BENADOR: West Getting Serious with Nuclear Arms Charge Against Iran

Ever since the Shah was ousted, the fate of Iran has been at the hands of murderous mullahs and as time has gone by, the situation has worsened, especially with a president who virulently has called for the destruction of an existing country and who has been supporting the Islamist movements expansion throughout the world by exporting and encouraging, promoting terrorism.

Nuclear weapons at the hands of rogue regimes are among the most dangerous situations, and ideally, it should have been the turn of the Iranian people to stop their own misfit government. But they have not. And, one can but see with no enthusiasm the need of other countries to 'fix' the situation.
_____________________________________

Nuclear Arms Charge Against Iran Is No Slam Dunk: Robert Kelley

By Robert Kelley Jan 10, 2012 7:01 PM ET

The conflict between Iran and the West just keeps heating up, with the Iranians announcing over the weekend that they have begun to enrich uranium at a second major facility, a well-defended site outside the city of Qom.
Given the high stakes, it’s valuable to take another look at the main source of the tension: Iran’s nuclear-weapons program. That this enterprise is active is widely considered a given in the U.S. In fact, the evidence, contained in a November report of the International Atomic Energy Agency, is sketchy. And the way the data have been presented produces a sickly sense of deja vu.
I am speaking up about this now because, as a member of the IAEA’s Iraq Action Team in 2003, I learned firsthand how withholding the facts can lead to bloodshed. Having known the details then, though I was not allowed to speak, I feel a certain shared responsibility for the war that killed more than 4,000 Americans and more than 100,000 Iraqis. A private citizen today, I hope to help ensure the facts are clear before the U.S. takes further steps that could lead, intentionally or otherwise, to a new conflagration, this time in Iran.
It’s accepted that Iran at one time had a nuclear-weapons program. The country’s enormous investment in a secret underground uranium-enrichment complex in the city of Natanz is essentially proof of clandestine intentions. The military plutonium-production reactor in Arak is yet another indicator.
However, it must be remembered that in the 2007 National Intelligence Estimate, U.S. agencies concluded that Iran halted its nuclear-arms program in 2003 under international pressure. It’s rare for intelligence officials to determine that they have sufficient evidence to say a program has ended, so their information presumably was very good. Similarly, until this year, the IAEA has consistently reported that it had no information suggesting Iran had a nuclear-weapons program after 2004.
So the issue is not whether there is evidence of such a program, but whether there is evidence that it was restarted after being shut down in 2003.
The Nov. 8, 2011, report of the IAEA, under the leadership of Director General Yukiya Amano, is long on the former and very short on the latter. In the 24-page document, intended for a restricted distribution but widely available on the Internet, all but three of the items that were offered as proof of a possible nuclear-arms program are either undated or refer to events before 2004. The agency spends about 96 percent of a 14- page annex reprising what was already known: that at one time there were military dimensions to Iran’s nuclear program.
Three Indications
What about the three indications that the arms project may have been reactivated?
Two of the three are attributed only to two member states, so the sourcing is impossible to evaluate. In addition, their validity is called into question by the agency’s handling of the third piece of evidence.
That evidence, according to the IAEA, tells us Iran embarked on a four-year program, starting around 2006, to validate the design of a device to produce a burst of neutrons that could initiate a fission chain reaction. Though I cannot say for sure what source the agency is relying on, I can say for certain that this project was earlier at the center of what appeared to be a misinformation campaign.
In 2009, the IAEA received a two-page document, purporting to come from Iran, describing this same alleged work. Mohamed ElBaradei, who was then the agency’s director general, rejected the information because there was no chain of custody for the paper, no clear source, document markings, date of issue or anything else that could establish its authenticity. What’s more, the document contained style errors, suggesting the author was not a native Farsi speaker. It appeared to have been typed using an Arabic, rather than a Farsi, word-processing program. When ElBaradei put the document in the trash heap, the U.K.’s Times newspaper published it.
This episode had suspicious similarities to a previous case that proved definitively to be a hoax. In 1995, the IAEA received several documents from the Sunday Times, a sister paper to the Times, purporting to show that Iraq had resumed its nuclear-weapons program in spite of all evidence to the contrary. The IAEA quickly determined that the documents were elaborate forgeries. There were mistakes in formatting the documents’ markings, classification and dates, and many errors in language and style indicated the author’s first language was something other than Arabic or Farsi. Inspections in Iraq later in 1995 confirmed incontrovertibly that there had been no reconstitution of the Iraqi nuclear program.
Today’s Regrets
I regret now that ElBaradei did not speak out more vehemently, before the U.S. went to war, about the 1995 faked documents, additional forgeries provided to the agency in 2003 and other falsifications. A good man, he had been an international lawyer with years of experience dealing with half- truths and prevarications. But he was trapped between telling the whole story and overtly insulting the U.S., which supplied 25 percent of the IAEA’s funding.
For example, ElBaradei labeled documents provided to the IAEA about Iraq’s attempts to acquire uranium from Africa “not authentic.” A better description would have been “blatant and amateurish forgeries.” He provided evidence that aluminum tubes the U.S. said were for nuclear centrifuges were actually for rockets. But he did not supply the supporting engineering details publicly. The truth was lost in the U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell’s scandalous detailing of Iraq’s supposed weapons of mass destruction, which was wrong in almost every respect.
ElBaradei’s successor also has fallen short by failing to note in his report the earlier doubts that Iran was continuing to develop a neutron-producing device. If Amano has found new reasons to overlook the many questionable aspects of this story, he should present them. Given past doubts about the episode, the agency’s reporting on it should be above reproach.
When it comes to accurately accounting for potential diversions of nuclear materials, the IAEA’s main mission, the agency has gone about its work with precision. It needs to be just as exacting when it delves into allegations about Iran’s weapons intentions.
I should be clear: Iran deserves tough scrutiny. It claims to have given up its nuclear-weapons ambitions, yet repeatedly acts as if it has something to hide. I am a skeptic; I suspect the Iranians may have an ongoing weaponization program. And the uncertainty must be resolved.
At the same time, we should not again be held hostage to forgeries and the spinning of data to make the worst case. If Iran is developing nuclear weapons, let it be proved through the analysis of current, solid information -- not recycled, discredited data. If there is to be a war with Iran, let’s not have a repeat, afterward, of the anguished articles and books from officials who kept their misgivings to themselves. Let’s get all the facts on the table now.

Robert Kelley, a nuclear engineer, was a director at the IAEA, where he worked for nine years. He gained his weapons expertise over 30 years at the University of California’s nuclear-weapons laboratories. The opinions expressed are his own.

Read more opinion online from Bloomberg View.
To contact the writer of this article: Robert Kelley at R.kelley@atomicreporters.com.
To contact the editor responsible for this article: Lisa Beyer at lbeyer3@bloomberg.net.

Source

BENADOR: IRAN BEGINS URANIUM ENRICHMENT IN UNDERGROUND QOM SITE

Iran, leading in a world leftist-Muslim conspiracy against the established world order, is moving ahead on nuclear plans.


Iran has begun uranium enrichment at a new underground site well protected from possible air strikes, 32 km from Qom at Fordo. (GeoEye Satellite Image, AP)


Tehran - Iran has begun uranium enrichment at a new underground site well protected from possible air strikes, a leading hardline newspaper reported on Sunday in another show of defiance against Western pressure to rein in Tehran's nuclear programme.

Another newspaper quoted a senior commander of the powerful Revolutionary Guard force as saying Tehran's leadership has decided to order the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic oil route, if the country's petroleum exports are blocked.

Revolutionary Guard ground forces also staged war games in eastern Iran in an apparent display of resolve against US forces just over the border in Afghanistan.

"The supreme authorities... have insisted that if enemies block the export of our oil, we won't allow a drop of oil to pass through the Strait of Hormuz. This is the strategy of the Islamic Republic in countering such threats," Revolutionary Guard deputy commander Ali Ashraf Nouri was quoted as saying by the Khorasan daily.

Iranian politicians have issued similar threats in the past, but this is the strongest statement yet by a top commander in the security establishment.

The latest statements are certain to fuel tensions with the US and its allies, which are trying to turn up pressure on Iran with new sanctions to punish it over its disputed nuclear programme. The West suspects Iran is trying to make nuclear weapons, but Iran denies this.

The United Nations has already sanctioned Iran for refusing to stop uranium enrichment - which can produce both nuclear fuel and fissile warhead material. Tehran says its nuclear programme is only for energy and medical research, and refuses to halt uranium enrichment.

Kayhan daily, which is close to Iran's ruling clerics, said Tehran has begun injecting uranium gas into sophisticated centrifuges at the Fordo facility near the holy city of Qom.

"Kayhan received reports yesterday that show Iran has begun uranium enrichment at the Fordo facility amid heightened foreign enemy threats," the paper said in a front-page report. Kayhan's manager is a representative of Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has the final word on all important matters of state.

8 000 centrifuges

Iran's nuclear chief, Fereidoun Abbasi, said late on Saturday that his country will "soon" begin enrichment at Fordo. It was impossible to immediately reconcile the two reports.

Iran has a major uranium enrichment facility in Natanz in central Iran, where nearly 8 000 centrifuges are operating. Tehran began enrichment at Natanz in April 2006.

The Fordo centrifuges, however, are reportedly more efficient. And the site better shielded from aerial attack.

Nouri said Iran's leadership has made a strategic decision to close the Strait of Hormuz, should the country's exports be blocked. One-sixth of the world's oil flows to market through the Strait of Hormuz, at the mouth of the Persian Gulf.

President Barack Obama approved new sanctions against Iran a week ago, targeting the central bank and its ability to sell petroleum abroad. The US has delayed implementing the sanctions for at least six months, worried about sending the price of oil higher at a time when the global economy is already struggling.

The new sanctions nevertheless prompted a series of threats from Iranian officials about closing the Strait of Hormuz.

The newspaper paraphrased Nouri as saying that a 10-day naval war game which ended on Tuesday was preparation for such a closure. The Guard, which is Iran's most powerful military force and which has its own naval arm, has planned more sea manoeuvres for February.

"The exalted leader [Khamenei] determined a new strategy for the armed forces, by which any threat from enemies will be responded to with threats," Nouri said.

The US and Israel have said that all options remain open, including military action, should Iran continue with its enrichment programme.

Underground tunnel

Tehran says it needs the programme to produce fuel for future nuclear reactors and medical radioisotopes needed for cancer patients.

The country has been enriching uranium to less than 5% for years, but it began to further enrich part of its uranium stockpile to nearly 20% as of February 2010, saying it needs the higher grade material to produce fuel for a Tehran reactor that makes medical radioisotopes needed for cancer patients. Weapons-grade uranium is usually about 90% enriched.

Iran says the higher enrichment activities - to nearly 20% - will be carried out at Fordo. These operations are of particular concern to the West because uranium at 20% enrichment can be converted into fissile material for a nuclear warhead much more quickly than that at 3.5%.

Built next to a military complex, Fordo was long kept secret and was only acknowledged by Iran after it was identified by Western intelligence agencies in September 2009.

Buried under 90m of rock, the facility is a hardened tunnel and is protected by air defence missile batteries and the Revolutionary Guard, Iran's most powerful military force. The site is located about 32km north of Qom, the religious nerve centre of Iran's ruling system.

"The Fordo facility, like Natanz, has been designed and built underground. The enemy doesn't have the ability to damage it," the semi-official Mehr news agency quoted nuclear chief Abbasi as saying on Sunday.

- AP

Source