If there is one thing that all nations are agreed on -- when it comes to Iran -- it is that "everybody wants to avoid another Iraq," as the incoming UN deputy secretary general, Mark Malloch Brown put it. But it is much more difficult to reach a consensus on how exactly that should be done. Measures, actions, consequences -- when it comes to possible strategies, there is a lot of vagueness flying round. Most of these terms are simply synonyms for sanctions, rather than military action. But do even economic or political sanctions look like a realistic solution?

Russia and China, are currently likely to veto any Security Council decision to impose sanctions due to their energy interests with Iran. Russia is building a nuclear power reactor for Iran, while China has agreements to buy oil from Iran, and intends to develop one of its oil fields. The United States, on the other hand, already bans pretty much all trade with Iran, making any official American sanctions effectively toothless anyway. After International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief Mohamed ElBaradei slammed Iran in a report that cited the country's lack of cooperation, he also made a point of saying the matter should not be allowed to escalate out of control: "I think we need people to lower the rhetoric … everybody will benefit from a political settlement of the Iranian issue and it would be a positive implication on an already volatile area." Is this likely? Today's papers in Germany are not so sure.

The Berlin-based daily Der Tagesspiegel sees in the current Iran crisis unfortunate similarities with the run-up to the Iraq war. "US Vice President Dick Cheney is once again threatening 'serious consequences.' More drastic still are the words of the American UN ambassador John Bolton, who said that the US would use every means possible to prevent an Iranian atomic program." The only thing missing, the paper ironically adds, is a dramatic performance by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to the UN Security Council, in which satellite pictures prove that the Mullahs are on the verge of building the bomb. "The bellicose rhetoric sounds all too familiar to be believed," writes the commentator bitterly. "We are now suffering the consequences for how, before the Iraq war, the truth was shamelessly manipulated." The paper believes that the result of this "illegal war," developments in Iran and Iraq have become more closely linked than ever. The commentator also believes, perhaps somewhat overdramatically, that a civil war in Iraq depends entirely on a click of the fingers from Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Because the US and Britain have lost credibility in Iraq, the solution, according to the paper, is for Berlin and Paris to play a more important role in talks with Iran. "Washington would do well to stay in the background."

But for the conservative Die Welt, this lack of unity against Iran is exactly the problem. "So far the Iranians have failed to outmaneuver the UN Security Council or separate the Europeans from the Americans," writes the commentator. "The world's powers are united in their wish to prevent Iran from getting the bomb, however, not in how they view US domination of the Gulf." The paper also believes that the Iranian crisis is a result of the war in Iraq, and is adamant that achieving stability in this region is the biggest challenge the world faces. "The idea that Iran's nuclear capacity could really be neutral is nothing more than self-delusion and appeasement." The paper concludes by saying that "the only thing that stands between the Europeans and nuclear blackmail is the United States."

Not afraid to bring a bit of emotion into the debate, the populist tabloid Bild rather predictably ups the fear stakes, by featuring a picture of a manic Ahmadinejad looking decidedly unhinged, like some sort of comedy dictator, under the headline "Iran threatens the US with terror." Just in case the picture and headline weren't enough the paper dubs Iran's president "The madman from Teheran."

The center-left Süddeutsche Zeitung rather more soberly writes that it would be a good thing for the UN Security Council to step in, saying it is high time. The paper concedes there are risks involved if the Council get involved, mainly that the Europeans and Americans, who favor a harder line, will probably clash with the more reticent Russians and Chinese over sanctions. "In the last few days Russia has come up with new suggestions for compromise which the West views as out of the question." The paper believes that the Security Council finds itself faced with two tasks. "Tehran must be carefully, but decisively, brought to its senses," concludes the commentator. "At the same time the Council must ensure that it avoids becoming as divided as it did over Iraq. No wonder some diplomats are already feeling queasy."

-- Damien McGuinness, 12:00 p.m. CET
____________________________________________________

Do Mention The War

It's never easy dealing with someone who feels hard done by. Especially when that someone has been harboring a grudge since 1945 for the destruction of an entire country -- which is why Germany has to be forgiving when Poland acts a bit prickly at times. However over the last year the German-Polish relationship, which has never been an easy one, has suffered several severe blows.

The cooperation between Russia and Germany to build a natural gas pipeline under the Baltic Sea, avoiding Poland altogether, brought back painful memories of previous German-Russian co-operations which resulted in Poland disappearing entirely. Then-Chancellor Gerhard Schröder's cavalier attitude to Polish sensitivities didn't exactly  help. And the proposed memorial center for German war-time expellees in Berlin has created another storm of controversy in Poland, from those who are saying the Germans are trying to make themselves out to be victims as well. In addition Poland's wholesale rejection of the EU draft constitution last year-- seen by many in Germany as selfish and high-handed, has hardly helped.

In an attempt to improve German-Polish relations, Polish President Lech Kaczynski traveled to Germany on Wednesday,  for the first time in his life, to meet with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Both have called for an "open and honest dialogue," which is polite way of saying "argue." But at least they are talking.

Given that the left-leaning Berliner Zeitung has the headline "A Difficult Neighbor" above its editorial about Poland, it is clear that the paper is hardly Kaczynski's greatest fan. The commentator appears piqued that Germany was only sixth on the list of country's to be visited by the Polish president and goes on to say that "it was predictable that with the incoming head of state, who enjoys being provocative and confrontational, the already complicated German-Polish relationship would enter an especially difficult phase." Although the paper is clearly uncomfortable with Kaczynski's confident Polish patriotism -- for most liberal Germans any form of national pride is generally suspect anyway -- it recognizes the importance of Poland as Eastern Europe's largest and economically most important country. However the commentator still regards the Polish leader as someone who puts his country's interests over those of Europe. "He knocked back the European constitution, knowing full well that this would make him no friends in Berlin."

The center-left Süddeutsche Zeitung is equally scathing when it comes to Poland's administration. "The new national conservative leadership is more provincial and more divorced from reality than that of any other country in the European Union. President Lech Kaczynski had never before been to Germany. And like his brother Jaroslaw, who runs the local government in Warsaw, he is a foreign policy layman." But the real problem, believes the commentator, is history. "Two generations after World War II the Germans, while owning up to their responsibility, view this chapter of their history as closed." This, says the paper, is not the case with the Poles, who don't draw a line under what has happened. "After the Polish partitions of the 19th century, Poles started romantically thinking of themselves as the 'people of heroes and victims.' The generation born just after the war, which includes the Kaczynski twins, also views itself as victims." According to the commentator this prickly attitude is felt in all foreign policy negotiations, from the German-Russian gas pipeline which would bypass Poland, to Poland's rejection of the EU draft treaty. But the paper sees hope in Chancellor Angela Merkel's understanding of the importance of psychology when dealing with the Poles, with whom she shows a lot more sensitivity than ex-Chancellor Schröder ever did. "An improvement in the German-Polish relationship depends entirely on whether Merkel succeeds in finding a way-in to the seemingly emotionally impenetrable Kaczynski," concludes the paper.