William Broad and David Sanger wrote quite an interesting article for The New York Times. Iran is expected to announce something important on February the 11th (this coming Sunday): the anniversary of Iran’s Islamic Revolution. As both men write, “Iran is expected to declare in coming days that it has made a huge leap toward industrial-scale production of enriched uranium — a defiant act that the country’s leaders will herald as a major technical stride and its neighbors will denounce as a looming threat.” They add that “many nuclear experts say, the frenetic activity at the desert enrichment plant in Natanz may be mostly about political showmanship.”
The many setbacks and outright failures of Tehran’s experimental program suggest that its bluster may outstrip its technical expertise. And the problems help explain American intelligence estimates that Iran is at least four years away from producing a nuclear weapon.
After weeks of limited access inside Iran, inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency have reported that Tehran has succeeded in manufacturing parts for about 3,000 centrifuges, the devices that can spin uranium into reactor fuel — or bomb fuel. In recent days, the Iranians have begun installing the machines and supporting gear in a cavernous plant at Natanz, which would be a potential target if the United States or one of its allies decided that diplomacy would never keep Iran from getting the bomb.
What the Iranians are not talking about, experts with access to the atomic agency’s information say, is that their experimental effort to make centrifuges work has struggled to achieve even limited success and appears to have been put on the back burner so the country’s leaders can declare that they are moving to the next stage.
Thus: it could very well be that the Mullahs announce something ‘major’ because of the domestic situation / due todomestic pressure.
Mark Fitzpatrick, a senior fellow at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, commented: “It looks political unless they’ve made progress that we don’t know about.”
Besides the fact that an announcement by Iran regarding its nuclear program is most likely never positive, Broad and Sanger explain:
Nuclear experts outside the United States government say that if Iran is successful in its latest move and carries out the enrichment, in open defiance of a United Nations demand that it suspend such activity, it could potentially yield fuel for an atom bomb in two or three years, faster than American intelligence has suggested.
American intelligence suggested that Iran would be able to produe an atom bomb in four years.
A European diplomat, who wised to remain anonymous, said that inspectors found parts for 3 000 centrifuges. 3 000 centrifuges would, obviously, bring Iran quite a big step closer to an atom bomb. The less bad news is that those centrifuges are of the P-1 type. P-1 centrifuges enrich uranium much slower than P-2 centrifuges do.
The more bad news, however, is that Ahmadinejad already stated last year that Iran is also building P-2 centrifuges. This could be bluff, but it also leads many people to believe that Iran has a hidden nuclear facility somewhere. Why? Because inspectors have not “been shown any of those”.
The above quotes Mr. Fitzpatrick explained that the “industrial push” is a bit strange considering its reported problems with its nuclear program: “From a technical point of view, it’s illogical to stand up 3,000 centrifuges before you know how to do it.”
If we purely rely on what Western countries know about Iran’s nuclear program, it seems that Iran is / will be bluffing.
There is however, as Broad and Sanger explain, a problem: Iran is leaving inspectors partially blind. They are only allowed to visit “a narrow range of operations”. Combine that with the following paragraph:
The Iranians appear to have sped ahead. In interviews, diplomats and nuclear officials said recent inspector reports of rapid centrifuge mobilization and installation at Natanz show that Tehran had worked hard for the past year, even as it engaged in increasingly harsh language that some experts took as a cover for technical failings.
And it is clear that… there are lot of things we don’t know, aren’t sure of and are quite worrisome.
The Gun Toting Liberal responded to this news and to reports that Iranian scientists claimed that they have discovered a herbal cure for AIDS. As GTL writes: “It’s great to know Iranian technology will help prolong the lives of AIDS victims to the point where they, too, can both participate in, and fully enjoy the battle to end human, animal, and plant life on Earth as we know it.”
He goes on to explain that he sees some similarities between Bush and Ahmadinejad:
What it gets down to is this: curing AIDS while commanding one [LOSING] side in the Battle of Armagheddon; leaving “No Child Left Behind� while commanding the other [LOSING] side in the Battle of Armagheddon; amounts to picking up a candy bar wrapper on a sidewalk and tossing it into the nearest waste receptacle on one’s way to robbing and MURDERING an elderly lady with a cane…
And concludes:
… and if we, as a people, believe that there is ANY “honor� WHATSOEVER in such conduct, this world has gone completely INSANE.
Although I understand GTL’s point of view, I have to say that I get the feeling that he is overdoing it a bit: firstly, Bush is absolutely no Ahmadinejad and, secondly, I don’t think that Bush and Ahmadinejad are truly preparing for Armageddon (although Ahmadinejad might disagree). At this point in time, Iran can, quite simply, not win a full-scale war against the U.S. It will be destroyed quite instantly. The situation becomes dangerous when Iran does have nuclear weapons. That is why – I presume – most people are dedicated to making sure that Iran will never own them.
Another blogpost that has to be read is this one by Steve Clemons. He writes:
Iran’s scientists and theocratic leaders may be lying to their public about their technological achievements much as Americans were lied to about Iraq’s WMDs to stoke national passions and expectations.
If this is the case, it would be useful for some sophisticated and precise commentary at some point from inspectors or other nuclear experts familiar with Iran’s nuclear program to define whether or not there is a gap between what Ahmadinejad and other top Iran officials are saying about Iran’s nuke program, and what they have really achieved — or said another way, what failures they want to cover-up from their citizens and the world.
He is – of course – right. The Mullahs – or perhaps better said Ahmadinejad – might be lying to the Iranian people. If not, however, the situation is becoming more and more dangerous. We have to find out more about Iran’s nuclear program. More studies are necessary.
More at Hot Air. The guys at Hot Air also wonder whether scientists are “fair game for assassination” in response to reports that the Mossad may have killed one of Iran’s leading nuclear scientists (h/t Holly). Although this might sound harsh, my answer is that, yes, scientists can be “fair game for assassination”. As Misha commenting at Hot Air points out: “Should Wernher v Braun or Joseph Mengele have been assassinated? I believe that’s your answer, right there.”
If it is considered to be absolutely necessary, it should be done. Just as politicians can threaten other countries, (the acts of) scientists can do the same.
Secular Blasphemy shares my view on this.
That being said, it is far from sure that the Mossad did, indeed, kill Iranian nuclear physicist professor Ardashir Hosseinpour. A typical “could be true, could also be very much untrue”-case.
PAST CONTRIBUTOR.