The nuclear debate on Iran unfolds again after the resumption of uranium conversion at the Isfahan facility. Iran had earlier halted uranium enrichment during November 2004 to continue its dialogue with Britain, France and Germany. The recent controversy signals a major shift in the country's foreign policy under the new conservative president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

At the global level, countries involved in this issue fall into three categories. The first category, including India and Russia believe Iran needs nuclear energy, and should acquire nuclear knowledge and technology. The second category, including China and Pakistan argue that Iran should not only have nuclear technology as alternative sources of energy, but also possess a nuclear weapons capability. The third category, consisting of the US and EU demands that Iran should give up its nuclear development programme.

Iran insists on nuclear power as an alternative energy source. Earlier this year, Iran's ambassador to Britain, Dr Seyed Mohammad Hossein Adeli produced a reasonable argument that, "Iran has a right to continue its conversion and enrichment programme, for its nuclear industry, as part of the country's diversification of its energy needs and that attempts to halt it were not only unfair but ungrounded."

The US President, George W Bush had warned that military force 'remained on the table' to compel Iran to comply with international demands. In May 2004, the US House of Representatives passed Resolution 398, calling on the US government "to use all appropriate means to deter, dissuade, and prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons." If a similar resolution is passed in the Senate, it will give President Bush or any future administration the ability to launch a pre-emptive strike on Iran's nuclear facilities whenever this is deemed necessary.

The EU had proposed a resolution calling on Iran to halt nuclear fuel development and leaving the door open to further talks if it complies. The EU plan - which has not been made public - is said to 'offer recognition of Iran's right to produce nuclear power for civilian purposes, as well improved trade relations with the EU and guarantees of alternative nuclear fuel sources from Europe and Russia.'

The response of China and Russia has been very different than expected. Russia has urged Iran to halt the uranium conversion work 'without delay' in apparent reversal of Moscow's earlier endorsement of Tehran's plans to produce its own nuclear fuel. At the same time, Moscow warned Washington against taking repressive measures against Iran. It did not say that the hardening of stance would affect energy cooperation with Tehran.

China, which has a growing interest in the region to supply its own energy needs, is against any use of force against Iran. Iran supplies 'energy hungry' China with oil and key industrial materials essential to China's rapidly expanding economy. In the past 15 months, China has signed a number of energy contracts with Iran, including a '25-year agreement valued at more than $100 billion over the next decade, a deal that gives Chinese companies a 51 per cent interest in the vast Yadavaran oilfield, Iran's biggest onshore field'. In return, China provides Iran with military and civilian technology. Given the Sino-Iranian relationship, it is expected that China would veto any resolution aimed at Iran's nuclear programme.

Pakistan has been critical of the use of force against Iran, saying it would destabilize the region and welcomed the negotiations between the EU and Tehran. Pakistan said it supports the 'legitimate rights of Iran' to the peaceful exploitation of nuclear energy. Moreover, other nuclear states such as Brazil, Argentina, Pakistan, and South Africa are expected to oppose the resolution against Iran because they fear the same could comeback to haunt their own nuclear programmes.

There is also a real possibility of surgical military strikes against Iranian installations - not because there is a deliberate strategy towards this goal, but because the Americans and the Iranians are now 'subject to events, and events can take on a momentum of their own.' Given the complexity of the situation, an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities could destabilize the entire region and strengthen the hard-line regime in Iran. Most Iranian views the nuclear programme as a symbol of national pride and security. The IAEA has been investigating Iran's nuclear programme for the past two years. While it has found no proof that Iran plans to build nuclear weapons, it has also been unable to confirm that the programme is entirely peaceful as Iran insists. While the current standoff will not necessarily lead to a showdown between Iran and the US or the EU, there is no guarantee that wisdom will prevail.