And why not? They have the right to develop Nuclear energy just like everyone else does.
Bush had such hypocrisy attacking Iran for refusing to comply with UN resolutions on the development of its nuclear program while never mentioning Israel already has nuclear weapons and refuses to bring them under international control or scrutiny.
US officials are considering whether to accept Iran’s pursuit of uranium enrichment, which has been outlawed by the United Nations and remains at the heart of fears that Iran is seeking nuclear weapons capability.
As part of a policy review commissioned by President Barack Obama, diplomats are discussing whether the US will eventually have to accept Iran’s insistence on carrying out the process, which can produce both nuclear fuel and weapons- grade material.
“There’s a fundamental impasse between the western demand for no enrichment and the Iranian demand to continue enrichment,” says Mark Fitzpatrick, a former state department expert now at the International Institute for Strategic Studies. “There’s no obvious compromise between those two positions.”
The US has insisted that Iran stop enrichment, although Mr Fitzpatrick notes that international offers put to Tehran during George W. Bush’s second term as president left the door open to the possible resumption of enrichment.
“There is a growing recognition in [Washington] that the zero [enrichment] solution, though still favoured, simply is unfeasible,” says Trita Parsi, president of the National Iranian American Council. “The US may still have zero as its opening position, while recognising it may not be where things stand at the end of a potential agreement.”
Yesterday, Mr Obama summarised the US message to Iran as, “Don’t develop a nuclear weapon” – a form of words that would not rule out a deal accepting Iranian enrichment. Mr Bush was much more specific in calling Iran to halt enrichment.
Asked last month whether the administration was considering allowing Iran to keep a limited enrichment capability, Robert Wood, a state department spokesman, said: “I don’t know . . . Let’s let the review be completed and then we can spell out our policies.”
Some analysts say priority should be given to winning greater access for UN inspectors, to acquire more information about Iran’s enrichment plant in Natanz and fill in gaps in knowledge on Iran’s nuclear-related activities across the country. That could provide warning of any move to enrich uranium to weapons grade levels at Natanz and ease fears of clandestine facilities.
Privately both US and Israeli officials say that even the current, more limited inspection regime at Natanz would provide sufficient warning of any “breakout” towards a nuclear bomb. Outside Natanz, by contrast, information on Iran’s programme is diminishing.
The US line that Iran is seeking the capability to develop nuclear weapons – but not necessarily such weapons themselves – contrasts with Mr Bush’s insistence while in office that it sought nuclear weapons.
Iranian regime insiders have said they would expect a compromise by the US on enrichment to be reciprocated.