Iran's atomic plans: fait accompli or stoppable?

BERLIN (Reuters) - World powers have failed to persuade Iran to halt its nuclear program despite nearly four years of diplomatic efforts and are beginning to confront the ultimate choice -- accept it or stop it at all costs.

The U.N. Security Council has already passed two resolutions imposing sanctions on the Islamic republic for refusing to suspend its uranium enrichment program.

The West fears Iran wants to develop fuel for atomic weapons but Iran says its nuclear ambitions are limited to peacefully generating electricity and is determined to press ahead.

As a result, the six world powers dealing with Iran -- the United States, Britain, France, Germany, China and Russia -- met this week to begin discussions on whether a third, harsher sanctions resolution might be needed.

Some analysts say it is not too late to stop Iran, which is many years away from getting a bomb if it wants one, through diplomacy and without military action.

"But I think we have to be much more active on both sides of the process -- working aggressively to pressure Iran over its nuclear program and showing that we are prepared to open real engagement with them if they comply," said Jon Wolfsthal at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a U.S. think tank.

There is also the option of U.S. or Israeli military strikes to take out Iranian nuclear facilities, though German and other European diplomats said the EU would almost certainly oppose the use of force in favor of diplomacy and compromise.

One diplomat said the EU has yet to make up its mind.

"There are several ways of contending with the Iranian threat and Europe has still not decided which ones would be preferable -- considerably increasing the sanctions, a military option or a compromise," the Western diplomat said.

Opponents to military strikes against Iran say the country's considerable nuclear know-how cannot be destroyed with bombs. They also say that if Iran has not yet decided to get the bomb, military strikes would make that decision easy.

READY TO GIVE UP?

Wolfsthal said some government officials and security experts are convinced it is already too late to stop Iran from getting the bomb and worry that expressing this view publicly would only serve to undermine the delicate diplomacy under way.

Several European diplomats said their capitals are quietly preparing for the day when a nuclear-armed Iran will alter the global security landscape. This is simple realism, they said.

According to Alon Ben-David, Israel analyst for Jane's Defence Weekly, defeatism on the Iran issue can be detected in Israel, which has hinted it could use military force to attack Iran's nuclear facilities the way it did in Iraq in 1981.

"There are some in Israel who are already talking about the Iranian bomb as a done deal that they'll have to live with," Ben-David said.

The sense of defeatism in Israel comes from the fact that Jewish state never really believed the European Union's biggest powers were ready to do what was necessary to force Tehran to give up its enrichment program, he said.

Britain, France and Germany launched a diplomatic initiative in 2003 aimed at persuading Iran to freeze its enrichment program in exchange for a package of incentives. It failed.

Last year, the United States, China and Russia joined the "EU3" in new talks on a deal for Iran, provided Tehran suspended enrichment. So far Iran has refused.

"BEARING FRUIT"

Oliver Meier, a Berlin-based analyst for the Arms Control Association, said the idea that it is time to start thinking about how to live with a nuclear Iran is a dangerous one.

"It is too early and potentially dangerous to shift policy from engagement to containment of a potentially nuclear-armed Iran," he said.

But Washington is already preparing for what it sees as the looming Iranian threat. One reason for a U.S. missile shield likely to be deployed in Poland and the Czech Republic is Iran's long-range missile and nuclear programs, U.S. officials say.

This missile shield has angered Russia and Germany's Social Democrats (SPD), conservative Chancellor Angela Merkel's center-left coalition partners. Both Russia and the SPD doubt the U.S. analysis of the threat Iran poses.

The Western diplomat told Reuters the sanctions were "bearing fruit" and patience was needed.

"Rather than dealing a harsh blow, the sanctions have an accumulating effect, gradually gathering momentum towards a critical mass," he said on condition of anonymity.

He said Iranian government officials were voicing concerns about the sanctions, which are having a negative impact on Iran's foreign trade and overall economy. But, he said, Europe must now decide whether it is ready to ratchet up the pressure or give up and compromise.

A diplomat close to the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said it was time to "be real" and accept Iran's program as a fait accompli and let IAEA inspectors monitor it.

Meier disagrees: "An appeasement strategy towards Iran is not only premature but would also have serious negative implications for the non-proliferation regime as a whole."

(Additional reporting by Dan Williams in Jerusalem and Mark Heinrich in Vienna)