The agreement by Washington and the European Union to seek joint diplomatic means to curtail Tehran's nuclear programme has added spice to Iran's presidential election in June, emboldening conservative Islamists eager to confront the “Great Satan”.
Most Iranians aware the US encouraged the Shah's nuclear programme before the 1979 Islamic Revolution believe their government should not give up uranium enrichment, even though the US and EU are threatening to refer Iran to the UN Security Council if it does not do so.
“The nuclear issue is one where the people are ahead of us,” says an Iranian diplomat.
But differences over how to respond to international pressure are playing a growing role in the run-up to the election, when Mohammad Khatami, the reformist president, stands down.
“US pressure benefits the conservatives here, not those who want change,” said Mostafa Tajzadeh, a leading official in Mosharekat, the main reformist party. “I'm not sure if the US realises this but my assumption is that they do. It's to the benefit of the warmongers in Washington that the conservatives are in power here.”
The main conservative caucus, the Council for Co-ordinating the Islamic Revolution's Forces, this week endorsed Ali Larijani, as its presidential nominee.
Mr Larijani is the representative of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's supreme leader, on the Supreme National Security Council, and has criticised the 18-month-old negotiations with the EU. He said in November that Iran had “given a diamond and received a candy” by suspending uranium enrichment in return for promises of technology transfer and trade opportunities.
Europe's apparent acceptance of the US demand that Iran permanently give up enrichment has been seized on by conservatives as proof of the irrelevance of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty that allows signatories, such as Iran, to have peaceful nuclear energy and of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), whose inspections in Iran have not found evidence of the nuclear weapons programme. The Kayhan newspaper said this week events confirmed Washington's “brimming bile” and its plan for regime change in Iran.
But behind the scenes, more careful calculations are being made.
Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, the powerful head of the Expediency Council and former president, this week gave the clearest indication he would stand in the presidential election, telling newspaper editors “the responsibility is getting heavier”.
Allies of Mr Rafsanjani, who share his brand of pragmatic Islamic conservatism, have conducted the negotiations with the EU, and Mr Rafsanjani used a recent interview with USA Today, the American tabloid, to call for dialogue with Washington once, he stressed, the US showed “positive signs so that we can believe they are sincere”.
Throughout negotiations with the EU, Iranian officials have pledged they would never abandon uranium enrichment in the long-term. But some now suggest privately that Tehran's offer of “objective guarantees” as to the peaceful nature of its nuclear programme could entail a limit in its number of centrifuges, the central enrichment device.
“The minimum is a certain number, let's say 500 out of the 7,000-8,000, for enrichment, and then the Europeans can build up economically viable power plants [in Iran] and give us fuel,” said a senior official.
“It's clear Iran will be attacked if it doesn't give up the fuel cycle,” said a second senior official.
But both officials stressed how difficult compromise or retreat would be.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited . All rights reserved. Please don't copy articles from FT.com and redistribute by email or post to the web.