George W. Bush's stand on Iran has thrown a real challenge to hiswell-wishers who may now wonder whether he is a statesman of some import and historical significance or a half-witted simpleton bogged down by an authority whose magnitude he is unable to understand and exploit.

He started off with the 'axis of evil' mantra putting Iraq and North Korea along with Iran then trailed off to spew out a 'regime change' thriller on Iran. With the attack on Afghanistan and Iraq came the hymn bedevilling Iran for supporting 'terrorism' and then for the last couple of years the whole world is ensnarled in the propaganda against Iran for clandestinely making the 'nuclear-Islamic-bomb;' leaving Bush to suffer from lack of sleep.

What is he to get from a peaceful nation of 60 million people so far off from the US shores? He is talking everything except oil.

Iran's stand on its nuclear programme has been consistent and quite in line with the NPT that Iran had signed in 1970. In the beginning of this year on January 28, Iran's top nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani, talking to BBC said that his country was ready to compromise over its nuclear programme.

He said that Iran was willing to discuss concerns about an alleged weapons programme and offer guarantees. Mr. Mr Larijani made it abundantly clear that there were no chances that Iran would suspend uranium enrichment.

He said, 'They should not ask a brave nation with very good scientists not to engage in nuclear research.' However, he called for the resumption of talks in search for a compromise. He said, 'If they want guarantees of no diversion of nuclear fuel we can reach a formula acceptable to both sides in talks.'

However, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice riding her high horses said there was 'not much to talk about.' Completely ignoring Iran's persistent claims that its nuclear programme is peaceful and energy oriented, she said, 'Iran must not be allowed to get a nuclear weapon. It must not be allowed to pursue activities that might lead to a nuclear weapon and on that we are fully united.'

The scary side of the US diplomacy on the nuclear issue is that despite the time lapse it has not changed its position on Iran a bit despite having no tangible proof to support its over a dozen claims on militarisation of Iran’s nuclear programme.

Last months two revelations have put the US stand on Iran in perspective and proved it wrong and in fact even mischievous. Vilmos Cserveny, a senior director at the International Atomic Energy Agency, in a recent letter addressed to the chairman of the US House of Representatives’ Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, has described the committee’s claim that the Iranians were trying to acquire nuclear-weapons capability as ‘outrageous and dishonest’.

The letter, which was widely reported in the US media recently, complained to Rep. Peter Hoekstra that the report by his committee had given ‘incorrect and misleading’ information to the IAEA to try to mislead it.

The committee report had stated that IAEA director-general Mohamed ElBaradei removed a senior inspector ‘for concluding that the purpose of Iran’s nuclear programme is to construct weapons’; in reality, Mr Cserveny pointed out, it was Iran, not Mr ElBaradei, who had asked for the inspector to be replaced, pertaining to a right Tehran enjoys under agreements ‘governing countries’ relationships with the IAEA.’

Another report by the Senate Intelligence Committee brings out more
information on Iraq. The document said the CIA had learned in late 2002 from a top-level Iraqi contact, then foreign minister Naji Sabri, that ‘Iraq has no past, current, or anticipated future contact with Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda’ and ‘bin Laden was in fact a long-time enemy of Iraq’.
 
Mr Bush and his acolytes are busy cooking stories to hoodwink the  world  community to advance their own agenda under the influence of thediabolical fanatic Zionist lobby in Washington. The sheer strength of Iran’s argument and honesty of purpose can defeat these liars to bring peace, stability and security to the Gulf region as well as the world along with a just international order as a by product of a principled stand.
 
One wonders why Iran cannot be allowed to enrich uranium to fuel its nuclear energy plants in the presence of tangible, verifiable and trusty supervision of the nuclear watchdog IAEA with such huge technolo-gical paraphernalia at its disposal to do the job to everyone’s satisfac-tion: mistrust defies all logic.

If America does not have confidence in Iran to allow it to exploit  enrichment  technology to make fuel for its energy producing nuclear reactors, then on the same logic, how can Iran trust America and its stooges for the fuel: Iran has to follow a policy of self reliance. Inquisition of Mr. Bush cannot make Iran unlearn the nuclear full cycle, an achievement that the Iranian nation has gained through huge sacrifices and labour of its scientists.

It seems quite wishful thinking to expect Iran to shut down the nuclear process entirely after achieving a significant advance at the research and development level. Why cannot the West live with it? There is absolutely no immediate danger of Iran going for a nuclear weapon so soon. The level of enrichment needed for nuclear bombs is far higher than the 3.5 per cent that Iran has achieved.

Experts say it would take Iran a decade to produce enough highly enriched  uranium for one bomb from its current centrifuges that too if it enhances the enrichment level to six per cent or beyond which is impossible to go unnoticed with the current IAEA inspection arrangement.

Although the Nantanz enrichment facility has a capacity for 54,000 centrifuges, Iran has installed 3,000 centrifuges for research and development  purposes to alleviate West’s unfounded suspicion. Europe will naturally come to terms with the hugely cultured and peaceful Iranian nation very soon; it needs to get rid of its US blinders.