Iran Halted Nuclear Weapons Program in 2003, US Intelligence Agencies Find

[Frodo]

U.S. Says Iran Ended Atomic Arms Work

By MARK MAZZETTI
Published: December 3, 2007

WASHINGTON, Dec. 3 — A new assessment by American intelligence agencies concludes that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003 and that the program remains frozen, contradicting judgment two years ago that Tehran was working relentlessly toward building a nuclear bomb.

The conclusions of the new assessment are likely to reshape the final year of the Bush administration, which has made halting Iran’s nuclear program a cornerstone of its foreign policy.

The assessment, a National Intelligence Estimate that represents the consensus view of all 16 American spy agencies, states that Tehran is likely keeping its options open with respect to building a weapon, but that intelligence agencies “do not know whether it currently intends to develop nuclear weapons.”

Iran is continuing to produce enriched uranium, a program that the Tehran government has said is designed for civilian purposes. The new estimate says that enrichment program could still provide Iran with enough raw material to produce a nuclear weapon sometime by the middle of next decade, a timetable essentially unchanged from previous estimates.

But the new estimate declares with “high confidence” that a military-run Iranian program intended to transform that raw material into a nuclear weapon has been shut down since 2003, and also says with high confidence that the halt “was directed primarily in response to increasing international scrutiny and pressure.”

The estimate does not say when American intelligence agencies learned that the weapons program had been halted, but a statement issued by Donald Kerr, the principal director of national intelligence, said the document was being made public “since our understanding of Iran’s capabilities has changed.”

Rather than painting Iran as a rogue, irrational nation determined to join the club of nations with the bomb, the estimate states Iran’s “decisions are guided by a cost-benefit approach rather than a rush to a weapon irrespective of the political, economic and military costs.” The administration called new attention to the threat posed by Iran earlier this year when President Bush had suggested in October that a nuclear-armed Iran could lead to “World War III” and Vice President Dick Cheney promised “serious consequences” if the government in Tehran did not abandon its nuclear program.

[Хahar 🤔]

Any surprises here?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Wow, all that fuss about nothing.

[Robespierre's Jaw]

Wow, all that fuss about nothing.

You can say that about Iraq to and Vietnam ect. 

[Хahar 🤔]

Wow, all that fuss about nothing.

You can say that about Iraq to and Vietnam ect. 

I wholeheartedly agree.

[Frodo]

I am especially glad to see they are agreeing with my original assessment of Iran:
------------------------------------------

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Sensei]

yup, the administration scares the population sh*tless again for no reason...

[Middle-aged Europe]

Well, those Iranian fanatics just aren't what they're used to be...

But I assume the traditional Cheney/Rumsfeld neo-con approach would be to say: "Ah, hell, let's bomb them anyway."

[StateBoiler]

Wow, all that fuss about nothing.

My opinion is that American intelligence agencies could be publicly forcing the Bush administration's hand on the Iran issue by putting this out there. The CIA and the Bush administration not getting along is hardly news. I mean this report wipes out a lot of their case for pre-emptive strike.

[Tory]

The report also finds Iran still has a nuclear program(which is obvious, their leader talks about it openly), they just aren't actively pursuing weapons in particular. They could, according to the report, still have a nuclear weapon by between 2010 and 2015. If they can enrich uranium they can build a weapon fairly easily, just ask Kim Jong Il. In fact it would probably take less time for them to build a weapon by fooling the international community through claiming their program is peaceful.

[The Man From G.O.P.]

This report is hopefully true but achieves nothing other than putting the admin and future ones in a terrible position to bargain with Iran.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

If correct, this is great news.  If wrong, it will be the biggest blunder of the Bush43 Administration.  Let's hope and pray it is correct.

[Boris]

If Iran has halted their nuclear weapons program, what exactly is the objective of current U.S. foreign policy towards Iran?

[Middle-aged Europe]

If Iran has halted their nuclear weapons program, what exactly is the objective of current U.S. foreign policy towards Iran?

That it remains halted... I think.

[Tory]

If Iran has halted their nuclear weapons program, what exactly is the objective of current U.S. foreign policy towards Iran?

That it remains halted... I think.

If it hasn't already been re-constituted. Remember we had thought that North Korea's nuclear program had ended in 1994. And the fact remains, Iran does have a nuclear program that it doesn't need. A nuclear Iran, once uranium is being enriched wholesale, is only a year or two away from getting the bomb. One could look at it in the sense that the greater nuclear program is a weapons program, because every day they have that program running is a day they're closer to having a weapon.

[The Duke]

First, these are the same guys who in 2002 said Iraq was a month from having an atomic bomb and that Iraq was rapidly expanding their biological and chemcial weapons programs.  The NIE has a very poor track record.

Second, two years ago the NIE published a totally contradictyory claim and said that with a high degree of certainty, Iran was pursuing a nuclear bomb.  The NIE says it was totally wrong then but is totally right now, trust us.  The NIE report flatly contradicts past NIE reports.

Third, the NIE report is also contradcited by the IAEA and Israeli intelligence, two organizations known to have superior information and better analysts than US intelligence.  The Israelis say that Iran continues its weapons program unabated and the IAEA says Iran has enough working centrifuges to produce a bomb within 18 months.  The NIE's conclusions are contradictory to the conclusions of more reputable intelligence organizations.

The NIE claims Iran has stopped its military program, but not its civilian program, then uses a definition of "civilian" and "military" that is totally incoherent.  For example, Iran continues enrichng uranium, and the NIE admits this, but the NIE classifies uranium enrichment as a purely civilian use.  Uranium enrichment is obvioulsy not a purely civilian use.  The NIE's definitions are arbitrary and nonsensical.

None of the intelligence sources on which this report is based have been made public.

An intelligence report with a terrible track record publishes a report that is contradicted by its own past reports and by the assesments of superior intelligence agencies and by the assesments of international monitors and bases this report on sources that are not disclosed to us and uses definitions that are erroneous to make a misleading distinction between "military" and "civilian" uses of nuclear technology.

Forgive me if I am not reassured.

[Boris]

Third, the NIE report is also contradcited by the IAEA and Israeli intelligence, two organizations known to have superior information and better analysts than US intelligence.  The Israelis say that Iran continues its weapons program unabated and the IAEA says Iran has enough working centrifuges to produce a bomb within 18 months.  The NIE's conclusions are contradictory to the conclusions of more reputable intelligence organizations.

I'm unsure about the Israeli position (the following article briefly mention that they "question the findings"), but El Baradei more or less concurs with this NIE conclusion:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/98352EE3-B5D0-4209-8ADB-79E8A3B45A72.htm

Have any other NATO Intelligence Agencies confirmed or contradicted the NIE conclusions? For the reasons you stated, I have a rather dim view of U.S. intelligence at the moment.

[The Duke]

The IAEA confirmed that Iran now has 3,000 centrifuges at Natanz, though there is dispute over how many are as yet online.  El baradei confirmed that 2,000 pf the centrifuges are already operational.  Link below.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/02/AR2007090200415.html

Also, El Baradei's agreement with the NIE report is to be viewed with some skepticism.  He once said, "I have no brief other than to make sure we don't go into another war or that we go crazy into killing each other. You do not want to give additional argument to new crazies who say, 'Let's go and bomb Iran.'"  Dr. El Baradei's views are to be taken with a grain of salt, which makes his confirmation of the activities at the rapidly growing enrichment facility at Natanz all the more disturbing.

As for Israel, the Jerusalem Post has the reaction of israel's leaders on the NIE.  Minister's Barak and Ben-Eliezer have some condescending and dismissive quotes that make it clear they are not presuaded by our intelligence, and their policy recommendation is essentially to ignore the NIE.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1195546799748&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

I don't really trust the objectivity of Israeli's positions on Iran cause they are highly oriented by their fear or their will, or surely by both.

But I trust IAEA, and I'm sceptical with this NIE repport. Is it made to unlegitimate an eventual Bush/Cheney's will of a military action? If yes, do these intelligence agencies do that cause they feel that Bush/Cheney really want to strike?

How to interpret the reaction of G.W. Bush? Does it mean he wants to strike? No matters any report?

[The Duke]

It was revealed this morning that the primary author of this report told House Armed Services in July that Iran was still trying to build a bomb.  What was so compelling that he had to change his view in just four months?

[Silent Hunter]

It was revealed this morning that the primary author of this report told House Armed Services in July that Iran was still trying to build a bomb.  What was so compelling that he had to change his view in just four months?

If they told you, they'd have to kill you.

[phk]

Iran has its own stockpile of Russian nukes... its nuclear weapons program only did what all Iranian weapons programs do... reverse engineer black market products for mass production within Iran. They ended it in 2003 and at the same time asked for peace talks (this was after Iran helped the US train the Afghan army and helped bring the government of Hamid Karzai to power).

But when it is sandwiched between US-loving Gulf states with more US military bases in them than universities, the Wahhabi state of Saudi Arabia and the tumultuous state of Pakistan which has nukes and is in danger with the Sunni extremists in Waziristan, not to mention Israel, Iran has to be stupid NOT to have a stockpile of nukes lol...

The issue is not about the nuke program though... in 2003 Iran switched from petro-dollars to petro-euros and since then the US economy has been slowly plunging (although its also contributed to the war in Iraq, Iran has a big hand in the weakening US economy too). Since the dollar to euro switch, Bush made the "Axis of Evil" speech and continues to press that Iran has a nuke program... trying to pull an Iraq on us... don't be fooled!

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Iran has its own stockpile of Russian nukes... its nuclear weapons program only did what all Iranian weapons programs do... reverse engineer black market products for mass production within Iran. They ended it in 2003 and at the same time asked for peace talks (this was after Iran helped the US train the Afghan army and helped bring the government of Hamid Karzai to power).

But when it is sandwiched between US-loving Gulf states with more US military bases in them than universities, the Wahhabi state of Saudi Arabia and the tumultuous state of Pakistan which has nukes and is in danger with the Sunni extremists in Waziristan, not to mention Israel, Iran has to be stupid NOT to have a stockpile of nukes lol...

The issue is not about the nuke program though... in 2003 Iran switched from petro-dollars to petro-euros and since then the US economy has been slowly plunging (although its also contributed to the war in Iraq, Iran has a big hand in the weakening US economy too). Since the dollar to euro switch, Bush made the "Axis of Evil" speech and continues to press that Iran has a nuke program... trying to pull an Iraq on us... don't be fooled!

To reason well, I think it's good to be aware that today, it's not only the reality that is important but it is more what seems to be the reality.

I'm aware about the fact that Iran is alone in the Middle East and it has reasonable reason to have the nuke weapon.

But first, it has not only reasonable reason, some in Iran are waiting for Mahdi (a lord from "God") after an apocalypse. After 2003, there was 2005, with an election and a new president, different of the one of 2003.

Then, what seems to be the reality is that Iran want nukes to destroy Israel, what could anyway happen if it had.