MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti political commentator Pyotr Goncharov)
The conclusions made by Washington's leading analytical centers on Iran's nuclear program have come as a big surprise. It appears that Iran is much closer to the development of nuclear weapons than was previously believed.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) may report in half a year that Iran has enough uranium for a nuclear bomb. A recent report by IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei suggests that this is not unlikely.
This news has split American experts into pessimists and relative optimists. The former believe that nothing can stop Iran from becoming a nuclear power. The latter are hoping to prevent this with diplomatic efforts.
Former U.S. envoy to the United Nations John Bolton is a pessimist. He thinks that both George W. Bush and Barack Obama said many times that a nuclear Iran was unacceptable for the United States but that neither of them backed this position with any action. Israel, the main opponent of Iran's full nuclear cycle, is not likely to deal a strike at its nuclear facilities, even less so until January 20 when Obama assumes office.
Optimists proceed from the premise that Iran's nuclear ambitions are limited to the desire to dominate the region. For this reason, it is possible to agree with Iran on the limits of its influence in the Gulf. Talks with Iran should cover four subjects: resumption of diplomatic relations, its nuclear program, regional security, and an Arab-Israeli settlement.
Moscow urged Washington to do exactly this before Iran launched its first nuclear enrichment centrifuge. Now it has from 4,000 to 6,000 of them.
Time has been wasted. Even if Obama starts direct talks, this does not guarantee that Iran will agree to stop nuclear enrichment.
Bolton said that negotiators with Iran should have opted for tough economic sanctions, up to its economic isolation in order to make it stop uranium enrichment. He may be right. After all, nuclear non-proliferation was at stake. Now it only remains for us to wonder what other countries will declare rights to a full nuclear cycle for "peaceful purposes" and go nuclear - Saudi Arabia, Egypt or Turkey?
The president-elect has been offered two scenarios for resolving the Iranian problem. The first one provides for talks from the position of strength, up to a military operation. The second one is limited to strictly diplomatic efforts, and includes recognition of Iran's regional leadership.
Will Obama gain the time wasted by his predecessor in following the second option? If not, will he have the resolve to choose the first one?
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
