United States has been pressurizing the IAEA Board of Governors to refer Iran for its violation of the NPT to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). It has also been lobbying within the European Union for the same, besides imposing economic, political and diplomatic sanctions on Iran.

Iran, a signatory to the NPT signed the Additional Protocol in December 2003, which is yet to be ratified. The signing allows tougher inspection by the IAEA, though it does not bind Iran to give up uranium enrichment process. Iran's efforts to continue with its uranium enrichment cycle, many fear, is aimed at building its nuclear weapons program.

Iran's nuclear programme has been under pressure from the US ever since it was classified as one of the 'axis of evil' along with Iraq and North Korea. With American 'proactive' policies already in place in Iraq and North Korea, Iran is the next target, as could be observed in various statements, emanating from the Bush administration. Colin Powell cited the lack of progress in halting the Iranian nuclear program as one of the reasons to take the Iran case to the UN Security Council while Richard Boucher stated that Iran's behavior has been well documented in its failure to honour previous promises.

Iran has a history of breaking its earlier promises over the issue. For example, in September 2003, Iran signed a deal with France, Germany and UK to allow increased international monitoring of its nuclear installations in exchange for civilian nuclear technology. This agreement, however, ended in June 2004, when Iran restarted its nuclear program. Besides, in December 2003, Iran promised the IAEA to suspend uranium enrichment and reprocessing facilities. Further, in February 2004, it had also committed to the IAEA to suspend centrifuge components.

In its last meeting in June 2004, IAEA concluded that Iran continues to produce parts for uranium enrichment centrifuges. It also alleged that Iran has further plans to proceed with producing uranium hexafluoride. Iran has already built a reactor that could be used in a plutonium based nuclear weapon program. Despite IAEA laying down norms for Iran's nuclear program, Iran did not comply with it.

Earlier this month, Hasan Rohani, Iran's security official, stated his country would again suspend assembling the centrifuges used to enrich uranium. Iran prefers to renew its economic ties with Germany, France and UK against suspending its nuclear program. The US, however does not trust this latest volte-face and perceives that Iran will again renege on its commitment. The US is apprehensive that Iran is close to building its own nuclear bomb, as it would become self sufficient in its uranium needs. In less than two years, the US fears that Iran would succeed extracting uranium from its Saghand mines. According to an independent American source, more than 77 percent of this work has already been accomplished. Moreover, Iran is proceeding ahead with the nuclear capable Shahab 3 ballistic missile with a range of 2000 kms, which the US perceive as a direct threat to itself.

Even the IAEA believes that Iran has been moving ahead with its nuclear programme. In August 2004, Iran wrote to the IAEA regarding starting of "hot tests", which, since then, is already in process. These tests would generate uranium hexafluoride which can be used for nuclear energy as well as nuclear weapons. Iran agreed introducing 37 metric ton of uranium for converting uranium hexafluoride and has also resumed making components for uranium enrichment centrifuges.

All these factors substantiate US decision to put up Iran's case before the UNSC. However, many European countries are against involving the UNSC. They believe that a better solution could be to force Iran to cooperate with the IAEA, the US and Europe. The UK, France and Germany prefer a deadline in November (next IAEA meeting) for Iran to allay the suspicion that it is developing a nuclear weapons program. The European countries prefer a softer approach on Iran and request the IAEA to reconsider the case, against the harder US approach.

The US is likely to pressurize the IAEA to refer the case to the Security Council for Iran's violation of the NPT. As the IAEA has no power over any country's completing its nuclear fuel cycle, the US is apprehensive that Iran would emerge as a major challenge in the Middle East and a threat to Israel as it is about to complete its nuclear cycle. The US thus prefers the imposition of economic and political sanctions against Iran through the UN Security Council.

With failures in Afghanistan and Iraq, Iran has the possibility to emerge as a success story for the Bush Administration.