In connection with the Iranian question, time is pressing. Teheran's refusal to suspend its enrichment activities has enabled it to accelerate its nuclear programme in recent months. We are perhaps only a few years away, just two or three, from the fatal moment when the Islamic Republic will be able to acquire the nuclear bomb. Every week counts in the race against time that is under way to avert the ''catastrophic alternative'' that would lead either to the Iranian bomb or to a war on Iran. Since December 2006 targeted and progressive sanctions have been in place thanks to unanimous decisions by the UN Security Council. These measures are having their effect. Iran is isolated and is finding it increasingly difficult to make its economy function. It is to be hoped that the sanctions will eventually weaken those within the mollahs' regime who champion a hard line with the West and who are pressing for an escalation over the nuclear question. This is why the pressure must be ! maintained. But there is no guarantee that the United Nations will adopt a new package of sanctions. The difficulty stems from the respite granted to Iran by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA,) which awaits explanations from Teheran of its dubious nuclear activities. Keen to avert [a repetition of] the Iraqi precedent, IAEA Director ElBaradei has spared Teheran so that his inspectors can remain on the ground. He has given Iran a few months to reply. Meanwhile it will be difficult to achieve a consensus at the Security Council on another resolution. It is in order to maintain the pressure that France is pressing for the EU to adopt sanctions outside the United Nations. Such measures would complement those adopted unilaterally by the United States, which are the ones that hurt the most, because they deprive the Iranian economy of access to the international financial system. In order to show the way, Paris has asked French firms to freeze their investments in Iran.! France's stiffening is also apparent from the language used. [Foreign Minister] Bernard Kouchner did not hesitate to dramatize what is at stake when he said that ''we must prepare for the worst,'' namely, ''for war,'' if Teheran persists in refusing to suspend its nuclear programme. The aim is not to press for a confrontation but to mobilize the public in order to make them aware of the gravity of the situation. At a time when the Europeans are hesitating to adopt further sanctions, it is useful to point out that that the latter constitute the only available instrument to support diplomatic efforts and to force Iran to change its attitude. As for the hypothesis cited by Mr Kouchner, let us be under no illusions. There is no point in ignoring it. It does indeed exist. The Iraqi debacle could prompt the United States to strike Iran in order to demonstrate that it strategic capability is undiminished. Rather than denying the actual facts, it is better to prepare for this eventuality. In order better to avert it.