Iran nuke deadline passes, traces of weapons-grade uranium found (Update: Traces don’t match previous samples)
posted at 11:33 pm on August 31, 2006 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
I’m going to stop blogging this subject. I’ve written the same g-ddamned post 15 times now: Iran’s still enriching uranium, western diplomats are expressing “grave concerns,” the UN’s afraid it might have to act, Russia and China are hedging, Ahmadinejad says it’s their inalienable right, the Pentagon thinks they’re 10 years away from the bomb but they can’t be sure, etc etc. Then Sy Hersh puts out a piece in the New Yorker with 20 anonymous sources and Russert has him on Meet the Press to talk about it and a new round starts. Wash, rinse, repeat.
So here’s the latest wash. The deadline for Iran to stop enriching uranium passed this afternoon. The IAEA issued a new report today confirming, to the surprise of no one, that they’ve actually resumed enrichment within the past few days. And something else, too:
The IAEA report said its inspectors in mid-August found traces of highly-enriched uranium, of potential use for atom bombs, in a container at Iran’s Karaj Waste Storage Facility. The IAEA asked Iran to explain the source of the contamination.
“Additional questions about the scope and nature of Iran’s nuclear program have arisen during recent inspections,” said a senior official close to the IAEA.
But there was no “smoking gun”.
It could be that the equipment was already contaminated with HEU when they bought it (from Pakistan, presumably, or on the black market). The military says we’ve got at least five years until we need to start worrying about this. Stay tuned for the Rodham-Clinton administration’s airstrikes on the reactors in 2011, which will be good airstrikes. Unlike Bush’s, which would be decidedly evil.
The crazy Chamberlainian neocons at NRO don’t want to wait:
We would be fools to take comfort in the International Atomic Energy Agency’s report, released today, that suggests Iran’s enrichment activities are proceeding slowly and producing uranium of a quality too low for weaponization. Given enough time, the regime will build its nukes. The paramount mission of the Bush administration in its remaining two years should therefore be twofold: to keep the mullahs from going nuclear, and to speed their fall from power. Unfortunately, these objectives do not admit of a single solution. We should redouble our aid the Iranian democracy movement, but we quite obviously cannot assume that the revolution will come before the bomb…
[A]n Iranian bomb would likely produce a regional arms race and multiply the number of Middle Eastern nuclear powers. This too would raise the likelihood that a weapon of mass destruction will fall into terrorist hands; and by making it harder to determine where a detonated bomb had originated and retaliate against the guilty party, it would give the jihad that much more incentive to push the button.
Bush has made forfending that possibility his presidency’s raison d’être. We believe he means it. But we wonder how much longer he will wait before abandoning “solutions” that are anything but.
Bush is trying to put together a coalition of western countries to impose their own sanctions on Iran in case Russia and China torpedo the eventual resolution in the Security Council. Sounds like it’s working:
Eventually, punitive measures might expand to restrict travel by Iran’s leaders and limit the country’s access to global financial markets, according to diplomatic officials involved in the talks who spoke only on condition of anonymity.
Aside from the effort in the Council, the Bush administration is also seeking to persuade European financial institutions to end new lending to Iran. Some Swiss banks have already quietly agreed to limit their lending, American officials say.
It was quiet. It’s not anymore.
Brave, brave Sir Robin, who stands more to lose from an Iranian financial crunch than perhaps anyone else, celebrated his birthday in hiding today. Elsewhere, Carter’s going to be a good joe and give the mullahs the propaganda photo op they’ve been pining for by sitting down for “talks” with stooge former president Mohammed Khatami when he visits the U.S. next month. It’s a solid precedent; when the Democrats are back in power, let’s be sure to have our guys acting like a government-in-exile too when the ruling administration’s bete noires blow into town.
Update: Hitchens was on Hardball tonight to straighten Norah O’Donnell out about a few Iranian-related subjects. Spruiell has the video.
Update: Two points. First, it appears I erred in the title of this post by equating highly enriched uranium with “weapons grade.” The two aren’t synonymous. I apologize for the error.
That’s the good news. Here’s the bad news, courtesy of the New York Times:
Inspectors have found [highly enriched] uranium, which at extreme enrichment levels can fuel bombs, twice in the past. The International Atomic Energy Agency concluded that at least some of those samples came from contaminated equipment that Iran had obtained from Pakistan.
But in this case, the nuclear fingerprint of the particles did not match the other samples, an official familiar with the inspections said, raising questions about their origin…
The particles were taken from the container for testing a year ago, but the agency obtained the result only a few weeks ago because of the limited capacity of its verification laboratory…
But Thursday’s disclosure was different, diplomats said. “This is the first case with no known linkage,” said one European diplomat who could not be quoted by name because of diplomatic rules. “But we have to be careful because over time these things can be explained away, at least in theory.”…
The report did not specify the level of the particles or whether they were weapons-grade quality. The official who was discussing the report refused to be drawn into that discussion, suggesting that such a definition was meaningless. “You cannot say weapons-grade, but very high,” he said.
Update: WaPo thinks it knows where the new traces came from. Let’s hope they’re right:
Previous traces were found to have been the result of used and discarded centrifuge equipment the Iranians bought from Pakistan. Officials at the IAEA said privately yesterday that the new contamination appears to be from old spent fuel the Iranians moved out of harm’s way during their eight-year war with Iraq.
Forgive a possibly stupid question, but how and why would highly enriched uranium have contaminated Iranian equipment 20 years ago?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Some days you think you have to be living in Bizarro World. Weapons-grade enriched uranium in Iran isn’t a ’smoking gun’. Artillery shells filled with Sarin in Iraq aren’t ‘WMDs’. Katyushas fired by Hezbos, in the general direction of Israeli population centers aren’t war crimes, but Israeli attacks on the launch sites (positioned in civilian areas in violation of the Geneva Conventions) are.
Up is down, right is wrong. And Russert has the gall to say that the media got Katrina coverage right.
The Monster on August 31, 2006 at 6:45 PM
Interesting that the Manhatan project created the atomic bomb in 4 years, while not knowing it was possible, or how to do it…
but they are 10 years away??? with modern technology, 8 different easily researched methods of enrichment, and knowing it CAN be done? With already existing nuclear sites and fuel???
Sorry…. those “experts” are living in La La land…
Romeo13 on August 31, 2006 at 6:57 PM
Romeo13
Actually, that’s not quite true. Little Boy was never tested because they knew it would work. Trinity was the test for Fat Man because the experts couldn’t agree if it would work.
Bomb Doctor on August 31, 2006 at 7:02 PM
Pretty much everything the mainstream media does, when viewed through the lens of trying to undermine the Bush administration, makes perfect sense. They are mad as hell that they aren’t in office, and they are going to use all the unelected power at their disposal to, in their eyes, mitigate the damage that Bush is doing to the march towards “progress”.
kaltes on August 31, 2006 at 7:07 PM
I watched “The Siege” last night with Denzel Washington. It was about Islamic fascists bombing things, like buses, in NYC. It came out in 1998. It was so sad, but almost ironically funny, that in the movie they were all worried about bombings targeting a march of maybe 200 people. In the background, the World Trade Center towers stood, watchfully.
Just as pre-9/11 we never dreamed the Twin Towers would fall at the hands of these evil freaks, even in movies…now we can’t even imagine how terrible what they have planned for us will be.
NTWR on August 31, 2006 at 7:14 PM
My point Bombdoctor, was that it went from theory to fact very quickly… no one had ever built one before, while Iran KNOWS its not only possible, but there is a lot of published information available about how…
But these “experts” expect them to be SLOWER???? by 2 1/1 times???
Romeo13 on August 31, 2006 at 7:24 PM
Romeo13
The problem is testing. They have to test to make sure their theories are correct. Once they test there is no longer any doubt about their intentions. Also, there is no way that you could fit a Little Boy or Fat Man device on a missile. What we are talking about is a fusion device that not only works, but will fit on a missile. It took the US decades to get our warheads to a size and weight that was reasonable for a missile.
Sure, they could make a gun type weapon that would work, it would also weigh as much as Little Boy (~8,900 lbs).
Bomb Doctor on August 31, 2006 at 7:31 PM
Anyone who seriously thinks that the mullahs are “five years” away from “The Islamic Bomb” has s**t for brains.
The one consistency we’ve had in guaging the progress that other nations have made in their nuclear weapons programs has been to grossly overestimate the time frame in which we thought they were going to achieve success:
- Pakistan
- India
In both of these cases, we were stunned when they conducted underground atomic weapon tests.
- Iraq, pre-1991
- Libya
- North Korea
In these instances, we were surprised each time by how much further along these states were in their design and development compared to the “think-tank” estimates of the CIA, DIA, etc.
Iran will be no different. I’d give them a year, two on the outside. Five? Ha!
Spurius Ligustinus on August 31, 2006 at 7:37 PM
Bomb Doctor,
Once they test, it no longer matters what there intention were. They are then a nuclear power and the entire center of gravity in the Middle East sits squarely over Tehran.
a4g on August 31, 2006 at 7:44 PM
Spurius Ligustinus
You do know that most of the Pakistani weapon tests were fizzles?
Bomb Doctor on August 31, 2006 at 7:49 PM
a4g
One nuke test makes them a nuclear power? BTW, Iran isn’t in the middle east.
One question for you, do you know why MacArthur didn’t use nukes in Korea?
Bomb Doctor on August 31, 2006 at 7:51 PM
Bombdoctor…. uh… why?
Why do they have to make a missle deployable bomb? Eventualy yes, but for the nuclear threat? not really…
You have to remember that they could easily build that type of bomb INTO an aircraft, then use one of the Jihadists to suicide it into the target…. or give it to terrorists to smuggle in. 8900 lbs is NOTHING when its on a merchant ship working its way into LA harbor…
Nuclear weapons have (except for 2 expceptions) had political weight because of the THREAT… not the use.
Romeo13 on August 31, 2006 at 7:56 PM
Romeo13
We didn’t have them, five years after VJ Day.
So they are going to deploy hundreds if not thousands of nukes on ships or planes?
Really, this is simple, one nuke does not make you a super power, ten doesn’t, 100 doesn’t. They may get lucky once, maybe even more times. Then they get crushed.
Nukes are not some magical weapon that ends the world.
People never stopped living in Nagasaki or Hiroshima.
Bomb Doctor on August 31, 2006 at 8:01 PM
Never said they were trying to end the world… but it DOES make any threat they make more credible, and the THREAT of giving one to an Jihadist organization is the real threat…
What do we do if they suddenly “loose” one? and fundamentalists get ahold of it, put it on a ship and nuke New York harbor? Do we bomb Tehran???? after all, they didn’t do it… they “accidentaly” lost it.
Terrorists use terror to forward their political agenda… and Nuclear weapons are the ultimate terror weapon right now. The populace (who does not know what these can or can’t do) will force governments, out of fear, to continue the appeasement agenda, until its too late.
IMO even a single verifiable Atom bomb, will not only embolden the Jihadists, but also really mess with public opinion and perception.
Romeo13 on August 31, 2006 at 8:46 PM
Romeo13
I wish I had saved the link, but I read an article a day or two ago that some L³ said that the only reason that criminals had guns was because police started carrying them.
You are using the same kind of logic. Do you really think that the US or even France for that matter will just capitulate because Iran has one nuke?
Bomb Doctor on August 31, 2006 at 8:51 PM
Anybody else notice the “destroyed building” picture in the brave, brave Sir Robin link?
B Moe on August 31, 2006 at 9:11 PM
B Moe
What about it? It’s been all over the wire services, been destroyed at least ten times…
Bomb Doctor on August 31, 2006 at 9:14 PM
Yo Allah: Red meat.
Favorite quote so far, from “gapewoman”:
Savage on August 31, 2006 at 9:23 PM
Actually, no I’m not…. false analogy there bomb…
What I AM saying is that we need to stop them from getting the bomb in the first place.
A better analogy to what I’m talking about… does it really matter if a Bad guy has a musket… or a futuristic machine gun??? at least to the person HE JUST SHOT?
Iran does NOT need a modern nuke to gain both the prestige, and political power, that a nuke would bring…. remember, we are not just dealing with reality here, but with political perception…
Romeo13 on August 31, 2006 at 9:27 PM
The only “smoking gun” the UN sees is the one that just smoked their own house, and that’s up for debate.
sMack on August 31, 2006 at 9:38 PM
Romeo13
That is the best option. But even if they test a nuke, it does not mean they have a stockpile.
To the person shot, it’s not good. But bottom line is, they won’t get a chance after that to shoot another.
Nukes are not magic, they don’t end the world. If, and I do mean if, Iran tests a nuke, no one in the UN or the IAEA can claim otherwise. It’s a no win for Iran to test. If they don’t test, they don’t know if they have a workable design. If they do test, everyone knows.
It may well be that Pakistan’s Khan sold nuke information to Iran, but the Paki nukes haven’t proven very reliable in their tests.
Iran is using NorK missile tech, which blew up midflight in recent tests.
Qom was recently destroyed in an earthquake. The buildings literally fell apart.
Their big “victory” was getting Israel to stop killing Hezballah terrorists.
Now you expect me to believe that they are going to secretly deploy nukes all over the US?
Bomb Doctor on August 31, 2006 at 9:45 PM
The AQ Khan network did sell Libya a design for a first-generation implosion device that is believed to be the uranium implosion bomb the Chinese tested in 1964. It’s possible Iran received the same design from the Khan network.
Implosion designs are tricky without testing though.
NPP on August 31, 2006 at 10:07 PM
NPP
To say the least.
Bomb Doctor on August 31, 2006 at 10:10 PM
There is that nuclear power that has a footprint in Iraq…
Pablo on September 1, 2006 at 12:10 AM
BombDoctor
North Korea has never tested a nuclear weapon and yet everyone takes them very seriously, and no one is really disputing that North Korea has them. Iran isn’t re-inventing the wheel. There are many proven designs already out there, especially when you consider proliferation legacy of the Khan network. Also, consider the Soviet and Chinese programs. I would not put much faith in warhead design being the weak link in the process.
No, fusion is not necessary. Pakistan uses fission warheads on missiles.
The USSR had successfully tested a nuclear ICBM by 1957, a mere 8 years after their 1st nuclear test. The USA tested the nuclear-capable Redstone missile in 1953 then used it in a nuclear test in 1958. The US had the Atlas ICBM in 1959. You think it took the US decades to get a nuclear weapon onto a missile?
Yes, it does.
Yes, it is.
I don’t know where you are getting your information, but you are very wrong. The US mass produced 120 “fat man” bombs between 1947 and 1949, 550 improved mk-4 “fat man” bombs starting in 1949. The real reason MacArthur did not use nukes against North Korea and mainland China, which MacArthur wanted to do as well, was that he lacked the authority to do it and Truman overruled him.
Nukes are VERY magical. Ask North Korea. If Iran gets even 1 nuke, they will have “won” and all military options will be off the table. The world has learned a terrible lesson thanks to North Korea: you get nukes, and you get handled with kid gloves.
kaltes on September 1, 2006 at 3:07 AM
Allah,
The fuel in the WAPO article would probably be from the 5MW research reactor we built for the Iranians in the mid 1960’s. It uses 93% HEU. We refused to refuel the reactor after 1979, but I think the Iranians also had fueling contracts with France and Germany. It appears the original fuel we provided is still stored at the reactor. The reactor has been under IAEA safeguards since 1974 with no known violations. I’m not sure when the reactor was last refueled or how many times it has been. Typically, the used fuel is transferred under IAEA safeguard back to the entity they bought it from. Since I haven’t seen anything to the contrary, I’m assuming that’s the case with any refuellings of this reactor.
The fuel was probably moved during the Iran-Iraq war because of repeated scud attacks and airstrikes on industrial facilities.
It should be relatively straightfoward to determine if this recent contamination is from the spent fuel or not.
NPP on September 1, 2006 at 9:55 AM
And was there anyone out there that didnt think the deadline would come and go with Iran being cooperative? Now the U.S. and Britian can ask the UN to put the useless sanctions in place for a couple of years while Iran continues to defy, I mean ignore, I mean get the reactors up and running for peaceful means. I mean come on, they need electricity and all that oil they are sitting on is running out. When the UN comes to the conclusion that the sanctions are not working, (we can all dream cant we?) then and only then will Kofi send Mahmoud Ahmadinsnowjob to bed without any dinner. Speaking of dinner, are we having cream of mushroom cloud soup with ours?
Long Island Pete on September 1, 2006 at 10:35 AM
Lets face it, Iran will get the bomb and it will be used by some Islamic group against American interests somewhere. The Dems will get in power and be overwhelmed by it all and choke. Americans seem to be getting softer and softer, and Michael Savage is right, all the panty waist new generation of Suburban American Liberal weenies will have their throats slit like sheep. We got a real deep problem on our hands with these Muslims and we are going to have to get mean to clean it up.
Shmo on September 1, 2006 at 11:57 AM
NPP
This link says the research reactor was converted from 93% enriched to 20% enriched by Argentina in the 1980s. It is hard for me to find reliable sources of information on the tehran research reactor because so many of the sources discussing it are liberals trying to make the argument that this is all really our fault, the same argument they made about the Taliban and Bin Laden. Im not going to put much faith in liberal secondary sources. This NTI link seems legit though:
http://www.nti.org/e_research/profiles/Iran/3119_3220.html
Let me know what you think, and if you find any more recent / updated / detailed info.
kaltes on September 1, 2006 at 2:51 PM
Kaltes,
That conversion didn’t happen until 1987 - late in the Iran-Iraq war. Some of the used HEU fuel from the 60’s is still sitting in Tehran today (see here):
This used fuel is still considered HEU but is obviously no longer at 93%. IAEA testing should be able to easily confirm if this is the source of the contamination or not.
NPP on September 1, 2006 at 4:08 PM
Iran’s building nukes. N Korea’s trying to supply long range missiles. The UN is stalling, and … we’re sitting on our hands.
The most Ironic thing that could happen if all of this comes to a head and we reap the nuclear winter is that some libtard’ll be on tv talking about how “we’re fear mongering” because we’re worried about terrorists having nukes, and then one goes off … poof … right in the middle of their bloviation their argument is proven wrong.
This is seriously scarry stuff. I read that little summation of what a nuke would do in Nyc (which is what I said would be next if they get the means when 9/11 hit), and it is the utter destruction of our social structure.
This is really scarry stuff. Anyone who’s in a position to do something is just … ignoring it hoping it will go away. This is bad … reeeeeeeeeeal bad.
One Angry Christian on September 1, 2006 at 7:54 PM
Well, the poobahs in the “United” Nations Assembly and the “Security” Council may harbor illusions that they’re men of action, but even when they pass a “resolution,” it doesn’t amount to an action. If the UN “acts” in this way or if it doesn’t, what’s the difference? It’s just theater, just acting! Oh, I see; you meant they have stage fright. Well, then I withdraw my point.
Kralizec on September 2, 2006 at 2:10 AM