The Iranian nuclear crisis is nearing to be a political stalemate. When a political crisis reaches a dead end, other alternatives, which by its nature are more unpleasant, are being considered. The ultimate alternative is war.
In order to evaluate the present situation, the motives of each of the participants, which in this case Iran is in one side, and on the other side a great portion of world community, should be considered:

1.  In any democratic country, the highest priority is assigned to national security. The territorial integrity of each country is on the top of their national security requirements. There must be a territorial entity in order for a government to function. But for the regime which is in power in Iran, the highest priority rests with the preservation of their own power. In other words, the country and its territorial integrity is important as long as the power rests with them. All the calculations and policies are derived from this all powerful principal. This also applies to all of the competing groups within the government, whether we call them fundamentalists, pragmatists or reformists.
   
   As far as the ruling elite is concerned, dealing with the nuclear program is no exception to this basic rule. Although all the layers of government in Iran, deny their desire or plans for acquiring nuclear weapons, almost all in the international community, believe that this is ultimate goal. The governments goal in acquiring nuclear weapons is to strengthen their internal standing and prevent regime overthrow in the hands of actual and imaginary foes inside the country or from outside. According to their calculations, since acquiring nuclear weapons is directly linked to the survival of their illegitimate rule, there is no high enough price to pay. In any case, the cost has to be borne by Iranian Nation.
    
2.  In present day Iran, the power and decision making mechanism is scattered among different power centers with no absolute authority in making tough decisions. It appears that the 'Supreme Leader' has the absolute power. However it is worth noting that, although he is more powerful than others, he does not posses the absolute power and hence, always has to compromise with other power brokers. Alliances, directions and coalitions among different factions, are made and broken on short term deals, based on individual and group interests, ideology and maintenance of a balance of power among competing groups. Since the Islamic Republic is inherently short sided and this shortcoming has not been helped by its isolation from the outside world, and as a result it has been removed from rapid political, economical and scientific developments, thus it is unable to come up with comprehensive plans for a modern governance. Therefore, the official policies and statements contradictory and are aimed at reducing the flames which erupt periodically due to unwise decisions and the pure aggressiveness of their rule. The policies rarely aim in achieving long terms goals.
    
3. The Islamic Republic has concentrated its efforts to prevent international response against its rule, both internally and externally:
   
   a- Internally – The Islamic Republic's rule has destabilized Iran's national security. National solidarity which has evolved in the long history of Iran, due to the regime's actions of enflaming the ethnic, linguistic and religious differences, has seen a blow to its foundations. In the meantime, by erasing the last remaining traces of democracy, coupled with economic devastation, has harmed national security. Now that they see themselves cornered, by appealing to national pride, they are seeking to increase their defensive capabilities. At the present, words that were rarely used in the past such as 'Nation' and 'People's Right' are being utilized by government to gain people’s support. The people of Iran which during the reign of the Islamic Republic have witnessed the loss of their pride, in order to regain its pride has rallied around this case. The government in order to increase and maintain the support of the people has to loosen its grip and yield more to the people. Any yield of power will be interpreted as a weakness on the part of government. This means opening Pandora's Box. At the same time, all the executive power has shifted to the intelligence community, in order to increase preparedness against unforeseen unrests.
   
   b- On the foreign front, the Islamic Republic has concentrated in 3 different areas:
   Regional Security – The regime has attempted to intimidate the neighboring countries and other countries in the region so they would take an stand against harsh measures from the West. This policy has been done through the demonstration of missile capability, military exercises in the Persian Gulf, threats of retaliatory actions either directly or through their allies in terrorists groups in Iraq, Palestine, Lebanon and inflicting damages on economic interests of the West in the region. Considering the deadly force possessed by the US and solidarity among the West which is in sharp contrast to the Iraq case, these actions are interpreted as yet another manifestation of blind aggression inherent in the regime. The regime's aggressiveness is demonstrated, while it is weak, with no substantial internal support, and no foreign ally of any significance. Now the questions arises, that what the world should expect in future, thanks to windfall from oil, they solve their immediate economic problems and have achieved to their goal of destructive nuclear weapons? The future picture would be horrendous. As a result, the fear in the neighboring countries and other countries in the region as well as among powerful nations has increased, no matter how many emissaries by the regime is dispatched to calm them.
   
   Economic sweetener – Recent increase in the price of oil on the international market is due to many factors, chief among them perhaps, is the crisis looming over Iran. Russia, as the world's second largest exporter of oil has benefited tremendously. The Russians and Chinese are enjoying a thriving commercial relation with Iran. In the case of China, Iran has been transformed to be among its main suppliers of imported energy. Both countries are, relatively speaking, supporters of the present government of Iran. However, if the crisis developed to the point that in which they have to choose, the West and other countries in the region out weigh Iran, by far.
   
   Russian & Chinese strategic Goals – Both powers are actively seeking to expand their power in the region. As the Chinese economy grows rapidly and the Russian economy improves its performance, both are eager to show themselves as an alternative to US power. There are similarities with the role that they are playing in the present crisis as the role played by Russia, France and Germany in case of Iraq in 2002 and 2003. According to documents seized from Iraq, Sadam Hussein, even though the enemy's tanks were fast approaching the Capital, still believed that those countries would prevent the US from toppling him. Consequently, he was preparing himself to deal with insurgencies that he expected will erupt after foreign forces evacuate Iraq. (Foreign Affairs, March/April 2006.)
    
4. Now we have to look at the crisis from the West's point of view. The question is not weather Iran has the right to enrich Uranium or not. The question centers on the distrust of the present Iranian government by many in the world. They have made it clear that they will not allow Iran to acquire such technology, even if they have to use military force. Contemporary US history, proves that they are willing and able to intervene militarily if their perceived national security is threatened (sometimes seriously and sometimes even not so seriously). A glance at the US militarily intervention after Cold war will suffice: i.e. in Somalia, Panama, Haiti, Afghanistan, Iraq and lands previously known as Yugoslavia. Nobody can claim that military action against Iran is inevitable. However, in case other alternatives are exhausted, nobody can claim that such action is out of question.
   
   It is worth noting that any military campaign, by necessity, cannot be limited to the destruction of nuclear facilities. In order to minimize the retaliatory actions, the destruction of all military installation in western and southern Iran and as well command and control, has to be done. This in turn, will mean the collapse of law and order and a golden opportunity for forces eager to see the disintegration of the Iranian territory.
   
   Strengthening of forces advocating the disintegration of Iran, is an integral part of any military plan against that country. Considering the general dissatisfaction present in Iran, inflaming the sectarian and religious differences that this regime has achieved, compelled with active intervention of neighboring countries and other powers present in the region, the separatist forces have gained strength and attractiveness rarely seen in the contemporary history of Iran. It could be concluded, that the regime has been able, to make its survival, to a large degree dependent on political and territorial integrity of the country as a whole.
    
5. Considering all factors together, as pointed out above, the present Iranian nuclear crisis has a potential to be catastrophic to Iran, increase violence disrupt what little stability remains in the region and finally unpleasant consequences for the West. The final tab has to be picked up by the Iranian Nation.
   
   There seems to be only one option still open to prevent such disaster and that is a meaningful negotiation with the Islamic Republic. This has not been possible in the past, due to disunity in the core of the regime, as pointed out in item 2 above. With consideration to past experiences, it could be concluded that the regime is unable to analyze the world as it is and that the only time they will negotiate when their survival is threatened.
   
   The regime has to feel that it has been cornered, in order to be prepared to seriously negotiate. At the present, Russia and somewhat China are giving a falls sense of security to the government in Tehran. This is preventing to reach an agreement that has the potential to curtail more severe actions in future.