What's new

An Iranian nuclear facility is so deep underground that US airstrikes likely couldn’t reach it

An Iranian nuclear facility is so deep underground that US airstrikes likely couldn’t reach it
By JON GAMBRELL May 22, 2023 GMT
https://apnews.com/article/iran-nuclear-natanz-uranium-enrichment-underground-project-04dae673fc937af04e62b65dd78db2e0


DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — Near a peak of the Zagros Mountains in central Iran, workers are building a nuclear facility so deep in the earth that it is likely beyond the range of a last-ditch U.S. weapon designed to destroy such sites, according to experts and satellite imagery analyzed by The Associated Press.

The photos and videos from Planet Labs PBC show Iran has been digging tunnels in the mountain near the Natanz nuclear site, which has come under repeated sabotage attacks amid Tehran’s standoff with the West over its atomic program.

With Iran now producing uranium close to weapons-grade levels after the collapse of its nuclear deal with world powers, the installation complicates the West’s efforts to halt Tehran from potentially developing an atomic bomb as diplomacy over its nuclear program remains stalled.

Completion of such a facility “would be a nightmare scenario that risks igniting a new escalatory spiral,” warned Kelsey Davenport, the director of nonproliferation policy at the Washington-based Arms Control Association. “Given how close Iran is to a bomb, it has very little room to ratchet up its program without tripping U.S. and Israeli red lines. So at this point, any further escalation increases the risk of conflict.”



The construction at the Natanz site comes five years after then-President Donald Trump unilaterally withdrew America from the nuclear accord. Trump argued the deal did not address Tehran’s ballistic missile program, nor its support of militias across the wider Middle East.

But what it did do was strictly limit Iran’s enrichment of uranium to 3.67% purity, powerful enough only to power civilian power stations, and keep its stockpile to just some 300 kilograms (660 pounds).

Since the demise of the nuclear accord, Iran has said it is enriching uranium up to 60%, though inspectors recently discovered the country had produced uranium particles that were 83.7% pure. That is just a short step from reaching the 90% threshold of weapons-grade uranium.

As of February, international inspectors estimated Iran’s stockpile was over 10 times what it was under the Obama-era deal, with enough enriched uranium to allow Tehran to make “several” nuclear bombs, according to the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

President Joe Biden and Israel’s prime minister have said they won’t allow Iran to build a nuclear weapon. “We believe diplomacy is the best way to achieve that goal, but the president has also been clear that we have not removed any option from the table,” the White House said in a statement to the AP.



The Islamic Republic denies it is seeking nuclear weapons, though officials in Tehran now openly discuss their ability to pursue one.

Iran’s mission to the United Nations, in response to questions from the AP regarding the construction, said that “Iran’s peaceful nuclear activities are transparent and under the International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards.” However, Iran has been limiting access for international inspectors for years.

Iran says the new construction will replace an above-ground centrifuge manufacturing center at Natanz struck by an explosion and fire in July 2020. Tehran blamed the incident on Israel, long suspected of running sabotage campaigns against its program.
https://defence.pk/video/iran-gover...press-israel-986492a548964754805b3ac439776698
Tehran has not acknowledged any other plans for the facility, though it would have to declare the site to the IAEA if they planned to introduce uranium into it. The Vienna-based IAEA did not respond to questions about the new underground facility.

The new project is being constructed next to Natanz, about 225 kilometers (140 miles) south of Tehran. Natanz has been a point of international concern since its existence became known two decades ago.

Protected by anti-aircraft batteries, fencing and Iran’s paramilitary Revolutionary Guard, the facility sprawls across 2.7 square kilometers (1 square mile) in the country’s arid Central Plateau.



Satellite photos taken in April by Planet Labs PBC and analyzed by the AP show Iran burrowing into the Kūh-e Kolang Gaz Lā, or “Pickaxe Mountain,” which is just beyond Natanz’s southern fencing.

A different set of images analyzed by the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies reveals that four entrances have been dug into the mountainside, two to the east and another two to the west. Each is 6 meters (20 feet) wide and 8 meters (26 feet) tall.

The scale of the work can be measured in large dirt mounds, two to the west and one to the east. Based on the size of the spoil piles and other satellite data, experts at the center told AP that Iran is likely building a facility at a depth of between 80 meters (260 feet) and 100 meters (328 feet). The center’s analysis, which it provided exclusively to AP, is the first to estimate the tunnel system’s depth based on satellite imagery.

The Institute for Science and International Security, a Washington-based nonprofit long focused on Iran’s nuclear program, suggested last year the tunnels could go even deeper.

Experts say the size of the construction project indicates Iran likely would be able to use the underground facility to enrich uranium as well — not just to build centrifuges. Those tube-shaped centrifuges, arranged in large cascades of dozens of machines, rapidly spin uranium gas to enrich it. Additional cascades spinning would allow Iran to quickly enrich uranium under the mountain’s protection.



“So the depth of the facility is a concern because it would be much harder for us. It would be much harder to destroy using conventional weapons, such as like a typical bunker buster bomb,” said Steven De La Fuente, a research associate at the center who led the analysis of the tunnel work.

The new Natanz facility is likely to be even deeper underground than Iran’s Fordo facility, another enrichment site that was exposed in 2009 by U.S. and other world leaders. That facility sparked fears in the West that Iran was hardening its program from airstrikes.

Such underground facilities led the U.S. to create the GBU-57 bomb, which can plow through at least 60 meters (200 feet) of earth before detonating, according to the American military. U.S. officials reportedly have discussed using two such bombs in succession to ensure a site is destroyed. It is not clear that such a one-two punch would damage a facility as deep as the one at Natanz.

With such bombs potentially off the table, the U.S. and its allies are left with fewer options to target the site. If diplomacy fails, sabotage attacks may resume.

Already, Natanz has been targeted by the Stuxnet virus, believed to be an Israeli and American creation, which destroyed Iranian centrifuges. Israel also is believed to have killed scientists involved in the program, struck facilities with bomb-carrying drones and launched other attacks. Israel’s government declined to comment.

Experts say such disruptive actions may push Tehran even closer to the bomb — and put its program even deeper into the mountain where airstrikes, further sabotage and spies may not be able to reach it.

“Sabotage may roll back Iran’s nuclear program in the short-term, but it is not a viable, long-term strategy for guarding against a nuclear-armed Iran,” said Davenport, the nonproliferation expert. “Driving Iran’s nuclear program further underground increases the proliferation risk.”
 
.
I hope that Iran does not experience American fury in any way, shape, or form. I don't think that US has a plot to invade Iran but Iranians should seek to mend ties with US in my view. There is no Saddam out there to draw American attention away from Iran this time.

You are being emotional with this, these lines has make all your argue before to be lost. What american fury ??? shock and awe?? Iran does not fear it, you fail to understand all US wars has been ultimately when US had all the weaponry adavantages, now Iran has closed the gap, for God sake they are gonna show hypersonic missiles before the US...

You just only has to think US has not attacked Iran for a reason, and the only reason is Iran can win a war to US if they begin one. US has done simualtions, and all the outcomes have been disaster for them, they have their hands tied to their back, they cannot do anything.

Times has passed, and this is the disgrace for the US, they lost the chance with its stupid war on Irak, where they don t accomplish anything, and have lost the future interests, because tehere is nobody in the world cannot stop now Iran. What fury? It s clear Iran does not agree with most people here about US power, diferent lens and optics.
 
Last edited:
.
i knew exactly the blueprint for that come to Pakistan , i wonder if you guys also knew it.

Let just say in Iran we have a proverb about a thief who enter the house with lamp
Blueprints are one thing. Possessing the mental fortitude to build a vast capability is totally another.

The USA gave Iran a working nuclear plant in the 50s, still couldn't make heads and tails out of it.
 
.
Like what damage? I don't think there's going to be 100,000 US troops running around the streets of Iran.

Inflicting damage to any and all US linked assets in its sphere of offence. Bare in my mind, US could not engage in a conflict without putting its assets in the firing rang of Iran. It's not really possible for US to wage a strike against Iran with its assets based 2000km+ away from Iran proper. Iran is able to cause absolute havoc to anyone within this 2000km range (in reality it is even more). The Americans know this. General Mckenzie himself stated Iran has obtained an overmatch capability:

Tehran has achieved what McKenzie calls “overmatch”—a level of capability in which a country has weaponry that makes it extremely difficult to check or defeat. “Iran’s strategic capacity is now enormous,” McKenzie said. “They’ve got overmatch in the theatre—the ability to overwhelm.”


Look at Saddam's Iraq as a comparison. For months NATO was building up right at their door step and there was nothing they could do but just watch and wait. You think US will have that opportunity with a country like Iran? US can neither surprise Iran with an attack nor can it build up its assets without any fear of strike on them.

Moreover, this notion of a total war from the US is kind of silly anyway. Short of a major existential threat to is existence, I doubt the US would ever mobilise its entire forces to deal with one nation. The US would not for example, leave the South China sea empty of its presence. It is simply bogged down geopolitically in too many areas of the world.

Iran is not an existential threat to the US. The Americans have calculated that a war against Iran would prove too costly to be worth any gains. Bare in mind in such a conflict, US would have to go either all out i.e attempt at a ground invasion or do not engage at all. Why? because anything short of that will guarantee Iran going nuclear openly and that would change the dynamic completely.
 
.
It's not really possible for US to wage a strike against Iran with its assets based 2000km+ away from Iran proper.

We can fly bombers all the way from some remote base in Montana to Afghanistan and back and you think we can't fly 2000km??

By the way how do you think our fighters and bombers manage to land in Guam or Hawaii everyday when they are in the middle of nowhere?

Let's see what this 2000km limit gives us for Guam and Hawaii
Guam.png

Not much for Guam. I guess that big base must be useless to us. No US military there i suppose.

Don't worry these F-22s on Guam are all a big lie I guess. No use taking off since nowhere to go.

hawaii.png

Hawaii. Not much at all..yet through some mysterious magic our military commutes to Hawaii all the time.
.

2000km is NOTHING to the US military.
They do it all the time and every day.
 
Last edited:
.
We can fly bombers all the way from some remote base in Montana to Afghanistan and you think we can't fly 2000km??

By the way how do you think our fighters and bombers manage to land in Guam or Hawaii everyday when they are in the middle of nowhere?

Let's see what this 2000km limit gives us for Guam and Hawaii
View attachment 932532
Not much for Guam. I guess that big base must be useless to us. No US military there i suppose.

Don't worry these F-22s on Guam are all a big lie I guess.

View attachment 932533
Hawaii. Not much at all..yet through some mysterious magic our military commutes to Hawaii all the time.
.

You're misunderstanding my comment. I did not claim US cannot fly from those ranges. I was saying US cannot engage in a conflict against Iran and hope to achieve any major objective with its offensive assets at those distances.
 
.
You're misunderstanding my comment. I did not claim US cannot fly from those ranges. I was saying US cannot engage in a conflict against Iran and hope to achieve any major objective with its offensive assets at those distances.

Those bombs dropped on Iraq came from bombers taking off and landing at Diego Garcia.

diegoGarcia.png


The weapons in those planes don't care how far they have traveled by air.
 
Last edited:
.
Those bombs dropped on Iraq came from bombers taking off and landing at Diego Garcia.

View attachment 932535

So you're saying you're going to fly a bomber into Iranian air space from Diego Garcia? That's your military plan against Iran?

In order for that to be ever realistic, you need to make sure Iran has no functioning air defences. How will you accomplish SEAD/DEAD with your assets that far away from Iran?

Think about these scenarios deeply. You'll realise it's just not practically doable to the extend of meeting a major military objective.
 
.
So you're saying you're going to fly a bomber into Iranian air space from Diego Garcia? That's your military plan against Iran?

In order for that to be ever realistic, you need to make sure Iran has no functioning air defences. How will you accomplish SEAD/DEAD with your assets that far away from Iran?

Think about these scenarios deeply. You'll realise it's just not practically doable to the extend of meeting a major military objective.

Like we did in Desert storm....a combination of stopover bases and aerial refueling.
 
.
Like we did in Desert storm....a combination of stopover bases and aerial refueling.

In desert storm you were building up your forces right next to Iraq for months before you went in and destroyed their high value assets such as air defence which allowed you to conformably bring in your bombers from those ranges.

Like I explained to you in my first reply, you will not have that opportunity against Iran hence the whole point of this discussion about you needing to perform SEAD/DEAD missions from those ranges.
 
.
Like I explained to you in my first reply, you will not have that opportunity against Iran hence the whole point of this discussion about you needing to perform SEAD/DEAD missions from those ranges.

We can do that too with aerial refueling. What's the purpose of having an Air Force if it can't do anything past the horizon?
 
.
We can do that too with aerial refueling. What's the purpose of having an Air Force if it can't do anything past the horizon?

You cannot perform any meaningful number of sorties from those ranges. The issue is not if it can be done at all on a relatively small conflict scale, but whether it can be done at the right intensity to achieve your objectives in the context of a SEAD/DEAD with Iran which would have to very of high intensity given the size and quality of Iranian IADN.
 
.
You cannot perform any meaningful number of sorties from those ranges. The issue is not if it can be done at all on a relatively small conflict scale, but whether it can be done at the right intensity to achieve your objectives in the context of a SEAD/DEAD with Iran which would have to very of high intensity given the size and quality of Iranian IADN.

...and you think we have a shortage of planes somehow.

The F-35 program is about to deliver its 1000th plane by the end of the year. That's up from the zero we had in Iraq and Afghanistan.

 
Last edited:
.
Iran will show them what is a real war.

When we kill thousands of Yankees you will understand it too.

Every American ships, every bases, every soldiers,... Will see thousands of missiles, drones, and soldiers.

Their military leaders know it and they are in fear. No American is safe in middle east.

Also iranian nukes are an option on table.
To be honest I think Iran already has Nukes or is only few screws away, my assessment is bases on US behavior.

You're misunderstanding my comment. I did not claim US cannot fly from those ranges. I was saying US cannot engage in a conflict against Iran and hope to achieve any major objective with its offensive assets at those distances.
Exactly, or US would not waste a second.
 
.
...and you think we have a shortage of planes somehow.

Just the F-35 program is about to deliver its 1000th plane by the end of the year. That's up from zero in Iraq and Afghanistan.

It's not just about the number of planes. These planes require launch platforms, which in this case would be carriers. How many planes will you be launching from 2-3000Km away? How many sorties can they do from those ranges? These planes need refuleing. You can't just think those 1000 F-35 will teleport into Iranian airspace and back.

You need to think carefully about the practicalities of what you're saying.
 
.
US would face a logistic problem for weaponry, they soon would have to replenish weapons from 10000 miles away, Diego Garcia does not count, it is nothing if Iran reveals its long range missile strike capabilities... just imagine the problem will have the US for replenish, smart Iran is increasing the size of its own made shell against attack in a radious that grows every year. And Iran is a producer of missiles, it means they always will have more missiles in the theater of action than the US.
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom