After negotiating with the West for two years over their nuclear programmes, Iran and North Korea seem to be heading in opposite directions.

Today, North Korea announced that it would end its campaign to build a nuclear weapon, while Iran continues to insist on its rights to nuclear energy, prompting a crisis meeting at the International Atomic Energy Agency this morning. Richard Beeston, (left), Diplomatic Editor of The Times, discusses the developments.

Why has North Korea decided to climb down?

The breakthrough appears to have been prompted by a threat from the US to pull out of the talks unless progress was made. This in turn prompted the North Koreans to make their declaration. It could open the way for North Korea to return to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and allow for the resumption of monitoring by international nuclear inspectors.

What does North Korea get in return for its agreement to "de-nuclearise"?

First and foremost North Korea remains engaged with its key neighbours and the US. The main incentive for it to back down was the possibility that the international community will build a light water reactor for power generation and provide food and other aid.

Does this suggest that North Korea was bluffing over its capabilities?

North Korea is thought to have built a few nuclear weapons. It did so because it wanted to use them as a bargaining chip in order to squeeze concessions out of the international community. It wants a deal and so do its neighbours and the Americans. While it may have succeeded in unlocking the secret of the atom bomb, it cannot feed its own people and its country is desperately poor and in need of foreign assistance.

And on Iran. Iran says it has an inalienable right to nuclear power and no intention to build a nuclear weapon. What's the problem?

Signatories of the NPT are allowed to develop nuclear programmes for peaceful civilian use. It is under this provision that Iran has embarked on building a nuclear reactor at Bushehr with the help of Russian technicians. They are completing a programme first launched by the late Shah of Iran.

Where the Iranians have run into difficulties is over the question of fuel for the plant. They have also built a uranium conversion plant at Isfahan and a uranium enrichment plant at Natanz, which was constructed secretly over many years. The international community is concerned that Iran could use these facilities to make highly enriched uranium, which can be used as the core of a nuclear warhead.

Last year the Iranians agreed to stop work at the plants under a deal concluded with Britain, France and Germany, who offered to provide Iran with the fuel needed to run its civilian reactors. But the Iranians unilaterally pulled out of the deal last month and resumed work at the conversion plant. They are now threatening to start enrichment work at Isfahan. They argue they are within their legal rights to this, but their critics insist that they have gone back on their word.

What is the likely outcome of today's IAEA meeting?

While the news from North Korea will be celebrated, this is not the end of the process and many details will have to be resolved through careful diplomacy. The main issue to be resolved in Vienna remains Iran.

Britain, France and Germany have now decided that their two-year diplomatic efforts are drawing to a close. They are working on a tough-worded resolution against Iran. They and the Americans and other Western nations would like to refer Iran to the UN Security Council which has the teeth to punish Iran. While this view might have the support of some 20 of the 35 members of the IAEA the non-aligned movement nations are unhappy about what they see as a precedent set by the West against a developing country.

How much of the current tension is being driven by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the new hardline president of Iran?

Western diplomats involved in negotiations with the old regime were accustomed to horse-trading with the Iranians, who were famous for pushing a tough line and then relenting at the last minute. President Ahmadinejad seems far more straightforward and has set out his case in clear terms.

In one sense this is a relief since no one is left in any doubt about Tehran's intentions. That said, he is relative novice in international affairs. Does he really want to embark on an outright conflict with the West a first weeks into office? It is not clear, for instance, how he would respond if international sanctions were imposed against Iran, making the country even more isolated than it already is. In one respect he is lucky, though. The high oil price means that he has resources available to him to deal with the country's economic problems and give him a higher profile on the international stage.

Explore World News

• World Agenda

• Iraq News

• US & Americas News

• Europe News

• Middle East News

• Afghanistan News

• Asia News

• Africa News

• Ireland News

Times Recommends

• UN may halt 400-year-old 'freedom of the seas'
• Where the Rosetta belongs can’t be set in stone
• Gas deal on hold, but Ukraine may pay in the end