(H/T – LGF)
Or so says the unclassified version of a fresh National Intelligence Estimate. I’m certain the Left half of the blogosphere, like the media already has, is seizing upon the opening phrase of the ‘Key Judgements’ section – “We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons
program;…”. Allow me to point out a couple of key equivocations.
The first is the footnote to that phrase – “For the purposes of this Estimate, by ‘nuclear weapons program’ we mean Iran’s nuclear weapon design and weaponization work and covert uranium conversion-related and uranium enrichment-related work; we do not mean Iran’s declared civil work related to uranium conversion and enrichment.” Given that the particular method of “declared civil work” selected by the Iranians is at the least approximating one of the popular methods used to create weapons-grade uranium rather than simply the much-less-militarily-useful reactor-grade uranium, I have to strongly question the claim that the program has been completely stopped.
The second is the phrase immediately following – “…we also assess with moderate-to-high confidence that Tehran at a minimum is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons.” That is an understatement. Judging by what the Iranians have claimed about that “declared civil work” noted above, Iran has transitioned the semi-open portion of its nuclear program to a “turn-key” nuclear weapons program, requiring upon full implementation simply a directive to assemble nuclear weapons.
Interestingly, the NIE notes that the Iranians had spent “considerable effort from at least the late 1980s to 2003 to develop such weapons.” I don’t exactly remember hearing too much about the Iranian nuclear weapon program until after the fall of 2003. Related to that time frame, I also remember another WMD program not in a country that started with an “I” that very-publicly stopped, rather than the covert “stop” the Iranian program supposedly had, right about that 2003 timeframe, and that stoppage was directly attributed to a unique certain event that happened in 2003.
This part is chilling; “We do not have sufficient intelligence to judge confidently whether Tehran is willing to maintain the halt of its nuclear weapons program indefinitely while it weighs its options, or whether it will or already has set specific deadlines or criteria that will prompt it to restart the program.” Given that a possible American pincers movement from Iraq and Afghanistan undoubtedly weighed in on the “cost-benefit approach” the NIE claims the Iranians are using, given the kick-the-can-down-the-road assessment of 2010-2015 for sufficient HEU uranium, and given the claim that Iran was spending “considerable effort” on its nuclear program through the 1990s, I’ll guess that the election of a Democrat or Ron Paul would be all the criteria Iran would need to resume a full “Manhattan Project” program.
The laugh of the day, however, comes from point F, which says that the Iranians might use covert facilities, had in fact used covert facilities in the past, and stopped using covert facilities in 2003. Wasn’t that the assessment of North Korea’s nuclear program between 1994 and 2002, which was completely invalidated by the discovery of said covert facilties and their use between 1994 and 2002?
Revisions/extensions (4:48 pm 12/3/2007) – There’s a lot more linkage to the Right half’s react over at Hot Air.
From IranAffairs.com:
WHy should we believe that Iran EVER had a nuclear weapons program at all?
Simple; if it walks like a covert nuclear weapons program and quacks like a covert nuclear weapons program, it’s probably a future North Korea, South Africa, Israel, Pakistan, India, the Red Chinese, the Soviet Union, and yes, the United States. The difference is, the Mullahs that run Iran aren’t exactly as interested in self-preservation as the current members of the Nuclear Club.
As for the IAEA, they didn’t exactly notice South Africa’s or Pakistan’s nukes, and for 8 years, they denied that North Korea continued its nuclear program.
But…but…the IAEA is so, so….credible!
(massive sarcasm)
The IAEA is more credible than Bush and the “intelligence community”
Care for some Yellowcake from Niger with your Vatloads of Anthrax?
You could try asking the Brits that question; it was their intel and their take on said intel.
One more thing; Iraq was shopping for just that.
“the Mullahs that run Iran aren’t exactly as interested in self-preservation as the current members of the Nuclear Club.”
I keep hearing this, but I’m not seeing the solid evidence. In the what, 26 years or Iranian theocracy, you’d think these mullahs would already have self destructed, if they were as suicidal as was so often claimed.
Let’s say they do get a nuke, or even a few dozen. What incentive does Iran have to use them? None. After the destruction of Iran, the Shia Islamic revolution would effectively be over, with Sunnis now the completely dominant doctrine. What incentive does Iran have to give them to a terrorist group? It would likely be traced back to them, might not get used on the target they want, and defeats the purpose of having the most powerful weapon: waving it around in your enemies faces.
So, I just don’t buy the “crazy mullah” theory. Repulsive? Sure. Insane? No. They work by a logical set of rules like everybody else, just THEIR rules not ours.
I also have to take issue with the idea that Ron Paul or Democratic wins would be the trigger to starting a full program again. Is that possible? Sure. It’s just as possible that a Rudy or McCain win will do the same. I guess you’re trying to say that a win by a more bellicose candidate will “scare” Iran from starting up again? Maybe. Maybe not. I’d think that having your enemy surround you on two sides might cause you to try and develop the one weapon you know will scare them off (worked for North Korea).
In any event, military action is now off the table. If the intelligence community doesn’t even think there is a program, then logically we wouldn’t know exactly where to strike to knock it out if it did exist.
In the Iran-Iraq war, the Iranians utilized human wave attacks to try to overwhelm the Iraqis. Meanwhile, the Iranian-backed and -funded group Hezbollah pioneered the use of suicide bombers. Not exactly hallmarks of self-preservation.
As for the logical set of rules, you’re right; they don’t play by Western rules. The Koran has enshrined in it the sentiments behind the saying, “Diplomacy is the art of saying, ‘Nice doggie,’ while searching for a big stick.” That “big stick” is nuclear weapons, and they’re busy searching. They know that provoking a violent military response from the US, the only entity able to crush them, at this time would result in that crushing.
Their mindset is much like pre-World War II Japan’s. In case you forgot, the Japanese leaders knew that if they failed to deliver the knockout blow at Pearl Harbor, they would lose the war. That didn’t stop them.
As for my assertion that a Paul or Democratic Presidency would be all that is needed for Iran to transition back to a full-out quest for nuclear weapons, remember that the entire foreign policy goal of those candidates is to withdraw from the Middle East. The only thing that slowed down Iran’s quest (as noted above, they haven’t “stopped”) was the threat of forced regime change from the United States. Iran learned from the fall of their neighbor to the west that complete secrecy would likely result in the same thing happening to them, and scared up a semi-“civilian” program with just enough cover from the Sovie…er, Russians, Red Chinese and you lefties to run out the clock until 2009.