Week in Review

DoctorZin provides a review of this past week's [4/09/06 - 4/15/06] major news events regarding Iran. (The reports are listed in chronological order, not by importance) READ MORE

Iran's Nuclear Program & The UN Security Council.

• Ha'aretzreported that a fire broke out in a forest north of Tehran on Saturday, not far from an area intelligence agencies suspected illegal nuclear activity.
• The Financial Times reported that companies doing business in Iran face the prospect of a crackdown on export credits unless Tehran’s co-operation with the United Nations over its nuclear program is improved.
• The Jerusalem Post reported that Iran said it was a "big mistake" for the US and its allies to think the UN Security Council will be able to force Teheran to give up uranium enrichment.
• Telegraph reported that teams of nuclear experts attached to the IAEA are saying Iran's ayatollahs are moving closer to their goal of building an atom bomb.
• Reuters reported that Iran's president promised "good news" within days about the country's nuclear program.
• Mehran Riazaty produced a roundup of Iranian press reports discussing Ahmadinejad's coming announcement on Iran’s nuclear program.
• The Washington Post reported that EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana said Monday that the 25-nation bloc should consider sanctions against Iran, including a visa ban on nuclear officials.
• The Financial Times reported that Jack Straw yesterday used his toughest language yet to rule out any military strike against Iran and that Mr Blair has shown signs of exasperation with Mr Straw's cautious approach.
• AP reported that Iran has successfully enriched uranium for the first time and Ahmadinejad added that the country "will soon join the club of countries with nuclear technology."
• Mehran Riazaty reported Iranian leaders were meeting with many of its neighbors the morning of Iran's nuclear announcement. The report reminds us that Iranian leaders are seeking to increase the price of oil to $100 a barrel.
• IranMania reported that the Iranian Defense Minister said that Tehran is ready to sign non-aggression pacts with countries in the region.
• Kuwait News Agency reported that Rafsanjani announced that the state resumed operation of 164 centrifuges in its Natanz nuclear facility for the enrichment of industrial uranium.
• Reuters reported that a White House spokesman said Iran's statements on its nuclear program are "moving in the wrong direction" and if Tehran persists, the United States will discuss possible next steps with the U.N. Security Council.
• Reuters reported that China's envoy to the United Nations urged a diplomatic solution to the standoff over Iran's nuclear program and said military and economic measures would be counter-productive.
• RIA Novosti reported that a Russian expert claimed that any military strike by the United States against facilities that are part of Iran's controversial nuclear program would damage but not paralyze the Iranian economy.
• Ynetnews reported that senior U.S. and Israeli specialists say that if Iran continues to develop nuclear weapons, a military operation against it is inevitable and will take place in 2007.
• The Wall Street Journal reported that China's assistance to Iran is a violation of its obligations under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and what can Washington do about it.
• The Wall Street Journal reported that Iran in formal breach of a U.N. Security Council resolution and now has the know how to make a nuclear bomb.
  
• Reuters reported that the UN is unlikely to act sooner than May on the question of Iran's nuclear ambitions.
• The Washington Post reported that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said that the United Nations Security Council must now take "strong steps." The permanent 5 (plus Germany) will meet next week in Moscow.
• The Washington Post reported that Russia's Foreign Ministry criticized Iran saying: "We believe that this step is wrong."
• Reuters pointed out that Russia did not reiterate its past opposition to sanctions.
• Downing Street released a statement from Jack Straw which said: "The latest Iranian statement further undermines international confidence in the Iranian regime and is deeply unhelpful."
• Bangkok Post reported that a day after Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad declaration, Pakistan's foreign ministry spokesperson Tasneem Aslam said: "We have no comments."
• Iran Focus reported that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad demanded that the world’s “lying and corrupt powers” disarm their nuclear arsenals.
• Mehran Riazaty reported that Iranian Defense Minister Brigadier General Mohammad Najjar said Iran's enemies' reaction to Iran's acquisition of the nuclear enrichment cycle does not matter much to the Iranians.
• Bloomberg reported that a U.S. State Department official said Iran may be capable of making a nuclear bomb within 16 days, once they have their planned 50,000 centrifuges online.
• The Times reported that Mohamed ElBaradei delivered in person in Tehran a message from the four permanent Security Council members.
• The New York Times reported that Mohamed ElBaradei's meeting with the Iranian ended Thursday night with no agreement.
• Reuters reported that the IAEA says it cannot confirm Iran's enrichment claim, yet.
• CNN News reported that the CIA is doesn't know what exactly Iran's nuclear scientists up to.
• The Washington Post reported that while the White House is saying "it is time for action" by the U.N. Security Council, there were no signs of consensus on what to do about it.
• The Wall Street Journal reported that while Russia and China have resisted discussing even limited sanctions on Iran, U.S. officials appear ready to force the issue, challenging Moscow and Beijing to veto a resolution. U.S. officials say they don't believe either would do so.
• Reuters reported that China will send a top envoy on arms control to Iran and Russia in an effort to defuse Iran's nuclear standoff with the West.
• Amir Taheri, New York Post argued that as the diplomatic maneuvers to pressure Iran to rein in its nuclear ambitions continue, the key is in Moscow.
• The Times argued that Iran is racing down the nuclear route before the UN can put up a roadblock.
• Stratfor reported that since Iran declared on Tuesday that it has "joined the club of nuclear countries." The question is what the Iranians hoped to achieve? The answer is rooted in the things that were not said.
• Stratfor examined Iran's major advance in their country's nuclear program. Here is what it means -- and does not mean.
• The Times reported that Condoleezza Rice is to renew the push for punishing sanctions against Iran when world leaders meet next week and that Tehran must now face the consequences.
• The Los Angeles Times reported that Ahmadinejad rebuffed a request from U.N. nuclear agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei to suspend it suranium enrichment saying: "Our answer to those who are angry about Iran achieving the full nuclear fuel cycle is just one phrase. We say: 'Be angry at us and die of this anger.' "
• DEBKAfile reported that Iran is constructing a secret, large-scale enrichment plant at Neyshabour designed to run 155,000 centrifuges, enough to enrich uranium for 3-5 nuclear bombs a year.
• BBC News reported that former Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres has urged the UN to take united action against Iran. "Iran is a member state of the United Nations that is threatening to destroy another member state of the United Nations."
• The Telegraph reported that Iranian scientists are secretly conducting crucial nuclear research and development, using university laboratories as cover to avoid international scrutiny.
• BBC News reported that many believe the Iranian regime has two choices: either it will take a tougher stance on its nuclear program, or it will become more willing to compromise.

Iranian regime incompetence.

• Bloomberg reported that an Iranian ministry of energy official said Ahmadinejad's decision to abandon the country's annual switch to daylight saving time might cost the Islamic republic as much as 3 trillion rials (R2 billion) in extra energy consumption.
  

Iran's Dissidents.

• Iran Press News reported that Iranian blogger, Afshin Zareyi, will go on trial after 13 months in prison.
• Iran Press News reported that the trial of Dr. Farzad Hamidi was postponed.
• Iran Press News reported the latest news on Iranian political prisoners.
• Iran Press News reported that Iranian blogger Mojtaba Samiinejad has been sentenced to 10 months in prison.
  

Power Struggle inside of Iran?

• Rooz Online reported on Rafsanjani's recent upstaging Ahmadinejad's "historic" nuclear announcement.
• SeattlePI reported that Ahmadinejad is annoying predecessors by claiming the success of Iran's nuclear achievement in his name alone and that not all Iranians back his radical rhetoric.
• Rooz Online disclosed details of an under reported meeting where Khamenei criticized other conservative clerks for not backing Ahmadinejad. These criticisms are indicative of the diminishing role of the traditional clerics in Islamic regime.
  

The Unrest inside of Iran.

• IranMania reported that armed rebels have killed two army officers, and shot a top cleric in troubled Sistan-Baluchistan province in southeastern Iran.
• Reuters reported that an Iranian Sunni rebel group video broadcast on Arab satellite television showed the killing by firing squad of a man identified as an Iranian Revolutionary Guard officer.
  

Human Rights/Freedom of the press inside of Iran.

• Rooz Online reported on the latest efforts by the Iranian regime to control cell phone text messaging (SMS). SMS in Iran began just four years ago. The volume of SMS messages surpasses the seven million users of Internet in Iran.
• Iran Press News reported that Islamic police stopped a 10-year-old girl at Tehran airport for improper clothing.
  

Rumors of War.

• FOX News reported that a senior administration official said a magazine news story suggesting the Bush administration will go to war to stop Iran from developing a nuclear bomb is long on hype and short on facts.
• The Washington Post reported that the Bush administration is studying options for military strikes against Iran as part of a broader strategy of coercive diplomacy to pressure Tehran, but no attack appears likely in the short term.
• The Times reported that Jack Straw described the idea that the White House wanted a nuclear strike as “completely nuts”.
• The New York Times reported that President Bush dismissed reports that his administration is accelerating plans for a possible military strike against Iran, calling them "wild speculation."
• The Washington Post reported that the Pentagon preparing for possible military action on Iran.
• The Guardian reported that British officers took part in a US war game aimed at preparing for a possible invasion of Iran, codenamed Hotspur 2004.
• The Toronto Star reported that a U.S. strike on Iran could make Iraq look like a warm-up bout.
  

Support for Internal Regime Change in Iran.

• Eli Lake, The New York Sun reported that the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the House appropriations panel are resisting administration efforts to fund independent Iranian broadcast efforts into Iran and instead want to solely fund Voice of America and Radio Farda. But Iranian opposition groups claim VOA and Radio Farda are undermining pro-democracy efforts inside of Iran.
• The New York Times reported that a newly created office of Iranian affairs in the State Department is poring over applications for a rapidly expanding program to change the political process inside Iran.
• The Scotsman reported that Tony Blair will not offer military support to any strike on Iran, regardless of whether the move wins the backing of the international community, but is expected to support the call for a "Chapter 7" resolution, which could effectively isolate Iran from the international community. Blair's "favourite think-tank" argues that "The only long-term solution to Iran's problems is democracy."
  

Iran's Military.

• Seattle PI reported that spy planes that Iran claims to have shot down over its territory were not operated by the U.S. Air Force.
  

Iran's economy in serious trouble.

• Iran Press News reported more than 500 textile workers have gone unpaid for 8 months.
  

Iran's Troublemaking in Iraq.

• Sunday Mirror reported that British Special Forces are tracking up to 40 Iranian agents who have slipped over the border into southern Iraq.
• Iran Focus reported that Iraqi military forces recently discovered an Iranian-made weapons cache hidden in the city of Tikrit, north-west of Baghdad.
  

Iran's Troublemaking in Israel.

• Mehran Riazaty reported that Ahmadinejad said that the Zionist regime is a dried rotten tree which will fall by one storm.
• Yahoo News reported that the president of Iran again lashed out at Israel and said it was "heading toward annihilation..." and "that Palestine will be freed soon."
• Yahoo News reported that Palestinian militant leaders have rallied behind Iran, vowing to resist pressure to recognize Israel and supporting the Islamic republic in its stand-off with the West over its nuclear program.
  

US/Iran talks on hold.

• SFGate reported that U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad said that planned talks with Iranian officials over Iraq-related issues would be delayed until a government is formed.
• Arabic News reported that Rafsanjani said: the upcoming talks between Tehran and Washington on Iraq could, if they turn out to be successful, pave the way for talks on other issues.
  

Iran and the International community.

• The New York Times reported that Iraqi leaders joined together to denounce President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt today for publicly asserting that Iraq was already engulfed in civil war and that Iraqi Shiites were loyal to Iran.
• Reuters reported that Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has no plans to travel to Germany to support his country's World Cup campaign.
• IranMania reported that Secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council Ali Larijani held talks with Saudi King Abdullah bin Abd al-Aziz. The Saudi king said that Iran-Saudi Arabia cooperation would be effective in repelling the threats and establishing permanent security in the region.
• Xinhua reported that Dutch authorities have suspended deportation of rejected homosexual and Christian asylum seekers to Iran.
• Iran Press News reported that a French investigative judge has launched an investigation into charges of bribing the Rafsanjani family by the French oil company, Total.
• Iran Press News reported that while the Islamic regime wants to maintain an output of 300,000 barrels per day from Yadavaran oilfield, Sinopec, the Chinese Oil Company refuses to commit to more than 180,000 barrels.
• The Sunday Times reported that Iran has formed battalions of suicide bombers to strike at British and American targets if the nation’s nuclear sites are attacked. Dr Hassan Abbasi, head of the Centre for Doctrinal Strategic Studies in the Revolutionary Guards said: “pay close attention to wily England” and vowed that “Britain’s demise is on our agenda”.
  

US Congress.

• MosNews reported that visiting U.S. senators have said Russia’s record on democracy and the Kremlin’s stance on the Iranian nuclear crisis would influence the U.S. Congress, as it considers Moscow’s bid to join the WTO.
• Eli Lake, The New York Sun reported that the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the House appropriations panel are resisting administration efforts to fund independent Iranian broadcast efforts into Iran and instead want to solely fund Voice of America and Radio Farda. But Iranian opposition groups claim VOA and Radio Farda are undermining pro-democracy efforts inside of Iran.
• Rep. Steve Israel, Newsday argued that if diplomatic, economic and other tools don't work in dissuading the Iranian regime from its nuclear ambitions, reducing the amount of gas that goes into Iran may work.
  

Must Read reports.

• Ha'aretz asked what will come more quickly on the Iranian clock: the nuclear capability or the democratic revolution?
• AlJazeera reported that Iran is planning to launch a second satellite.
• Mark Steyn, City Journal argued why our lives depend on facing down Iran.
• Iran Press News reported that a Swiss judge issued an international arrest warrant for ex-Minister of Intelligence and Security of the Islamic regime. A must read.
• Mark Bowden, Atlantic Online published an excerpt from his new book: "Guests of the Ayatollah: The First Battle in America's War with Militant Islam."
• MosNews reported that Iran wishes to send a man into space and Russia is not opposed to the idea.
• Howard Fineman, MSNBC reported that a generation ago, the Iranian hostage crisis cost Jimmy Carter and the Democrats the White House. Now, 26 years later, another Iranian hostage crisis threatens to do the same thing to George W. Bush and the Republican Party.
• The New York Times reported that one of President Bush's most senior foreign policy advisers said "The problem is that our policy has been all carrots and no sticks... and the Iranians know it."
• William Kristol, The Weekly Standard sees parallels between how the west failed to deal with Hitler early on and how the west now appears headed to do the same with Iran.
• Eli Lake, The New York Sun reported that the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the House appropriations panel are resisting administration efforts to fund independent Iranian broadcast efforts into Iran and instead want to solely fund Voice of America and Radio Farda. But Iranian opposition groups claim VOA and Radio Farda are undermining pro-democracy efforts inside of Iran.
• The Los Angeles Times reported on their poll which claims that Americans are divided over the prospect of U.S. military action against Iran.
• John Podhoretz, New York Post argued that the president should invite leading Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill, sooner rather than later, to Camp David for a major policy summit to create a bipartisan consensus on what to do about Iran.
• Matthias Küntzel, The New Republic produced a detailed examination of Ahmadinejad's roots in the Bassij in a report: Ahmadinejad's Demons. A must read.
• Los Angeles Times reported on the messianic fervor growing among some of Iran's Shiites.
  

The Experts.

• Amir Taheri, Arab News answered the question: “what does Iran want?”
• Michael Ledeen, The National Review outlined the Iranian Mullah’s view of why their confrontation approach to the international community will work.
• Ilan Berman, AFPC reported that Iran considering a bill which would require American citizens to be fingerprinted and searched at all entry points into Iran while at the same time some 500 intelligence operatives from Iran are suspected to have entered Iraq over the past couple of weeks.
• Amir Taheri, New York Post argued that as the diplomatic maneuvers to pressure Iran to rein in its nuclear ambitions continue, the key is in Moscow.
• Kenneth R. Timmerman, NewsMax.com interviewed retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Tom McInerney who outlined what an attack on Iran would likely entail; he calls it the "Big George" scenario.
• Michael Rubin, The Wall Street Journal warned that in 1953 and 1979, Washington supported an unpopular regime against the will of the Iranian people; any deal which would preserve the regime would be to make the same mistake again.
• Reuel Marc Gerecht, Weekly Standard examined, in detail, the question: to bomb, or not to bomb.
• Henry A. Kissinger, International Herald Tribune discussed American strategy on Iran and the US Pre-emptive War doctrine.
• Amir Taheri, Asharq Alawsat wonders if Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahamdinejad has been inspired by a Tehrani folk tale to try and lead the Islamic Republic out of what looks like the most serious foreign policy crisis in its history.
  

Photos, cartoons and videos.

• Iran Press News reported that Ahmadinejad's picture is now on Russian Chocolates sold in Iran. Photo.
• Rooz Online published a cartoon: Ahmadinejad leading Iran over the cliff.
• Cox & Forkum published a cartoon: Mild and Woolly.
• Robert Tait, The Guardian asked: Have you heard the one about Iran's President? Rumors in Tehran are that his ire was stirred when someone sent him a joke suggesting he didn't wash regularly enough. More jokes.
  

The Quote of the Week.

The Los Angeles Times reported that Ahmadinejad rebuffed a request from U.N. nuclear agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei to suspend it suranium enrichment saying:

"Our answer to those who are angry about Iran achieving the full nuclear fuel cycle is just one phrase. We say: 'Be angry at us and die of this anger.' "

Tags: iran, news, iraq, nuclear, israel,

Sunday's Daily Briefing on Iran

DoctorZin reports, 4.16.2006:

Blair says no to an attack on Iran. But counseled to promote democracy instead.

• The Scotsman reported that Tony Blair will not offer military support to any strike on Iran, regardless of whether the move wins the backing of the international community, but is expected to support the call for a "Chapter 7" resolution, which could effectively isolate Iran from the international community. Blair's "favourite think-tank" argues that "The only long-term solution to Iran's problems is democracy."

Iran prepared to attack Britain.

• The Sunday Times reported that Iran has formed battalions of suicide bombers to strike at British and American targets if the nation’s nuclear sites are attacked. Dr Hassan Abbasi, head of the Centre for Doctrinal Strategic Studies in the Revolutionary Guards said: “pay close attention to wily England” and vowed that “Britain’s demise is on our agenda”.

Reports on the 12 Imam and his Bassij followers.

• Matthias Küntzel, The New Republic produced a detailed examination of Ahmadinejad's roots in the Bassij in a report: Ahmadinejad's Demons. A must read.
• Los Angeles Times reported on the messianic fervor growing among some of Iran's Shiites.

War gaming Iran.

• The Washington Post reported that the Pentagon preparing for possible military action on Iran.
• The Guardian reported that British officers took part in a US war game aimed at preparing for a possible invasion of Iran, codenamed Hotspur 2004.
• The Toronto Star reported that a U.S. strike on Iran could make Iraq look like a warm-up bout.
  

Ahmadinejad support inside Iran slipping.

• SeattlePI reported that Ahmadinejad is annoying predecessors by claiming the success of Iran's nuclear achievement in his name alone and that not all Iranians back his radical rhetoric.
• Rooz Online disclosed details of an under reported meeting where Khamenei criticized other conservative clerks for not backing Ahmadinejad. These criticisms are indicative of the diminishing role of the traditional clerics in Islamic regime.
  

Here are a few other news items you may have missed.

• BBC News reported that former Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres has urged the UN to take united action against Iran. "Iran is a member state of the United Nations that is threatening to destroy another member state of the United Nations."
• Yahoo News reported that Palestinian militant leaders have rallied behind Iran, vowing to resist pressure to recognize Israel and supporting the Islamic republic in its stand-off with the West over its nuclear program.
• The Telegraph reported that Iranian scientists are secretly conducting crucial nuclear research and development, using university laboratories as cover to avoid international scrutiny.
• BBC News reported that many believe the Iranian regime has two choices: either it will take a tougher stance on its nuclear program, or it will become more willing to compromise.

Tags: iran, news, nuclear

Iran suicide bombers ‘ready to hit Britain’

Marie Colvin, Michael Smith and Sarah Baxter, The Sunday Times:

IRAN has formed battalions of suicide bombers to strike at British and American targets if the nation’s nuclear sites are attacked. According to Iranian officials, 40,000 trained suicide bombers are ready for action.

The main force, named the Special Unit of Martyr Seekers in the Revolutionary Guards, was first seen last month when members marched in a military parade, dressed in olive-green uniforms with explosive packs around their waists and detonators held high.

Dr Hassan Abbasi, head of the Centre for Doctrinal Strategic Studies in the Revolutionary Guards, said in a speech that 29 western targets had been identified: “We are ready to attack American and British sensitive points if they attack Iran’s nuclear facilities.” He added that some of them were “quite close” to the Iranian border in Iraq.

In a tape recording heard by The Sunday Times, Abbasi warned the would-be martyrs to “pay close attention to wily England” and vowed that “Britain’s demise is on our agenda”. READ MORE

At a recruiting station in Tehran recently, volunteers for the force had to show their birth certificates, give proof of their address and tick a box stating whether they would prefer to attack American targets in Iraq or Israeli targets.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad warned last Friday that Israel was heading towards “annihilation”. He was speaking at a Tehran conference on Palestinian rights aimed at promoting Iran as a new Middle Eastern superpower.

According to western intelligence documents leaked to The Sunday Times, the Revolutionary Guards are in charge of a secret nuclear weapons programme designed to evade the scrutiny of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

One of the leaked reports, dating from February this year, confirms that President George W Bush is preparing to strike Iran. “If the problem is not resolved in some way, he intends to act before leaving office because it would be ‘unfair’ to leave the task of destroying Iran’s nuclear facilities to a new president,” the document says.

Alireza Jafarzadeh, a former spokesman for National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), an opposition group, said a secret, parallel military programme was under way. According to sources inside Iran, the Revolutionary Guards were constructing underground sites that could be activated if Iran’s known nuclear facilities were destroyed.

The NCRI is the political wing of the Mujaheddin-e-Khalq, which is deemed a terrorist organisation in Britain and America. However, much of its information is considered to be “absolutely credible” by western intelligence sources after Jafarzadeh revealed the existence of the Natanz plant in 2002.

Within the past year, 14 large and several smaller projects have been created, according to Jafarzadeh. Several are designed to be nuclear factories; others are for the storage of weapons, he claimed.

Additional reporting: Safa Haeri

Blair refuses to back Iran strike

The Scotsman:

TONY Blair has told George Bush that Britain cannot offer military support to any strike on Iran, regardless of whether the move wins the backing of the international community, government sources claimed yesterday.

Amid increasing tension over Tehran's attempts to develop a military nuclear capacity, the Prime Minister has laid bare the limits of his support for President Bush, who is believed to be considering an assault on Iran, Foreign Office sources revealed.

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is calling on the United Nations to consider new sanctions against Tehran when the Security Council meets next week to discuss the developing crisis. Blair is expected to support the call for a "Chapter 7" resolution, which could effectively isolate Iran from the international community.

But, in the midst of international opposition to a pre-emptive strike on Tehran, and Britain's military commitments around the world, the government maintains it cannot contribute to a military assault. "We will support the diplomatic moves, at best," a Foreign Office source told Scotland on Sunday. "But we cannot commit our own resources to a military strike."

Meanwhile, a new report on the Iran crisis has warned that neo-conservatives in the Bush administration are on "collision course" with Tehran.

The Foreign Policy Centre (FPC), often referred to as Blair's "favourite think-tank", will appeal for a greater effort to find a diplomatic solution in a report to be published later this week. FPC director Stephen Twigg, formerly a Labour minister, explained: "It is essential UK policy on Iran is well informed... We want to engage with the various reformist elements in Iran, both inside and outside the structures of power.

"There is potential for political dialogue, economic ties and cultural contacts to act as catalysts for the strengthening of civil society in Iran."

While the sense of crisis over Iran has been escalated by the fiery rhetoric between Tehran and the West - particularly Washington - many within the British government are now convinced that the impasse can be resolved by repeating the same sort of painstaking diplomatic activity that returned Libya to the international fold.

The approach contrasts sharply with the strategy employed during the run-up to the war in Iraq, when ministers repeatedly issued grim warnings to Saddam Hussein over the consequences of not falling in line with their demands.

"The only long-term solution to Iran's problems is democracy," said Alex Bigham, co-author of the FPC report. "But it cannot be dictated, Iraq-style, or it will backfire. Iran may seem superficially like Iraq but we need to treat Iran more like Libya. Diplomatic engagement must be allowed to run its course. There need to be bigger carrots as well as bigger sticks." READ MORE

However, the conciliatory language was not reflected in the approach from Washington, where senior figures in the Bush administration remain keen to stress the danger of Tehran's intentions.

In a declaration aimed at America's allies as much as Iran, Rice claimed the Security Council's handling of the Iranian nuclear issue would be a test of the international community's credibility. "If the UN Security Council says: 'You must do these things and we'll assess in 30 days,' and Iran has not only not done those things, but has taken steps that are exactly the opposite of those that are demanded, then the Security Council is going to have to act."

Rice dismissed Iran's declaration that it is only interested in enriching uranium for use in civil nuclear power facilities, saying the international community must remain focused on the potential military applications of this technology.

"The world community does not want them to have that nuclear know-how and that's why nobody wants them to be able to enrich and reprocess on their territory, getting to the place that they can produce what we call a full-scale nuclear plant to be able to do this," she said.

Rice reiterated that President Bush has not taken any option off the table, including a military response, if Iran fails to comply with the demands of the international community.

Iran's 'nuclear university' conceals research

Philip Sherwell, Telegraph:

Iranian scientists are secretly conducting crucial nuclear research and development, using university laboratories as cover to avoid international scrutiny, according to highly placed opposition supporters within the Islamic regime. READ MORE

Teheran's Imam Hossein University, which is run on military brigade lines by Iran's Revolutionary Guards, is the main centre for experiments on nuclear weapon technology, the exiled National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) reported.

Last week, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad boasted that Iran had successfully enriched uranium as it forges ahead with the nuclear programme, which he claims is intended solely to generate energy, but which the West believes is intended for atomic weapons.

The belligerent Iranian hardliner followed up that claim with a fresh diatribe against Israel, which he described on Friday as "a rotten, dried tree", which would be annihilated by "a storm". He has previously called for the country to be "wiped from the map".

Teheran is publicly flagging up its "peaceful" nuclear know-how in its showdown with the international community. But, at the same time, scientists with close ties to the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) were conducting secret trials on military aspects of the programme, opposition figures said.

Alireza Jafarzadeh, the NCRI official who revealed the existence of the clerics' clandestine nuclear programme to the world in 2002, told the Sunday Telegraph that the latest information came from the same sources within the regime's national security structure.

Iran factfile

He named 21 professors and researchers involved in nuclear work at the Imam Hossein University, many of whom also hold senior IRGC posts, as proof that the Revolutionary Guards were running Iran's supposedly "civilian" nuclear programme.

The IRGC's influence in the regime has strengthened since the election last year of Mr Ahmadinejad, who was a brigadier general in its Quds (Jerusalem) Force, the wing linked to a series of international terror attacks.

In a sign of the importance of the Imam Hossein University, Iran's leader visited the campus in September for a briefing shortly after his return from the United Nations in New York, where he robustly defended Iran's nuclear ambitions.

In a photograph not previously published in Britain, the president is shown inspecting students in military cadet uniforms. He was told of "research achievements in the domains of defence and national security, basic sciences as well as technical and engineering fields", the Teheran-based Fars news agency reported.

Clandestine nuclear research is being led by scientists who were student radicals in the Islamic revolution that overthrew the last Shah in 1979, and share the activist background of Mr Ahmadinejad, 49.

Fereydoon Abbasi, 48, head of physics, who fought in the Iran-Iraq war, has overseen the transfer of several nuclear experts to the university from other institutions.

Other key figures include Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, 45, a nuclear engineer whom the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has unsuccessfully sought to question, and Mansour Asgari, 48, a laser expert. They both lecture at Imam Hossein, but are based at the Centre for Readiness and New Defence Technology, to which the IAEA has been refused access by the regime.

Dr Abbasi recently oversaw tests on the high-powered emission of neutrons by a neutron generator, Mr Jafarzadeh said. Other work is believed to focus on beryllium oxide (which has possible nuclear applications), laser-enrichment, nuclear trigger experiments and tests on bomb materials.

"Imam Hossein university has a top-notch nuclear physics department," said Mr Jafarzadeh. "The work they are doing there is crucial to the nuclear programme and it has never been inspected.

"While Ahmadinejad is proudly proclaiming the regime's uranium enrichment success, he is concealing the central role of the Revolutionary Guards corps and its Iman Hossein University in the secret rush to acquire the nuclear bomb."

The United States will urge its allies this week to consider punitive measures - including a freeze on assets, targeted sanctions and travel restrictions - against Iranian leaders. Senior officials from the US, Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany meet in Moscow on Tuesday to discuss their response to Iran's announcement that it had joined the "nuclear club".

The declaration came the day before a visit to Teheran by Mohamed El Baradei, the IAEA chief, in a clear snub to the UN's atomic watchdog. The UN Security Council has given Iran until April 28 to halt all enrichment activity, but is divided over what to do if Teheran ignores the ultimatum.

The head of the Revolutionary Guards warned the US on Friday not to attack the Islamic republic, saying American troops in Iraq and the region were "vulnerable".

"You can start a war but it won't be you who finishes it," said General Yahya Rahim Safavi, one of the regime's most powerful figures. "The Americans know that their troops are vulnerable. I would advise them not to commit such a strategic error."

The Pentagon Preps for Iran

William M. Arkin, The Washington Post:

Does the United States have a war plan for stopping Iran in its pursuit of nuclear weapons?

Last week, President Bush dismissed news reports that his administration has been working on contingency plans for war -- particularly talk of the possibility of using tactical nuclear weapons against Tehran -- as "wild speculation." Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld chimed in, calling it "fantasyland." He declared to reporters that "it just isn't useful" to talk about contingency planning.

But the secretary is wrong. READ MORE

It's important to talk about war planning that's real. And it is for Iran. In early 2003, even as U.S. forces were on the brink of war with Iraq, the Army had already begun conducting an analysis for a full-scale war with Iran. The analysis, called TIRANNT, for "theater Iran near term," was coupled with a mock scenario for a Marine Corps invasion and a simulation of the Iranian missile force. U.S. and British planners conducted a Caspian Sea war game around the same time. And Bush directed the U.S. Strategic Command to draw up a global strike war plan for an attack against Iranian weapons of mass de struction. All of this will ultimately feed into a new war plan for "major combat operations" against Iran that military sources confirm now exists in draft form.

None of this activity has been disclosed by the U.S. military, and when I wrote about Iran contingency planning last week on The Washington Post Web site, the Pentagon stuck to its dogged position that "we don't discuss war plans." But it should.

The diplomatic effort directed at Iran would be mightily enhanced if that country understood that the United States is so serious about deterring the Iranian quest for nuclear weapons that it would be willing to go to war to stop that quest from reaching fruition.

Iran needs to know -- and even more important, the American public needs to know -- that no matter how many experts talk about difficult-to-find targets or the catastrophe that could unfold if war comes, military planners are already working hard to minimize the risks of any military operation. This is the very essence of contingency planning.

I've been tracking U.S. war planning, maintaining friends and contacts in that closed world, for more than 20 years. My one regret in writing about this secret subject, especially because the government always claims that revealing anything could harm U.S. forces, is not delving deeply enough into the details of the war plan for Iraq. Now, with Iran, it's once again difficult but essential to piece together the facts.

Here's what we know now. Under TIRANNT, Army and U.S. Central Command planners have been examining both near-term and out-year scenarios for war with Iran, including all aspects of a major combat operation, from mobilization and deployment of forces through postwar stability operations after regime change.

The core TIRANNT effort began in May 2003, when modelers and intelligence specialists pulled together the data needed for theater-level (meaning large-scale) scenario analysis for Iran. TIRANNT has since been updated using post-Iraq war information on the performance of U.S. forces. Meanwhile, Air Force planners have modeled attacks against existing Iranian air defenses and targets, while Navy planners have evaluated coastal defenses and drawn up scenarios for keeping control of the Strait of Hormuz at the base of the Persian Gulf.

A follow-on TIRANNT Campaign Analysis, which began in October 2003, calculated the results of different scenarios for action against Iran to provide options for analyzing courses of action in an updated Iran war plan. According to military sources close to the planning process, this task was given to Army Gen. John P. Abizaid, now commander of CENTCOM, in 2002.

The Marines, meanwhile, have not only been involved in CENTCOM's war planning, but have been focused on their own specialty, "forcible entry." In April 2003, the Corps published its "Concept of Operations" for a maneuver against a mock country that explores the possibility of moving forces from ship to shore against a determined enemy without establishing a beachhead first. Though the Marine Corps enemy is described only as a deeply religious revolutionary country named Karona, it is -- with its Revolutionary Guards, WMD and oil wealth -- unmistakably meant to be Iran.

Various scenarios involving Iran's missile force have also been examined in another study, initiated in 2004 and known as BMD-I (ballistic missile defense -- Iran). In this study, the Center for Army Analysis modeled the performance of U.S. and Iranian weapons systems to determine the number of Iranian missiles expected to leak through a coalition defense.

The day-to-day planning for dealing with Iran's missile force falls to the U.S. Strategic Command in Omaha. In June 2004, Rumsfeld alerted the command to be prepared to implement CONPLAN 8022, a global strike plan that includes Iran. CONPLAN 8022 calls for bombers and missiles to be able to act within 12 hours of a presidential order. The new task force, sources have told me, mostly worries that if it were called upon to deliver "prompt" global strikes against certain targets in Iran under some emergency circumstances, the president might have to be told that the only option is a nuclear one.

Contingency planning for a bolt-out-of-the-blue attack, let alone full-fledged war, against Iran may seem incredible right now. But in the secretive world of military commands and war planners, it is an everyday and unfortunate reality. Iran needs to understand that the United States isn't hamstrung by a lack of options. It needs to realize that it can't just stonewall and evade its international obligations, that it can't burrow further underground in hopes that it will "win" merely because war is messy.

On the surface, Iran controls the two basic triggers that could set off U.S. military action. The first would be its acquisition of nuclear capability in defiance of the international community. Despite last week's bluster from Tehran, the country is still years away from a nuclear weapon, let alone a workable one. We may have a global strike war plan oriented toward attacking countries with weapons of mass destruction, but that plan is also focused on North Korea, China and presumably Russia. The Bush administration is not going to wait for a nuclear attack. The United States is now a first-strike nation.

The second trigger would be Iran's lashing out militarily (or through proxy terrorism) at the United States or its allies, or closing the Strait of Hormuz to international oil traffic. Sources say that CENTCOM and the Joint Chiefs of Staff have developed "flexible deterrent options" in case Iran were to take such actions.

One might ask how these options could have any deterrent effect when the government won't talk about them. This is another reason why Rumsfeld should acknowledge that the United States is preparing war plans for Iran -- and that this is not just routine. It is specifically a response to that country's illegal pursuit of nuclear weapons, its meddling in Iraq and its support for international terrorism.

Iran needs to know that the administration is dead serious. But we all need to know that even absent an Iranian nuke or an Iranian attack of any kind, there is still another catastrophic scenario that could lead to war.

In a world of ready war plans and post-9/11 jitters, there is an ever greater demand for intelligence on the enemy. That means ever greater risks taken in collecting that intelligence. Meanwhile, war plans demand that forces be ready in certain places and on alert, while the potential for WMD necessitates shorter and shorter lead times for strikes against an enemy. So the greater danger now is of an inadvertent conflict, caused by something like the shooting down of a U.S. spy plane, by the capturing of a Special Operations or CIA team, or by nervous U.S. and Iranian forces coming into contact and starting to shoot at one another.

The war planning process is hardly neutral. It has subtle effects. As militaries stage mock attacks, potential adversaries become presumed enemies. Over time, contingency planning transforms yesterday's question marks into today's seeming certainty.

warkin@igc.org

William M. Arkin writes the Early Warning blog for washingtonpost.com and is the author of "Code Names: Deciphering U.S. Military Plans, Programs and Operations in the 9/11 World" (Steerforth Press).

U.S. strike on Iran could make Iraq look like a warm-up bout

Tim Harper, Toronto Star:

Poison-laced missiles raining down on U.S. troops in Iraq or Afghanistan, the downing of a U.S. passenger airliner, suicide bombers in major cities, perhaps unleashing their deadly payload in a shopping mall food court. It could be 9/11 all over again. Or worse.

On the political front, more anti-Americanism.

Renewed venom aimed at Washington from European capitals, greater distrust from China and Russia, outright hatred in the Arab and Muslim world. Oil prices spiralling out of control, a global recession at hand.

In Iran, a galvanizing of a splintered nation. An end to hopes for political reform, a rally-around-the-leader phenomenon common among the victimized, an ability to rebuild a nuclear program in two to four years.

These are the potential costs of a U.S. military strike in Iran. READ MORE

"It would be Iran's Pearl Harbor and it will be the beginning of a war, not the end of a war. It will set back American strategic interests for a generation," says Joseph Cirincione, the director for non-proliferation at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

"The war will take place at a time and location of Iran's choosing. It will make Iraq look like a preliminary bout."

But the cost of inaction could be even higher: a defiant nation with an apparently unstable leadership steeped in hatred for Americans in the heart of the Middle East with nuclear capabilities.

With Tehran ignoring both threats and cajoling from the international community and declaring itself — prematurely — part of the world's "nuclear club" this week, talk of the Washington stick moved to the forefront, while the carrot, now discredited, was pushed off centre stage.

While the week began with the White House trying to tamp down speculation about military strikes in Iran, reported by The Washington Post and by journalist Seymour Hersh in The New Yorker, it was becoming clear the Bush administration was growing impatient with a diplomatic effort that is not working with Tehran.

It may have also welcomed talk of potential military strikes, even if it would be extremely reluctant to use them, simply to remind some recalcitrant United Nations members such as China and Russia that diplomacy does have an end date.

The bluntest assessment of diplomatic success came from Karl Rove, U.S. President George W. Bush's political adviser and deputy chief of staff, who told a Houston audience Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was "not a rational human being."

"We are engaged in a diplomatic process with our European partners and the United Nations to keep (Iran) from developing such a weapon," Rove said. "It's going to be tough because they are led by ideologues who have a weird sense of history."

Ahmadinejad announced this week that Iran had taken its nuclear enrichment program to new levels. Before he did so, he dismissed any influence of the United Nations, according to state media. "They know they cannot do a damned thing," he said.

The Iranian government has stated it will construct 3,000 centrifuges at a facility in Natanz and would eventually expand that to 54,000 centrifuges, which spin uranium into fuel rich enough to produce atom bombs. Estimates of their capability date range from 2010 to 2020.

Bush has been clear he wants to stop Tehran from acquiring even the knowledge needed to build nuclear weapons, and last month he vowed U.S. military might could be used to protect staunch allies such as Israel.

But, earlier this week, Bush called reports of potential military strikes on Iran "wild speculation." British Foreign Minister Jack Straw said the stories were "completely nuts."

U.S. Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld weighed in, saying he wouldn't address things from "fantasy land," but then added: "The last thing I'm going to do is to start telling you or anyone else in the press or the world at what point we refresh a plan or don't refresh a plan, and why. It just isn't useful."

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice sternly called for action at the UN, but didn't say what it could be, leaving her spokesman sputtering about "re-underlining" the call for Iran to suspend its enrichment program and vowing this time the Security Council will do more than just release a statement.

"This is not a question of Iran's right to civil nuclear power," Rice said. "This is a question that the world does not believe that Iran should have the capability and the technology that could lead to a nuclear weapon.

"When the Security Council reconvenes, it will be time for action."

The timing of military strikes is now being openly debated in Washington.

Cirincione says he believes there will be secret strikes announced by Bush after they happen. But first, he says, Bush should be expected to go to the U.S. Congress for authorization before mid-term elections in November, while Republicans still control the House of Representatives and the Senate.

Approval before the elections, the strike after the elections, because the almost certain spike in U.S. gas prices following such action will blunt any rally-round-the-flag effect at election time, he says. John Pike, a military analyst at globalsecurity.org, predicts strikes in the summer of 2007, safely away from the presidential election the next year. He argues, as many do, that Bush already has congressional approval and needs not go back to lawmakers. "It will be a surprise," he says. "There's nothing like dropping bombs on evil-doers to give Republicans some political updraft."

Pike argues that, despite all the breast-beating in Congress about misuse of a resolution that got the country into war in Iraq and all the sound and fury about clandestine surveillance in this country, nothing has been done to strip Bush of any power when it comes to war. "He will be looking at atomic ayatollahs. There will be some real downsides (to military action) and there will be efforts to redouble diplomatic moves, but in Tehran, the U.S. is equated with Satan.

"What kind of diplomatic solution do they believe they can get from Satan?"

Other analysts have been blunt in their assessment of the cost to the United States.

"The most dangerous delusion is that a conflict would be either small or quick," says Richard Haass, the president of the non-partisan Council on Foreign Relations.

Haass, who until July 2003 was a principal adviser to former secretary of state Colin Powell, says destroying Iran's nuclear capacity would require numerous cruise missiles and aircraft.

"Iran would be sure to retaliate, using terrorist groups such as Hezbollah and Hamas and attacking U.S. and British forces and interests in Iraq and Afghanistan," he said in a written analysis this week. "This would require the U.S. to respond militarily against a larger set of targets inside Iran. What would begin as a limited strike would not remain limited for long."

Haass also warned that such a strike would likely push oil prices above $100 (U.S.) per barrel, setting off an economic chain reaction that could lead to global recession. He predicts a certain increase in anti-Americanism in Europe, further rage against the U.S. in the Arab and Muslim world, and a questioning of U.S. ties in Russia and China.

Ken Pollack of the more liberal Brookings Institution argues for sanctions restricting investment in Tehran.

"The world community should force Iranians to have an internal debate — do they want their nuclear program more than a healthy economy?" he told a recent forum.

But Pollack adds a sobering point. If the administration truly believes it cannot live in a world in which Iran has nuclear weapons, the military option may be the only way to prevent that.

But it would be seen as an unprovoked attack on a country that has attacked no one. It would be likened to Osama bin Laden's attack on the U.S., Pollack said, reminding his audience how the United States responded to that.

Reprimanding Jame-e Rohaniyat

Hossein Bastani, Rooz Online:

The meeting that Jame Rohaniyate Mobarez [Association of Combatant Clergy] - the most important political organization of the conservative clerics in Iran - had with ayatollah Khamenei, the leader of the Islamic regime, led to an important event that was not picked up by the press. During the meeting, ayatollah Khamenei criticized the members of the Association in an unprecedented manner and scolded them for not supporting the president. According to news reports, the criticism was so unexpected by the members of the Association that some of them expressed their dissatisfaction with the meeting just as they were leaving the assembly.

Following this meeting, the minister of the interior of Ahmadinejad’s cabinet made a trip to Qom and met the most important ideological cleric grouping there, i.e. Jame Modaresin Hoze Elmie Qom (Qom Seminary Teachers Association) and invited them to be more supportive of the executive branch. But during that meeting members of the Teachers Association criticized the government’s unplanned policies and behavior, leading to strong arguments during the meeting.

In addition to these two events, Ali Akbar Nategh Nouri who is a senior member of the conservative Combatant Clergy and was their presidential candidate almost 9 years ago, publicly criticized the president and called his plans and ideas in running the country as “illusionary”. This led to counter-attacks by supporters of the president and Aref news website even made accusations about Nouri’s wealth.

These criticisms are indicative of the diminishing role of the traditional clerics in Islamic regime. READ MORE

This process began with the end of the last presidential elections last year which brought in the new president through the support of the military. This process and struggle intensified when about two months ago Khamenei threw in his support for the hardline president and called on others to absolutely support him as well. It appears that the intensification of this struggle lies in the developments of Iran’s nuclear issue. So it appears that the nuclear issue has not only drastically changed Iran’s relations with the world, but has even imposed fundamental changes internally.

Senior Iranian leaders seem to have concluded that only the military-security circles close to the president have the capability to save the Islamic regime. These circles believe in creating terror as deterrence vis-à-vis the threats they perceive against the regime, even at a time when its conservative diplomats are scheduled to talk to the US, and thus promote joining the nuclear club.

In this atmosphere, the non-military-security political institutions of the conservative camp lose their impact at the expense of the former, and include even the conservative clerics.

While these new developments may not lead to immediate crises, but the growing energy caused displeasure of the conservative camp will be unleashed when the regime may be forced to make serious concessions and turn-abouts in its nuclear policy. At that point, the regime will need to create some kind of consensus among its leading factions, particularly among the conservatists. But the rapidly widening gap among them makes the possibility of such a unity very distant. This signals the inevitability of the crisis that may follow the changes that could come regarding the nuclear issue.

Hossein Bastani is the former Secretary General of the Association of Iranian Journalists who now lives in exile.

Not all in Iran Back President's Rhetoric

Ali Akbar Dareini, SeattlePI:

Iran's success in producing enriched uranium for the first time may have increased national pride, but hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is annoying predecessors by claiming the achievement in his name alone.

And others, including some among the president's supporters, worry his tough rhetoric is intensifying international anxiety over the nuclear program and worsening the country's isolation. READ MORE

On Tuesday, Ahmadinejad announced that Iran successfully enriched uranium using 164 centrifuges, a significant step toward the large-scale production of a material that can be used to fuel nuclear reactors for generating electricity - or to build atomic bombs.

Iran insists it is interested only in the peaceful use of nuclear power, but the United States and others suspect the regime wants to develop weapons and are demanding a halt to enrichment activities.

Since his announcement, Ahmadinejad has been even more defiant in defending his country's decision to press ahead with its nuclear program over the U.N. Security Council's objections.

Ahmadinejad rebuffed a request Thursday by Mohamed ElBaradei, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, that Iran suspend uranium enrichment, saying Tehran will not retreat "one iota."

To those upset by that stance, he said, "Be angry at us and die of this anger."

A day later, he turned up the heat in anti-Israel rhetoric that has brought international condemnation, calling the Jewish state a "rotten, dried tree" that will be annihilated by "one storm." He previously angered many world leaders by calling for Israel to be wiped off the map.

Such talk has some in this conservative Islamic nation concerned.

"The more Ahmadinejad confronts the international community, the more power he may show to his public in the short term but deny Iran a good life among world nations in the long term," said Hossein Salimi, a professor of international relations in Tehran.

For now, it's a minority opinion. The president's tough talk resounds with many Iranians.

"Ahmadinejad is a source of pride for resisting the U.S. and defending Iran's nuclear rights," said Ali Mahmoudi, a regular attendee of Friday prayers in this strongly religious nation.

Still, the president may have alienated potential allies with this enrichment announcement because he didn't cite former Iranian leaders or thank them for their efforts in the program.

"Ahmadinejad spoke as if production of enriched uranium was his work. He didn't mention that it was the outcome of more than two decades of clandestine work by previous governments," said political analyst Saeed Leilaz.

In an apparent show of displeasure, ex-president Hashemi Rafsanjani tried to take some of the glory from Ahmadinejad by announcing the enrichment step several hours ahead of time.

Reformist Mohammad Khatami, who preceded Ahmadinejad as president, publicly reminded Iranians that the nuclear achievement was "the outcome of efforts by competent Iranian scientists, a process that had begun by previous governments."

Even some of Ahmadinejad's supporters are starting to question his tactics.

"Ahmadinejad has forgotten why he won the presidential vote. The needy voted for him because he promised to bring bread to people's homes but nothing good has been done to improve living standards," said Reza Lotfi, a student at Tehran University.

Mansour Ramezanpour, a construction worker, questioned why the government hasn't done more for the weak economy.

"Previously, I went to work four days a week. Now, not more than two days. Recession is everywhere," he said.

But Ahmadinejad appears determined to make the most of the nuclear card to bolster his standing among his people. It was no coincidence that he announced Iran had enriched uranium on April 9 - the date that the United States severed ties with Iran in 1980.

He and other top leaders see the nuclear program as a level to get the United States to recognize Iran as a "big, regional power" and deal with it on that basis.

"The key problem between Iran and the U.S. is that Washington treats Iran as a non-grownup person. The Iranian leadership is very unhappy with this. Tehran wants America to treat Iran as a regional superpower," Leilaz said.

On Wednesday, Ahmadinejad sent a clear message that Iran expected to be treated as a peer.

"Today, our situation has changed completely. We are a nuclear country and speak to others from the position of a nuclear country," he said.

Iran's Next Nuclear Choices

Roxana Saberi, BBC News:

Iran's announcement this week that it had made nuclear fuel, followed by the inconclusive visit to Tehran by the chief of the UN's nuclear watchdog, has left observers wondering what Iran will do next. In general, they believe Iran will now follow one of two paths: either it will take a tougher stance on its nuclear programme, or it will become more willing to compromise. READ MORE

Statements made by many Iranian lawmakers and officials since Tuesday's announcement seem to support the first view.

Iran's top nuclear negotiator has said the UN Security Council's call for Iran to return to a freeze on its uranium enrichment work "was not very important".

Hamidreza Babaei, a member of the National Security and Foreign Affairs Commission in Iran's parliament, said Iran would not re-suspend its uranium enrichment work.

"Suspension doesn't have a meaning in our opinion," he said. "Suspension means regression."

'Turning point'

Tehran says it wants to enrich uranium to a low level to power nuclear reactors and not to a high level, which would be needed to develop nuclear weapons.

Iran has said it enriched uranium to 3.5% as part of its pilot enrichment programme.

Mohamed ElBaradei, the director of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), said after talks with Iranian officials on Thursday that his agency was studying samples to confirm Iran's announcement.

But while many Iranian leaders have sounded defiant, some observers believe Iran may be more prepared to suspend its industrial-scale uranium enrichment programme now that it has announced it has the ability to make nuclear fuel.

"On the one hand Iran can persuade [domestic] public opinion that it has gained nuclear technology," said Rahman Ghahremanpour, a political analyst in Tehran.

"On the other hand, the world knows Iran's capability is not too dangerous, and it's in the low-scale and not high-scale enrichment.

"Because of this I think we may see a turning point in solving the Iranian problem," he said.

"Iran may accept a [temporary] halt of its work toward industrial-level enrichment and accept having a limited pilot enrichment programme."

'Generous offer'

Mr Babaei, however, dismissed this theory.

"The Islamic Republic is neither trying to brag to the world nor is it trying to deal politically with its people and say, 'well, we arrived at this point so now we'll suspend [uranium enrichment work]'," he said.

"Iran is pursuing the third path, which is what both our people and our leaders want.

"We want, without creating tensions or threats, to defend our national interest - which is to have the nuclear fuel cycle in our country for production of fuel for our reactors."

Aliasghar Soltanieh, Iran's ambassador to the IAEA in Vienna, has said his country offered last March to temporarily suspend large-scale enrichment, but that the proposal was rebuffed.

"We were able to [offer a] compromise to suspend large-scale enrichment and discuss ways and means to assure there won't be any ambiguities left and that this will be for peaceful purposes," he said in a telephone interview late last month.

"We gave a generous offer that gave a lot of compromise, provided this issue was not sent to the UN Security Council - but this historical opportunity was not taken into consideration by our European colleagues."

When asked if Iran would consider making the same offer again, he replied: "To the best of my knowledge, it won't be possible."

Dialogue

But some observers and Western diplomats say even if Iran were now to agree to temporarily suspend its plans for industrial-scale uranium enrichment, the country would never agree to demands to halt all enrichment work.

And Iranian leaders may have concluded that any compromise would need to be reached through a dialogue with the US, according to analyst Mr Ghahremanpour.

"Iranian power elites have accepted that any confrontation between Iran and the US is not beneficial for Iran," he said.

"They probably believe the future way will be determined by US-Iran negotiations, and they hope they can solve the problems with negotiations with the US."

A compromise over Iran's nuclear programme would also depend on the response from Washington.

Some observers believe while certain players in the Bush administration want to reach a nuclear deal with Tehran, others welcome Iran's tough stance as a justification for pursuing regime change.