Peres warns: One morning we’ll wake to a nuclear Iran

Israeli President Peres meets with former American Secretary of State, exhorting world not to compromise with Iran over nukes
Roni Sofer – Published: 12.05.07, 16:49 / Israel News

Ahmadinejad: Report a Victory for Iran

By ALI AKBAR DAREINI
Associated Press Writer

AP Photo/Mehdi Ghasemi

Advertisement

Buy AP Photo Reprints

Multimedia
A Look at Iran’s Recent Political History

Latest Iran News
Ahmadinejad: Report a Victory for Iran
Iran Says Ties With Syria Rock Solid

Iran’s Use of Oil Weapon Cuts Two Ways

Iran Says It Has Sonar-Evading Submarine

Iranian President: Annapolis a Failure

PHOTO GALLERY

Latest Iran Photos

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — A new U.S. intelligence review concluding Iran stopped developing an atomic weapons program in 2003 is a “declaration of victory” for Iran’s nuclear program, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Wednesday.

Russia’s foreign minister, meanwhile, indicated that the U.S. report’s findings undermined Washington’s push for a new set of U.N. sanctions against Iran.

The U.S. intelligence report released Monday concluded that Iran had stopped its weapons program in late 2003 and shown no signs since of resuming it, representing a sharp turnaround from a previous intelligence assessment in 2005.

“This is a declaration of victory for the Iranian nation against the world powers over the nuclear issue,” Ahmadinejad told thousands of people during a visit to Ilam province in western Iran.

“This was a final shot to those who, in the past several years, spread a sense of threat and concern in the world through lies of nuclear weapons,” Ahmadinejad said, drawing celebratory whistles from the crowd.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice would not directly respond to Ahmadinejad’s remarks, but told reporters in the Ethiopian capital Wednesday that the public release of the National Intelligence Estimate showed the Bush administration was committed to transparent democracy while Iran was not.

Iran has touted the report as vindication of its claims that its nuclear program is peaceful and Iranian officials insist that Washington should take a less hawkish stance and drop attempts to impose new sanctions in light of the report’s surprise conclusions.

Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency, called the report a “sigh of relief” because its conclusions also jibe with the agency’s own findings.

“Iran obviously has been somewhat vindicated in saying they have not been working on a weapons program, at least for the last few years,” ElBaradei told reporters in Brazil’s capital, Brasilia.

ElBaradei did not say whether the U.S. report’s findings will undermine Washington’s push for a new set of U.N. sanctions against Iran, but warned that the International Atomic Energy Agency still plans more inspections to address some issues about Tehran’s nuclear energy program.

“We have not seen a smoking gun in the last few years, but we still have work to be performed,” he said. “Iran needs to continue working with us. Iran needs to clear the deck.”

The intelligence estimate was released Monday – two days after the world’s major powers met in Paris and indicated that a compromise text on a third sanctions resolution could be circulated at the U.N. as early as Friday by the six countries – the U.S., Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany.

Russia, a veto-wielding member of the U.N. Security Council, said Wednesday there was no proof that Iran has ever run a nuclear weapons program.

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov indicated that the U.S. acknowledgment that Iran halted a suspected nuclear weapons bid in 2003 undermined Washington’s push for a new set of U.N. sanctions.

“We will assess the situation regarding a new U.N. Security Council resolution taking into account all these facts, including the U.S. confirmation that it has no information about the existence of a nuclear weapons program in Iran,” he said.

Russia and China, another veto-wielding council member, have grudgingly approved two sets of limited U.N. sanctions against Iran over its refusal to suspend uranium enrichment. But the Kremlin has bristled at the U.S. push for tougher measures, saying they would only widen the rift.

China had said Tuesday the U.S. report raised second thoughts about new sanctions.

President Bush defended his approach Tuesday, and Rice said it would be a “big mistake” to ease any diplomatic pressure on Iran despite the new U.S. findings.

“I continue to see Iran as a dangerous power in international politics,” Rice told reporters traveling with her to Ethiopia where she planned to see African leaders. “At this moment, it doesn’t appear to have an active weaponization program. That frankly is good news. But if it causes people to say, ‘Oh, well, then we don’t need to worry about what the Iranians are doing,’ I think we will have made a big mistake.”

The finding comes at a time of escalating tensions between the United States and Iran, which President Bush has labeled part of an “axis of evil,” along with Saddam Hussein-era Iraq and North Korea.

The United States and some of its allies accuse Iran of seeking to develop nuclear weapons, a claim denied by Iran, which says its nuclear program aims only to generate electricity.

Iran has rejected the two U.N. Security Council resolutions demanding that it halt uranium enrichment, a process that can produce either fuel for a reactor or a nuclear warhead.

Rice urged nations such as China and Russia not to harden their stance against a new round of sanctions.

“People need the opportunity to absorb what they’ve heard,” Rice said. “We have been completely transparent about what the intelligence assessment says. And people need a chance to read it. When they do that and when they read it in its detail and nuance, they will be able to see the points that I have made.”

But some analysts said it may be hard to maintain support for a swift new U.N. resolution that would further restrict trade with Iran.

“An enormous effort has been invested to date in trying to bring the Russians, Chinese and Europeans on board with the current sanctions … and this report doesn’t appear to have been widely anticipated among our allies,” said Suzanne Maloney, a foreign policy senior fellow at the Washington-based Brookings Institution.

“Now you have the U.S. intelligence community coming out and saying formally that Iran halted its weapons program four years ago. This will certainly undercut any push to get new sanctions,” she added.

European and U.N. officials said the report bolsters their argument for negotiations, and that the international community should not walk away from years of talks with an often defiant Tehran that is openly enriching uranium for uncertain ends.

They also said sanctions are still an option to compel Iran to be fully transparent about its nuclear program.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini said the new U.S. intelligence report meant that Washington’s push to refer the case over Iran’s nuclear program to the U.N. Security Council in 2006 was “illegal.”

“One of the consequences of this report is that referring Iran’s nuclear issue to the U.N. Security Council was illegal because, based on the report by U.S. intelligence agencies, Iran had no nuclear weapons program when the issue was referred to the U.N. Security Council in 2006,” Hosseini said in a statement Tuesday.

—

But on to your misdirect on aluminum tubes. I repeat. The entire enrichment program by Iran IS NECESSARILY PART OF ANY NUCLEAR WEAPON PROGRAM. And Iran had other bunkers and facilities when they FIRST STARTED TO MAKE A BOMB AND GOT CAUGHT. DId you get this? No tubes. THE NIE states that Iran was trying to build a bomb. The reports wants us to believe there is no present effort beside Iran’s civilian program, that can lead to a bomb though the NIE failed to stop Iranian activities for more than ten years. Their report will lead to unraveling the very mechanism it states contained Iran and iscounts the native group that revealed the programs in the first place. Please note the decades to build many secret facilities and the difficulty of getting ground knowledge in Iran. There have been reports of Israel causing mayhem at Iranian sites so one would reasonably conclude they have a bit more Intel than the US does. You failed to respond reasonably to my remarks.

I point out that the backlash has occured. Ahmadinejad who makes Bush look like a friggin saint, is claiming victory as Russia and China now question THE VERY SANCTIONS THE NIE CLAIMED ARE STOPPING IRAN. Is this proof enough that a report called the national INTELLIGENCE report is an oxymoron? Can you or anyone in fairness deny the obvious effect of such a short, poorly qualified and questionable document coming at the very moment more pressure was likely to avert war and force Iran to make some bargain? He is parading in the streets claiming a victory for the Iranian people. This single declassified report may do more harm to national security than any previous and agian, the claim that Iran didn’t blink after Saddam was caught in an earthen hole shows the extent IC was twisting information. Had this report come from Cheney’s office and show the facts in reverse with such bias, the Left would be screaming impeachment….oh they are anyway, sorry.

Let me post again yor words,

“The report mentions “cost – benefits” as a reason, maybe the reason was that Iran mullahs could go with the EXTREME cost of a nuke program without a mentor(China, USSR or even USA). There is no such thing as a truly native program, Pakistan had friends in the US and China.”

The reports says quite clearly that the costs (sanctions and international pressure) WERE GREATER THAN the benefit of a nuclear bomb program still years way. By lifting sanctions and by not making them tougher to end the flow of dual use technology that helps Iran to continue production of enriched uranium needed for their “possibly” dormant bomb programm the very cost/benefit constrain is lifted. Do they teach basic logic at Denial U or is it just basically a religious institution?

Yes there is often foreign elements imported to a native nuclear program. Are we to blame for AQ Khan and the on-going help of Russia, China and North Korea? That is exactly what sanctions are suppose to stop. The NIE didn’t even address this issue and Armscontrolwonk has low probability his knowledge of Syrian effort is right. The simplist and most transparent resolution to Syrian and Iranian claims is the South African model which they reject. Why? Because they say until Israel gives up the bomb, they have every RIGHT to have one which puts the issue back to square one. I suppose at Denial University, there is no difference between Israel and Iran.

Of course this intelligent report sets back efforts at sanctions based on gross human rights violations, murder abroad and sponsorship of terror groups. My original remarks stand and I hope next time, you might actually make a reasonable effort tp present your case over such important issues as a monster like Ahmadinejad laughing his way into nuclear weapons over the pathetic political effort to vilify Bush and company at the expense of our national security.

One last thing. I have never voted for a Republican, but their is NOTHING that angers me more as illiberal liberal rooting out the very concept of liberal. Jefferson, FDR, Kennedy would all be screaming if they saw the extent the NSS they supported and helped create so under fire by those pretending to be liberals.

Livni also criticized the exaggerated use that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is making of the issue of the Iranian bomb, claiming that he is attempting to rally the public around him by playing on its most basic fears. Last week, former Mossad chief Ephraim Halevy said similar things about Iran.

Barak: US got it wrong

“The bottom line is that words don’t stop missiles, actions do,” Defense Minister Ehud Barak said on Tuesday evening in response to the US report.

“And there is much that needs to be done regarding the Iranian nuclear program. We need to take action in applying sanctions, in exercising diplomacy and in other venues as well.”

Israeli intelligence disputes the report’s conclusion, Barak said, and still believes Tehran is still trying to develop a nuclear weapon: ”It’s apparently true that in 2003 Iran stopped pursuing its military nuclear program for a time. But in our opinion, since then it has apparently continued that program. There are differences in the assessments of different organizations in the world about this, and only time will tell who is right.”

Asked if the new US assessment reduced chances that the US will launch a military strike on Iran, Barak
said that was ”possible.”

However, he said, ”We cannot allow ourselves to rest just because of an intelligence report from the other side of the earth, even if it is from our greatest friend.”

Deep bunkers surround by air defense and a stream of dual use equipment are key.

Yes, like the aluminum tubes in Iraq. The report mentions “cost – benefits” as a reason, maybe the reason was that Iran mullahs could go with the EXTREME cost of a nuke program without a mentor(China, USSR or even USA). There is no such thing as a truly native program, Pakistan had friends in the US and China.

Thinking outside the box? Dupuis points to questionable qualifications of the report. I have expressed logical reservations elsewhere, but I cannot stress more the illogic of this report. It claims quite clearly that sanctions and pressure stopped the Iranian regime. The release of this report was certain to provide ammnuition to all the forces that object to sanctions. Clinton is blasted over her Quds vote. China and Russia are reconsidering sanctions. Iran boasts that the UN should essentially apologize. I ask you all to judge how intelligent this intelligence report is. Even if the NIE felt Iran had disabled key steps towards a nuclear bomb, what high school student doesn’t know enrichment is the key? Heavy water is the key. Deep bunkers surround by air defense and a stream of dual use equipment are key. Based on NIE track record, what ordinary citizen not totally consumed in partisan politics can accept that US Intel knows where all Iran’s sites are. The strongest objection to attacking Iran has always been our lack of sufficient Intel. Iranian generals boast we do not know where all nuclear-related sites are.

Given these reasonable onservations how can one not conclude this report was colored by political considerations? Thinking outside the box means IC needed to understand the ramifications of such a report. Only after South Africa gave complete inspection did the IAEA confirm compliance.

Some respond with Armscontrolwonk, but what is his record? Given the WMD agreement between Syria and Iran, are not Syrian efforts part of Iranian programs? I defy Armscontrolwonk to sate the number and nature of all Iranian nuclear-related programs with high confidence. And does he boast the credentials of Mossad?

As far as US inflaming the situation, I ask all to read the daily crap out of Iran. Obama would not say national security trumps human rights, but this is a different issue. Iran supports terror in Lebanon. It offers technology and support to Sudan. It even supplies material support to the Taliban. It helps Hamas and a number of security experts trace connections to AQ. Dupuis doesn’t mention ballistic missiles that can reach Moscow or Paris, crusie missiles and silent subs. The very sanctions the NIE holds up as critical to stop Iran are now being questioned. Ahamdinejad has a stage to further his blighted visions. Peraps now the Arabs will seek nukes. Perhaps Israel will be forced to attack before Iran moves closer to sufficient stockpiles of materila s needed for bomb production. All these considerations should have been imagined as part of declassifying this report.

Again thinking outside the box? With France newly supporting tougher sanctions and with China about to consent, this NIE helps dissolve the very peaceful behavior required to enforce international will. Until someone presents a case otherwise, this NIE is an oxymoron. It seems political retribution for Iraq,which is probably why the role Iraq played in curtailing Iran is unintelligently omitted. American Thinker was closer to the truth.

As one Iranian dissident said a few weeks ago, “please keep pressure on Iran. It is the only thing that will make them blink”.

I don’t think this will happen juding by the spin from the anti-war, self-loathing crowd. We have alienated the Left and Right in the world. Seems we learn only when the crap hits the fan. My symapthies for the State of Israel.

JERUSALEM — Efraim Halevy, the former head of the Israeli intelligence agency Mossad, titled his memoirs “Man in the Shadows.” But now that he’s out in the sunlight, the 72-year-old retired spy chief has some surprisingly contrarian things to say about Iran and Syria. The gist of his message is that rather than constantly ratcheting up the rhetoric of confrontation, the United States and Israel should be looking for ways to establish a creative dialogue with these adversaries.
(snip)
Halevy suggests that Israel should stop its jeremiads that Iran poses an existential threat to the Jewish state. The rhetoric is wrong, he contends, and it gets in the way of finding a peaceful solution to the Iranian nuclear problem.

“I believe that Israel is indestructible,” he insists. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad may boast that he wants to wipe Israel off the map, but Iran’s ability to consummate this threat is “minimal,” he says. “Israel has a whole arsenal of capabilities to make sure the Iranians don’t achieve their result.” Even if the Iranians did obtain a nuclear weapon, says Halevy, “they are deterrable,” because for the mullahs, survival and perpetuation of the regime is a holy obligation.
ad_icon

“We must be much more sophisticated and nuanced in our policies toward Iran,” Halevy contends. He argues for a combination of increased economic pressure and a diplomatic opening that attempts to speak to Iran’s “national aspirations” and its shared interests with America and the West — and even Israel.

Even current Israelis officials are saying this. DLS How can you have a pre-emptive war on “nuclur knowlege”? That would be criminal, ask Joe Biden.

Maybe a good source would be Haaretz, JP or the Jaffee Center at TAU.

BONUS: Dem debate on NPR (transcript — includes Iran)

It’s an excuse for more sanctions, at least.

Who knows what really drove this. It even could be deliberate deception by the Bush administration and others (hint: the language is Hebrew) prior to an attack, or just to deceive the Iranians into letting their guard down in the belief they have concealed more from the West than they actually have. I can’t believe it’s merely a face-saving gesture for the Bush people as an excuse to avoid war before next November (a burned-out-on-Iraq public is not going to vote overwhelmingly Republican to reward attacks on Iran), maybe to keep the Halliburton business going. (US oil and gas interests would like thawed relations with Iran, and Halliburton’s offshore unit is already doing business with Iran.)

It could be not only a message “You’re on your own, Israel” but a means of twisting Israel’s arm to agree to some kind of peace settlement against its interests.

…

Y-Net (good reader remarks):

“US: Iran nuclear weapons program stopped in 2003”

“(Israel) Alone in the battlefield”

“Barak: Iran still pursuing nuclear bomb”

“Iran welcomes US report, Olmert says it won’t hinder anti-nuke efforts”

Israel Insider (more good reader remarks):

“Don’t worry, be happy: US estimates Iran stopped developing nuke weapons”

“Israeli officials and experts stunned by US estimate on Iranian nukes“

This will make it more difficult to press for more sanctions or even maintain the sanctions that are in place. There is no choice, however, as calling for bombing under these circumstances would make us look ridiulous and would utterly destroy what credibility we have left.

For once, the US has to stop the inflammatory rhetoric, present the case as it is, and do it as forcibly as possible. The taboo against presenting a case with all the warts showing (meaning areas of uncertainty) has got to be lifted, due to circumstances, if not by the will I would prefer.