'Weak' sanctions may not work

Washington: Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad boasts that world powers are getting weak knees about stopping his country's nuclear programme.

Is the fiery leader right?

The United Nations Security Council is considering a watered-down resolution of sanctions aimed at punishing Iran for pursuing its uranium-enrichment programme, a process that could lead to development of a nuclear weapon.

But with the United States seemingly occupied with Iraq, and with Russia and China still balking at any action that would suggest "humiliation" of a valued trade partner, doubts are rising over how much the Europe-sponsored resolution will be worth.

"Nothing has changed for the better with respect to this resolution and what it says about determination to stop a very dangerous scenario before it gets out of control," says Gal Luft, codirector of the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security in Washington. "The Iranians are moving ahead. The world is acting in ways that reduce the chance of having a real impact on that, and countries in the region are taking note of both."

Indeed, as prospects wane for tough international action against Iran, some countries in the region are expressing alarm at the pace of Tehran's progress toward mastery of the nuclear cycle. And they seem to be saying, "If the international community is not going to do something about it, we will." Such an attitude is raising fears of a Middle East arms race.

Noting that Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries announced over the weekend their interest in developing a cooperative nuclear-energy programme, former Middle East negotiator Dennis Ross said, "Who is that message for? Let me tell you, it's not for Iran. It was for us."

Ambassador Ross, now at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, also said at an event on Tuesday that the Saudis are telling the US, "Stop them, or that [nuclear power] is the way we go, too."

Luft says, "If their neighbour Iran goes nuclear in this climate of deepening Shiite-Sunni divisions, they don't see how they could sit aside and not match it."

Some analysts say the US is so preoccupied with Iraq, and tied up in debate over whether it should engage Iran in diplomatic efforts to stabilise Iraq, that it has weakened its determination to stop a nuclear-armed Iran from emerging.

Others note that while the US goes along with diplomatic efforts to curtail Iran's nuclear progress, Bush continues to insist that "no options are off the table" in terms of guaranteeing that Iran never develops the bomb. They speculate that if Iran continues its nuclear march, the US could take military action to at least seriously damage its programme before the end of Bush's term, claiming it had favoured diplomatic action until the risk dictated another course.

Luft adds that the Gulf countries are not talking about a nuclear programme for energy reasons, but with security in mind. "If you sit on top of the world's biggest pile of oil and gas, the last thing you need is nuclear energy," he says. "They would be doing this for security interests, not for energy."