By John J. Metzler
UNITED NATIONS ― The U.S. administration's Iran policy has spun like a weathervane during the past year. Washington's policy went from frosty containment to one of cautious thaw as President Barack Obama offered Tehran his celebrated hand of friendship to counter the Islamic regime's clenched fist.
But now the winds of change have blown across the Persian Gulf with the unmistakable gale warning by the U.N. nuclear watchdog ― the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) ― that Iran may be closer to developing a nuclear bomb than previously admitted.
The blissful optimism which characterized Obama's early diplomacy toward Tehran with the underlying theme ``we are not Bush, so let's get along,'' was scathingly rebuffed by the Ayatollahs and the wider leadership.
The U.S. good intentions were then ``played for time'' by the Iranians who kept changing the timetable and goal posts of nuclear compliance. Now a year on, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has brought a dose of needed realism to the discussion.
The New York Times wrote, ``President Obama's Iran policy is beginning to look a lot like candidate Clinton's Iran policy. With the administration's efforts to reach out to Iran having failed to produce a response, it is shifting to a more confrontational strategy that is tailor made for Mrs. Clinton, a long-time skeptic of the value of engaging with Tehran.''
On a recent trip to the Middle East to build diplomatic support for wider economic sanctions, Secretary Clinton stressed a new theme; that Iran was becoming a military dictatorship.
Clinton's assertion that the Revolutionary Guards had assumed control over the political and theocratic reigns in Tehran may be correct, but this in itself will not sell countries on a wider sanctions package. Is she using the shopworn model of isolating Myanmar (Burma) or its military regime?
Iran poses key security and stability concerns for the world community. First and foremost rests the clear and present danger posed by the country's nascent nuclear program and the stated willingness by the regime of President Mahmud Admadinejad to develop and use atomic weapons.
Though a number of U.N. sanctions packages have been slapped on Iran, the practical effect has been little more than a slap on the wrist.
Given Admadihad's boastful pronouncements over nuclear research, the United States, France and importantly Russia sent a letter to the IAEA warning of Iran's ``capability to produce highly enriched uranium.''
Getting Russia on board with a U.N. sanctions package pushed by the British, the United States and France is a positive diplomatic development.
Yet China, another veto-holding member of the Security Council may have other plans. The Islamic Republic of Iran engages in a brisk commerce with the rest of the world, though not the United States.
According to the Financial Times of London, ``China has overtaken the European Union to become Iran's largest trading partner.''
In 2008 trade with the EU stood at $35 billion compared with $29 billion with People's Republic of China.
The paper adds that much of Beijing's commerce with Tehran is channeled through the United Arab Emirates which in fact boosts the trade numbers up to $36.5 billion.
Needless to say, most of Iran's trading partners are importing huge amounts of petroleum while sending machinery and technology to the Islamic republic.
Given the cozy commercial ties between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the People's Republic of China, never mind that Beijing depends on Tehran for at least 10 percent of its energy requirements, it is highly unlikely that China would support any serious and biting package of sanctions in the U.N. Security Council.
The other key issue remains the nature of the regime itself. Having just celebrated the 31st anniversary of the Islamic republic and the overthrow of the reformist and pro-West Shah of Iran in 1979 by the Ayatollahs, the Tehran rulers nonetheless face a tarnished political record and deepening crisis of legitimacy.
Presidential elections in June 2009 were marred by widespread fraud. Though Ahmadinejad ``won'' the contest, the regime itself is divided and now largely supported by the hard-line Revolutionary Guards, the feared Pasdaran.
While the Pasdaran, these thuggish guardians of the Islamic regime, have morphed into a ruling circle and business enterprise, even challenging elements in the theocracy, they are keeping Ahmadinejad in power at least for the short run.
Over the past year Iran has gained precious time in approaching the nuclear threshold.
There's an underlying nervousness among diplomats at the U.N. that a new confrontation with Iran is brewing.
Tougher U.N. sanctions, should they even pass the council, may be a moot point as the atomic Ayatollahs may soon raise the crisis to a whole new level. The clock is ticking.
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 jjmcolumn@att.net.