Decision time on Iran

According to a report by the International Atomic Energy agency, the UN's nuclear agency, Iran has stockpiled enough enriched uranium to make one nuclear bomb. The UN report said that Teheran had accumulated one tonne of low enriched uranium hexafluoride at a facility in Natanz. If such a quantity was further enriched, it could produce more than 20 kg of fissile material which is enough for a nuclear bomb.

"If Iran did decide to build nuclear weapons, it is entering an era in which it could do so quickly," said David Albright, head of the Institute for Science and International Security, a Washington DC-based non-profit, non-partisan institution dedicated to informing the public about science and policy issues affecting international security.

I am sure that Iran will soon become the number one foreign policy priority for the US and for the EU. A nuclear armed Iran, if it does come to that, will radically change the international balance of power and will present a new security challenge not only to Israel but to the West in general. It will also make Iran much more resilient in its foreign policy.

Dealing with the Iranians is obviously very difficult, and so far negotiations and UN sanctions have done nothing to make Teheran change track over its nuclear programme. Realistically speaking, and with hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in power, there is really not much that can be done - on the diplomatic front - to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

It is also true that the fall in the price of oil will make Iran more vulnerable to economic sanctions and that Obama's global popularity will make it easier for America to put together an international coalition to put the squeeze on Iran. However, it is doubtful whether Russia and China are in favour, imposing harsher UN sanctions against Teheran. Also, one wonders if Iran really cares about additional sanctions, as long as they manage to produce nuclear weapons.

Having said that, however, President Barack Obama should continue to engage with Iran, especially in view of June's presidential election in which Ahmadinejad is to be challenged by the moderate former President, Mohammed Khatami. One hopes that Ahmadinejad will be defeated by Khatami - perhaps Obama's offering of an olive branch to Iran will convince voters to back a voice of moderation.

Of course, one cannot build a strategy of dealing with Iran based on a hope that the country's President will be defeated in an election. The international community, led by the US, has to come to terms with the fact that Iran is likely to be able to develop nuclear weapons soon. If diplomacy or sanctions fail to prevent this, there are only two options left: either bomb Iran to destroy its nuclear weapons-making capability or get used to living with a nuclear-armed Iran and rely on deterrence to contain Teheran.

The Israelis will no doubt argue that the only solution is to bomb Iran, especially now that Benjamin Netanyahu is likely to form the next government in Israel. Ahmadinejad's denial of the Holocaust and his assertion that Israel is a "stinking corpse" that should be "wiped off the map" is enough to convince most politicians in Israel that Iran is run by a bunch of crazy fanatics who want to destroy the Jewish state.

The Israelis have a point, naturally, but whether Iran actually wants to use nuclear weapons against Israel - knowing full well that there will be a nuclear response by both Tel Aviv and Washington - or whether it wants these weapons to enhance its status and power in the region - is still not clear.

I would imagine that the latter is the real reason for Iran's perusal of nuclear arms. In such a scenario, Iran would be able to threaten both Israel and the moderate Arab Gulf states with greater confidence and would also continue supporting movements like Hamas and Hizbollah as well as Shi'ite extremists in Iraq with far greater assertion and less fear of reprisals.

The military option against Iran is extremely risky. Is it worth attacking Iran? Will Iran be able to resume its nuclear programme swiftly? There will surely be a massive Iranian reprisal if such an option were to be pursued, the Middle East would be greatly destabilised and the hardline elements in Iran would no doubt be boosted.

It is time for the Obama administration to make one last diplomatic effort at preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons - either now or after June's election - and then it must have a new strategy in place to be able to live with a nuclear-armed Iran, which I believe, will soon become a reality.