How close is Iran to a nuclear bomb?

[Neo]

Saturday, 10 February 2007

How close is Iran to a nuclear bomb?
By Gordon Corera
BBC security correspondent

Tehran says its nuclear programme is purely civilian .
In the coming days, Iran is expected to make what is being billed as a major announcement on its nuclear programme to coincide with the anniversary of the Iranian revolution.

But just how close is Iran to mastering nuclear technology?

Both Iran and some of its critics may have their own reasons for exaggerating the progress - but the real truth is hard to establish.

In its announcement, Iran may claim to have begun large-scale industrial enrichment of uranium.

But any statement is likely to be as much about political positioning as real technical progress, according to nuclear analysts.

The announcement may focus on work Iran has conducted in installing two cascades of more than 300 centrifuges in an underground industrial size plant at Natanz with the aim of moving towards a total of 3,000 machines.

With US troops so close to Iran's borders, a small event could easily ignite a wider escalation and even trigger an 'accidental' war

The centrifuges are used to enrich uranium. This is in addition to two existing cascades in a pilot plant above ground.

But Iran's plan to initially run 3,000 centrifuges before moving towards an ultimate goal of 54,000 has run into obstacles and delays and is well behind target. Even the cascades in the pilot plant have seen problems.

However, once Iran has mastered the technology of enrichment and the ability to enrich gas at high speeds in a centrifuge then transferring it to a larger scale presents a lesser challenge.

'Own mistakes'

Uranium enriched to around 5% can be used as nuclear fuel, but if it is enriched to around 90% it can be used in a weapon.

Diplomats have been shown the Isfahan nuclear plant recently
Over the years, some of the problems with the programme seem to be due to Iran's own mistakes.

For instance, one of the top figures in the programme has talked of how in the early days, those assembling the centrifuges did not wear cloth gloves.

As a result, tiny beads of sweat would be transferred to the rotor which spins inside the centrifuge.

This almost imperceptibly increased the weight of the rotor which then unbalanced the centrifuge when it started to spin, causing it to "explode".

Iran also was thought to have had problems with the purity of the uranium hexafluoride which is fed into the centrifuges, although its scientists now say this has been solved.

'Mossad's hand'

But the problems may also be due to more shady activity by others.

Over a number of years, both US and Israeli intelligence are believed to have covertly passed flawed parts and equipment to Iran to cause technical difficulties and slow the Iranian programme down.

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has warned the US against attacks on Iran
In one event last April, according to Iranian press reports, the explosion of another set of centrifuges was attributed to problems with the power supply.

The supply needs to be kept precise and constant to ensure the centrifuges spin at the correct speed but Iranian scientists said that on this occasion the power supply might have been "manipulated" which may imply they were sabotaged.

It is possible that some of the electrical parts for Iran may have come through the Turkish end of the network run by Pakistani scientist AQ Khan which also supplied electrical components to the Libyan nuclear programme.

By the end of the network's activity in early 2004, it had been penetrated by British and American intelligence with some of the suppliers turned as agents.

Recent reports have also questioned whether the death in January of a 45-year-old Iranian scientist, Ardeshire Hosseinpour, might have been the result of an operation by Israel's intelligence service, Mossad.

Hosseinpour had been involved in the enrichment programme, but Iranian reports have denied that his death was due to anything other than natural causes.

Mossad is widely believed to have been behind a campaign of killings and intimidation targeted at the Iraqi nuclear programme and some of its suppliers in Europe in the early 1980s, but this has never been definitively proven.

'Many unknowns'

Arguably it is human expertise in the form of trained scientists rather than equipment which is the most important element of a nuclear programme.

Whether or not there has been extensive covert activity directed at Iran (and by definition it is hard to discern the truth), the variety of technical problems mean that its hard to know if Iran is actually far away from mastering nuclear technology or relatively close to it and thereby able to make the relatively short journey from "peaceful" civilian technology towards manufacturing nuclear material for a bomb.

The problem is that there remain many "unknowns" when it comes to the Iranian programme.

One of the most important is exactly how much help Tehran received from the Khan network.

The network first sold centrifuge designs to Iran in 1987 and provided on-off help for more than a decade after, including parts and designs for more advanced machines.

But international investigators remain unsure that they have an understanding on the full extent of the assistance, not least because no-one outside Pakistan has been able to question Khan directly whilst he remains under a form of house-arrest in Islamabad.

The biggest question surrounds the more advanced P2 centrifuge design that Khan passed to the Iranians.

Iran initially said it had conducted little work on the design but last year Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said that Tehran was working on the machine (which would be far more efficient than the model in Natanz).

However, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has not been provided any information on such work.

No rush?

If Iran was able to run a parallel, second enrichment program which it had managed to keep secret, then many of the estimates of how far Iran was from mastering the technology might be way of the mark. But this remains an unknown.

The degree of uncertainty can cut the debate over action against Iran in both directions.

Some voices argue that Iran remains at least five years away from nuclear weapons capability, and US intelligence estimates have consistently pushed back when that might be - so some argue there is no rush.

Other hawkish and pessimistic voices argue that Iran could soon master the technology and the time-frame for action lies this year.

Israel is keen to emphasise that it sees the shorter time-frame as the valid one and is willing to take action.

The US has been playing down its willingness to engage in military action but is currently pushing the Europeans to squeeze Iran financially.

'Accidental war'

But conflict between the US and Iran is still possible.

President Ahmadinejad is facing his own domestic problems with mounting criticism of not just his approach to foreign policy and the nuclear issue but also his failure to deal with economic concerns at home.

This could lead to other power centres in Iran forcing him to back down but could also encourage him to take a harder line on the nuclear programme in order to try and rally support.

At the same time, Washington has been increasing the pressure over Iran's alleged involvement in Iraq.

With US troops so close to Iran's borders, a small event could easily ignite a wider escalation and even trigger an "accidental" war - although conspiracy theorists might argue that there are some in both Tehran and Washington who would like to engineer just such a confrontation and blame the other side.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6348797.stm

 

[Neo]

Monday, April 23, 2007

Iran far from having N-arms technology: Olmert

JERUSALEM: Israel’s arch-foe Iran is still a long way from acquiring technology necessary to produce nuclear weapons, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told public radio in an interview aired on Sunday.

“Iran is far from attaining the technology threshhold and this country is not close to getting it, contrary to statements by its leadership,” he said. Olmert also said that he preferred diplomacy in dealing with the Islamic republic’s controversial nuclear programme.

“I don’t think that a military operation would ensure that Iran doesn’t get nuclear arms,” he said. “The enormous diplomatic efforts, with which Israel is associated, are attaining their objective,” he said. “Iran is the biggest danger for us, but we shouldn’t give in to panic and hysteria, which result in nothing,” he said.

The Jewish state, widely considered the sole if undeclared nuclear power in the Middle East, considers Iran its arch-foe following repeated calls by its President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for Israel to be wiped off the map.

The UN Security Council has imposed two sets of sanctions on Iran over its refusal to comply with demands issued last year that it suspend uranium enrichment and reprocessing work. Israel and the West fear Iran’s nuclear programme is aimed at developing atomic weapons. Tehran insists it is solely for civilian purposes. In December, the chief of Israel’s Mossad spy agency estimated that Iran could have its first atomic weapon within three or four years if its nuclear programme continues at its present pace. afp

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2007\04\23\story_23-4-2007_pg4_12

 

[Neo]

Sunday, April 29, 2007

Missile raid would hit Iran nuclear plans: Olmert

* Israel denies Olmert’s comments on missile raid

BERLIN: Iran’s disputed nuclear programme could be severely hit by firing 1,000 cruise missiles in a 10-day attack, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert was quoted as saying on Saturday.

Asked in an interview with Germany’s Focus magazine whether military action would be an option if Iran continued to defy the United Nations, Olmert said: “Nobody is ruling it out.” “It is impossible perhaps to destroy the entire nuclear programme but it would be possible to damage it in such a way that it would be set back years,” Olmert said.

“It would take 10 days and would involve the firing of 1,000 Tomahawk cruise missiles.” Meanwhile, Olmert’s spokeswoman, Miri Eisin, said the prime minister had spoken to the author of the Focus article, but she said Olmert did not make the comments that were attributed to him. Eisin said the meeting was not an interview and was conducted for background purposes, on the understanding it would not be used.

“The prime minister did not say these things,” Eisin said. Ulrich Schmidla, a foreign affairs editor at Focus magazine, said he would try to contact the reporter who conducted the interview, who was a regular contributor.

Iran says it is developing nuclear technology for power generation, but the West fears it is trying to build a bomb and two sets of UN sanctions have been imposed on Tehran. European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana urged Washington on Friday to speak directly to Iran over its nuclear programme and said he was sure Tehran was ready for such talks. Focus quoted Olmert as saying UN sanctions should be given a chance to work before military action was considered.

“We must give the (UN) process time to take effect,” he said. “We have no intention of attacking Iran at the moment.”

Olmert said he doubted whether Iran’s nuclear programme was as far advanced as Tehran said. “I don’t think that Iran is about to cross the nuclear technology threshold as its leaders claim,” he said. “We still have time to stop them.”

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has proclaimed Iran’s ability to enrich on an “industrial scale”, but UN inspectors say it remains at test level. Iran would face further sanctions if it has not stopped enrichment by a new Security Council deadline of May 24.

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2007\04\29\story_29-4-2007_pg4_9

 

[EagleEyes]

Iran pursues diplomacy, Israel threatens military action

As the European Union resumes diplomatic talks with Iran, urging the United States to follow suit and stressing that the Iranians are ready for such negotiations, Israel is recommending ways to destroy Tehran’s nuclear installations.

"It is impossible perhaps to destroy the entire nuclear program but it would be possible to damage it in such a way that it would be set back years," Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said in an interview with Germany's Focus magazine.

"It's technically feasible. It would require 10 days and the launch of a thousand Tomahawk missiles," he said in the interview, due to be published on Monday.

Olmert also said that "nobody could exclude" military action against Iran, echoing a position long held by the U.S., which doesn’t want to negotiate with Tehran unless it suspends its uranium enrichment program, a demand Tehran refuses to meet despite being slapped with two sets of UN sanctions.

Olmert’s suggestion that a rain of missile could degrade Iran’s nuclear program came as the EU’s foreign police Javeir Solana ended two days of talks with Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani. After the talks, which have been described as constructive, Solana demanded Washington to open direct negotiations with Tehran, stressing that Iranian officials are ready for such unconditional talks.

"We have always said we are ready for talks if they have something new to say. We are fully prepared for talks without preconditions to reach a solution," Iran’s Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said earlier this month.

But Olmert’s threat of military action against Tehran could hinder Iran and the EU’s diplomatic efforts.

Iranian authorities, who insist that Tehran’s nuclear plans are strictly peaceful, immediately described Olmert's warning as empty “bravado.”

"If the United States and Israel commit such a mistake, they know better than anybody what the consequences will be for themselves,” said the head of Iran’s parliamentary foreign affairs commission, Alladin Borojerdy, according to the state-run news agency Isna.

Borojerdy added that the head of the UN nuclear watchdog "Muhammad El-Baradei has stated that Iran's nuclear science cannot be destroyed by missile strikes ... because the science is national."

The science indeed could not be destroyed. But Olmert’s recent warning raises fears that Israel and the United States are preparing plans for a military strike against Iran, a move that military experts say could be disastrous for a region already suffering from two U.S.-led initiated wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

In a report, the Oxford Research Group suggested last month that pre-emptive air strikes, like those reportedly being considered by the U.S. and Israel, would harden Iranian attitudes and political resistance to outside pressure to stop uranium enrichment. "Armed attacks on Iran would very likely lead to the result they were meant to avoid -- the building of nuclear weapons within a few years,” said the report, backed by the former chief UN weapons inspector in Iraq, Hans Blix.

Another fact usually ignored by supporters of military action against Iran is that many of Tehran’s nuclear facilities are believed to be deep underground, in reinforced bunkers difficult to destroy with conventional weapons. Using thousands of missiles, as suggested by Olmert, could result in a high number of civilian casualties, as a surprise attack would inevitably catch many people unprotected, leading to the deaths of thousands of civilians in another conflict that could still be resolved through diplomacy.

http://www.aljazeera.com/me.asp?service_ID=13483

 

[EagleEyes]

Olmert said bombing Iran requires the use of a thousand Tomahawk missiles

 

[mirage_lover]

I don't support Iran having an A-bomb because then Pakistan will be sandwiched between two nuclear armed states. Relations with Iran may be okay for today, however we don't know what the future holds.

 

[ahussains]

i didnt think iran can easily adopt the bomb in the quick time .. it need 5 years to me .... Maybe more

 

[Cheetah786]

I don't support Iran having an A-bomb because then Pakistan will be sandwiched between two nuclear armed states. Relations with Iran may be okay for today, however we don't know what the future holds.

could you please share with us what are you planing to do to iran.that we should fear there Nukes.:wall:

 

[Neo]

He probably means that Iran is still considered a rogue state by most of the world, the regime is unstable and uncertain so a potential possible threat to anyone including Pakistan.