From every conceivable viewpoint except Tehran's, the International Atomic Energy Agency is no closer to defusing the crisis over Iran's continued enrichment of uranium. President Obama's deadline has come and gone. The offer to process the majority of Iran's enriched uranium in Russia and France is still on the table, but as Iran does not trust a US-backed process to deliver the reactor fuel it says it needs, it has begun its own production of 20% enriched uranium. This takes it closer to becoming a nuclear break-out state, capable of producing a bomb. The Senate Armed Services Committee heard on Wednesday that Iran could produce enough fuel for one bomb in a year, but would need from two to five years to manufacture a workable warhead.
The US is lumbering towards a new round of sanctions, but with China's concerns about its future supplies of oil and Shanghai-based companies fulfilling Pakistan's former role as a supplier of dual-use equipment, it is doubtful how effective sanctions will be. President Hu Jintao said this week he would join negotiations over sanctions, but he did not say he would back them. There is only one sign of progress. Each time US generals talk about the military option, which Israel has pushed for, they are more dismissive of it. And if Centcom really believes that enduring hostilities between Israel and its neighbours represent "distinct challenges" to the US ability to advance its interests in the Middle East, how much truer would that proposition be if you are a US soldier in southern Iraq or Afghanistan, in the aftermath of a strike by Israeli jets on Iran's nuclear facilities? The crack that has begun to open between Israel and Washington on the stalled peace process would overnight become a canyon.
Two analysts at the Federation of American Scientists (FAS) have argued that the international community should accept Iran's current counter-offer, which is to have the fuel swap (low-enriched uranium for fuel elements) but keep it on Iranian soil. Ivanka Barzashka and Ivan Oelrich say that in haggling over details we are losing sight of the goal, which would be to make it more difficult, not easier, for Iran to build a nuclear weapon. The breakthrough was Iran's agreement to a fuel swap, not where it should happen. Agreeing to a fuel swap on Iranian soil would be a way of stopping the Iranian nuclear countdown, provided it stopped production of 20% uranium. And if it didn't, it would be more evidence both of Mr Obama's commitment, and of Iran's real intentions. Both would be useful in persuading China and Russia.
There are both political and technical problems with this approach. It would be another concession, another "final" offer, which might well induce Iran to think it could extract more – such as allowing its fuel to be handed over in batches rather than in one go. There would be contingent problems over timing and transparency. However, the longer the current impasse continues, the more it plays into the hands of those who push for extreme solutions. The US and Iran are currently engaged in an international beauty contest. After Mr Obama's attempts to close down the channels of nuclear proliferation, Iran is to host its own conference on nuclear disarmament, entitled "Nuclear energy for everyone, nuclear arms for no one". China, Russia, Syria, Cuba, Venezuela, Oman and Turkmenistan have already confirmed their participation, but it should be interesting to see at what level. The proof of US attempts to isolate Iran should come at the review conference of the non-proliferation treaty next month.
We are back to a familiar game of diplomatic brinkmanship, but one cannot help thinking that if sanity were to break out it would be in a form not too far away from the FAS's version. The gaps are bridgeable. There is, unfortunately, much that could happen in the Middle East to derail that outcome.