By John J. Metzler

UNITED NATIONS ― The Obama administration's ongoing efforts to get yet another Iran sanctions package through the U.N. Security Council faces an uphill battle.

While key countries such as Britain, France and possibly now Russia are supporting U.S. calls for a stronger economic embargo on the Islamic Republic for its nuclear proliferation activities, the People's Republic of China still stands firm with Teheran thus guaranteeing that its veto may make the draft resolution stillborn.

China's cozy commercial links with Iran remain a significant part of the equation. Right now PRC trade with Iran stands at $37 billion, or more than Teheran's trade with the European Union.

And don't forget that Beijing often wishes to trim, if not thwart, American efforts on the international stage.

This has less to do with the obvious PRC anger over Washington's support for a democratic Taiwan or for Tibetan human rights, but the cold geopolitical calculation that China has the political and economic power and is now in the position to use it for its national interests.

But beyond Beijing's presumed blocking of sanctions on Iran, other important countries are not signing on to the Western-led effort to punish the Atomic Ayatollahs either.

Both Brazil and Turkey, two nonpermanent members of the Council, have weighed in against the wider embargo.

Given that both countries are political heavyweights, regional powers, but also close American allies, there's cause for genuine concern.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visited Brazil recently to press the populist President Lula da Silva to support sanctions on Iran. Lula was hearing none of it.

``It's not prudent to put Iran against a wall,'' Lula said, adding that he shall have ``frank'' discussions with Iran during a planned visit to Tehran in May. Brazil adds that Iran has a right to a peaceful nuclear program.

Later Foreign Minister Celso Amorim stated strongly that Brazil ``will not simply bow down to an evolving consensus if we do not agree. We have to think by ourselves with our values and principles.'' He added, ``Usually, sanctions are counterproductive.''

Brazil, which sees itself as an emerging regional power aspiring to a permanent seat on the U.N. Security Council, again wishes to strut its political standing.

In November, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinijad visited Brazil to cement deeper commercial ties in the South American nation.

While two-way trade is just over a billion dollars, mostly in the petroleum sector, there are growing links between dictatorial Iran and democratic Brazil thus offering Tehran political support form a mainstream player.

Besides Brazil wishing to play on a global stage in the sanctions debate, there's yet another nagging issue between Brasilia and Washington.

A complicated trade dispute with Washington involving cotton subsidies has soured bilateral ties with the U.S.

Brazil may soon slap tariffs on American products, causing bad political blood between both hemispheric giants. This is one more reason why Lula is not willing to back Barack Obama's initiative.

Turkey another regional player on the crossroads of Europe and the Middle East is not on board either.

Though a longstanding NATO member and close American ally, Turkey's current Islamic-lite government is a far less supportive friend.

This is not the traditional secular Turkish government, which was predictably close in the postwar era.

The current government in Ankara has a fundamentally different political instinct and social dynamic, and thus is not likely to back a Security Council resolution.

Turkey borders Iran, has significant trade with its neighbor and furthermore has tried to move closer to a political understanding with Tehran.

Ankara's government has many disputes with the U.S., most recently with a U.S. congressional committee vote condemning the Ottoman-era Turkish rulers for the Armenian genocide during WWI.

While both the White House and State Department are trying to keep the Armenian resolution from a full congressional floor vote, the Turks are livid that the matter has even gone this far.

Turkish nationalism runs deep across the political spectrum, and the perception, no matter how misguided it may be, that the United States is criticizing and blaming the country for events which predate the current Turkish Republic, are causing a bitter backlash against the U.S.

Turkey's foreign minister went so far as to say that the U.S. shows ``a lack of strategic vision.'' Any chances of Turkey backing the U.S. in a Security Council vote have now dropped dramatically.

Though it takes nine votes and no vetoes from any permanent members to get a resolution through the 15-member Council, there's also the possibility that Lebanon would vote no or abstain.

Barring Beijing's likely veto, the draft resolution would still pass but with far less international consensus.

Passing a tough and robust resolution to restrain the Islamic Republic of Iran's nuclear ambitions, it is not likely given political constraints in the Council.

Despite the dubious presumption that the Obama administration is universally admired, Washington faces an uphill battle for this key diplomatic goal.

John J. Metzler is a United Nations correspondent covering diplomatic and defense issues. He is the author of ``Divided Dynamism ― The Diplomacy of Separated Nations; Germany, Korea, China'' (University Press, 2001). He can be reached at Contact jjmcolumn@att.net.