Why Russia and China won't stop Iran.

The Obama administration is claiming that it finally has support from China and Russia for "crippling sanctions" on Iran over its nuclear program.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton recently proclaimed that America and China are "unified" on the sanctions issue, while President Obama said he expects a new United Nations Security Council sanctions resolution "within weeks."

But there's a catch: These hopeful statements jibe neither with reality nor with experience.

Take China. Just last week, the Chinese government -- with which we're supposedly on the same page regarding Iran sanctions -- hosted a delegation of senior Iranian nuclear negotiators.

Clinton: Wrongly claim ing US has unified stance with Chinese.

Clinton: Wrongly claim ing US has unified stance with Chinese.

Before the talks, the Chinese declared that a diplomatic solution was the best way to resolve the problem. After the talks, the Iranians said -- in the presence of a Chinese diplomat, who didn't dispute it -- that "we agreed. Sanctions as a tool have lost their effectiveness."

So the signals China is sending to Iran seem to be very different from the ones the Obama administration says it's getting from China. Indeed, a careful parsing of Chinese statements suggests that the United States and China are anything but unified on Iran sanctions.

China has agreed merely to talk about sanctions, not to impose them. And even this token gesture was forthcoming only after the United States indicated that it would back away from several key demands, including measures limiting Iran's access to international banking services and blocking Iranian aircraft and ships from international airspace and sea lanes.

It's the same deal with Russia. Clinton visited Russia a few weeks ago to press for a tough sanctions resolution. But on the very day that she arrived in Moscow, the Russian government made a stunning announcement: Russia will proceed with its planned construction of a controversial nuclear reactor in the Iranian city of Bushehr.

The timing of the announcement was no coincidence. The unmistakable message is that the Iranian government can continue to count on Russian protection of, and at times support for, its nuclear ambitions -- even in the face of American pressure.

None of this should surprise the United States. Russia and China played the same obstructionist role during North Korea's successful quest to become a nuclear power.

In one relevant example, the United States sought a resolution authorizing the inspection and interdiction of North Korean planes, trucks and vessels suspected of carrying illicit materials, and the banning of certain North Korean exports.

Russia and China removed the provisions, just as they're now forcing the removal of similar measures from Iran-related resolutions. Along the way, they provided financial aid to North Korea -- including a $200 million Chinese payment to North Korea shortly after Pyongyang detonated a second nuclear device last year -- and opened their markets to North Korean goods.

The fact is Russia and China simply don't find the prospect of a nuclear Iran as threatening as does the United States. Even worse, they apparently view an anti-American, nuclear-armed Iran as a strategic benefit to them, because it would balance America's growing dominance in much of the Middle East.

Coupled with the fact that both countries have made large investments in Iran that they don't want to jeopardize -- China, for example, recently committed $120 billion to Iran's energy sector -- Russia and China obviously won't countenance "crippling sanctions" anytime soon.

So the options are clear. Either the United States imposes meaningful sanctions outside of the Security Council -- without the support of Russia and China -- or it tries something else altogether, such as a military strike or some form of support for soft regime change.

But obtaining Security Council approval of watered-down, toothless sanctions -- which are what America will get if it stays on its present course -- is likely to have only one result: a nuclear-armed Iran allied with Russia and China.

Alexander Benard, managing director of a Middle East-focused investment firm, has worked at the Defense Department and the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Paul J. Leaf, a Los Angeles attorney, is a former editor of the Stanford Law Review.