5000 Centrifuges

Iran announced today that it now has 5000 centrifuges up and working.

For Iran to build a first-generation implosion bomb it will need 17.6 kg of U-235, according to the SWU calculator published by URENCO, a European uranium enrichment consortium: web.archive.org/web/20021226100607/www.urenco.de/trennarbeit/swucal_e.html.

Assuming 16.2 kg of U-235 on hand in early November 2008, a requirement of 17.6 kg for a first bomb, and a production rate of 1.8 kg of U-235 each month, Iran would have needed about three weeks from November 7 (early December 2008). These are based on numbers derived on the assumption that Iran had 4000 centrifuges up and running.

Iran might be sitting on enough U-235 right now.

More evidence from Syria

A new story from the McClatchy Washington Bureau warning that the thing in the desert that Israel destroyed last year had nuclear fingerprints. I guess we wait for Israel to do our dirty work in Iran too, eh?

U.N.: Bombed Syrian facility had nuclear reactor features

By Jonathan S. Landay, McClatchy Newspapers Jonathan S. Landay, Mcclatchy Newspapers Wed Nov 19, 6:38 pm ET

By Jonathan S. Landay, McClatchy Newspapers Jonathan S. Landay, Mcclatchy Newspapers

Wed Nov 19, 6:38 pm ET

WASHINGTON — A Syrian facility that Israel bombed last year had similarities to a nuclear reactor and chemically processed uranium particles were found at the site, but a final determination can't be made until Syria provides "the necessary transparency," a new U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency report out Wednesday says.

[Sentinel]: Pretty certain Syria will not be providing the necessary transparency.

"The onus of this investigation is on Syria ," said a senior U.N. official, who requested anonymity because the report is confidential.

A separate IAEA report says that Iran has persisted in stymieing the agency's probe of its nuclear program and continues to defy U.N. Security Council demands to suspend uranium enrichment, a process that can produce fuel for nuclear weapons.

"There is no communication whatsoever, no progress regarding possible military dimensions of their ( Iran's ) program," the senior U.N. official said.

The reports served as stark reminders of one of the thorniest security issues that will confront President-elect Barack Obama — global nuclear proliferation — particularly Iran's refusal to suspend the uranium enrichment program that it kept secret for 18 years.

Iran says that it's legally producing low-enriched uranium fuel for power reactors; U.S. and other Western officials contend that Tehran is pursuing the capability to make highly enriched uranium used in the explosive cores of nuclear bombs.

[Sentinel]: By mid January Iran should have enough enriched Uranium for a bomb. Six weeks later, after the gas has been converted to a metal and machined, we might be having some excitement.

Iran has refused to halt its enrichment program despite being hit with three rounds of U.N. economic sanctions and punitive measures by the United States and the European Union .

[Sentinel]: Translation: punitive means laughable.

The nuclear watchdog's director general, Mohamed ElBaradei, submitted the confidential reports to the agency's 35-nation board of governors. Copies were posted on a blog, www.armscontrolwonk.com.

The IAEA opened an inquiry into the Dair Alzour site in eastern Syria after the United States charged in April that the facility, which was destroyed in a September 2007 Israeli airstrike, was an undeclared nuclear reactor that was being built with North Korean help to produce plutonium for bombs.

U.S. officials said that satellite pictures, photos taken inside the semi-completed facility — also known as al Kibar — before it was bombed and other information showed that the building was a copy of the British-designed natural uranium-powered reactor that North Korea built at its main nuclear complex at Yongbyon.

The Bush administration provided the IAEA with the materials on which the U.S. assessment was based.

"It cannot be excluded" that the Syrian facility "was intended for non-nuclear use," the IAEA report says.

However, it continues, "The features of the building . . . along with the connectivity of the site to adequate pumping capacity of cooling water, are similar to what may be found in connection with a reactor site."

Pre-attack photographs show a "containment structure (that) appears to have been similar in dimension and layout to that required for a biological shield for nuclear reactors, and the overall size of the building was sufficient to house the equipment needed for a nuclear reactor of the type alleged" by the United States , the report says.

[Sentinel]: Who among us is afraid that this type of hard analysis will fall by the wayside with the advent of our new emperor?

It also says that dirt samples taken from the site by IAEA inspectors who visited in June contained "a significant number of natural uranium particles."

An analysis of the particles found that they were "produced as a result of chemical processing," the report says.

Syria is required by an accord with the IAEA to inform the agency six months before it begins building a nuclear reactor.

Damascus contends that the destroyed building was an unused non-nuclear military facility. It says that it lacks the trained manpower and other requirements to have run such a reactor.

Satellite pictures taken after the Israeli strike showed that the remains of the facility were demolished and then buried or carted away, and a shed-like building was erected over the site.

The report criticizes Israel for its "unilateral use of force," the Bush administration for waiting seven months after the attack to turn over information on the site to the agency and Syria for the "removal of the remains," all of which made the IAEA inquiry "more difficult and complex."

Syria told the IAEA inspectors that the uranium particles had come from missiles fired in the Israeli airstrike, and it refused them access to three other sites that satellite photographs provided by an IAEA member nation showed might have been related to Dair Alzour, the report says.

The senior U.N. official said the particles weren't depleted uranium, a substance used in hardened military munitions, and a second U.N. official said that one of the closed locations is thought to contain debris removed from Dair Alzour that inspectors want to test.

"The director general has called on Syria to provide the necessary transparency, including allowing visits to the requested locations and access to all available information for the agency to complete its assessment," the report says, noting that Damascus also has failed to provide the inspectors with documents related to the suspected reactor.

The IAEA also urged Israel to cooperate in the investigation.

Iran fires yet another missile

So, Medved is moving a "missile defense" system onto the Polish border (link), and Iran is test firing missiles with a range capable of hitting Europe. Meanwhile, U.S. generals are desperately trying to convince Hussein that now would not be a good time to discontinue funding missile defense systems and cutting military spending (link). Getting closer ....

Iran tests precision missile able to reach Europe

By ALI AKBAR DAREINI, Associated Press Writer Ali Akbar Dareini, Associated Press Writer 40 mins ago

TEHRAN, Iran – Iran said it successfully test-fired a new generation of long range surface-to-surface missile on Wednesday — one that could easily strike as far away as southeastern Europe with greater precision than earlier models.

The Sajjil is a solid fuel high-speed missile with a range of about 1,200 miles, Defense Minister Mostafa Mohammed Najjar said on state television. At that range, it could easily strike Iran's arch-foe Israel and go as far as southeastern Europe.

Solid-fuel missiles are more accurate than the liquid fuel missiles of similar range currently possessed by Iran. The country has had a solid-fuel missile with a shorter range — the Fateh, able to fly 120 miles — for several years.

The Islamic Republic News Agency said the test was conducted Wednesday, and television showed the missile being fired from a desert launching pad.

Najjar said the missile was a defensive weapon and not a response to threats against Iran. He didn't name any country, but Israel has recently threatened to take military action against Iran to stop Tehran from developing a nuclear bomb.

Najjar said the missile was part of a "defensive, deterrent strategy ... specifically with defensive objectives."

[ERIC]: Not believable.

The defense minister, quoted by Iran state television, said the two-stage missile with two solid-fuel engines has "an extraordinary high capability" but gave no further details. He did not say whether it was capable of carrying a nuclear warhead.

Israel's Foreign Ministry refused comment about the missile test.

In Washington, the State Department said the missile tests were not good for the stability of the region and were another sign that U.S. plans to construct a missile shield in Europe are critical to international security. Department spokesman Robert Wood said Washington hoped Russia, which has criticized the proposed shield, would recognize the threat posed by Iran and realize the system is not aimed at Russia.

[ERIC]: To believe that Russia is not acting in concert with Iran is naive. Russia is fully aware of Iran's intentions and what the intent of the U.S. response is. It is my firm belief that Russia and Iran are working together, formulating a strategy that will ultimately lead to the misery of many people.

"I think it's pretty obvious when Iran launches one of these ballistic missiles, that this is something of concern to the international community, and I'm including Russia in the international community here," he said.

The name "Sajjil" means "baked clay," a reference to a story in the Quran, Islam's holy book, in which birds sent by God drive off an enemy army attacking the holy city of Mecca by pelting them with stones of baked clay.

[ERIC]: Everything Iran does is motivated by their fanatical Islamic belief system. This is no longer a point to prove, simply a fact to accept.

Iran has intensified its domestic missile development in recent years, raising concerns of the U.S. and its allies at a time when they accuse the country of seeking to build a nuclear weapon. Iran denies it wants to build a bomb, saying its nuclear program is aimed only at generating electricity.

In a speech coinciding with the missile launch, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad warned that his government would act against any threats.

"The Iranian nation defends its dignity. Should any power stand against the Iranian nation, the Iranian people will crush it under its foot and will strike it on the mouth," he said in a speech broadcast live on state television.

Ahmadinejad added that it doesn't matter who comes to power in America because the important question will be how a future U.S. administration will behave.

[ERIC]: So, how our ruler (Hussein's press secretaries own words) behaves with respect to his relation with Iran will determine if Iran decides to unleash his missiles on a target of interest? Again, Iran assumes that Hussein is weak and will respond by curling into the fetal position. We shall see ...

The Sajjil's range puts it at around the same range as Iran's other farthest-flying missiles — a version of the Shahab-3 unveiled in 2005 and the Ghadr, which was shown off at a September 2007 military parade. The Shahab-3 missile is capable of carrying a nuclear warhead, and its latest versions use a combination of liquid and solid fuel.

Iran launched an arms development program during its 1980-88 war with Iraq to compensate for a U.S. weapons embargo. Since 1992, Iran has produced its own tanks, armored personnel carriers, missiles and a fighter plane. Najjar said the Sajjil was built by the Defense Ministry's aerospace department.

____

Associated Press writer Matthew Lee in Washington contributed to this report.

Iran making some noise

What a surprise. Wonder what will happen when the U.S. immediately withdraws its troops?

Iran test-fires new missile near Iraq: state media

Tue Nov 11, 2008 10:17am EST

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran has test-fired a new type of missile during war games near the Iraqi border, state television said Tuesday, after warning the United States it would respond to any violation of Iranian airspace.

The English-language Press TV said the Iranian-made missile, named as the Samen, was successfully tested Monday by the elite Revolutionary Guards in the western border city of Marivan.

They also tested artillery and rocket launchers, Press TV said on its website.

Iran's armed forces have staged frequent maneuvers in recent months, coinciding with speculation of possible U.S. or Israeli strikes against the Islamic Republic over its disputed nuclear ambitions.

[ERIC]: Or perhaps in anticipation of coalition force withdrawal.

In a move that further heightened tension, Iran in July test-fired nine highly advanced missiles, including one which reportedly could reach Israel and U.S. bases in the Middle East.

Iran's army last Wednesday said U.S. helicopters had been seen flying close to Iran's border and that it would respond to any violation, a message analysts said seemed directed at U.S. President-elect Barack Obama more than American troops in Iraq.

[ERIC]: Heh. Who could have predicted this?

The November 5 statement followed a cross-border raid last month by U.S. forces into Syria, an action that was condemned by Damascus and Tehran.

The United States and its Western allies suspect Iran is seeking to build atomic bombs, a charge Tehran denies.

Obama, like outgoing U.S. President George W. Bush, has not ruled out military action although he has criticized the outgoing administration for not pushing for more diplomacy and engagement with Iran.

[ERIC]: If not mistaken, I believe that Iran has now set down its own preconditions for negotiation (click here).

Iran has said it would respond to any attack on its territory by targeting U.S. interests and Washington's ally Israel, as well as closing the Strait of Hormuz, a vital route for world oil supplies.

[ERIC]: Methinks Iran considers our incoming Commander in Chief to have little appetite for confrontation, and can threaten him and push him around.

(Reporting by Fredrik Dahl; Editing by Angus MacSwan)

Iran setting the stage

This past week Senator Biden, running mate of Hussein, indicated that Hussein would certainly be tested within the first six months of taking office (LINK). Today, Hussein himself echoed this sentiment. I do not think anyone is in disagreement with these statements. I read the press release from Iran, stating their conditions for negotiations, and I begin to get a sense of where the testing will occur. Who doubts that Hussein, as President, will fold up like a cheap tent on a rainy night when forced to make a decision when Iran reveals it has missiles pointed at Tel-Aviv and orders Syria into Israel? How long will it take Hussein to pull every last U.S. troop out of the middle east and end U.S. support for our Jewish allies? With no U.S. presence in the middle east I wonder what the result will be? Without U.S. backing I wonder how long Israel will survive? I think I know the answer to these questions.

Iran's Preconditions

So much for Obama's diplomacy.

Barack Obama's declaration that, if elected, he would be willing to sit down and talk to Iran "without preconditions" has been widely discussed in this country. It's a key policy difference between him and John McCain, who rejects unconditional talks with Tehran.

So what does the Islamic Republic think? The enterprising reporters at the state news agency recently asked a high-ranking official for his opinion on talks with the U.S. As it turns out, Iran has its own "preconditions" and they don't suggest a diplomatic breakthrough, or even a summit, anytime soon.

Mehdi Kalhor, Vice President for Media Affairs, said the U.S. must do two things before summit talks can take place. First, American military forces must leave the Middle East -- presumably including such countries as Iraq, Qatar, Turkey and anywhere else American soldiers are deployed in the region. Second, the U.S. must cease its support of Israel. Until Washington does both, talks are "off the agenda," the Islamic Republic News Agency reports. It quotes Mr. Kalhor as saying, "If they [the U.S.] take our advice, grounds for such talks would be well prepared.

Iran is one of the toughest and most urgent foreign policy problems the new U.S. Administration will face. If Mr. Obama ends up in the Oval Office on January 20, he may find that solving it will take more than walking into a room and talking to Iranians "without preconditions."

Meanwhile, back in Iran ...

The question is, "what will Obama do about a nuclear Iran?" What Obama does about a nuclear Iran will yield a very black and white result. There will be no prognosticator pulling the wool over the eyes of useful idiots. The results of Obama's Iranian policy will be very clear to see.

Good luck.

Iran's Nuclear Waltz

An ominous U.N. report, but more diplomatic dancing.

At its annual Vienna powwow this week, the world's nuclear watchdog is taking Iran for a few spins over its atomic ambitions. But the mullahs in Tehran know this diplomatic waltz well, and they can rest assured the dance merely frees up more time and space for them to get their bomb.

AP

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

The International Atomic Energy Agency report does at least tell us the Iranians are closer than ever to becoming a nuclear power. In unusually scathing terms for an outfit disinclined to criticize Iran, the IAEA lays bare Tehran's lack of cooperation and implies it was hiding illegal military work related to its nuclear program. After six years of monitoring, says IAEA boss Mohamed ElBaradei, "the agency has not been able to make substantive progress" to resolve concerns about Iran's military ambitions.

[ERIC]: That the IAEA is now sounding the alarm is a particularly ominous sign. In the past the IAEA has been one of Iran's biggest apologist.

According to the IAEA report, Iran had built up a stockpile of 1,058 pounds of "low-enriched" uranium hexafloride by the end of August. At this rate, as Gary Milhollin of Iran Watch pointed out in the New York Times, Iran will have the low-enriched uranium necessary to produce enough weapons-grade uranium for a bomb by mid-January. Iran has recently tested long-range missiles and tried to retrofit them to carry a nuclear warhead.

[ERIC]: Mid-January. What if someone where to tell you today that the world that you knew would change dramatically for the worse in less than 90 days?

The five permanent members of the Security Council, plus Germany, are on record saying a nuclear Iran would be unacceptable. Surely the U.N., meeting in General Assembly last week days after the IAEA report came out, would respond with urgency. Sure enough, the Europeans and the U.S. suggested another round of sanctions, a position backed by China. And sure enough, Russia scotched those plans.

In its place, the Security Council adopted a resolution calling on Iran to abide by the previous three resolutions to suspend its enrichment program. Translation: "Stop -- or we'll do nothing."

[ERIC]: I am not understanding how the U.S. and its allies can continue to believe that there is a diplomatic solution when they have not positioned themselves into a more effective negotiating posture.

Condoleezza Rice called it "a very positive step." Her Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov, a foreign minister in the Andrei Gromyko mold, was more honest: "This is a reiteration of the status quo."

The Russian ambassador at the U.N., Vitaly Churkin, claimed the irresolute resolution would channel "the minds of everybody in the direction of political rather than military enterprises." The potentially tragic irony is that the failure of resolve makes a military conflict more likely. If Iranian nuclear progress isn't halted by political or economic means, someone -- probably Israel -- will try to stop it by force.

[ERIC]: Are you ready?

The Security Council nonaction did give Iran a pretext to make fresh threats. A senior Iranian lawmaker told the state news agency that Iran would limit the IAEA's access to the known nuclear sites. The covert sites are off limits. Presumably he was speaking on orders. But the Europeans, joined in recent months by the Bush Administration, still claim to believe that Iran can be talked out of the bomb.

The Iranians have been offered everything from membership in the World Trade Organization to Western billions and backing for its energy sector, including civilian nuclear reactors. The mullahs mock those entreaties. And in the latest humiliation, Iran's terrorist client state with its own nuclear ambitions, Syria, was poised this week to win a seat on the IAEA's 35-member board. The U.S. and EU are trying to get Afghanistan in its place.

Both of America's Presidential candidates say they worry about a new nuclear arms race. The best way to stop proliferation, particularly in the combustible Middle East, is to start getting serious about stopping Iran from joining the club.

About a month ago ...

... Ahmadinejad says Israel will soon disappear [Excerpts]

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gkqvlPndHPxXMqNzQLCQAPNyxbdQ

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad predicted on Monday that Muslims would uproot "satanic powers" and repeated his controversial belief that Israel will soon disappear, the Mehr news agency reported.

"I must announce that the Zionist regime (Israel), with a 60-year record of genocide, plunder, invasion and betrayal is about to die and will soon be erased from the geographical scene," he said.

"Today, the time for the fall of the satanic power of the United States has come and the countdown to the annihilation of the emperor of power and wealth has started."

"I tell you that with the unity and awareness of all the Islamic countries all the satanic powers will soon be destroyed," he said to a group of foreign visitors ahead of the 19th anniversary of the death of revolutionary leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.

Ahmadinejad also again expressed his apocalyptic vision that tyranny in the world be abolished by the return to earth of the Mahdi, the 12th imam of Shiite Islam, alongside great religious figures including Jesus Christ.

"With the appearance of the promised saviour... and his companions such as Jesus Christ, tyranny will be soon be eradicated in the world."

http://www.citizen.co.za/index/article.aspx?pDesc=1,1,22&type=top&File=080603073505.4dct8rl4.xml

http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2008/06/ahmadinejad-pre.html

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,361705,00.html

From the U. S. Ambassador to the UN: Iran’s Nuclear Threat Deepens

The problem with Iran seems to be getting worse. The overtures made in this editorial by Mr. Khalilzad are filled with hope and the promise of a warm global embrace for a country that the world desperately wants to include as a responsible member. The ball is in Ahmadinejad's court. I am not confident.

Iran's Nuclear Threat

By ZALMAY KHALILZAD
March 4, 2008; Page A17

The United Nations Security Council has passed another resolution concerning Iran because its nuclear program is an unacceptable threat. Iran's violations of Security Council resolutions not only continue, but are deepening. Instead of suspending its proliferation-sensitive activities as the council has required, Iran is dramatically expanding the number of operating centrifuges and developing a new generation of centrifuges, testing one of them with nuclear fuel.

Once again, Iran has not made the choice the world had hoped for; once again, the Security Council has no choice but to act. At stake is the security of a vital region of the world, and the credibility of the Security Council and the International Atomic Energy Agency, as they seek to hold Iran to its nonproliferation commitments.

[ERIC]: The credibility of the IAEA is on life support.

The latest report from the IAEA states that Iran has not met its obligation to fully disclose its past nuclear-weapons program. On the core issue of whether Iran's nuclear program is strictly peaceful, the report showed no serious progress.

The IAEA presented Iran with documents assembled over a period of years from multiple member states and the agency's own investigations. The documents detailed Iran's efforts to develop a nuclear warhead, including designs for a missile re-entry vehicle, and showed other possible undeclared activities with nuclear material.

Iran dismissed these documents as "baseless and fabricated." But the IAEA does not share that conclusion.

Instead of slogans and obfuscations, the international community needs answers from Iran. The international community must be able to believe Iran's declaration that its nuclear program is for exclusively peaceful purposes. Iranian leaders must as a first step fully disclose past weapons-related work, and implement additional safeguards to ensure no continuing hidden activities. We agree with the IAEA that until Iran takes these steps, Iran's nuclear program cannot be verified as peaceful.

The latest IAEA report also states that Iran is not suspending its proliferation-sensitive activities.

For almost two years now, the Security Council has required Iran to suspend all of its enrichment-related, reprocessing, and heavy water-related activities. I want to ask the Iranian leaders, "If your goal is to generate nuclear power for peaceful purposes, why do you court increasing international isolation, economic pressure and more, all for a purported goal more easily and inexpensively obtained with the diplomatic solution we and others offer?"

I want the Iranian people and others around the world to know that the United States recognizes Iran's right to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. They should know that the five permanent members of the Security Council and Germany have offered to help Iran develop civil nuclear power, if it complies with the Security Council's demand -- a very reasonable demand -- to suspend enrichment. They should know that the package of incentives includes active international support to build state-of-the art light water power reactors, and reliable access to nuclear fuel.

Iran should do what other nations have done to eliminate any doubts that their nuclear program is peaceful. Many states have made the decision to abandon programs to produce a nuclear weapon. Two of them sit on the Security Council today: South Africa and Libya.

Other countries that have stepped away from past nuclear-weapon aspirations include Brazil, Argentina, Romania, Ukraine and Kazakhstan. These countries did not see their security diminished as a result of their decisions. Indeed, one could easily say their security has been enhanced. Nor did they lose their right to develop nuclear energy. We urge Iran to take the same path these other states have chosen.

[ERIC]: These are arguments being made not only by Iran but by left-wing pundits here too: Iran needs nukes for their own safety and (good lord) national self-esteem. Nothing could be further from the truth, simply look at the countries mentioned above.

The international community has good reason to be concerned about Iran's activities to acquire a nuclear-weapons capability. The present Iranian regime, armed with nuclear weapons, would pose a greater potential danger to the region and to the world.

The Iranian government has been a destabilizing force in the broader Middle East and beyond. Contrary to its statements, Iran has been funding and supporting terrorists and militants for operations in Lebanon, the Palestinian territories, Iraq and Afghanistan. Their lethal assistance has harmed countless innocent civilians. The president of Iran has made many reprehensible statements -- embracing the objective of destroying a member state of the United Nations.

[ERIC]: Why not just name it? It is Israel, and Ahmadinejad has stated publicly that his intention is to drive Israel from the Middle East. Actually, his intention is to destroy the Jewish state. The world slumbers fitfully, annoyed with being disturbed yet unconcerned that another despot pronounces intentions for genocide and destruction.

Because of all these factors, the international community cannot allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons. If Iran continues down its current path, it would likely fuel proliferation activities in the region, which, in turn, could cause the demise of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty regime itself.

The U.S. remains committed to a diplomatic solution. If Iran shares this commitment, it will suspend its enrichment and reprocessing activities and let diplomacy succeed. We call on Iran to engage in constructive negotiations over the future of its nuclear program. Such negotiations, if successful, would have profound benefits for Iran and the Iranian people.

The message from the U.S. to the people of Iran is that America respects you and your great country. We want Iran to be a full partner in the international community. And as President Bush has said, if Iran respects its international obligations, it will have no better friend than the United States of America.

[ERIC]: That the U. S. can become any countries strong ally and friend has been demonstrated again and again in our relatively short history. The Iranian people want this as much as the American people do - this I know for fact. I pray this result follows.

Mr. Khalilzad is U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations.

Iran: Back on track!

Well, that NIE hoopla didn't last very long, did it? I guess the revelation that Iran has discovered how to build a better centrifuge (using composite materials no less!) has everyone wringing their hands and wiping perspiration from their foreheads.

UPDATE: Iran cries foul! Claims the U.S. is making stuff up, and that they are only interested in exploring clean energy alternatives for their country! And the IAEA is buying it!! Hooray, Iran really doesn't pose a threat to World Peace!

US intel links Iran with nuke bomb bid

By GEORGE JAHN, Associated Press Writer

Thu Feb 14, 10:21 AM ET

The U.S. has recently shared new intelligence with the International Atomic Energy Agency on key aspects of Iran's nuclear program that Washington says shows Tehran was directly engaged in trying to make a bomb, diplomats said Thursday.

[ERIC] Again, how effective is the IAEA?

One of the diplomats said Washington also gave the IAEA permission to confront Iran with at least some of the evidence in an attempt to pry details out of the Islamic republic, as part of the U.N. nuclear watchdog's attempts to investigate Iran's suspicious nuclear past.

The diplomats suggested that such moves by the U.S. administration would be a reflection of Washington's' drive to pressure Iran into acknowledging that it had focused part of its nuclear efforts toward developing a weapons program.

The U.S. is leading the push for a third set of U.N. sanctions against Iran. Tehran insists its program is intended only to produce energy and has refused U.N. demands that it suspend its uranium enrichment program — technology that can produce both fuel for nuclear reactors and the fissile material for a bomb.

A recent U.S. intelligence assessment that Iran had a clandestine weapons program but stopped working on it four years ago has hurt Washington's attempts to have the U.N. Security Council impose a third set of sanctions.

While the Americans have previously declassified and then forwarded intelligence to the IAEA to help its investigations, they do so on a selective basis.

Following Israel's bombing of a Syrian site late last year, and media reports citing unidentified U.S. officials as saying the target was a nuclear installation, IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei turned in vain to the U.S. in asking for details on what was struck, said a diplomat who — like others — spoke on condition of anonymity in exchange for divulging confidential information.

Over the past two years, the U.S. already has shared material on a laptop computer reportedly smuggled out of Iran. In 2005, U.S. intelligence assessed that information as indicating that Tehran had been working on details of nuclear weapons, including missile trajectories and ideal altitudes for exploding warheads.

[ERIC]: Why would these details be worked out if they are only enriching Uranium for fuel?

After declassification, U.S. intelligence also was forwarded on two other issues: the "Green Salt Project" — a plan the U.S. alleges links diverse components of a nuclear weapons program, including uranium enrichment, high explosives testing and a missile re-entry vehicle — and material in Iran's possession showing how to mold uranium metal into warhead form.

Two of the diplomats said the material forwarded to the IAEA over the past two weeks expanded on the previous information from the Americans, but had no additional details.

Iran is already under two sets of U.N. Security Council sanctions for refusing to suspend uranium enrichment, which it started developing during nearly two decades of covert nuclear activity built on illicit purchases and revealed only five years ago.

Since then, IAEA experts have uncovered activities, experiments, and blueprints and materials that point to possible efforts by Iran to create nuclear weapons, even though Tehran insists its nuclear project is peaceful and aimed only at creating a large-scale enrichment facility to make reactor fuel.

Its leaders consistently dismiss allegations that they are interested in enrichment for its other use — creating fissile material suitable for arming warheads.

Instead of heeding Security Council demands to freeze enrichment, Iran has expanded its program. On Wednesday, diplomats told the AP that Iran's new generation of advanced centrifuges have begun processing small quantities of the gas that can be used to make the fissile core of nuclear warheads.

[ERIC]: Pretty dramatic way to end the article. My question is, what will Obama do when he is elected?

Copyright © 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.

IAEA: Iran disputes atomic arms evidence

By GEORGE JAHN, Associated Press WriterFri Feb 22, 6:20 PM ET

The U.N. nuclear watchdog said Friday that Iran is defying a U.N. Security Council ban on uranium enrichment and accusing the U.S. and its allies of fabricating information to back up claims that Tehran is making nuclear weapons.

[ERIC]: And what is the IAEA's response? Read on ...

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said there was a "very strong case" for moving forward with a third round of sanctions against Tehran, while Iran said the report's findings confirmed that its nuclear program is a peaceful one.

"There is very good reason after this report to proceed to the third Security Council resolution," Rice said, adding that the report "demonstrates that whatever the Iranians may be doing to try to clean up some elements of the past, it is inadequate."

The 11-page report obtained by The Associated Press said Iran "has not suspended its enrichment-related activities," despite two sets of U.N. Security Council sanctions over fears the program might be used to make weapons-grade uranium instead of the nuclear fuel Iran says it is interested in.

Instead, said the report, Iran "started the development of new-generation centrifuges" — an expansion of enrichment — and continued working on heavy water nuclear facilities. When finished, Iran could cull them for plutonium, a possible fissile payload in nuclear warheads.

At the same time, the International Atomic Energy Agency report said that Tehran has cooperated in other areas of an IAEA probe, leading the agency to put to rest for now suspicions that several past experiments and activities were linked to a weapons program.

[ERIC]: Woo-hoo!! That is FANTASTIC news! The IAEA declares that Iran is not really in the process of building nuclear weapons! I can sleep easier now that I know this.

Specifically, the report suggested the agency was satisfied with answers provided by Iran on the origin of traces of enriched uranium in a military facility; on experiments with polonium, which can also be used in a weapons program; and on purchases on the nuclear black market.

[ERIC]: Dude, I am at a loss for words on this one ...

It said that in those areas information given by Tehran is either "consistent with its findings (or) ... not inconsistent with its findings," suggesting it was content for now with explanations that these activities were not weapons-related.

Iran's U.N. Ambassador Mohammad Khazee said the report "clearly attests to the exclusively peaceful nature of the nuclear program of the Islamic Republic of Iran, both in the past and at present."

The report "also serves to strongly and unambiguously support my country's long-standing position that the allegations raised by few powers against the peaceful nuclear program of the Islamic Republic of Iran have been entirely groundless," Khazee said in written response to the AP.

[ERIC]: Is there anyone reading this BLOG who actually agrees with this? Does everyone think I am some paranoid nut case whose odd fascination with Iran is just some neo-con's peculiar past-time?

But the American U.N. ambassador said Friday that report should pave the way for passage next week of a new U.N. Security Council resolution tightening sanctions on Tehran.

"They're increasing their capabilities," U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad said. "Not only have the number of centrifuges increased, but they're working on a second-generation, if you like, a more capable centrifuge.

"Things are getting worse in terms of the enrichment part."

Britain and France introduced a council resolution on Thursday — with support from the United States, Russia, China and Germany — to expand and toughen travel bans and the freezing of assets for more Iranian officials linked to the nuclear effort.

A declassified U.S. intelligence report last December judged that the Iranians had put a nuclear weapons program on hold in 2003. But the U.S., Israel and others contend Iran's continued advances in the crucial centrifuge work will eventually give it a capability to quickly build a bomb.

Much of the information purportedly linking Iran to attempts to make nuclear arms came from the United States, with allies providing lesser amounts and the IAEA passing on selected material to Tehran, after approval by the nations that gave the agency the information.

IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei, who drew up the report, said his team had "made quite good progress in clarifying the outstanding issues that had to do with Iran's past nuclear activities, with the exception of one issue, and that is the alleged weaponization studies that supposedly Iran has conducted in the past."

Ahead of the confidential report's release to the 35-nation IAEA board and the U.N. Security Council, U.S. officials had repeatedly insisted that the IAEA probe would be incomplete unless Iran acknowledged trying to make nuclear arms in the past. That stance is shared by Canada, Japan, Australia and U.S. allies in Europe.

A senior IAEA official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the report was confidential, said that if the material provided by the U.S. and other agency members on the alleged activities was genuine, most of Iran's work was "most likely for nuclear weapons."

But he said the agency was not reaching any conclusion until the Iranians went beyond rejection of the purported evidence and concretely addressed the issues it raised.

When confronted with some of the documentation from the U.S. and other on its alleged weapons experiments, Tehran "stated that the allegations were baseless and that the information ... was fabricated," the report said.

Iran explained some of its activities linked by the Americans to a weapons program as work on "air bags and for the design of safety belts," according to the report.

[ERIC]: I think Iran just insulted the entire civilized, educated world.

The report will be the focus of discussions at an IAEA board report starting March 3. At that meeting, the U.S. and its allies are weighing whether to ask the board to approve a resolution declaring that the agency was unable to shed light on Iran's suspected nuclear weapons program, according to diplomats.

___

Associated Press writers Edith M. Lederer and Charles J. Hanley at the United Nations and Matthew Lee in Washington contributed to this report.

NIE part deux

Looks as if the NIE report submitted late last year, to the resounding cheers if militant Islamic mullah's and Bush haters alike has been re-addressed by Admiral Michael McConnell who sponsored it. Might have made a little error in judgment with respect to the wording of document, eh Mike?

February 8, 2008

REVIEW & OUTLOOK

Iranian Nuclear Rewrite
February 8, 2008; Page A16

Give Admiral Michael McConnell credit for trying to walk back the cat. Questioned this week by the Senate Intelligence Committee, the Director of National Intelligence defended the "integrity and the professionalism" of the process that produced last December's stunning National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran's nuclear program. Yet his testimony amounts to a reversal of the previous judgment.

The December NIE made headlines the world over for its "key judgment" that in 2003 "Tehran halted its nuclear weapons programs" -- programs that previously had been conducted in secret and in violation of Iran's Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty obligations.

This was a "high confidence" judgment, though the intelligence community had only "moderate confidence" that the program hasn't since been restarted. The NIE also waded into speculative political and policy judgments, such as that "Tehran's decisions are guided by a cost-benefit approach rather than a rush to a weapon irrespective of the political, economic, and military costs."

So it was little wonder that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad quickly called the NIE a "declaration of victory" for Iran's nuclear programs. Diplomatic efforts to pass a third round of U.N. economic sanctions ground to a crawl, though another weak draft resolution is currently making the rounds. Russia decided to ship nuclear fuel to the reactor it has built for Iran at Bushehr, a move it had previously postponed for months and which has worrisome proliferation risks.

Elsewhere, the NIE complicated U.S. efforts to deploy an antiballistic-missile shield in Central Europe. The Israelis worried that the report signaled the death of American seriousness on Iran, possibly requiring them to act alone. At home, Democrats used the NIE to accuse the Administration of hyping intelligence. "It's absolutely clear and eerily similar to what we saw with Iraq," said John Edwards.

[ERIC]: Ah yes, partisan politics at its finest. Are we sacrificing national security for the sake of the party?

Now Admiral McConnell is clearly trying to repair the damage, even if he can't say so directly. "I think I would change the way that we described [the] nuclear program," he admitted to Evan Bayh (D., Ind.) during the hearing, adding that weapon design and weaponization were "the least significant portion" of a nuclear weapons program.

He expressed some regret that the authors of the NIE had left it to a footnote to explain that the NIE's definition of "nuclear weapons program" meant only its design and weaponization and excluded its uranium enrichment. And he agreed with Mr. Bayh's statement that it would be "very difficult" for the U.S. to know if Iran had recommenced weaponization work, and that "given their industrial and technological capabilities, they are likely to be successful" in building a bomb.

The Admiral went even further in his written statement. Gone is the NIE's palaver about the cost-benefit approach or the sticks-and-carrots by which the mullahs may be induced to behave.

[ERIC]: Again, I see terrible errors projecting a Western based system of "rewards" into the Middle East. What constitutes their wants and desires nullifies MAD, and renders useless diplomatic enticements intended to curb their drive to the bomb.

Instead, the new assessment stresses that Iran continues to press ahead on enrichment, "the most difficult challenge in nuclear production." It notes that "Iran's efforts to perfect ballistic missiles that can reach North Africa and Europe also continue" -- a key component of a nuclear weapons capability.

Then there is the other side of WMD: "We assess that Tehran maintains dual-use facilities intended to produce CW [Chemical Warfare] agent in times of need and conducts research that may have offensive applications." Ditto for biological weapons, where "Iran has previously conducted offensive BW agent research and development," and "continues to seek dual-use technologies that could be used for biological warfare."

All this merely confirms what has long been obvious about Iran's intentions. No less importantly, his testimony underscores the extent to which the first NIE was at best a PR fiasco, at worst a revolt by intelligence analysts seeking to undermine current U.S. policy. As we reported at the time, the NIE was largely the work of State Department alumni with track records as "hyperpartisan anti-Bush officials," according to an intelligence source. They did their job too well. As Senator Bayh pointed out at the hearing, the NIE "had unintended consequences that, in my own view, are damaging to the national security interests of our country." Mr. Bayh is not a neocon.

Admiral McConnell's belated damage repair ought to refocus world attention on Iran's very real nuclear threat. Too bad his NIE rewrite won't get anywhere near the media attention that the first draft did.

[ERIC]: This statement does not surprise me.

Iran builds a better centrifuge

I sure hope when we elect Obama that he has the courage to draw a hard line with Iran and then stand by it.

Iran starts up advanced centrifuges

By GEORGE JAHN, Associated Press WriterThu Feb 7, 6:23 PM ET

Iran's nuclear project has developed its own version of an advanced centrifuge to churn out enriched uranium much faster than its previous machines, diplomats and experts said Thursday.

[ERIC]: That is great news, isn't it?

They said that few of the IR-2 centrifuges were operating and that testing appeared to be in an early phase, with the new machines rotating without processing any uranium gas.

More significant, the officials said, is the fact that Iran appears to have used know-how and equipment bought on the nuclear black market in combination with domestic ingenuity to overcome daunting technical difficulties and create highly advanced centrifuges.

[ERIC]: The Persians I knew in school were no dummies. It is amazing what a little motivation, coupled with high IQ can produce.

Iran's uranium enrichment work has raised concerns in Washington and other Western capitals because it can produce the radioactive material needed for nuclear bombs. Tehran says it is only pursuing lower-level enrichment to make fuel for atomic reactors that will generate electricity.

[ERIC]: Then why buy nuclear "fuel" from Russia?

Iran is under two sets of U.N. Security Council sanctions for refusing to suspend uranium enrichment, which it started developing during nearly two decades of covert nuclear activity built on illicit purchases and revealed only five years ago.

That secrecy heightened suspicions about Iran's intent, but Iranian leaders argued the country has a right to run a peaceful enrichment program and dismissed the U.N. demands, saying they planned to expand the project rather than freeze it.

Up until recent weeks, Iran had publicly focused on working with P1 centrifuges — outmoded machines that it acquired on the black market in the 1980s. Workers set up more than 3,000 of the machines in the large underground hall near Natanz, a city about 300 miles south of Tehran.

But diplomats told The Associated Press that Iranian experts now are testing a small number of more advanced IR-2 machines. They described it as a hybrid of the P-2 centrifuge once peddled on the black market by A.Q. Khan, the scientist who oversaw Pakistan's development of nuclear weapons.

The diplomats, who agreed to discuss the development only if granted anonymity because they weren't authorized to divulge the confidential information, said it was unclear whether the new generation centrifuges were in the underground facility or an aboveground pilot site at Natanz.

The P-2 centrifuge sold by Khan can enrich uranium gas up to three times faster than a P-1, but it is made from maraged steel — a high-nickel, low-carbon steel that is difficult to manufacture and hard to smuggle through international controls.

One of the diplomats said the Iranians had circumvented that problem by making the centrifuge's rotor tubes out of carbon fiber, presumably using machines and technology developed for Tehran's missile sector and using a German version as a model.

A former U.N. nuclear inspector, David Albright, said the ingenuity demonstrated by such a development was impressive.

"If you learn how to make carbon fiber rotors, you are very far ahead," said Albright, whose Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security tracks countries under nuclear suspicion. "They are much cheaper and easier to make, and you can learn to spin them very fast."

Using a hypothetical example of the efficiency of a P-2-based centrifuge compared with the P-1, Albright said 1,200 of the more advanced machines could produce enough material for a single nuclear warhead in a year, compared to 3,000 of the older model.

[ERIC]: Am I the only person that finds this disturbing?

Iran has stonewalled the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency for years on details of its centrifuge development program, but in recent months has shown more cooperation under a plan agreed to last year that commits Tehran to lifting the veil of secrecy on all past nuclear activities.

[ERIC]: Once that first mushroom cloud begins rising over Tel-Aviv I think the veil of secrecy will pretty much be lifted.

Last month, the International Atomic Energy Agency's chief, Mohamed ElBaradei, was given new information on Iran's "new generation of centrifuges" during talks in Tehran — a priority as the agency tries to establish how far along Iran is in developing the technology.

ElBaradei is to report on the progress of his probe next month to the 35-nation IAEA board.

Ali Ashgar Soltanieh, Iran's chief representative to the IAEA, declined to discuss specifics of the probe but told AP that "we have made good progress."

___

On the Net:

International Atomic Energy Agency: http://www.iaea.org

Copyright © 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.