An ‘Ambivalent’ U.S. Intelligence Report
![[The Times, U.K.]](http://www.timesonline.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00251/car385_251073a.jpg)
Does the recent U.S. intelligence estimate that Iran has shelved its nuclear weapons program since 2003, demonstrate the independence of America’s intelligence agencies? According to this editorial from French newspaper Le Monde, it’s time to renew a conciliatory approach since, ‘Beyond the nuances – and even contradictions, the report provides a confirmation of the strategy that up to now has been used by the West, followed by the Russians and the Chinese.’
“The lesson of Iraq has been learned. The heads of intelligence this time have refused to be used as instruments of the political leadership.”
EDITORIAL
By Kate Davis
December 6, 2007
France – Le Monde – Original Article (French)
The estimates of the American intelligence services on Iran , released on Monday, December 3, are sufficiently ambiguous to ensure that the secret services – whatever happens – will not be accused of a mistake or attempted manipulation. It notes an interruption of Iran’s nuclear program since the fall of 2003, but also says that the door for the development of nuclear weapons remains open. The lesson of Iraq has been learned. The heads of intelligence this time have refused to be used as instruments of the political leadership. At the risk of embarrassing the head of the White House, they have put on the table a balanced assessment of on a nation that Western leaders, from George W. Bush to Nicolas Sarkozy, consider the greatest threat to stability.
Beyond the nuances – and even contradictions, the report provides a confirmation of the strategy that up to now has been used by the West, followed by the Russians and the Chinese. It firmly states that the interruption of Iran’s military nuclear program is the result of international pressure, but also that centrifuges for enriching uranium would “probably” be the method chosen by the Iranians to obtain the fissile material needed to make a bomb. That is why the international community insists that Tehran suspend this enrichment activity before negotiations resume.
And so far, unsuccessfully. This method, which in 2003 forced the stoppage of the military program, seems to have reached its limits. The combination of sanctions and incentives hasn’t worked for nearly two years. Does this mean that the medicine or the dosage is wrong? Should we raise the pressure, as the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and Germany (the Group of Six) were getting ready to do on the eve of the American report’s publication? Should we include – but not assume – the possibility of a military solution, even though Mr. Bush is the only one to say so? Or should we instead broaden the offers made to the Iranians? Or do both at the same time?
Before the first sanctions failed in June 2006, the head of European foreign policy, Javier Solana, presented proposals for cooperation to the Iranians on behalf of the Group of Six. These were described as “generous,” in several areas, including civilian nuclear power.
7 Responses to “An ‘Ambivalent’ U.S. Intelligence Report”
The estimates of the American intelligence services on Iran , released on Monday, December 3, are sufficiently ambiguous to ensure that the secret services – whatever happens – will not be accused of a mistake or attempted manipulation.
And there you have the entire episode wrapped up and concluded. AFter 911 and Iraq they do not want to be the scapegoat again.
That’s after being largely bypassed and what little information from them was used, cherry-picked.
Of course, along with acquiring plutonium if they can extract it or otherwise get their hands on it.
With uranium one can make a gun-type weapon (what I and other knowledgeable people I have discussed this in person with would do if we were rogue states or terrorist groups; gun-type weapons are simpler, don’t involve special, highly-controlled and monitored components, and only require more fuel than an implosion bomb would need for the same yield).
The change to public pursuit of “civilian” [sic] nuclear energy (while not permitting unrestricted access to all nuclear sites and other continued game-playing) fools nobody intelligent, and the continued enrichment of uranium constitutes progress by Iran toward a bomb. That it is public is not merely an attempt to fool the gullible but also (with stated intention to continue enrichment) open defiance of and confrontation with the West and Iran’s neighbors.
First comment EVER!
Hello, Moderate Voice! My name is Megaman_X. Or at least, that’s the screenname I chose. Anyway, I have been reading posts by Gandelman, Mullen, Stickings, and Holly in Cincinnati for several months. And I’ve decided that it’s time for me to start sharing my thoughts too. The comments section is full of energy and wild opinions, which is what inspired me to start posting instead of just reading.
In the future, I will post thoughtful and more serious comments on heavy topics, but for just the first time, I thought I’d start on a light, cheerful note.
Welcome Megaman_X!
[gulp] Non-liberals, non-Democrats, beware.
You are definitely on the right site. Welcome.
It’s a tough situation, but as it was suggested, the intelligence report does have the silver lining of clearly NOT being an administration position paper.
Since the administration has so little credibilty abroad, that is actually good news. At least, what the NIE says, ambiguities and all, will be believed.
Iran, of course, is purring like a cat who just caugth the canary. As annoying as that is, I’m keeping my fingers crossed that the administration will not fall into its trap this time, but will outplay them at their own game.
That means, talking straight, talk. Enumetate the concers without WWIII references. Maintain statesminship, rather than theatrics.
Can Bush and his team do it? That;s what worries me. They just don’t seem to understand how sophisticated the PR wars have to be in order to win.