Russia's readiness to build up to half a dozen nuclear reactors in Iran has alarmed Israel and the United States, but they are unlikely to opt for a military response soon, Israeli analysts say.

Tehran says the planned reactors are for peaceful purposes only, but Washington, which has dubbed Iran part of an "axis of evil", is not convinced, and still less so is Israel, which would be the obvious potential target if Iran acquired nuclear weapons capability.

Their concerns over Russia's decision to build up to six reactors in Iran and its involvement in the construction of the Bushehr nuclear plant have led to speculation of a pre-emptive strike on the Iranian Gulf coast facility.

But experts say that is improbable for now given logistical difficulties, Washington's more immediate concern with a possible strike on Iraq and doubts over Tehran's actual nuclear capability.

For the time being anyway, they say, the preferred option is to go on pressuring Russia to stop supplying technology.

"The assumption is that it will be complicated to act so the emphasis is on trying to prevent the flow of technology from Russia reaching Iran," said Israeli strategist Gerald Steinberg.

The United States has declared its intention to pre-empt threats to its national security, which US and Israeli intelligence suggest may be jeopardised by the Bushehr plant despite Tehran's and Moscow's pledges it is to be used for peaceful purposes.

In 1981, Israeli warplanes wiped out Iraq's French-built nuclear facility near Baghdad in an attack Israel said was aimed at stopping Iraq from making atomic bombs.

The Bushehr light-water reactor could not by itself make a nuclear bomb, security sources say. But it will use technology crucial for enriching fuel needed for nuclear weapons that the experts say Tehran could construct within 10 years.

Those worries are more likely to lead to diplomatic pressure on Moscow rather than a military offensive that could complicate an attack on Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, analysts said.

US President George W. Bush has vowed to use "all tools" to oust Saddam, and commentators say the expected US onslaught on Baghdad will come before a strike against the Iranian plant that intelligence suggests could function within a few years.

"Israel and the United States are waiting to see what happens," said Efraim Kam, an Israeli intelligence and security expert specialising in Iran's strategic threat to Israel.

"The prevailing view is that while Iran is in quite good nuclear shape, it has not passed the point of no return with its projects and still could be stopped by halting the transfer of techology from Russia," he said.

That could be hard, analysts predicted, given the lucrative financial gains for Moscow from building the reactors, expanding conventional power stations and developing oil and gas deposits.

A Russian government resolution last week approved the plans and also gave the nod to jointly producing aircraft and cooperating in communications and metallurgy - infuriating Washington.

Uncertainty as to when the Bushehr plant will have full nuclear capability is one reason why experts say Washington is in no hurry to act, and why Israel is not likely to deploy its warplanes as it did 21 years ago against Iraq's facility.

"At the moment its just speculation what Iran has," said Shlomo Aronson, author of The Politics and Strategy of Nuclear Weapons in the Middle East. He said a strike would also pose logistical challenges not present in 1981.

"Israel could at that time overfly Saudi Arabia and Jordan and reach Iraq. But to reach Iran it needs to pass over Iraq. It also has to contemplate Iran's response that could be aimed at Israel's nuclear facility which wasn't operational then."

At the same time, Iran appears to have learnt from Israel's 1981 Iraq strike by dispersing and fortifying strategic sites.

Experts said predictions of internal political change that could direct Iraq away from Islamic fundamentalism meant Washington was most likely to seek Russian compliance to stop construction rather than confront Teheran militarily.

"We may even see the opening of a political track where Israel no longer has a monopoly over strategic deterrence and may have to open dialogue with Iran," Steinberg said.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.