The Iranian nuclear issue has become more complicated.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Tuesday said that there is "no problem" if Iran ships abroad its low-grade enriched uranium and receives upgraded uranium several months later.

On Wednesday, Iran test-fired a satellite rocket, which the West fears "could be used to build long-range missiles and deliver warheads."

Almost within 24 hours, Tehran has made two moves on the sensitive nuclear issue, sending a subtle signal to the international community.

Under a draft deal brokered by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the international nuclear watchdog, in October 2009, most of Iran's existing low-grade enriched uranium would be shipped to Russia and France to be processed into fuel rods with a purity of 20 percent. The higher-level enriched uranium would then be sent back to Iran.

The United States, France and Britain had set the end of 2009 as the deadline for Tehran to agree, warning of a new round of sanctions otherwise.

However, Tehran defied the deadline despite a strong call for sanctions from the West.

At a meeting of foreign ministers from the U.S., France, Britain, Russia, China and Germany last month in New York, the Western nations, led by the U.S., demanded "strong sanctions" against Iran from the United Nations.

Just before the possible new sanctions come out, Ahmadinejad made the positive remarks on Tuesday that signaled a major change in Tehran's position toward its nuclear issue, if not a "U-turn."

In response to the change, Russia sent out a hailing signal but Western powers remained cautious.

"If Iran is willing to revert to the plan agreed upon earlier, we will only welcome this," Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Wednesday.

French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said he was "perplexed" while U.S. State Department spokesman Gordon Duguid said Tehran should simply agree to the original deal by the IAEA.

In the meantime, the West has chastised Tehran over its rocket test-firing, saying the move was a "provocative act" and reiterating its call for "strong sanctions."

The question is whether sanctions are effective in resolving the issue.

It is known to all that the UN Security Council had imposed three rounds of sanctions against Iran, but the measures failed to alter Tehran's firm stance.

As a matter of fact, the Iranian nuclear issue contains complicated elements, like the mistrust between Tehran and Western powers and the political situation within Iran.

Facts have repeatedly proven that imposing sanctions is not effective in resolving the thorny issue. Instead, it would increase mistrust and confrontation.

Resolving international and regional issues through diplomatic and peaceful means is a principle widely supported by the international community. The Iranian nuclear issue is not an exception.

As China's UN Ambassador Zhang Yesui put it: "It is not time to impose sanctions since diplomatic efforts are still under way."

Zhang said it is better to resolve the issue through diplomatic and peaceful means, and such an approach is also in the interests of the international community.

With no doubt, the signals sent by Tehran over the past few days, subtle as they were, tested not only Iran's political wisdom and flexibility but also the real intentions of various parties. What do they really want? Sanctions or progress?