Burma.

Now there's great debate that goes on, can you influence the Burmesse military junta more by exchanging ideas and engaging with them or sanctions and trying to get their attention or removing them from the organization... It's a fair debate. I have discussion with leaders in the region, who have advocated at both sides of the debate.

But you put your fingers on particularly painful issue for me personally as well as for my country. We admire Aung Sang Suu Kyi. I think that the sacrifice she has made for her people, people of Burma, are admirable... and really demonstrates that one person can make difference by standing up for the rights to determine your own future and your country. And I regret deeply that the unfortunate incidence that she has nothing to do with has surged an excuse for her to be put on trial and put in the prison. And yes we would like to see her release.

Let me just add that there are a lot of opportunities that could be made available to the Burmese government and people if they did really surged.

They should open up doors for investment and other exchanges that would help people in Burma. So we'll wait and see what the Burma government decides.

Q: Earlier you said US would extend ... to Iran. What else can be extended from US to Iran?

A: As you know our president came to office with very clear preference for talking with people and not prejudging what might come with those talks.

You know Winsor Churchill's famous saying 'It's always better with jaw jaw' meaning 'talk talk' or ...and of course it's our view.

And the president and I made it clear that we would be willing to have direct talks with Iran and we had hope that we would get a response. And we are positive that we can help circumstances for that kind of dialogue. Well their election helps. And I don't think there's any doubts of irregular. And when people tried to peacefully protest they were brutally oppressed. There's a great debate going on inside of Iran. We saw just this the past week with some of the leading clerics and former presidents even speaking out. So we have said that the door is open to what we would like to see a one-one-one engagement with Iran but they are so preoccupied right now. And at the same time the nuclear clock is ticking. We know they have continued to pursue their nuclear program so we're discussing with our counterparts around the world if there's meaningful engagement not only with us but with other countries. There is a mechanism that's called P5+1 which the Security Council, basically...US obviously... where we have been talking with Iran about their nuclear program for a couple of years so it's not just us and Iran, it's the world and Iran. As you know, the people around Iran are the most concerned and the ones to come to see me and convey their deep apprehension about what might happen... so we will still hold the door open but we also have made it clear that we will take actions as I've said you know time and time again, crippling actions, working to upgrade the defense of our partners in the region. We want Iran to calculate what I think is a fair assessment if the US extends a defense umbrella across the region, if we do even more to support the military capacity to those in the Gulf, it's unlikely that Iran will be any stronger or safer because they won't be able to intimidate or dominate as they apparently think they can once they have a nuclear weapon. So I think there is still a lot of opportunity here but we are not going to keep the window open forever.

Q: As you arrived in India last week, there were bomb attacks in Jakarta. Is international terrorism still a big threat?

A: It is and it is still an overwhelming priority of the United States because of our own experience. I think what happened in Jakarta was tragic as all of these cowardly terrorist attacks always are. It's especially cowardly because Indonesia just gone through a democratic elections. Now 10 years of democracy solidifying in Indonesia, a real exciting dynamism you can feel in the country... when I visited there a few months ago, I was very impressed with what I see Indonesia doing. And clearly the terrorists, they don't want to compete in the political environment, they don't want to take the results of that kind of competition and actually try to compete in that marketplace of ideas so they engage in this very destructive, violent behavior. But I have a lot of confidence in the resilience of the Indonesian government and of course the Indonesian people so as tragic as something like that is, I think it's important to convey to the terrorists that they will not intimidate us and they will in any way undermine our resolve to defeat them and their networks.

Q: How to reconcile the question of treating terrorists acceptable to international standards and at the same time get the message that you are being tough?

A: That's a very important question. And that's one that President Obama answered on the very first day. Despite how difficult it is, he is committed to prohibiting torture, to ending Guantanamo. What we believe is there are very effective ways to combat terrorism and there are effective ways to interrogate without crossing the line. In fact, many of the experts in interrogation would tell you get more information by treating someone humanely and trying to appeal to them and trying to find some common connection. I'm quick to add that some of these people are very difficult and very dangerous, there isn't any doubt about that. But I we're in a real contest in some parts of the world, for as we say, the hearts and minds. And what we want... and we're seeing some evidence of that... is the family member or the neighbor of the terrorist to say I don't believe in that so I know that my cousin or my roommate has signed on with this terrorist group and I'm going to tell somebody. And I've learned that they're making bombs down the road where I live... you've probably seen in the news the very dramatic trial in India of the surviving Mumbai terrorist who confessed in court. But what I found so interesting about his confession is that he was a young man without much purpose in life, he was in a job he did not find satisfactorily satisfying and he was susceptible to terrorist organizations, this will make you feel strong and powerful. This will give you a meaning and purpose in your life and he bought into that and joined this group that was trained for the Mumbai attacks. When you listen to his confession as I heard on Indian television, this was not someone who had some deep, overriding ideological commitment, this was somebody who got swept up in it. So we want to convey to families and communities across the world, there's a better way. Now, we have to put some meat into the bone of that statement, we have to make sure people get some good education, we have to make sure that the people do have jobs. Those are parts of what we see a more positive alternative to what the terrorists are selling.

Continued reading