In a fit of fiery eloquence, Ahmadinejad felt all but a messiah and warned the powers that be: "If the world powers listen to my advice, they will live in peace and security. If not, they will sink into darkness, as the Quran says."

Even his idol, the architect of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, would not have dared issue such a warning.

But as the New Testament goes, "Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things which are God's." We should not forget about worldly problems. One of the most burning issues is Tehran's nuclear program. The world community expected the Iranian president to speak about its civilian direction but heard only appeals to turn to God.

There is no doubt that Ahmadinejad's impressive performance is just the beginning.

It was continued on Sept. 27 when the foreign ministers of the Iranian Six gathered in the U.N. headquarters to discuss further action on Tehran's nuclear program. The Six consist of the pro-Iranian Russia and China, and the anti-Iranian United States, France, Britain and Germany.

Further action means tougher sanctions, which are advocated by the latter four. Iran has not complied with the previous resolution of the U.N. Security Council No. 1747 on the moratorium on all uranium-enrichment procedures, and is not going to abide by it. As for the sanctions, they have produced no impression on Iran at all, but Russia and China are ready to give it another chance to avoid punishment.

Sanctions are not likely to be toughened, because Russia and China have a well-grounded position demonstrated by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. He said that the Security Council may discuss tougher sanctions in the future but the time was not yet ripe for that -- now the Council should support the Iran-International Atomic Energy Agency agreements and give Tehran an opportunity to carry them out.

The Six should primarily try to remove vague points in Iran's nuclear program rather than introduce new sanctions. As a result, the Six would "become clear on many issues that have remained unanswered up to this day," Lavrov explained.

Having recently stepped up its cooperation with the IAEA, Iran has done away with a number of white spots in its nuclear program, but all of them are from the past, like the issue of the plutonium trace in Iranian centrifuges.

The main question is still there: Why should Iran go for a full nuclear cycle -- commercial uranium enrichment -- if it does not have the ability to produce heat-emitting pellets?

Nuclear fuel is loaded into a reactor exclusively in pellets, but Iran will not be able to produce them in the foreseeable future. Why is it still developing its nuclear-enrichment cycle? Ahmadinejad has not answered this most important question.

Meanwhile, his position does not enjoy undivided support in Iran. Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, his main rival in the presidential elections, the former president and now the chairman of the Council of Experts, Iran's No. 1 authority, maintains that while being a national priority, the Iranian nuclear program should not bring disaster to the Iranian people. An obvious majority in the Council of Experts shares this view.

Ahmadinejad's impressive performance in New York was meant not only to win him sympathy at the United Nations but also to help him retain support at home.

earlier related report
Bush wants diplomatic end to 'Iran problem'
US President George W. Bush wants a peaceful end to "the Iranian problem," the White House said Monday after a fresh report that the United States is looking at possible military options.

"The president has said that he believes there is a diplomatic solution that we can use to solve the Iranian problem. And that's why we're working with our allies to get there," said Bush spokeswoman Dana Perino.

Perino refused to comment on an article in The New Yorker magazine about alleged US preparations for war except to express frustration with its unnamed sources and with other US media outlets for reporting what the piece said.

"We don't discuss such things. What we have said and what we are working toward is a diplomatic solution in Iran," she said.

"What the president has also said is that as a president, as a commander in chief -- and any commander in chief would not take any option off the table -- but the option that we are pursuing right now is diplomacy," said Perino.

The magazine reported that the White House had asked the Pentagon earlier this year to redraw longstanding contingency plans for a possible attack on the Islamic republic amid concerns over its nuclear program and allegations of aiding fighters who target US troops in Iraq.

The New Yorker, which cited anonymous sources, said that Bush told the US ambassador to Baghdad, Ryan Crocker, a few months ago that he was thinking of hitting Iranian targets across Iraq's border and that he had British support.

At that point, the magazine said, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice interjected that Washington needed to proceed carefully because of diplomatic outreach to Tehran, and Bush ended up telling Crocker to warn Iran of retribution if it continued to interfere with US-led efforts in Iraq.

"I'm not going to comment on that," said Perino. "I'm not going to comment on any possible scenario that an anonymous source continues to feed into (investigative reporters Seymour) Sy Hersh. I'm just not going to do it."

(Pyotr Goncharov is a political commentator for RIA Novosti. This article is reprinted by permission of RIA Novosti. The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.)

(United Press International's "Outside View" commentaries are written by outside contributors who specialize in a variety of important issues. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of United Press International. In the interests of creating an open forum, original submissions are invited.)