Nukes And Mullahs.(ISSUES & INSIGHTS)(EDITORIALS)(Editorial)

Iran: We see two peaceful solutions to Tehran's nuclear threat. One is to get Europe behind tough sanctions. The other is democratic change. Which would be easier?

Well, neither is a snap. But if we had to stake the future on reluctant allies or on the Iranian people, we'd bank on the latter. The mad theocracy that rules Iran has begun processing uranium to eventual bomb-grade quality and is upgrading its Shahab-3 missile, which can deliver a one-ton warhead as far as the Turkish capital of Ankara.

Meanwhile, the U.S. has been trying to get Britain, France and Germany to agree on sanctions against the Iranian regime if it doesn't shape up. So far, no luck.

That approach is too punitive for the Europeans, who prefer rewarding Iran when (if ever) it shows signs of good behavior. Unless this attitude changes, the U.S. faces a long diplomatic slog trying to create a united front. Even if it does, it may end up with nothing better than a promise of compliance that Iran -- like North Korea in the 1990s -- could secretly break.

The reality of Iran is this: As long as the current regime's in power, it'll be trouble. It can't be trusted to keep agreements, and it'll continue to be a source of instability and terrorism. The only real solution is regime change, and the only practical hope for that comes from within, through the people's thirst for democracy.

A couple of years ago, the Bush administration appeared to have accepted this fact and was doing its best to encourage Iranian movements for political reform. But lately it seems to have scaled down its goal to ...