Hot Air Mobile
Home The Vault Gear About
Hot Air -- get your fill


IAEA: Iran must explain 2004 documents for building nukes

posted at 4:45 pm on May 29, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | regular view

Last year, the American intelligence community issued a national estimate that claimed with moderate confidence that the Iranians had ceased work on a nuclear bomb by 2003. The IAEA has documents which dispute that, and call into question the motives behind the creation of the NIE. Iranian documents dated in 2004 show design work being done on both a nuclear warhead and its delivery system, and the IAEA wants answers from Tehran:

A ranking International Atomic Energy Agency official called Tehran’s possession of a drawing showing how to make part of an atomic warhead ” alarming” Thursday and said the onus is on Iran to prove it had not tried to develop nuclear arms, said diplomats attending a closed briefing. …

The documents, outlined in an IAEA report forwarded Monday to the U.N. Security Council and agency board members, are part of evidence provided by board member nations to the agency for its investigation into allegations that Iran used the cover of peaceful nuclear activities to conduct research and testing on a nuclear arms program.

One, dated January-February 2004 is linked to high explosives testing of the kind that can be used to detonate a nuclear device. Others, dated into January 2004 – and one as late as March 14 of that year – are part of purported evidence that Iran worked on designs of a missile re-entry vehicle that is normally a part of a nuclear delivery system.

That tends to argue against the NIE. If the Iranians had frozen their efforts in 2003 as the intel community said — reversing years of assessments that Iran actively pursued nukes — then they would have no need to create documentation and designs into 2004. Moreover, these designs show a military purpose for their nuclear program, which the Iranians have long denied.

The IAEA calls this “alarming”. These documents serve no purpose in a peaceful nuclear-energy program. With the Iranians just months away from increasing their uranium enrichment centrifuge cascades to 6,000, they could produce enough fissile material for a weapon in less than two months. If they have continued design and manufacturing work on a device, they could have a nuclear weapon by Christmas, if not sooner.

While the IAEA demands answers from Iran, perhaps we could get a few from the American intelligence community. Why were they so intent on dismissing the threat from Iran that they reversed three years of high-confidence assessments of an ongoing nuclear-weapons program to replace it with a moderate-confidence dismissal? How much did politics play in attempting to blunt the White House’s focus on a serious threat?


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

Comment pages:

Seriously, how many sleeper agents have jobs with our intelligence community?

Dr.Cwac.Cwac on May 29, 2008 at 4:49 PM

Trust in Iran’s goodwill.

danking70 on May 29, 2008 at 4:50 PM

That NIE seems to get more worthless with each passing day.

SoulGlo on May 29, 2008 at 4:57 PM

If they have continued design and manufacturing work on a device, they could have a nuclear weapon by Christmas, if not sooner.

Good thing they don’t celebrate Christmas, so we’ve got nothing to worry about.

mymanpotsandpans on May 29, 2008 at 5:02 PM

Political agendas seem to trump our national security interests, don’t they?

a capella on May 29, 2008 at 5:02 PM

The Iraq war was necessary. However, the only reason why it could be considered a mistake is because it has completely squandered any political capital necessary for stopping Iran from acquiring nukes.

There is no way this administration or the next could do anything to stop Iran now.

Riposte on May 29, 2008 at 5:03 PM

Obviously you never heard of Jimmy’s new project:
Habitat for Nuclear Plants…

right2bright on May 29, 2008 at 5:03 PM

But Kerry said they stopped.

lorien1973 on May 29, 2008 at 5:03 PM

We’re out of time. We need to strike Iran NOW!

stonemeister on May 29, 2008 at 5:04 PM

While the IAEA demands answers from Iran

.
Because if Iran doesn’t answer, Ban Ky Moon is going to hold his breath, or issue a scathing letter, or or or…

Think_b4_speaking on May 29, 2008 at 5:04 PM

The IAEA calls this “alarming”.

And it only took them how many years to realize this? I can’t decide which is more useless: the IAEA or our own CIA.

irishspy on May 29, 2008 at 5:13 PM

if you would have asked hawkish Americans 4 years ago about long term stategy in the middle east, most of us would have assured you that it would be Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Iran and eventually North Korea if they didn’t bump themsleves in line sooner. the “axis of evil” GWB told us that all intelligence said we should confront them on the table and in the field if needed to avert disaster. perhaps after the intelligence went bad on Iraq, the blowback created a need to tone down rhetoric and ease assumpation making in that plan… and for fear of being made fools again…. they dumbied down the reports and pulled back from the need to confront. and then we got to hear the big boom in the mountain by the Koreans… and we’re still doing basically the same thing as before… trying to buy them off.

Kaptain Amerika on May 29, 2008 at 5:14 PM

The Iraq war was necessary. However, the only reason why it could be considered a mistake is because it has completely squandered any political capital necessary for stopping Iran from acquiring nukes.

There is no way this administration or the next could do anything to stop Iran now.

Riposte on May 29, 2008 at 5:03 PM

I’m not so sure. All the pieces are coming together for a move, if bush can sew up a long term security arrangement/military base with Iraq. If Obama gets in, all bets are off anyway, but I think McCain would do the deed, if push comes to shove. We’re getting down close to crunch time.

a capella on May 29, 2008 at 5:15 PM

The little iran worm is in his hot tub drinking camels milk and laughing his two brain cell head off. U want me to do what?
L

letget on May 29, 2008 at 5:20 PM

if bush can sew up a long term security arrangement/military base with Iraq.

a capella on May 29, 2008 at 5:15 PM

… and afghanistan …

bookends

yo on May 29, 2008 at 5:29 PM

Our American intelligence estimates…

I think your better off trusting that they are WRONG than right…

Sad…

Romeo13 on May 29, 2008 at 5:40 PM

So, by 2012 the IAEA will know what Iran is doing right now? Hey, not bad for international bureacracy work, I guess.

Can we stop sending them my tax dollars now, along with the UN?

funky chicken on May 29, 2008 at 5:43 PM

C’mon, you’re all letting yourselves be ruled by fear. Didn’t you listen to Michelle Obama? She told us we must not fear anything; we must hope instead. So let’s all just hope that Iran doesn’t already have nukes, and isn’t already planning to use them (or sell them to Hezbollah, or some other group that would be happy to use them). And if that’s the case, then I guess we’d better hope that Iran’s nutty leaders will be as completely enthralled and bamboozled by Obama’s empty platitudes as our MSM has been.

AZCoyote on May 29, 2008 at 5:57 PM

I wonder if President Bush isn’t just waiting for the November election before giving the go ahead on the military option. He knows that a military operation against Iran before the election would just enrage the anti-war factions, would provide massive fodder for the leftist MSM and, along with the “nervous” moms, etc., assure the Donks the White House. So, he waits.

When he finally pulls the trigger he can make the argument that he couldn’t honorably leave the burden of what to do about Iran’s nuke program to the new incoming President. He could talk about how it was HIS responsibility to secure the emerging, hard-won stability in Iraq and to secure the continued existence of our ally, Israel.

He doesn’t have anything left to lose as far as “approval ratings” or popularity is concerned. Any hope for a positive “legacy” is simply going to have to be a long-term proposition, as it isn’t something that is likely to emerge for quite some time (because in the “near future”, his legacy will be relentlessly negative). Any future legacy centered around a positive outlook for the Middle East would only be further enhanced by removing the threat of a nuclear armed rogue state like Iran.

If I were Ahmadamnjihadi, I’d be building a really big bunker and would be living in it come November 10!

Fatal on May 29, 2008 at 6:04 PM

These ‘plans’ have been discussed for a year, for crying out loud. It has taken a frakkin year for the IAEA to do what?

When are we going to walk out of this Animal House of Nations?

Limerick on May 29, 2008 at 6:12 PM

The IAEA gets to take the high ground? That would be amusing if it wasn’t so pathetically sad. No one beieved the NIE, including the morons who disingenuously put it together.

Connie on May 29, 2008 at 6:16 PM

It’s just an estimate, anyway.

New title: NISWAG.

TexasDan on May 29, 2008 at 6:24 PM

Hey Fatal Bush’s will have good legacy in 4 years after we have to indure full blooded liberalism. I will make anyone a bet here saying Bush’s aprroval rating will be up in the high 50s if not even in the 60s in 2012.

BroncosRock on May 29, 2008 at 6:43 PM

Heh.

Bush will do nothing.

Crawford is miles away from anything, and the vast majority of non-Americans are barely aware of the existence of anything other than New York City and Washington, DC. That’s where the targets are, and that’s who’s going to get nuked when the good ship Khalifa Ahmad ties up at the dock. Interviewed afterward, GWB will be very careful to insure that the message gets through while he meticulously does not say “I told you so.”

Regards,
Ric

warlocketx on May 29, 2008 at 6:51 PM

There is no way this administration or the next could do anything to stop Iran now.

Riposte on May 29, 2008 at 5:03 PM

I wouldn’t be surprised if Bush doesn’t have some last minute plan to take out Iran’s nuclear program if some sort of resolution isn’t achieved before the end of his term and a Dem appears about to take office.

Bush might be able to leave the Iran problem to McCain but to pass it off to a Dem could be catastrophic.

Guardian on May 29, 2008 at 7:41 PM

Didn’t the libs have one big orgasm recently when the NIE said Iran was now harmless? That Beach Boys song is sounding better all the time. Maybe we can add Syria, Pakistan and Afghanistan to the play list.

Travis1 on May 29, 2008 at 9:13 PM

This “alarming” information comes from the infamous “stolen laptop” from three and a half years ago. You remember the story. Iran put all the information about their clandestine nuclear weapons program onto a laptop computer, where it was conveniently discovered by the MEK, a terrorist organization dedicated to overthrowing the Iranian government, who turned it over to the US. This top secret information that was put onto the laptop was in English. All in all, a very credible story.
When Iran comes out with a story next week that Hezbollah found a laptop containing top secret US information saying that Bush is responsible for 9/11, and that information is recorded in Farsi, I am sure you will believe it.
Grow up.

dave742 on May 29, 2008 at 10:32 PM

Political agendas seem to trump our national security interests, don’t they?

a capella on May 29, 2008 at 5:02 PM

Absolutely.

Our so called “intelligence” agencies are no more than a minefield of political activism that spends more time covering it’s own butt’s than objectively doing what it takes to keep this country safe and prepare against future threats.
The failures over the last few decades are massive but have been given a pass for the past 5 years with the “Bush lied” crap that has been front and center in the media and democratic party.

This “amnesia” created to make Iraq “Bush’s”war absolves the democratic party of their push to oust Saddam because of WMD’s and terrorist ties through most of the 90’s and up until they voted to go to war.

It has also resulted in little to no change in our intelligence agencies because most everyone thinks everything will be better when Bush is gone.

This election chant of “more of the same”should not worry the country pertaining to Bush/Mcain, it should worry the
country because of our ineffective, activist driven intelligence agencies.

These provide good insight into where our intelligence agencies are at:

Shadow Warriors ………….Kenneth R. Timmerman

Sabotage ………………..Rowan Scarborough

Legacy of Ashes ………….Tim Weiner

The Iraq war was necessary. However, the only reason why it could be considered a mistake is because it has completely squandered any political capital necessary for stopping Iran from acquiring nukes.

There is no way this administration or the next could do anything to stop Iran now.

Riposte on May 29, 2008 at 5:03 PM

I don’t think it will be about the US stopping Iran (except limited strikes against Qods forces and training camps).

The missiles(or nuclear weapon brought in by Hammas or Hezbollah) are pointed at Israel, not America.

The ineffective appeasement policies of the EU,UN,and liberal leadership here will force Israel to have to make it’s own move.

The Jews take it a lot more serious when terrorist dictators call for their destruction (Hitler),they are not going to play political games when it comes to Ahmadinejad.

Appeasement will bring on much more death and destruction than preemptive action would.

Churchill knew this in regards to Hitler but nobody would listen until the nazis were at their doorstep.

Bush knew this in regards to Saddam.Many consider Saddam’s demise a mistake,opening the door of an appeasement era in regards to Iran and the other enemies of Freedom in the world.

Israel will not and cannot afford appeasement, their lives depend on it.

Baxter Greene on May 29, 2008 at 11:14 PM

dave742 on May 29, 2008 at 10:32 PM

This is the same MEK which previously revealled the location of a secret Iranian nuclear facility. The one which took the IAEA three years to authenticate.

It seems as if the MEK may well have better intelligence assets in Iran than international agencies. I wonder why, maybe because they are Iranian.

Then again- under the do not talk to rat bags doctrine – we should not believe them.

davod on May 30, 2008 at 6:11 AM

davod:

revealled the location of a secret Iranian nuclear facility

The information that the MEK “revealed” was given to them by Israel.
BTW, the nuclear facilities were not “secret”, they simply had not been declared to the IAEA yet. Under INFCIRC/153 agreements, facilities do not need to be declared until 180 days before the introduction of nuclear material. The facilities were not within that time window, They were not “secret”.

dave742 on May 30, 2008 at 12:05 PM

dave742 on May 30, 2008 at 12:05 PM:

In the words of Maxwell Smart – It all depends on what the meaning of the word secret is Chief.

davod on May 30, 2008 at 5:36 PM

Comment pages:


You must be logged in to post a comment.