The U.S. conditional offer to participate in the talks between EU and Iran sheds the light of hope upon the talks over the Iranian nuclear crisis. Foreign ministers of the six countries passed a carrots-and-sticks package for Iran on June 1 in Vienna. U.S. Secretary of States Condoleezza Rice noted at a press conference that Iran would receive many an "incentives" provided it suspends uranium enrichment, although details are not made known. She said if Iran insists on its own way, it will pay an enormous price. Iran will have to make a choice from the two paths.

The U.S. shift on policy, we should say, is a progress. Just one year ago, the U.S. refused to take part in talks for fear that its participation will legalize the regime of Iran; it also showed dissatisfaction over the talks between EU-3 (Britain, France and Germany) and Iran. The U.S. denies Iran's right to peaceful use of nuclear energy, because it believes Iran, with abundant oil resources, does not have the need to develop nuclear energy at all.

In contrast, President George W. Bush now acknowledges the Iranian people's rights for peaceful use of nuclear energy, and he emphasized the nuclear crisis should be settled through diplomatic means time and again. If Iran suspends uranium enrichment, the U.S. is to offer a heap of benefits to Iran.

Despite the policy shift, the U.S. aim to abort the Iranian nuclear program remains unchanged. The policy shift is a tactic adjustment, and an outcome of the current situation. Trapped in Iraq, the U.S. has not found a way to pull out. The U.S. threat to "resort to military force" is no more credible as the American people's approval rate of the Iraqi war declining, and the allies in the EU saying they will not follow the U.S. This is the very reason why Iran dares to challenge the U.S.

Moreover, China and Russia, as members of the UN Security Council, do not agree to escalate the conflict and impose sanction on Iran if there is still room for diplomatic consultations. Besides, pressure from the international community also forced the U.S. to make the shift. Public opinion believes the U.S., as a major party in the nuclear issue, cannot stay remain aloof and just give orders to others. Therefore, direct consultation is the only wise option to break the deadlock.

More importantly, the U.S. has its own smug calculations. Aren't Russia and China insisting that diplomatic consultation can solve the crisis? Don't the EU-3 pin the hope on the carrot effect? So, let you have a try. If diplomatic means can get rid of Iran's nuclear program, why not? If it fails, then it's not the responsibility of the U.S. By then, the U.S. will press the UNSC to impose sanction on Iran.

The intention of the U.S. is very obvious: retreat in order to advance.

On the one hand, it shows to the world how flexible the U.S. is and how obstinate Iran is; on the other hand, it helps suppress voices opposing sanctions on Iran. To that end, the U.S. set forth a condition--Iran to suspend uranium enrichment before the talks, which becomes a barrier for the opening of the consultations. Does U.S. do it on purpose?

Nonetheless, for the world, the U.S. has made a big compromise and the ball is now kicked back to Iran. The international community is expecting positive responses from Iran. But people notice that Iranian foreign minister said Iran is willing to talk with the U.S.; on the other hand, he said Iran would not suspend uranium enrichment. What Iran and U.S. said will not make people feel optimistic about the opening of the talks. It is still believed that an opportunity for the peaceful settlement of the crisis through consultation has appeared; and Iran ought not easily give up such an opportunity helpful for winning itself rights and sympathy.

By People's Daily Online