Karim Sadjadpour of the Carnegie Endowment writes in the Washington Post that since Khamenei is averse to any compromise therefore he may think that building nuclear weapons is a way out of the current standoff:
But as unprecedented political and economic pressures — including sanctions against Iran's central bank and the European Union oil embargo — increasingly push his back against the wall, Khamenei seemingly has two paths to deliverance: a nuclear compromise or a nuclear weapon...
When you read nonsense like this you have to wonder what sort of drugs these Iran analysts are taking. The fact that both US and Israeli intelligence say that there's no actual nuclear weapons program in Iran, and that there's no proof that the Iranians want nuclear weapons; the fact that Khamenei himself has come on TV and publicly stated that he considers nuclear weapons to be a "great sin", apparently has no impact at all on their thinking.
Karim is right that Khamenei considers compromise impossible with a US that seeks regime change - and this is BECAUSE of a histroy of the US ignoring Iranian compromise offers. As Elbaradei himself noted:
“They weren’t interested in a compromise with the government in Tehran, but regime change – by any means necessary”
But Sadjadpour continues:
It’s possible that in the near term Khamenei will attempt a tactical and temporary compromise to stave off pressure and sow divisions among Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States (the P5+1), namely to peel China and Russia away from the United States and the European Union. There are no indications now, however, that Khamenei feels forced to make the types of meaningful and binding nuclear compromises that would reassure the United States and potentially placate Israel. (Such steps would probably include capping at 5 percent the level to which Tehran enriches uranium, sending out stockpiles of low-enriched uranium and agreeing to an intrusive inspections regime.)
There are many problems with this. Of course, Iran has already offered to cap enrichment and to send out the stockpiles of 20% enriched uranium and to allow greater monitoring of its nuclear program. But factual accuracy is not Sadjadpour's agenda. See, what this op-ed by Sadjadpour is, is a pre-emptive labeling of any move by Iran which actually reaches a compromise deal with the US as being merely a "tactical and temporary" delay in Iran's alleged quest for nuclear weapons. This is what the hawks will call any deal that is reached with Iran, if one is ever reached: a plot by the Iranians to "sow dissension" in those opposed to them, so as to "buy time" to make bombs.