They drag Iran into a conflict with the international community and raise opposition even in the Arab world. His blather strengthens those who claim a nuclearized Iran is a danger to its neighbors and world stability, and makes it easier to enlist international public opposition against a nuclear Iran. They also strengthen the argument that the  danger of a nuclear weapon becomes more tangible when the finger on the trigger belongs to a fanatical leader guided by a religious or otherwise extremist ideology.

In recent weeks, the Europeans were convinced that they were being taken for fools in their negotiations with the Iranians. Contributing to that sense is the repeated lies by the Iranians and their treating their interlocutors like innocent tourists who want to go shopping in the Persian bazaar. When the Russian proposal came up for Iran to enrich
its uranium in Russia, the Iranians rejected the proposal outright. A day later, when the criticism against Iran mounted, the Iranians expressed readiness to talk. The method was to talk and nuclearize at the same time.

The Arab states caught on  including Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the new Iraq and the Persian Gulf countries  and some of them expressed their concern to the U.S. about the worrisome nuclearization of Iran. When the mendacious activity of Iran was exposed in the nuclear sphere, I heard from a Kuwaiti personality that it would be good for the Arabs if Israel were to destroy the Iranian nuclear capability.

The argument is now focused on whether to raise the Iranian nuclear issue at the United Nations Security Council. The view in the American administration is that even if it is uncertain whether the council would approve sanctions, it is important to raise the issue. "The ball has to be moved into the rival's court," say administration officials.
"Clearly we will go back to the Security Council again, and maybe more than once, before there are sanctions on Iran."

There is still hesitation in Europe. It is very unlikely China would join sanctions. Russia has become a key player. It sells atomic reactors to Iran and has economic interests there. On the other hand, it does not want a nuclear Iran as a neighbor.

It is important that we know in detail what Russia's position is and that Russia knows Israel's red lines. That is why Acting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert sent to Moscow a high-level delegation headed by National Security Advisor Giora Eiland, Israel Atomic Energy Commission Director General Gideon Frank, the head of the strategic division in the foreign ministry, Miriam Ziv, and a representative of the intelligence community.

Like North Korea, Iran responded with extremism before the UN Security Council was even convened. Tehran threatened to take serious steps if the issue were brought to the council. North Korea threatened that going to the Security Council would be considered an act of war against it. That is a threat to the international community and an attempt to undermine the existence of international institutions. It is unprecedented since the establishment of the UN.

The nuclear crisis is focused on Iran. But the truth is that is not how the conflict should necessarily be seen. Strategically, the crisis should be regarded from a regional perspective. It is not enough to ask if extremist Shi'ite Iran will go nuclear but whether the Middle East will be transformed in its wake into a region with a number of nuclear countries. Not a bipolar nuclear region, but multi-polar, including perhaps terror groups  which raises doubts whether it would be possible to prevent the use of nuclear weapons in the region.