"A whiff of war" is how one German newspaper has described the drumbeat of threats against Iran emanating from Washington over the last week.
Given the authoritative sourcing of these threats this is a plausible description - even if they are intended as a warning to Iran's leadership not to proceed with a nuclear weapons programme, not an immediate declaration of hostilities.
Either way these developments represent a serious escalation of tension between the US and European states as well as with Iran. The threats cut across the efforts led by Germany, France and Britain to reach agreement with Iran not to develop a nuclear weapons programme in return for security and economic guarantees. While these have made substantial progress, they are not guaranteed success without US support. There is clearly a sharp division of opinion on the use of force against Iran between US and European leaders, while in Washington the debate on the best tactics required has tilted decisively towards those who believe Iranian leaders will only respond to credible military threats.
On the day President Bush delivered his inaugural address promising a doctrine of global democratic change without mentioning particular states, the Vice-President, Mr Dick Cheney, said that "you look around at potential trouble spots, Iran is right at the top of the list". He warned that Israel might take action first and "let the rest of the world worry about cleaning up the military mess afterwards", a scenario echoed this week by the head of Israel's intelligence service, who said Iran is close to the point of no return on nuclear weapons. According to the veteran journalist Seymour Hersch, US special forces have already explored potential targets in Iran as part of a new structure of clandestine operations controlled by the Pentagon.
Given the deepening mess in Iraq a threatened US war against Iran seems the height of folly to most European leaders and citizens. It would further destabilise the Middle East region without any guarantee that democratic change would be the beneficiary. In Iran such threats or actions are much more likely to bolster clerical right-wing rulers around a programme of Islamic nationalism against the US rather than precipitate regime change in favour of secular reformists.
If this is indeed the top foreign policy priority for the second Bush administration it will hasten the development of the EU's independent foreign policy, unite citizens in support of it and deepen transatlantic tensions.