The Bush administration's self-congratulatory statements on the Iranian nuclear crisis notwithstanding, the question we should be asking ourselves is whether the "victory" proclaimed is a hollow one. Our government has done a fine job of convincing its citizens and media (and the rest of the world) that the U.S. is cautiously pursuing diplomacy (quite unlike Iraq's case), but in doing so has set the stage for a military confrontation "at the time of its choosing" without fear of alienating Congress, the people, or even citizens of other countries.
But let's look at the implications of this American "victory" in constraining Iran's nuclear ambitions. Firstly, Iran has made good on its threat to halt any cooperation with the IAEA outside of a strict interpretation of its obligations, and that means the Additional Protocol with its intrusive inspections regime (and adhered to but not ratified by Iran) is now a dead issue when it comes to Iran's program. How this is progress in maintaining some form of transparency in the Iranian nuclear program is unclear, since IAEA inspectors were regularly on the ground in Iran, deciding when and where to make surprise visits, and presumably won't be as often in the future.
Secondly, Iran is also making good on its threat to re-start actual nuclear enrichment (as opposed to uranium conversion which as alarming as it sounds is hardly major progress towards self-sufficiency in building a bomb). Again, if the Iranians manage to perfect the enrichment process while the IAEA and the U.N. debate sanctions or other isolating measures (other than military action), Iran will be much closer to a bomb-making capability than if its enrichment activities remained frozen, even if further down the line a compromise on the nuclear standoff (something the Bush administration claims it would like to see) is hammered out. How this helps set back the Iranian nuclear program is hard to see, unless of course, tactical airstrikes or war stops Iran dead in its tracks.
So what has the U.S. and the West gained from taking Iran's case to the U.N.? Perhaps a more important question to ask is why Iran's "six-point" proposal to the EU-3 on January 30th, before the IAEA vote, was rejected out of hand as "nothing new" when reports indicate (since the media hasn't found it necessary to examine the proposal, it's hard to find a detailed description of it) that included in the offer was a two-year freeze on enrichment while negotiations would be underway. If true, then it's hard to understand why exchanging a continued freeze on enrichment and talks is less preferable to full-scale enrichment and no talks, unless plans for military action are afoot. It is to the Bush administration's great credit that it has managed to play the Iran card so well that even Democratic members of Congress are joining rational Republican hawks such as John McCain in wondering when the Bush administration is going to "do something about Iran." If Messrs. Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld are looking for a free pass on another war, it's beginning to look like they're going to get it.
It should be said that if there is any victory for the U.S. in its confrontation with Iran, it is undoubtedly the reduced viability of the proposed Tehran oil bourse which was to have opened in March of this year. The oil bourse, being set up to compete with the London and New York exchanges, was planning to use the Euro as its currency, marking virtually the first time (other than Saddam Hussein demanding Euros for Iraq's oil) that oil could be widely traded for a currency other than the greenback. Although some have suggested that the real reason for U.S. concern with Iran is the challenge to the dollar's supremacy as the "oil standard", others have pointed out that it would be highly unlikely that the dollar or the U.S. economy could suffer much even if the Iranian bourse were successful. (The mainstream media has not bothered much with the implications of Tehran's potential competition in the oil exchanges.) Regardless of which position one takes, the reality is that under the present climate and with Iran in the Security Council doghouse, it is highly unlikely that the bourse, even if it is launched as planned, will attract much investment or attention. Of course if it does, we can always add the bourse building to the list of targets to be bombed.
UPDATE: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060207/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/iran_attitudes_1;_ylt=At8xc9SDzQ4XjoeGoFKNnYRSw60A;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl