Bush went there to whip up support for an anti-Iranian coalition, while ElBaradei was in Tehran for a meeting with Iran's senior officials. The IAEA and Tehran agreed to broaden cooperation and step up efforts to resolve outstanding ambiguities in Iran's nuclear program.

Bush and his team must solve the Iranian nuclear problem, because many things depend on this, from the security of Israel, America's main ally in the region, to the possibility of losing U.S. positions there. Therefore the Iranian issue was discussed in Israel on a par with a Palestinian-Israeli settlement.

In the meantime, the Iranian Foreign Ministry sent to the ambassadors of the Gulf Cooperation Council countries a letter from the Iranian president in which he called on council member states to promote cooperation.

The letter was delivered while Bush was making his speech in Abu Dhabi.

By doing this, Tehran showed that it would not cede the Middle East to the United States, especially after the Iranian president for the first time attended the summit of the Gulf Cooperation Council last December. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad used the occasion to propose that the council set up a regional security organization.

So far, Tehran has been moving one step ahead of Washington. Last weekend, ElBaradei was in Tehran discussing Iran's nuclear program and outstanding IAEA questions related to the nature of Iranian nuclear research.

His visit has not changed anything in the nuclear sphere, but it is diplomatically significant that the head of the IAEA came to Tehran at this particular time at the request of the Iranian leaders.

This year Iran has been working hard to find a solution to the problem that suits its interests. It has sent a letter to the U.N secretary-general insisting that the Security Council return the Iranian nuclear dossier to the IAEA.

Its arguments are based on a declassified U.S. intelligence report, according to which Iran halted nuclear weapons work in 2003.

Tehran also warned in its letter that the continued involvement of the Security Council in the Iranian nuclear question would only complicate the situation and undermine respect for the IAEA. It writes that it will not stop its uranium enrichment program.

Tehran knows that its stance is not acceptable to its opponents, and that European experts want Iran above all to end its uranium enrichment project. By creating a full-cycle enrichment system, Iran would enter the path leading to possession of nuclear weapons.

It appears that Iran is deliberately fanning tensions. Why? The truth is that all the conditions are in place to make 2008 a crucial year for Iran's nuclear program.

One is the March 2007 Security Council resolution stipulating tougher sanctions should Tehran refuse to curtail its enrichment program. Since then, Iran has been given three 60-day deadlines to stop the program. Tehran disregarded the warnings, and European and U.S. experts say that the world cannot continue to indulge Iran without damaging the prestige of the Security Council.

Secondly, the stances of Iran and the Security Council are now polarized to such an extent as to rule out compromise. The situation has not improved, although Iran has promised to answer all the IAEA's outstanding questions by the end of February. Even if Iran fulfils its promise, the Security Council will continue to insist that it must stop all kinds of uranium enrichment. This is a matter of principle, because if Iran is allowed to enrich uranium, other countries may follow its example, and the Non-Proliferation Treaty will be as good as dead.

The third factor is the upcoming presidential elections in the United States in November 2008, which has given the Bush administration a deadline to find a solution to the Iranian problem.

The White House will most likely agree to postpone the issue of the Iranian dossier until March, and not only because by that time ElBaradei will have prepared a new report on the Iranian nuclear problem that will include the results of his Tehran visit.

Another important reason is that Russia will have a new president by that time. So waiting looks like a good option this time.

(Pyotr Goncharov is a political commentator for RIA Novosti, which first published this article. The opinions expressed here are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.)

(United Press International's "Outside View" commentaries are written by outside contributors who specialize in a variety of important issues. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of United Press International. In the interests of creating an open forum, original submissions are invited.)

Community
Email This Article
Comment On This Article

Related Links
Learn about nuclear weapons doctrine and defense at SpaceWar.com
Learn about missile defense at SpaceWar.com
All about missiles at SpaceWar.com
Learn about the Superpowers of the 21st Century at SpaceWar.com