Scepticism.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mikhail Kamynin on April 10 said Moscow was unaware of "any recent technological breakthroughs in the Iranian nuclear programme that would change the format of its enrichment effort". French Foreign Ministry spokesman Jean-Baptiste Mattei questioned the Iranian claim, saying: "There are announcements, and then there is technological reality". Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer voiced similar doubts, saying: "I'm not sure if that is true or not".

Russia and China on March 24 joined the rest of the UNSC in voting to impose the new sanctions against Tehran - the second in three months - for its refusal to suspend uranium enrichment. The sanctions included a ban on Iranian arms exports and an asset freeze against 28 people and organisations involved in Iran's nuclear and missile programmes. Iran rejected the sanctions and announced a partial suspension of co-operation with the UN monitoring agency, the IAEA. Further sanctions would be expected if Iran continued to defy the UNSC.

The 27-state EU and the US say Iran's enrichment programme is for nuclear weapons, while Iran insists it seeks only to generate electricity. US experts say 3,000 centrifuges are, in theory, enough to produce a nuclear weapon, perhaps within a year. But they doubt Iran has so many operational, a difficult feat given Iran's patchy success.

The FT on April 10 quoted a "top US intelligence official" as saying the American intelligence community had not changed its estimate that Iran would be incapable of building a nuclear bomb until early to the middle of the next decade. He said speculation Iran might be able to produce enough weapons-grade uranium for a bomb by 2009 assumed that it would meet every development milestone without a problem, which he said was almost impossible. The official suggested Ahmadi-Nejad was exaggerating Iran's nuclear ability, saying Tehran was playing a game of "Three-card Monte". He said it was more important to look at whether the centrifuges were working rather than their number.

The apparently slow progress of Iran's programme - monitored in reports from the IAEA - has encouraged speculation that the centrifuges had been overheating and may explain why Ahmadi-Nejad avoided specific detail on April 9. Two IAEA inspectors on April 10 arrived in Tehran to press for improved scrutiny of Iran's expanding nuclear programme. They were on a routine visit.

The IAEA is seeking to install TV cameras at the underground plant of Natanz so it can monitor activities there. But Iran, which has reacted to UNSC sanctions by reducing co-operation with the IAEA, has resisted the effort. The IAEA has told Tehran the enhanced surveillance will be needed before Iran introduces nuclear feedstock into centrifuges - in which uranium hexafluoride gas is spun at high velocities to yield enriched uranium - at Natanz. Remote monitoring will be needed once the number of centrifuges exceeds 500. Iran has refused to accede to this, saying the demands had no legal backing.

Jacqueline Shire, of the US-based Institute for Science and International Security, which monitors Iran's nuclear programme, said the ISIS estimated Iran had installed between 1,000 and 1,300 centrifuges. Although Iran has reduced co-operation with the IAEA, the inspectors should be able to verify the number of installed centrifuges. Ms Shire said the "real issue" now was IAEA access to Natanz.

Iran might seek to establish a negotiating baseline, possibly ahead of a nuclear deal with the West under which Iran kept a pilot enrichment scheme, and bolster its credentials domestically. On April 9, shortly before Ahmadi-Nejad's announcement, the Secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council (SNSC), Ali Larijani, said Iran was, with the nuclear fuel cycle complete, ready to begin real negotiations.

Iran has long expressed an intention to move towards operating 3,000 centrifuges after announcing in 2006 it had mastered the basic technology of the fuel cycle. IAEA head Muhammad ElBaradei in February said Iran could be six months to a year away from operating an industrial size cascade of 3,000 centrifuges.

Like Ahmadi-Nejad, Aghazadeh on April 9 refused to confirm Iran was operating 3,000 centrifuges. But on April 10 the FT quoted Larijani as saying the number had been reached. Asked in Natanz if the programme had faltered, Larijani replied: "Then why are they [the West] worried?" Larijani was quoted earlier on April 9 by Mehr news agency as saying Iran remained open to a compromise that would limit its programme, adding: "Today, with the nuclear fuel cycle complete, we are ready to begin real negotiations with the aim of reaching an understanding".

Events at the plant were part of Iran's "National Day of Nuclear Energy" as its leaders tried to cement consensus behind the atomic programme. School bells rang nationwide and students formed a human chain at Iran's AEO in Tehran, burning US and British flags.

Ahmadi-Nejad on April 9 said if the West did not end its pressure against Iran, Tehran would review its policy of co-operation with the IAEA. It was unclear whether that was a threat to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), as North Korea did in 2003, but Ahmadi-Nejad said the West "should know that the Iranian nation will defend its rights and this path is irreversible", adding: "With great pride, I announce as of today our dear country is among the countries of the world that produce nuclear fuel on an industrial scale. This nuclear fuel is definitely for the development of Iran and expansion of peace in the world".

Talks between Larijani and EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana resumed after Iran on April 4 freed 15 British sailors and marines who, Iranian officials claimed, had strayed into Iranian waters. (Solana negotiates on behalf of the permanent UNSC members - Russia, China, Britain, France and the US - plus Germany).

Natanz has a small pilot plant where for more than a year engineers have periodically shot uranium gas into scores of spinning centrifuges in an experimental effort to master enrichment, a complex kind of purification process. Uranium enriched to low levels can fuel reactors; if enriched to high levels, it can fuel nuclear weapons. Introducing uranium gas into centrifuges at the pilot plant would be nothing new. Injecting it into the larger facility under construction at the site, the one intended for "industrial production", would be a step forward. Nuclear experts said it was unclear what Larijani was referring to on April 9 when he said: "Yes, we have injected gas".

The large industrial plant under construction at Natanz is roughly half the size of the Pentagon. Inspectors say Iran is building 3,000 centrifuges as a first step towards 54,000. The New York Times quoted a "senior European diplomat" as saying he doubted Iran had crossed the line and begun enriching uranium at the larger plant because Iranian and EU negotiators were seriously discussing potential ways to resolve Iran's standoff with the UNSC. He said: "I would be surprised if they fed the centrifuges because it would jeopardize the talks. There are proposals out there that are quite serious".

The diplomat, who The New York Times said followed IAEA's work, added that none of its inspectors were currently at Natanz but that they were on their way. He said their assessment would clarify what the Iranians had actually achieved. Frustrated Western experts had said for months the underlying question was whether the frenetic activity at the desert complex was real, a bluff or a little of both. The issue was whether Iran had really mastered the centrifuge basics or was involved in a political show to strengthen its bargaining position in the global standoff.

David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security in Washington and a former UN weapons inspector, said Iran seemed more interested in scoring diplomatic points than in making technical advances, adding: "Ahmadi-Nejad is trying to demonstrate facts on the ground and negotiate from a stronger position. If they enriched today" in the cavernous industrial plant, "it would destroy the ability to go forward on any negotiation". He said enrichment "would escalate the confrontation", adding, "It raises all kinds of worst-case scenarios that, if not managed correctly, could escalate up to a military action".

It was unclear how seriously to take Iran's threat to reduce further its co-operation with inspectors. Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has the final word on state matters, warned after the UNSC resolution was passed, saying Iran would strike back against any threats. In a nationwide address on the first day of the Persian New Year on March 21, Khamenei said: "Until today, what we have done has been in accordance with the international regulations. But if they take illegal actions, we too can take illegal actions and will do so". He said the nuclear programme was more important than the nationalisation of oil in 1958, a source of great pride for most Iranians, adding: "If they want to treat us with threats and use force or violence, the Iranian nation will undoubtedly use all its capabilities to strike the invading enemies".

Iran and the US on April 11 ramped up their war of words, with an Iranian diplomat alleging he was tortured by an American intelligence agent while kidnapped in Iraq and the US army displaying what it said were Iranian-made weapons found in a Sunni part of Baghdad. US military spokesman Maj Gen William Caldwell displayed for reporters weapons, including mortars and rocket-propelled grenades, he said were Iranian-made.

Citing information obtained from prisoners under interrogation, Caldwell alleged that Iran had trained Sunni insurgents as well as Shi'ite militias in the use of arms, including roadside bombs which can disable tanks. He said: "We know that they are being in fact manufactured and smuggled into this country, and we know that training does go on in Iran for people to learn how to assemble them and how to employ them. We know that training has gone on as recently as this past month from detainees debriefs". He was referring to explosively formed penetrators (EFPs), a particularly deadly type of weapon which as of January had killed 170 US troops.

Caldwell, who sat near a table crowded with weapons he said the military believed had been largely manufactured in Iran, said: "We have in fact found some cases recently where Iranian intelligence sources have provided to Sunni insurgent groups some support". Some of the weapons had been found lying openly in the back seat of a car in a Sunni-majority part of Baghdad; others were in the car's trunk.

Display of the weapons caches came as the US military released figures showing that, while violence in Baghdad had dropped 26% between January and March, nationwide civilian casualties had risen. Just from February to March, casualties of civilians and Iraqi and US security forces rose 10%. Caldwell said: "What does that mean?. It means we still have a lot of work to do".

The military said one US soldier died on the eastern side of Baghdad from a roadside bomb early on April 11 and that another US soldier died in southern Baghdad on April 10.

The US military used the display of Iran-made weapons as an opportunity to deplore Tehran's failure to stop the apparent flow of weapons into Iraq. Caldwell said: "The death and violence in Iraq are bad enough without this outside interference. Iran and all of Iraq's neighbours really need to respect Iraq's sovereignty".

The link between Iranian intelligence and Sunni Arab insurgents is new. But the US military has talked in the past about the possibility that elements in Iran have supplied Iranian-manufactured bombs and the know-how for using them to Shi'ite militants. The New York Times on April 11 quoted US military officials as saying there were several explanations for how they could have turned up in Sunni hands. With Iraq awash in weapons, one possibility is that they came through Syria, which has long been a transit point for Iranian-made weapons being funnelled to Hizbullah, the Lebanese Shi'ite militia sponsored by Tehran.

Another possibility is that arms dealers with links to Iran weapons purveyors are selling to every side. Caldwell declined to offer any information on the proportion of weapons found in Iraq believed to originate in Iran. He did not say whether the trend had been up or down. In comments on the powerful EFPs, he referred to their prevalence in the period from October to December 2006 but did not say whether the US military had continued to find them in similarly large quantities in the past three months.

The weapons Caldwell put on display were found two days earlier after a resident of the Arab Jihad, a predominantly Sunni area, informed the local Joint Security Station run by Iraqi and US soldiers that there were illegal arms in the area. When the soldiers went to the house the resident pointed out, they found a black Mercedes sedan. On its back seat, in plain view, was a rocket of the type commonly sold by Iran; in the trunk were mortar rounds marked "made in 2006". Inside the house and buried in the yard were more mortar rounds, 1,000 to 2,000 rounds of bullets, five hand grenades, and a couple of Bulgarian-manufactured RPGs, said Major Marty Weber, a master ordnance technician.

The weapons displayed and alleged to be of Iranian origin were labelled in English, which Weber said was typical of arms manufactured for sale on the international market. He added that the US military knew they were of Iranian origin by "the structure of the rounds, the geometry of the tail fins and again the stenciling on the warheads". Weber said the 81-millimetre mortar rounds were made only by Iran. Other nearby countries make 82-millimetre rounds.

Jalal Sharafi, the Iranian diplomat freed recently after two months' captivity, last week gave a press conference at Iran's foreign ministry in Tehran, arriving from hospital in a wheelchair flanked by doctors and nurses. In footage of his arrival at Tehran airport Sharafi was shown standing as he met Foreign Minister Mottaki. Sharafi said he had been held in three places, but the longest period was 40 days in a basement "near Baghdad airport, which had 24-hour electricity".

Shortly after Sharafi went missing on Feb. 4, Iranian officials said they held the US responsible for his "safety", claiming he had been taken by Iraqi forces acting under US authority. The claim was denied by the US. Sharafi told reporters he had been questioned by two people, one from Iraqi intelligence and one American who said he was in charge of his case and who asked him about Iran's relations with Iraqi groups as well as where Tehran bought uranium for its nuclear programme. The diplomat said he had passed out at least twice during torture, and showed scars on his feet and legs.

Sharafi thanked Iraqi leaders - citing President Jalal Talabani, PM Maliki and Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari - for working for his release, and asked them to investigate who had kidnapped him and put them on trial. The FT on April 12 said that, after Sharafi's release, an Iraqi official told the paper his case was "very mysterious from the very beginning", adding: "It may have been a lone security entity [responsible for the kidnap], but it wasn't tied to the government as such".

Sharafi on April 10 appeared on Iranian TV where he was shown in a hospital bed visited by Iraqi Ambassador Muhammad Majed al-Shaikh, and by Peter Stocker of the International Committee of the Red Cross. A doctor described how Sharafi had been beaten with a cable, resulting in a broken nose, internal bleeding and damage to his ears.

Likely Outcome Of Tehran Tactics: Reviewing the March 23 capture and April 4 release of the 15 British Navy personnel by the IRGC, US-based Iranian expert Karim Sadjadpour on April 10 wrote: "From a diplomatic perspective, Tehran may feel like it has chastened the Europeans, so that they will think twice before working in concert with the US. In fact it has likely achieved the opposite effect. Instead of splitting the international coalition...by weaning the Europeans away from the Americans - a strategy which Iran successfully employed during the era of reformist President Mohammad Khatami - Iran's leaders have further eroded European confidence that they are mature and amenable to diplomatic compromise...

"In every case, Iran's recent behavior will probably help undermine trust that interacting with the country is a good bet. Iranian hardliners similarly proclaimed victory after the 444-day hostage crisis in 1979 with Washington, which humiliated the Carter administration. While three decades on the crisis is a blip in the history of the US, Iran continues to pay for it in terms of a blemished international reputation, political and economic isolation, and vastly unfulfilled potential.

"And what about the Iranian people, for whom Ahmadi-Nejad professes to speak? They have been diminished to a mere footnote during his presidency - amidst all the bustle surrounding uranium enrichment, centrifuges, Holocaust denial, and now British sailors; this, despite the fact that Ahmadi-Nejad's campaign platform was about compassion for the common man and putting oil money on people's dinner tables...

"In characteristic fashion, Iranian hardliners are consumed by making short-term tactical gains at the expense of advancing long-term interests. In the short term Iran stuck its finger in the eye of the West and put a smile on the face of millions around the world - especially in the Islamic world - who abhor Western policies in the Middle East. But once the dust settles in Tehran, more sober officials will come to realize that Iran has only increased the distance it will need to travel before it can reintegrate into the international community and assume its rightful position as a respected member of the partnership of nations".