WASHINGTON, April 30, 2006 (IslamOnline.net & News Agencies) – Seeking to forge a unified stance against Iran, the Bush administration is increasingly resorting to the same diplomatic rhetoric it used in the run-up to the Iraq war, invoking the "coalition of the willing," "UN credibility" and "weapons of mass destruction" clichés.

Nearly four years after President George W. Bush warned the UN it risked becoming "irrelevant" unless it dealt with Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, his administration is billing the showdown with Iran as a new test of UN mettle, Agence France-Presse (AFP) reported Sunday, April 30.

"Iran is openly challenging the United Nations," deputy State Department spokesman Adam Ereli said on Friday, April 28.

"That challenge should have consequences in order to sustain and to reinforce the credibility of the UN as an institution."

In a report to the UN Security Council on Friday, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief Mohamed ElBaradei said Tehran had failed to heed calls to stop enriching uranium.

Iran confirmed on Saturday, April 29, it was ready to re-allow snap UN atomic inspections if its case was dropped by the UN Security Council and passed back to the UN nuclear watchdog.

Faced with stubborn resistance from veto-wielding Security Council members Russia and China to punitive measures against Iran, the US is working on an alternative to UN action as it did for Iraq.

Back then it was a "coalition of the willing" rising up against Saddam; now it's a group of "like-minded nations" determined to keep Iran's nuclear ambitions in check.

The US is encouraging countries to consider their own sanctions against Tehran, such as a cutoff of trade, an embargo on sales of sensitive materiel, or asset freezes and travel restrictions on Iranian leaders.

"It's not beyond the realm of the possible that at some point in the future a group of countries could get together if the Security Council is not able to act," said Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns.

"That's important because those that might prevent the Security Council from acting effectively need to understand that the international community has to find a way and will find a way to express our displeasure with the Iranians."

Except for its chief ally the United Kingdom, the US failed to drum up support for a military action against Baghdad from world heavyweights like France and Germany, which insisted on a UN resolution first.

Now the US is pressing hard for a new "chapter seven" Security Council resolution that would open the way for sanctions and, in theory, military action.

"We do think there's a sense of urgency here and we hope that we can get council action just as soon as possible," US Ambassador to the UN John Bolton said Friday.

"The right to self-defense does not necessarily require a UN Security Council resolution," said Rice.

Underpinning US diplomacy is the always-present threat of force, if not to topple the Iranian regime then to strike at its nuclear facilities.

While publicly committed to a diplomatic track, the US has consistently refused to take the military option off the table and has sharpened its tone in recent weeks.

Before the US-led invasion of Iraq, President Bush insisted that diplomacy had not been yet exhausted to opt for a military action.

Bush, speaking in the Rose Garden after the release of the IAEA report, said he is not discouraged by the failure of diplomatic pressure on Iran.

"I think the diplomatic options are just beginning," he said, adding that "the world is united and concerned" about Iran's nuclear program.

In a speech in Chicago on April 19, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice raised echoes of the Bush administration's readiness to go-it-alone if necessary that put it at odds with many US allies at the outset of the war in Iraq.

"The right to self-defense does not necessarily require a UN Security Council resolution," she said.

"We are prepared to use measures at our disposal -- political, economic or others -- to persuade Iran."

Bush threatened in an interview with the Israeli television on August 13 he could consider using force to press Iran to give up its nuclear program.

"The use of force is the last option for any president and you know, we've used force in the recent past to secure our country," he said in a clear reference to the Iraq war.

US veteran investigative journalist Seymour Hersh said in a report earlier this month that the administration is looking "seriously" at striking Iran with tactical nuclear weapons.

The Bush administration is also playing the terror card in its standoff with Tehran.

The State Department's annual report on terrorism worldwide, released on Friday, described Iran as the world's most active sponsors of terrorism.

It said the Revolutionary Guards and the ministry of intelligence and security are directly involved in the planning and supporting "terrorist" acts in Iraq and elsewhere.

The report also accused Tehran of backing "terrorist" groups in Lebanon and the Palestinian territories.

In the run-up to the war, Bush and top administration officials repeatedly tried to link the Saddam regime to Al-Qaeda.

But an official investigation into the September 11 attacks found no links between the two, refuting a major war rationale.