More selective leaking from our friends at the Central Intelligence Agency:
A classified draft CIA assessment has found no firm evidence of a secret drive by Iran to develop nuclear weapons, as alleged by the White House, a top US investigative reporter has said.Seymour Hersh, writing in an article for the November 27 issue of the magazine The New Yorker released in advance, reported on whether the administration of Republican President George W. Bush was more, or less, inclined to attack Iran after Democrats won control of Congress last week.
A month before the November 7 legislative elections, Hersh wrote, Vice President Dick Cheney attended a national-security discussion that touched on the impact of Democratic victory in both chambers on Iran policy.
“If the Democrats won on November 7th, the vice president said, that victory would not stop the administration from pursuing a military option with Iran,” Hersh wrote, citing a source familiar with the discussion.
Of course, the CIA might be wrong – or at least this analysis may be flawed. There are probably other assessments that are much less sanguine regarding Iran’s nuclear ambitions but no one leaked those reports. They’re a secret.
And I suppose Iran’s known and verified relationship with Big Daddy A.Q. Khan – father of Pakistan’s atomic bomb – and his travelling nuclear arms bazaar was just a coincidence – a happenstance of fortunate circumstance. Besides, Khan wasn’t selling nukes, he was selling ice cream machines.
Except that this document discovered by the IAEA, proves that either Iran is seeking to build nuclear weapons or those ice cream machines have one helluva kick:
A document obtained by Iran on the nuclear black market serves no other purpose than to make an atomic bomb, the International Atomic Energy Agency said Tuesday.The finding was made in a report prepared for presentation to the 35-nation IAEA board when it meets, starting Thursday, on whether to refer Iran to the U.N. Security Council, which has the power to impose economic and political sanctions on Iran.
The report was made available in full to The Associated Press.
First mention of the documents was made late last year in a longer IAEA report. At that time, the agency said only that the papers showed how to cast “enriched, natural and depleted uranium metal into hemispherical forms.”
The agency refused to make a judgment on what possible uses such casts would have. But diplomats familiar with the probe into Iran’s nuclear program said then that the papers apparently were instructions on how to mold highly enriched grade uranium into the core of warheads.
In the brief report obtained Tuesday, however, the agency said bluntly that the 15-page document showing how to cast fissile uranium into metal was “related to the fabrication of nuclear weapon components.”
Iran is probably claiming the document was accidentally stuck in between instructions on how to make a killer Rocky Road or maybe a sublime Moose Tracks.
Most of the rest of the planet believes that Iran’s heavy water reactors at Natanz and Arak serve no other purpose than to manufacture plutonium, a waste product of the nuclear reactions at the plants. Or perhaps the CIA believes that the heavy water will be used to create a particularly tasty variation of “Magilla Vanilla.”
And all of this secrecy and subterfuge surrounding their nuclear efforts is almost certainly not due to the fact that they wish to hide the development of a weapons program but rather because their recipe for “Black Cherry Surprise” promises to sweep the world.
All kidding aside, one point made by the assessment is probably correct; Iran is no where near having the capability to enrich uranium to the 85-90% necessary in order to build a bomb. And the heavy water reactors are years away from generating enough power to manufacture enough plutonium for a single weapon (although the 40 Megawatt facility at Arak promises to be a veritable plutonium assembly line once its fully operational and producing).
The key to the assessment is that the CIA has found no “firm” evidence of a secret Iranian nuke program. There is plenty of anecdotal and circumstantial evidence that they are, in fact, working hard to build the bomb. But the fact remains that there is no documentary or photographic “smoking gun” that would confirm our suspicions one way or another.
To proceed on the assumption that they aren’t building a bomb would be stupid. To bomb them without some idea of what facilities to hit would be equally dumb. And while negotiations would almost certainly be a waste of time, protocol, tradition, and common sense demands that we talk directly to the Iranians at some point. For this reason – and because they are at least 3 and probably more years from even getting close to succeeding – it would seem politic of us to sit down with the Iranians and discuss nukes, Iraq, and other regional issues that impact our security.
Besides, maybe the CIA will discover Iran’s secret frozen custard capability. That would make talking to the mullahs worthwhile.
6:19 pm
One of the VERY VERY few times I’ve heard any blogger or media report state that simple fact, as is this:
Bravo!
One scenario I’ve put forth here and in other places is that Iran is not seeking nuclear weapons themselves, but the capability to produce them in a relatively short period of time. This strategy has several advantages for the Iranians. First, they don’t need to worry about hiding a cladestine program, whose discovery would be the “smoking gun” initiating an attack. Second, they can get to 95% of a weapon by using technology that’s perfectly legal under the NPT (as a reminder Iran’s current development and deployment of enrichment technology is perfectly legal under the NPT). Third, once the nuclear fuel cycle is mastered, they could weaponize quickly by reconfiguring their cascades or building new ones.
There is a lot of hyperbole on Iran running around the blogosphere and media. People need to seriously and critically consider the evidence and the costs of military action. Those who advocate attacking Iran almost universally overstate the evidence against Iran and understate the costs of military action. They also view the Iranian leadership as “Krazy” with a capital “K.”
That really depends on the context of negotiations. So far, Bush and company have primarily used poorly veiled threats in an effort to coerce Iran, and it’s failed miserably (predictably, I might add). It’s hard to change to negotiations at this particular point in time as Iran now views itself in a position of relative strength and therefore will likely be a much tougher negotiator, espcially given our hypocrisy in negotiating a nuclear deal with India.
8:25 pm
Conversely, the Iranians need to understand that we were stupid enough to invade Iraq, and we’re stupid enough to bomb their nuclear facilities.
(Change stupid to whatever adjective you prefer.)
Agreed that the “We Must Bomb Iran Now” crowd is getting way to much serious attention.
8:46 pm
Regarding the need to bomb Iran, I believe the U.S. would be better off letting the Israeli’s do that. The issue of a nuclear Iran is an existential issue for Israel and with President Ahmedenijad’s statements, while world opinion would be against Israel, the condemnation would be half-hearted at best.
Iran may also be accelerating their pursuit of nuclear technology and ratcheting up the rhetoric in order to set themselves up in a better position for future negotiations with the West. They can claim to have more than they have and then state the will “give it up” in exchange for consessions from the West.
Either way, it is IC concensus, via public statemetns from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence that Iran is mid-next decade away from acquiring enough technological know how to make a bomb.
9:30 pm
Everybody needs to read Horrorism by Martin Amis, available @ The Observer, UK to get some idea of what we are all in for. From some of the comments above, you all may not be concerned with his left wing slant or his tiny rant against religion, but his information of Sayyid Qutb is truly scary. Sayyid Qutb? Read it, it’s long,but worth very word. You cannot talk to crazy people, period.
Talking may be all we’ll be able to do. Not that anything will come of it except maybe to lead us on. Talking to the drug cartels or the crips and bloods would help too, no?
11:40 pm
I just have to comment on this Israel bombing Iran theory: Ain’t gonna happen in any meaningful way. Here’s why:
1. Israel will have to fly over at least two foreign countries to get to Iran. They won’t ask for or get permission, so they can really only attack one time, in one large strike package. In other words, they won’t be able to conduct an extended campaign. Given the number of aircraft Israel has, this will severely limit the number of targets they’ll be able to hit and they’ll have no restrike capability should they miss.
2. Range. Israeli aircraft don’t have the range to get to the critical sites and return without refuelling and they don’t have a good refuelling capability. Furthermore, they’ll have to refuel both on the way to Iran and back over someone elses airspace. Again, not going to happen.
So, at most the Israeli’s could conduct a single, relatively small strike on a few facilities. The effect would not be too significant in terms of damage to the Iranian nuclear program. At best it might buy a year or two.
Of course, the Israeli’s could opt for ballistic missiles, but those have disadvantages as well (namely small warhead size and accuracy, unless the payload is nuclear) and Israel does not have a large supply of them.
So overall, Israel’s capability to conduct a conventional strike on Iran is pretty limited.
—————————-
Sue,
Qutb is much more closely related to Sunni radicalism than Shia. Are you suggesting that all the Iranian power players are “crazy” followers of his brand of radicalism? Remember that Islam is not unitary, just look at Iraq and Lebanon for proof.
6:10 am
Nancy Pelosi on the Consequences of Leaving Iraq
The Democrats’ latest slogan of “phased redeployment” is an ill-disguised marketing campaign for retreat in the face of terrorism. But, assuming for a moment that this approach is adopted, what are the consequences?