Iran fuel cycle suspension is "temporary" move

When Iranian officials make statements likethis,

"The Islamic republic has not renounced its nuclear fuel cycle and it will use it," Hassan Rowhani, secretary of the Supreme National Security Council and Iran's chief nuclear negotiator, told reporters.

. . . it becomes harder to listen the logic of leftists like this. The Iranians want to temporarily suspend their fuel cycle and "the suspension will only last as long as the related negotiations go on." Are they trying to buy time? Is diplomacy a stall? Do they know better than us that our dithering at the UN gave Saddam time to hide, destroy and shuffle his weapons programs, and time to plan a guerrilla war? Perhaps. Seems to make sense. But . . . if the Iranians intend for their suspension to be temporary, why would they announce it? Maybe they are signaling that the price for their nuclear forbearance is higher than has yet been offered. Perhaps they are trying to get more concessions out of the West.

Rowhani said Iran had obtained a great success in recent nuclear negotiations, stressing that the United States had been frustrated on its attempt to refer Iran's nuclear case to the UN Security Council.

The thinking of the Iranians: Stall the US from going to the Security Council. Divide the west between Europe and the US. Continue with our covert program while this is happening. Get more concessions while they wring their hands and begin their planning cycle. Reach the no-return point before they can act. Iran 1, US 0. More here at the Christian Science Monitor:

At the same time, Iranian leaders are under intense domestic pressure to maintain the country's nuclear ambitions and to stand up to international pressures. That was evident yesterday when demonstrators in Tehran burned a British flag and tried to storm the gates of the British Embassy. Acknowledging the Iranian public's strong identification with the nuclear program, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was quoted on state television saying, "Iran will never halt its nuclear activities under any circumstances, and this is our red line." And in words suggesting the world has not heard the end of Iran's nuclear ambitions, government spokesman Andollah Ramazanzadeh was quoted by Reuters announcing at a weekly press conference: "We are not fully satisfied with the resolution ... but for the time being it was [beneficial] for Iran to accept it."

Hmmm. If the legitimacy of the regime is tied to a single weapons program, eliminating or severely hampering that program might do a good bit toward destabilizing and delegitimating the regime.