[an error occurred while processing this directive]
BBC News
watch One-Minute World News
Last Updated: Wednesday, 25 January 2006, 14:27 GMT
Iran crisis: Global reaction
Iranian women at prayers holding pictures of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
Iran has denied claims it wants to build nuclear weapons
The BBC News websites have received thousands of emails from around the world commenting on the ongoing Iranian nuclear crisis.

The following comments reflect the balance of views received, by BBC websites in seven languages.

"There is nothing wrong with Iran developing its nuclear ability"
S Kumar, Dhanbad, India

"Proposing further negotiations cannot solve anything"
Irani, Shiraz, Iran

"Bush is only using threats to scare Iran"
Salama Alabd, Saudi Arabia

"Iran has to stop this programme - it cannot face the US"
Sajid Sarwar, Kuwait
"Sanctions against Iran will make their strict authorities stronger"
Sidor, Russia

"A theocratic country should not have nuclear technology"
D Gorgerino, Paraguay

"What is wrong with Iran doing nuclear research in its own territory?"
Bzon, China


There is absolutely nothing wrong with Iran developing its nuclear ability. It says this development is purely for peaceful purposes. If Iran was to direct its energy towards destructive purposes, it is the Western world which should be blamed.
Sanjog Kumar, Dhanbad, India

I am absolutely against exercising any control on Iran's nuclear programme. It is all America's doing. It is a known fact that the US has always pursued its ulterior motives and turned them into global concerns.
Mahendra Mishra, Noida, India

The US, Europe and other nations need to understand that nuclear development does not pose a threat to anybody. India and Pakistan are examples - since they have developed their nuclear energies they have not had a war. It is wrong for the West to want to retain its monopoly on nuclear weapons.
Ravish Vaishya, Canada

Of course every country has a right to its own nuclear development. But the point is, does Iran need nuclear energy to create electricity? It is a country rich in oil and can surely meet its needs through the same. Its nuclear development is not free of danger as it has also threatened Israel.
Deepak Dhimeere, Oxfordshire, UK

The US should first surrender its weapons of mass destruction. It is high time these nations stopped fooling the world.
Javed Aazam, Darbhanga, Bihar, India


When both sides stand firm on their grounds and have never shown any flexibility in previous talks, proposing further negotiations cannot solve anything. Iran says it is entitled to peaceful nuclear might and the West says - with no proof - it is making weapons of mass destruction. The vicious circle goes on. The West cannot be both the claimant and the judge.
Irani, Shiraz, Iran

If the negotiations result in taking away Iran's right to nuclear energy, it would be of no use to both sides because all that has been invested would go to waste. If the West is so worried about Iran's intentions, why does it refuse to get involved directly in its programme?
Nariman Rezaee, Tehran, Iran

To have nuclear energy is our right, even it means having to bear economic sanctions. Negotiations would come to no results as we have seen for the past two years. Has the West been honest enough with us for us to be honest with them?
Alireza, Shiraz, Iran

What is the meaning of negotiation? To accept whatever the other side is saying? That is not negotiation, that is dictation. That is exactly how the Americans and the Europeans see it.
Shahab Baradaran Dillmaqani, Tehran, Iran

Negotiations with the Europeans will bear no results. Hopefully, when the Democrats come to power in the US, we can negotiate with the key player herself - the US. We should avoid Europe and talk to the Americans.
Bohranzadeh, Iran

The world has not understood the Iranian mentality. They come together in the times of hardship. I do not believe that Iran would ever resort to nuclear attack on any country. Who has given the US and the British the right to dictate to us what to have and what not to have? I am not an Islamist but a patriot and shall fight for the advancement of my country.
Mehrdad, Tehran, Iran


I believe that Russia and China side with contemporary dictatorships, as they did during Saddam Hussein's reign. They should side with the international community to prevent the dangers that might threaten mankind.
Sirwan, Iraq

Nuclear weapons will not liberate Palestine or solve Arab or Islamic problems. Nuclear weapons do not even solve the problems of Pakistan; they have poverty and hunger - will nuclear weapons alleviate their suffering?
Yaqoub, Kuwait

Where was the UN Security Council, which is controlled like a puppet by the US, when Israel built its nuclear arsenal? Iran has to submit, either willingly or unwillingly, to the US. However, it is in fact Iran's right as long as it has the financial and technical capabilities needed for a nuclear programme.
Emad al-Sadiq, Egypt

Why cannot Iran have a nuclear bomb like India, Pakistan and Israel in the region? The West is known for its double standards concerning its interests. Bush is only using threats to scare Iran, but his threats will not materialise. If Iran has nuclear weapons, this will restore the power balance between Arab countries and the West.
Salama Alabd, Saudi Arabia

I think the continuing insistence of the US to condone Israel's nuclear programme is the reason for Iran's insistence on having its own nuclear programme.
Mohammed Shaymi, Egypt

Iran's unrelenting stance towards its nuclear programme will lead to its referral to the Security Council.
Majid el-Brikan, Basra, Iraq

I am surprised at the stance of the West which wants to prevent Iran from making nuclear weapons that the West was the first to build and use. Does Iran pose more threat than the US, France, Russia, Britain and China? If the international community wants to prevent such weapons, it should propose a law that is binding to all countries.
Hassam Musbah, Egypt


Iran has the right to make nuclear weapons like any Western, rich country in the world. If they do not make them their integrity will be under threat. Looking at the history of the world, who has used atomic bombs upon innocent civilians? The US and Western powers should give their weapons up, then they will be in a better position to demand that other countries do the same.
Syed Taqi Shah, London, Britain

I think Iran has to stop this programme because it cannot face the US at this present time. It would be better to use the silent way and develop their economy to compete with the US instead.
Sajid Sarwar, Kuwait

First of all the IAEA should define what it means by a 'dispute'. Is using atomic energy for constructive purposes a dispute or is using it for destructive purposes a dispute? We have seen in the recent past that Israel made atomic bombs but in that case there is no dispute.
Tariq Aziz, Jhang, Pakistan

This matter should be resolved by talks between Iran and the United Nations. China and Russia can play their part to solve the matter.
Tahir Hussain, Mississaua, Canada

Both sides are wrong. Why shouldn't an independent country have something which other countries already possess? I think either all countries should destroy their nuclear plants or all should be free to develop their nuclear programmes.
Abu Mohsin Mian, Sargodha, Pakistan


Tight sanctions against Iran will only make its fundamentalist authorities stronger. There were no justifications for the second Iraq war or for the first Iran war - only a US wish to show who is the boss.
Sidor, Russia

Is there anyone who can explain grounds for sanctions against Iran? Did it bomb villages in other countries? Did it demolish someone's house? Did it attack its neighbours? Did it have secret prisons for foreigners in other countries? They say that Iran supports terrorism. But can they prove it?
Kastus, Belarus

If you support sanctions against Iran you have to bear in mind that the same may happen with your country. That is why I support diplomacy and negotiations, no matter how difficult they might be.
Anonymous, Russia

You cannot drag things out forever. The only way to deal with this is to go to the Security Council.
Anonymous, Russia

It is always worth trying diplomacy. The Iranian president's provocative comments have logic. War is inevitable if the case goes to the UN Security Council.
Evgeni Nikitin, Lithuania


Iran is managed by a government we cannot trust. They showed that when its president spoke about wiping Israel off the map. What could they do if they had nuclear weapons? In my opinion, we shouldn't let them go any further.
Ann Barrie

There is no doubt that the rise of fundamentalist Islamic governments have been bad for peace, the economy and world stability. For this reason, such governments should not be allowed to develop weapons.
Gerald, Quito, Ecuador

I think that Iran should be referred immediately to the UN Security Council, particularly by China and Russia because Iran belongs to their geographical area. A theocratic country should not have nuclear technology because they could declare a holy war to all the religions that do not agree with them.
Damian Jimenez Gorgerino, Asuncion, Paraguay

The European Union should demand that Iran accepts an observation mission formed by a multinational team. They should also set an example by having such a team in their own nuclear centres.
Ricardo Figuera, Venezuela

Iran has the right to do the trials that it considers necessary. Obviously, it should be regulated so we know it is not intending to create weapons. But first it is important to check and see if the US allegations are valid or whether they are a lie just as they did before regarding Iraq.
Luis Humberto Tejeda Taibo, Veracruz, Mexico


Iran has the legitimate right to develop nuclear weapons of their own in the same way as Israel does, because Iran has the right to defend itself and avoid being invaded as Iraq was.
Lugo, UK

The US, EU, China and Russia are motivated by their national interests. What is wrong with Iran doing nuclear research within its own territory? By international law it is not a strong enough reason for foreign interference.
Bzon, China

Geopolitically, the US troops occupied Afghanistan first, then Iraq. Their obvious purpose is to attack Iran from both flanks. However, I strongly advise against invading Iran and the UK should keep neutral.
Shulun, Taizhong County, Taiwan

Iran's oil is vital for China. China has made enough efforts to prevent Iran from having sanctions. In the event of war, the best China could do is to protest, lending some psychological support to Iran, China's important energy partner.
GG, China

The military intervention now is inevitable, the only question is how many countries would take part and in what way? Unless Iran gives up, the eventual result would be just like Iraq and Afghanistan. The only difference is Iran may resist longer.
Neutral, Thailand



Americas Africa Europe Middle East South Asia Asia Pacific