Intelligence Agencies Say No New Nukes in Iran

Contessa_Sharra

Searcher for Accuracy
Apr 27, 2008
1,639
149
48
Intelligence Agencies Say No New Nukes in Iran

Secret updates to White House challenge European and Israeli assessments.

By Mark Hosenball | Newsweek Web Exclusive
Sep 16, 2009

The U.S. intelligence community is reporting to the White House that Iran has not restarted its nuclear-weapons development program, two counterproliferation officials tell NEWSWEEK. U.S. agencies had previously said that Tehran halted the program in 2003.

The officials, who asked for anonymity when discussing sensitive information, said that U.S. intelligence agencies have informed policymakers at the White House and other agencies that the status of Iranian work on development and production of a nuclear bomb has not changed since the formal National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran's "Nuclear Intentions and Capabilities" in November 2007. Public portions of that report stated that U.S. intelligence agencies had "high confidence" that, as of early 2003, Iranian military units were pursuing development of a nuclear bomb, but that in the fall of that year Iran "halted its nuclear weapons program." The document said that while U.S. agencies believed the Iranian government "at a minimum is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons," U.S. intelligence as of mid-2007 still had "moderate confidence" that it had not restarted weapons-development efforts.

One of the two officials said that the Obama administration has now worked out a system in which intelligence agencies provide top policymakers, including the president, with regular updates on intelligence judgments like the conclusions in the 2007 Iran NIE. According to the two officials, the latest update to policymakers has been that as of now—two years after the period covered by the 2007 NIE—U.S. intelligence agencies still believe Iran has not resumed nuclear-weapons development work. "That's the conclusion, but it's one that—like every other—is constantly checked and reassessed, both to take account of new information and to test old assumptions," one of the officials told NEWSWEEK. It is not clear whether U.S. agencies' confidence in this judgment has grown at all since the 2007 statement.



This latest U.S. intelligence-community assessment is potentially controversial for several reasons, not the least of which is that it is at odds with more alarming assessments propounded by key U.S. allies, most notably Israel. Officials of Israel's conservative-led government have been delivering increasingly dire assessments of Iran’s nuclear progress and have leaked shrill threats about a possible Israeli military attack on Iranian nuclear facilities.

Former U.N. weapons inspector David Albright, an atomic-weapons expert who follows Iranian nuclear developments closely, said the U.S. government's current judgments will continue to provoke contention and debate. "People are looking at the same information and reaching different judgments," he said. "Given all the developments in Iran, these assessments are hard to believe with any certainty. Nobody's been able to bring total proof either way."

Israel is not the only American ally that has circulated assessments that contradict the U.S. intelligence conclusion that Iran is not currently pursuing nuclear-bomb development. According to German court documents released earlier this year, Germany's foreign intelligence service, known as the BND, reported in 2008 that “development work on nuclear weapons can be observed in Iran even after 2003."

A European counterproliferation official, who also requested anonymity, said that assessments like the one provided by the BND relied significantly on information collected by German and other intelligence agencies about efforts by suspected Iranian agents and front companies to purchase hardware and technology from Western firms that can be used to design or build nuclear weapons. Such equipment and know-how often has "dual uses"—both peaceful and military applications. But some Iranian purchases have appeared highly suspect. German authorities have been pursuing criminal charges against a German-Iranian businessman who allegedly tried to purchase for Tehran ultrahigh-speed cameras and radiation sensors that are built to withstand extreme heat—equipment that experts believe would be quite useful for nuclear-weapons development, though it could also be used for more benign purposes. The Institute for Science and International Security, run by Albright, recently published a paper on the German investigation.

When it first was made public, the November 2007 NIE was criticized by American and Israeli hardliners for playing up conclusions about Iran's having stopped work on nuclear-weapons development while playing down Iranian advances in its efforts to produce highly enriched uranium, which is the most critical, but difficult to manufacture, element of a primitive nuclear bomb. The NIE said that even though Iran had halted its nuclear-weapons program, it had made "significant progress" during 2007 in installing centrifuges used in uranium enrichment, though U.S. analysts believed that, as a result of technical problems with these machines, Iran probably could not produce enough highly enriched uranium for a bomb before 2010 at the earliest. The Iranians have consistently claimed that they are enriching uranium only for civilian purposes. Low-enriched uranium, which is all that Iran has made so far, is a common fuel for civilian power plants.

U.S. and European counterproliferation experts believe that Iran's centrifuge program has already produced enough low-enriched uranium, an essential precursor to the production of bomb-grade material, to provide feedstock to produce enough highly enriched uranium to make a bomb. However, that is an arduous and technically complicated process. Many U.S. and European experts say that Iran is still experiencing technical problems with centrifuges it would use to produce bomb-grade uranium, which could delay any Iranian bomb program for years.​

An Obama administration official says that top policymakers are being told that there is no significant disagreement among U.S. intelligence agencies and experts about the latest assessments regarding Iran's nuclear effort. That may encourage the White House's efforts to continue to try to engage Iran in diplomatic dialogue, including discussion of Iran's nuclear ambitions. A spokesperson for National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair's office, which is responsible for producing NIEs and updates on Iranian nukes, had no comment.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------​

One does have to wonder why certain countries and certain groups would push false info and lies about Iran having weapons nukes, but then again, if one country in the Middle East has nuke weapons, WHY SHOULDN'T THE OTHERS??????​
 
Why should Iran NOT have them when Israel does? Balance of powers there, I would think, and a deterent to Israel to not get ugly!


Like it USED TO BE between US and the Soviets!
 
Why should Iran NOT have them when Israel does? Balance of powers there, I would think, and a deterent to Israel to not get ugly!


Like it USED TO BE between US and the Soviets!

Because ;) Israel ;) doesn't ;) have ;) nuclear ;) weapons ;). :eusa_whistle:
 
Why should Iran NOT have them when Israel does? Balance of powers there, I would think, and a deterent to Israel to not get ugly!


Like it USED TO BE between US and the Soviets!

Because the Israeli's are rational. Ruthless, selfish and underhanded at times, yes, but rational.

Iran, or more specifically the council which would control the nukes, is not.
 
We have made our share of mistakes in our past dealing with Iran. However, when they rejected Rice's last offers and that idiot showed up and spoke before the UN instead ............. they shut a huge door on themselves.

Further, their actions since have done nothing to increase trust, faith or to entice us to be open to anything other than visible actions of compliance on their part.

Their openness to speak as the do about their wishes and intentions towards Israel and others, their insistence of continued support for rouge groups and their continued quest for the nuclear option, opens the path to the potential for a regional conflict which could directly effect European and African nations, as well as possibly the regional situation surrounding Afghanistan.

As I commend the effort to a peaceful and workable conclusion, our nation cannot afford to let Israel and Iran go at it. If a first strike must come, it would be better coming from us, as the other could draw us into a much larger and more costly endeavor.

Harsh sanctions should be implemented and the gulf should be blocked, sooner rather than later.


Hopefully reasonable minds on all sides will win out before such tactics and measures take place.
 
Let's see, on the one hand we have a pacifist US intelligence community that uses the term "man-caused disasters" instead of terrorism, and on the other hand we have the Israeli intelligence apparatus whose national survival relies on accurate and timely intelligence assessments against enemies determined to finish what Hitler began in the 1940's.

Call me one-sided, but I tend to listen to the one who has the most to lose if the guess is wrong.
 
Let's see, on the one hand we have a pacifist US intelligence community that uses the term "man-caused disasters" instead of terrorism, and on the other hand we have the Israeli intelligence apparatus whose national survival relies on accurate and timely intelligence assessments against enemies determined to finish what Hitler began in the 1940's.

Call me one-sided, but I tend to listen to the one who has the most to lose if the guess is wrong.
It's the way the article is worded, not the IC. It is true that there is no evidence that the Iranians have a functioning nuclear warhead.

It is NOT true that the Iranians are not still working on getting one, if one understands that there is no rational need for any non-weapons signatory state to be producing HEU just for one example, that is. And the IC knows this.
 
Last edited:
Let's see, on the one hand we have a pacifist US intelligence community that uses the term "man-caused disasters" instead of terrorism, and on the other hand we have the Israeli intelligence apparatus whose national survival relies on accurate and timely intelligence assessments against enemies determined to finish what Hitler began in the 1940's.

Call me one-sided, but I tend to listen to the one who has the most to lose if the guess is wrong.
It's the way the article is worded, not the IC. It is true that the Iranians do not yet have a functioning nuclear warhead.

It is NOT true that the Iranians are not still working on getting one, if one understands that there is no rational need for any non-weapons signatory state to be producing HEU, that is. And the IC knows this.

First of all, intelligence information is, to put it bluntly, a guess. Theoretically, it's an educated guess based on a number of different factors, but it's still a guess just the same.

Second of all, I'm always suspicious of so-called anonymous sources. You never know what's on their agenda nor why they are leaking this information to the press.

Third of all, Iran has a hostile agenda towards Israel. Their actions and statements make this abundantly clear to the casual observer. Whether or not the United States decides to get involved in this mess remains to be seen. I think Obama will sit this one out. Back in 1991, it was extraordinarily surprising that Israel took no action when Saddam fired his Scud missiles against the Israeli civilian population. Now that we have a US President who is somewhat hostile towards Israel in his not-so-diplomatic rhetoric, I don't see the Israelis waiting to find out if the Iranians actually have a nuclear warhead is confirmed or not.
 
Let's see, on the one hand we have a pacifist US intelligence community that uses the term "man-caused disasters" instead of terrorism, and on the other hand we have the Israeli intelligence apparatus whose national survival relies on accurate and timely intelligence assessments against enemies determined to finish what Hitler began in the 1940's.

Call me one-sided, but I tend to listen to the one who has the most to lose if the guess is wrong.

Tell that to the innocent civilians they killed in Palestine. I highly doubt Iran has a nuclear weapon at the moment. If they did, they would of used it by now. However, I'm sure they have or are developing nuclear capabilities. This doesn't mean however we go 1945 on them and wipe them off the face of the earth. How would that look if we were wrong? Imagine us being wrong on the Iraq War in 2003 x1000.
 
Let's see, on the one hand we have a pacifist US intelligence community that uses the term "man-caused disasters" instead of terrorism, and on the other hand we have the Israeli intelligence apparatus whose national survival relies on accurate and timely intelligence assessments against enemies determined to finish what Hitler began in the 1940's.

Call me one-sided, but I tend to listen to the one who has the most to lose if the guess is wrong.
It's the way the article is worded, not the IC. It is true that the Iranians do not yet have a functioning nuclear warhead.

It is NOT true that the Iranians are not still working on getting one, if one understands that there is no rational need for any non-weapons signatory state to be producing HEU, that is. And the IC knows this.

First of all, intelligence information is, to put it bluntly, a guess. Theoretically, it's an educated guess based on a number of different factors, but it's still a guess just the same.

Second of all, I'm always suspicious of so-called anonymous sources. You never know what's on their agenda nor why they are leaking this information to the press.

Third of all, Iran has a hostile agenda towards Israel. Their actions and statements make this abundantly clear to the casual observer. Whether or not the United States decides to get involved in this mess remains to be seen. I think Obama will sit this one out. Back in 1991, it was extraordinarily surprising that Israel took no action when Saddam fired his Scud missiles against the Israeli civilian population. Now that we have a US President who is somewhat hostile towards Israel in his not-so-diplomatic rhetoric, I don't see the Israelis waiting to find out if the Iranians actually have a nuclear warhead is confirmed or not.

I agree with everything you said, but I do not think BHO is at all hostile toward Israel. I also take media reports on what the IC thinks and/or knows with a grain of salt.
 

Forum List

Back
Top