Kharazi was also quoted by the student news agency ISNA as saying he believed the Americans were "intelligent enough" not to attack Iran, which Washington accuses of using an atomic energy drive as a cover for weapons development.

He said the main focus of Iran's negotiations with the European Union was "the recognition of Iran's legitimate right to master nuclear technology, notably the production of fuel... for 20 stations of 1,000 megawatts".

Britain, France and Germany have been trying to persuade Tehran to permanently abandon its capacity to produce enriched uranium -- which can be directed to both civil and military uses -- in return for a package of incentives.

The diplomatic effort is aimed at securing "objective guarantees" that Iran will not produce nuclear weapons.

"We have mastered the technology, so the Europeans know that they cannot employ the language of force," said Kharazi, who was speaking on the sidelines of a conference entitled Persian Gulf Security and Cooperation.

He said that unlike the Europeans, he wanted to see "a formula whereby Iran can continue to enrich, and in cooperation with the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency), give the guarantees that it is not heading towards a nuclear weapon."

"Different propositions have been made, and we hope to reach a result," he added.

Following talks in Paris last October, Iran pledged to suspend its fuel cycle work while the negotiations are in progress, but has also consistently warned that the freeze on enrichment is only temporary.

The United States in particular accuses Iran of seeking weapons, while many European diplomats see the fuel cycle drive as Iran seeking a "strategic option" to build an atomic bomb.

But Kharazi said: "I think that the American leaders are intelligent enough, that they have learned the lesson from Iraq and that they will not attack another country, especially Iran which is not like Iraq."

A two-year probe by the IAEA, the UN body that monitors the NPT, has uncovered plenty of suspect activity by Iran but no conclusive evidence that it has military plans for its programme.