Group items tagged

But outside analysts said the suspicions surrounding Mr. Ahmadinejad’s re-election would create new problems. “This is the worst result,” said Thomas R. Pickering, a former under secretary of state. “The U.S. will have to worry about being perceived as pandering to a president whose legitimacy is in question. It clearly makes the notion of providing incentives quite unappetizing.”

In Israel, which has hinted that it might launch a military strike on Iran to disable its nuclear capability, officials said Mr. Ahmadinejad’s victory underscored the threat from Tehran and the need for a tough response rather than patient diplomacy.Vice Prime Minister Silvan Shalom said in Tel Aviv that the victory “sends a clear message to the world” that Iran’s policies have broad internal support and will be continued. The results, he added, also “blow up in the faces of those” who thought Iran was ready for “a genuine dialogue with the free world on stopping its nuclear program.”

Many analysts and Middle East officials asserted that the outcome reinforced the reality that ultimate power resides not in the democratically elected president, but rather in Iran’s supreme religious leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.“We should be clear about what we’re dealing with,” said Karim Sadjadpour, an Iran expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “Just as we deal with Assad’s Syria and Mubarak’s Egypt, we now have to deal with Khamenei’s Iran,”

“It is easy to insult and confront and have Iran as a foe when Ahmadinejad is president,” said an Egyptian diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity in keeping with diplomatic protocol. “A lot of people would have been inconvenienced if someone else had become president.”

Mr. Obama, officials said, has long said he was willing to negotiate with whoever would respond, including Ayatollah Khamenei. “The administration will deal with the situation we have, not what we wish it to be,” another senior official said.

For the United States, the larger problem is that while the election has frozen the dialogue, Iran’s nuclear program has speeded ahead. This month, the International Atomic Energy Agency reported that by May’s end, Iran had built and installed 7,200 centrifuges to enrich uranium and was quickly adding to its stock of nuclear fuel.

Now, the administration faces a vexing choice. It can continue to demand that Iran give up all of its enrichment capability — still the official position of the United States, but considered an all but impossible goal. Or it can tacitly accept that Iran is not going to stop enriching.

Gary Samore, a former Clinton administration arms control negotiator who is expected to become Mr. Obama’s nonproliferation czar, has argued that any carrot offered to Iran should be accompanied by a bigger stick.

Aides to Mr. Obama say that Mr. Samore has favored offering Tehran warmer relations with the United States, including lifting certain American sanctions against Iran and assuring the Iranian leadership that the United States will not pursue regime change. (Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. said in the past that he thought the United States should assure Iran that it would not pursue regime change.) But Mr. Samore has also argued that such an offer is not enough unless it comes backed by the threat of stronger sanctions from the United States, Europe, Russia and China, like, for instance, a ban on foreign investment in Iran’s oil and gas industry.

United Against Nuclear Iran, an organization dedicated to stopping Iran from getting nuclear weapons

Several European diplomats said that France, Britain and Germany might be willing to consider sanctions if the Obama administration makes an effort to improve the atmosphere with Iran first.

American policy toward Iran is also likely to be complicated by presidential elections scheduled for June. An overture by the United States would raise two kinds of risks, experts say: that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran would benefit politically from such a gesture, and that he may choose to rebuff Washington to score political points before the voting.

“Coming out of the barrel like a jack-in-the-box, saying, ‘Meet us in two days in Geneva for talks,’ would be a mistake,” said Thomas R. Pickering, a former undersecretary of state for political affairs