Iran solution?

This is what I think about Rodger A. Payne's recent post:

“What would the Bush administration do if, in the next few months, Europe
announces that Iran has agreed to a comprehensive nonproliferation accord,
with intrusive IAEA inspections?”

I don’t think this will happen in future. This idea has already been materialized.

About “Tony Blair communicating this message on American television”, I don’t think it happen either. EU and US are both playing the same game, but at two different roles (and therefore, they don’t need to communicate on American television). I also agree with "Always Confused" in the previous comment that US want to show “who’s the boss” in this game.

“Anyone believe Iran will go for that?”

Iran has already gone for transparency (as it has been mentioned in UN’s November 2004 resolution) about its legal nuclear activities. Iran claims that it does not have any nuclear weapons program, and it has not yet been proven wrong. Therefore, “voluntary disarmament” wouldn’t make sense unless you believe in the US accusations (as I did before the war on Iraq).

But “voluntary disarmament” is not what US is after: they want Iran to fully abandon its nuclear research program, no matter what the purpose. Iranian officials don’t care about Iran’s needs for energy as much as they care about their existence and wealth. Apparently, they are confident that US is not able to endanger their existence with their current involvement in Iraq. I think there is only one thing that US can do to persuade Iran to stop its nuclear activities and that is to release the frozen assets of Iran (estimated to be $8 billion).

“Anyone believe the Bush administration will settle for less?”

That I can’t guess.