Will Iran Come Out Of The Nuclear Closet?
In a televised interview last week, the Chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen said that the U.S. believes Iran has obtained enough nuclear material to make a bomb. Hours later, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said that Iran was in fact not close to having a nuclear weapon. Iran now has enough low-enriched uranium to make one atomic bomb -- at least theoretically. Independent analysts say that became clear after the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency issued its latest inspection report on Feb. 19, revealing the presence of 1,010 kilograms of the material Washington and the Europeans hoped would never exist.
According to Israel's top military intelligence officer, Maj.-Gen. Amos Yadlin, Iran had "crossed the threshold" and had the expertise and materials required to produce nuclear weapons. He announced this on the same day that Iran tested a precision air-to-surface missile with a 70-mile range, a weapon that would give it the ability to threaten American and other ships operating in the Persian Gulf.
Israel is believed to have the Middle East's only nuclear arsenal, though it has never acknowledged such a program. The Jewish state has long denounced Iran's nuclear program as a threat to its existence and also cites remarks made by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad saying Israel should be wiped off the map.
Why does Iran pursue a nuclear bomb?
Contrary to popular conception, the Iranian nuclear program is nothing new. It began in the Shah's era in the 1960s, under the auspices of the United States. Iran's first nuclear research center was equipped with a U.S.-supplied, 5-megawatt nuclear research reactor. At the time, the Shah had plans to build as many as 23 nuclear power stations across the country with help from the United States.
Meanwhile, Israel's nuclear ambition practically began at the creation of the state. In 1949, Hemed Gimmel, a special unit of the Israeli Defense Force's Science Corps, began a geological survey in the Negev desert in search of uranium reserves. Later, in 1952, the Israel Atomic Energy Commission was created. At that time, its chairman, Ernst David Bergmann, declared that an "Israeli bomb" was the best way to ensure "that we shall never again be led as lambs to the slaughter."
If the Israeli nuclear program grew out of fear of its neighbors and the conviction that the Holocaust justified any measures Israel took to ensure its survival, from where does Iran's justification come?
On Sept. 22, 1980, following a long history of border disputes, Iraq invaded Iran. The war lasted eight years, claimed 1 million casualties, and cost over a trillion dollars. The majority of Arab nations supported Saddam's regime both financially and militarily. International antipathy toward the Islamic Revolution in Iran contributed to an apathetic response by the rest of the world to Iraq's use of chemical warfare, which caused the death of over 100,000 Iranian troops and civilians.
Resentment toward Arabs by Persians is not just a product of the Iran-Iraq war. It goes back to the seventh century, when the last Sassanid shah, Yazdegerd III, lost a 14-year struggle to drive the Umayyad Caliphate out of the Persian Empire.
The similarities between Iran and Israel's desire for nuclear dominance can also be seen in Iran's president Mahmoud Ahmedinejad's claim that Iran is developing its nuclear program for "peaceful purposes." That assertion brings to mind David Ben-Gurion's own in December of 1960. When U-2 spy planes identified Dimona as an Israeli nuclear site, Ben-Gurion claimed that it was only a nuclear research center built for "peaceful purposes."
It is only a matter of time for Iran to "come out of the closet" and surprise the world with a nuclear test similar to what Pakistan did a few years back to challenge India's nuclear dominance. This will only happen when Iran has more than one nuclear bomb, which it might already have by now.
It is convenient to characterize possession of nuclear capability as benevolent when it is we or our allies who are being questioned. But it is unrealistic to expect some nations to lay down their arms and make themselves vulnerable to others who will not.
Jamal Dajani produces the Mosaic Intelligence Report on Link TV
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
If this article was written in the 60's warning that Israel was developing nuclear weapons, then everyone on this thread who has been chastising the author would have been full of praise. Right? How does everyone know about Iran's nuclear capabilities, the only country besides Israel that put its own satellite into space (not carried on other county's rocket)?- Don’t misunderestimate (as Bush would say) Iran’s nuclear capabilities.
Everyone can speculate now about how much enriched uranium Iran has or what grade it is, the bottom line Iran is only buying more time. Nothing more nothing less.
This time is costing huge amount of money. Why would it incur such exorbitant cost? What is it trying to buy?
It's buying time to achieve parity with Israel. If your neighbor has a gun pointed at your house all the time, you have 2 options:
1. You buy a bigger gun
2. You pack up and leave
Iran is going nowhere.
"... Admiral Mike Mullen said that the U.S. believes Iran has obtained enough nuclear material to make a bomb. Hours later, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said that Iran was in fact not close to having a nuclear weapon. Iran now has enough low-enriched uranium to make one atomic bomb -- at least theoretically. Independent analysts say that became clear after the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency issued its latest inspection report on Feb. 19, revealing the presence of 1,010 kilograms of the material Washington and the Europeans hoped would never exist."
Low-enriched uranium cannot be used to make bombs. That is why Gates said they were nowhere close. Mike Mullen is just a scaremonger, and nobody should listen to those analysts, either. Having 1,010 kilograms of stuff useless to make a bomb with applies to everyone who owns an automobile, too.
What Mullen, meant is that Iran has enough raw fissile material to turn it into weapons grade material. You only need a small amount of highly enriched uranium to get MT yields. You need to enrich uranium to 90% from the 5% grade that Iranians have. The stockpile of 1,010 kg can yield more than 100 kg or highly enriched uranium. This would be enough for a dozen of nuclear bombs. Use remedial math and you can easily calculate this yourself.
Most drug addicts clearly started out hooked on milk.
Your logic, while seemingly rational, is deeply flawed.
Iran has uranium deposits.
If you HYPOTHESIZE on how many bombs could be made with the uranium in the ground, then we should have blown them up a long time ago.
Holy Cow, Bataman, there thousands of potential nuclear weapons in that soil!
BUT WAIT !
They mine the uranium and they separate out the U-238 and the next thing you know they have the potential for enriching that amount into not only VAST quantities of uranium-bombs, but also mathematically increase that into P-239 bomb potential, and... Holy Cow, Batman, let's bomb those guys.
And then Iran begins separating out of the 238 the UF 4 and UF 6 needed for enrichment, and Holy Cow, Batman, we have enough of that stuff to make gazillions of weapons.
Let's bomb these guys.
And then they put that into a centrifuge and they actually enrich that u-238 up to the 4 percent 235-enriched composition needed to make nuclear fuel, and Holy Cow, Batman, we have enough to make a hundred dirty nuclear weapons - we ALL know what they are, right.
And, if they put that 4-percent enriched uranium into a reactor, the, SOME of that 238 becomes 239 and, Holy Cow, Batman, we all know how many nuclear weapons that could produce.
YES, your remedial math argument is laughable.
Uranium IS.
What Mullen meant was to scare people, and THAT IS ALL. Iran does not have enough centrifuges to do the enrichment job to get to bombs, and has an avowed and open policy that PROHIBITS the development of nuclear weapons. We have the IAEA to warn us, and those people visit ONSITE to do inspections. I'm really happy that Iran has 1010 Kg of Nuclear Fuel for their POWER PLANTS. Good for them. I'm looking forward to Ahmedinejad or the next President, cutting the ribbon on their first working plant. Congratulations, although it should've been solar.
I point out that having an ability to do a thing says nothing one's INTENTIONS; otherwise by your OWN LOGIC, if you own a gun, we have to put you in jail because you COULD kill someone - right? Why should we trust you if you COULD kill someone?
And finally, I see no problem with Iran having Nukes; the USA should give Iran nuclear weapons, and then we would get PEACE and QUIET. I predict that we could offer to ARM Iran and they would REFUSE.
Mullen is a PROPAGANDIST and the PROPAGANDA against Iran is UNLAWFUL.
The "Neocons" are STILL TRYING TO LIE TO US and STILL TRYING TO CREATE ENEMIES for us. THEY are the problem.
The author makes a flawed comparison between Iran and Israel.
1. Iran is a signatory to the NPT - Israel is not?
2. Iran has undergone the most severe inspections in IAEA history - Israel has not!
2. Iran's nuclear facilities are under the watching "eyes" of the IAEA experts,cameras, sensors 24 hours a day - Israel's is not?
3. Iran has been the staunchest supporter of the NPT; requesting stricter regulations to maintain the sanctity of the NPT - Israel has not?
4. Iran called for a nuclear free zone Middle East - rejected by both the U.S. and Israel!
5. Iran has invited countries to join a JV partnership in her nuclear program to remove any distrust in Iran's motivations - U.S. has flatly rejected this.
7. Iran's spent nuclear fuel will be sent back to its supplier Russia - Israel's will not!
8. Iran has only enriched LEU to 3.9% only good for civilian fuel; you need HEU enriched to 90%. Iran neither has the technology, nor the capability of doing this! The process is quite complicated.
9. Even if Iran was able to do all of the above it would only have a prototype of a device not a bomb. If Iran was to ever test this - it would be subjected to a nuclear first strike by Israel or the U.S. destroying Iran 100 x over.
Read Eric Margolis's article in the Huffington Post :
http://www
I am not understanding why are you comparing Iran to Israel. As far as I know NPT is still voluntary. Israel has a right to sign NPT. Since, Iran did it has obligations. Enriching uranium to 90% is not hard you just have to keep going. It takes much longer, but it is not a technical challenge. If you have mastered 5% cycle, 90% is just a matter of time. Iran does not have to thick about a delivery system. It can put together a dirty bomb or simply scatter uranium over Israel, as Japan was planning to do during WWII. In other words Iran does not have to worry about large scale detectable test. It can continue experimenting with small amounts of highly enriched uranium achieving smaller undetectable yields.
Iran has both RIGHTS and OBLIGATIONS under the NPT.
The only violation Iran has been charged with are accounting
It's Iran's RIGHTS under the NPT that you ignore.
Iran has a right to 4 percent enrichment, and an obligation to perform that enrichment under the watchful eye of the IAEA, which it is doing.
So, where's the beef in your argument.
Hypothetical machinations of mathetical POTENTIAL is just plain silly.
Jalal has failed us here.
We may need to wait another twenty years to see if he is right.
But in the meantime, a respected, in some quarters, mideast journalist has warned us that Iran IS producing a secret nuclear weapon, and it is just a matter of time before Iran comes out of the nuclear closet.
I don't really care what you think, but I say SHAME on you, Jamal.
I see -- so Israel claims a right to threaten others with nuclear weapons whilst whinging about non-existent nuclear weapons in NPT-compliant states. LOL!
I think that Jamal gives a very analysis and a plausible scenario:
1.He draws a parallel between Israel’s drive to acquire nuclear weapons and Iran. Why wouldn’t Iran develop a secret nuclear weapons program when its constantly threatened by Israel’s nuke? This is what happened between India and Pakistan.
2.His last sentence speaks about the double standards.
joz22, are smocking something? When did Israel threaten Iran with the nuke? Israel did not even acknowledge it has nuclear weapon, let along threaten anybody with it
Israel's mere possession of nukes is threatening. Israel itself is the threat.
I am a long time admirer of Jamal so this article is very disapointing.
I agree with joebhed: this repeats many neocon and liberal hawk talking points that the US inteligence community systematically shot down in late 2007. The major difference between Iran and Israel, Pakistan and India is that Iran is a member of the IAEA and has signed the NPT--which guarantees it assistance in mastering the fuel cycle for peaceful purposes. Nowhere is this acknowledged nor the 2007 NIE, unanimously agreed by all the US intelligence agencies. Nowhere is it acknowledged that Iran will soon reach it peak and will become a net importer of energy within a generation.
Read Scott Ritter's book and articles at TruthDig and elsewhere.
What a shame.
I disagree. Jamal makes good points and explains clearly why Iran would want to pursue nuclear weapons. He explains Israel's "peaceful purposes" nuclear program which I find fascinating that we knew about it in the 60sand that it was the same answer Ahmadinejad is giving today.
Iran's nuclear program started under the Shah with US aid and support and has nothing to do with Ahmadinejad.
I am surprised and disappointed in your commentary.
A great deal of it is historic and accurate.
Then you venture into power-and-interest politics. I believe, and hope, you are wrong.
"It is only a matter of time for Iran to "come out of the closet" and surprise the world with a nuclear test similar to what Pakistan did a few years back to challenge India's nuclear dominance. This will only happen when Iran has more than one nuclear bomb, which it might already have by now."
Why would you believe that Iran has or will pursue nuclear weapons?
There is no evidence, and only the word of Israeli intelligence that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons.
You have furthered the Mossad intelligence logic of Iran's weapons pursuit.
I rely more upon Iranian “intelligence” for the logic of the day.
Nuclear weapons in the middle east are stupid.
Using nuclear weapons anywhere in the middle east will result in massive retaliations and certain widespread death to Arabs and Israeli's alike.
Do you think Iran would consider a first strike on Israel?
How foolish that is.
And if Israel did first-strike the Iranians, the Persian-Arab response would be ultimately vengeful.
If you know something that the rest of the world doesn't know about an Iranian nuclear weapons program, please give Mr. ElBaradei a call.
Otherwise, please tell whoever told you about the "two-nucle
This response is absolute nonsense. First of all ElBaradei acknowledged several times that Iran keeps stonewalling and refusing to provide answers on their nuclear activities. Secondly, even if we ignored whatever evidence that US and Israel has, Iran's behavior points to their intentions. Iran is incurring such economic losses from sanctions and bad PR that it is simply inconceivable that they are justifying their activities by future economic gains from nuclear energy. Iran turned down several offers from Russia and US to set up uranium bank controlled by Arab countries that can be used by all participant seeking to pursue peaceful nuclear programs.
Stonewalling you say:
Maybe you shouldn't read all the media pundits who love to sensationalize news and start reading the IAEA reports, footnotes to those reports and the NPT requirements.
Maybe what the IAEA is asking is not what the Agency is mandated to do? Maybe because every time IAEA releases a clean report on Iran, certain countries who don't want to hear the truth, provide falsified information to the IAEA and request that such information be withheld from Iran until one week prior to the Agency issuing its reports; making it impossible for Iran to respond in a timely fashion. Maybe because while Iran has not ratified the Additional Protocol it has proceeded forward as if it has, but has simply not obtained any benefit from the powers at be for its extensive cooperation that go far beyond her obligations under the NPT.
Maybe the answer is that IAEA has no right to request to see Iran's military facilities. This is neither the Agencies role, nor what the NPT states, and nor is any other country willing to allow any agency to inspect its sensitive military facilities.
Maybe the problem is not Iran's nuclear program, but other countries that have ulterior motives?
This is what the IAEA Director-General, has stated to the IAEA Board of Governors for the umpteenth time that;
"The Agency has been able to continue to verify the non-diversion of declared nuclear material in Iran."
So, that's that.
First, Iran has allowed every inspection that the IAEA is entitled to not only under its Safeguards Agreement but for two years under the Additional protocol, UNTIL the advent of Second Degree sanctions - an action completely outside both the NPT and the IAEA Statute.
Were this NOT true, then the IAEA would charge Iran with violating its NPT obligations or other agreements, which it has NOT.
Second, Iran's behavior regarding the effects of the sanctions are not at issue here.
Iran invested heavily in nuclear power for its electricity future.
A lot of the world seems to agree that this makes a lot of sense right now.
(I don't)
But they have an INALIENABLE right under the NPT to do it.
I leave it for Iran to explain why it might not accept a Russia-US brokered, Arab-controlled nuclear fuel arrangement.
But I will say this.
If I have already entered into an international agreement that gives me an INALIENABLE right to enrich MY OWN uranium on MY OWN soil, and that right has been ALIENATED by the actions of the US and the E-3, then why the F**k would I give up THAT right and seek a lesser one elsewhere.
My complaint is with Jalal on his posting.
I have often agreed with and loudly supported his opinions on the correct policies in the Mideast.
I am a Mosaic supporter.
Here I feel he OWES us all an explanation.
So, what is it, Jalal?
No actually the IAEA has stated repeatedly that Iran has allowed all the inspections it is legally obligated to provide. And Iran's nuclear program is in fact economically justifiable which is why the US encouraged and supported the program in the first place.
Tell you what, Iran can come out of the nuclear closet as soon as Israel does!
Israel did not? I guess when they get to about 300 warheads they will.
Where did you get your facts from? the Enquirer?
Iran says it is ready to host tourists who wish to visit its nuclear power plant in Bushehr during the Persian New Year holidays.
Iranian officials seek to highlight their peaceful nuclear intentions by opening the nuclear installations in southern Iran during Nowruz.
Nowruz marks the first day of spring in the northern hemisphere and is the start of the Iranian New Year - March 21st.
"Tourists, who are interested in visiting the country's nuclear site, are allowed to visit the facilities during the Nowruz holidays," Alireza Dejband, Secretary of Southern Region at Iran's Cultural Heritage, Handicrafts and Tourism Organization said.
http://www
I am not sure what does this prove?
The only country that used the A Bomb is the US. Not once but twice!
We should practice what we preach: TOATAL nuclear disarmament for everyone otherwise we will destroy the planet!
Or a better idea, let's unilaterally disarm ourselves! Right now the rest of the world is watching us (with the exception of India and Pakistan, who are looking at each other....) to see if we use our nukes. If we get rid of them, the rest of the world will see that we are serious!
Actually, we are obligated by the NonProliferation Treaty to disarm our own nukes -- but we have consistently violated our own obligations under the NPT while wagging a finger at Iran which is in compliance with the treaty.
The NPT also obligates us to NOT share nuclear technology with countries such as Israel and India, and we have done so quite blatantly
Israel won't wait for diplomatic solution to Iran nukes impasse, according to a report in Haaretz.
Iran is likely to obtain a nuclear weapon within a year as it already has access to enough fissionable material to manufacture 50 warheads, according to a report commissioned by a key U.S. think-tank.
The report by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, which is entitled Preventing a Cascade of Instability: U.S. Engagement to Check Iranian Nuclear Progress, notes that Israeli leaders still cling to the belief that a military option is available to stop the regime's nuclear program.
The Israelis have been saying that Iran is just 2 weeks away from building a bomb for the last 25 years. Give me a break.
Really just two weeks. Please, point me to that article from 25 years ago
to Justice2008
You have cited "the Washington Institute for Near East Policy," as the basis for your argument that "Iran is likely to obtain a nuclear weapon within a year...." Are you aware that WINEP is an affiliate of AIPAC, Israel's unregistered foreign lobby? Or are you hoping that we don't know this?
The country is the ME which has bombed and wantonly killed civilians in nearly every neighboring country is Israel. Iran has not attacked another country in 300 years. Israel wants to be the master country of the entire ME, as it is the master race, and has the weapons to do it. Expose and eliminate Israel's weapons and those of the US and, only then, will Iran not need weapons.
Of course Iran is working on developing nuclear weapons and might have already succeeded in making a bomb or two. Ahmadinejad can deny this till his face turns blue. Do I believe him? Absolutely not. Do I blame him? No. Why would he listen to anyone when he is threatened by the US, Israel and other European countries.
OK - I DO agree with your last comment.
Yes that's a wonderful argument. Iran is threatened by US and Israel that's why it is going to continue to pursue nuclear weapons. Only one thing US and Israel are threatening Iran only because they believe that Iran is developing nuclear weapons.
The US and Israel.
One an NPT-signer and VIOLATOR - that would be US.(disarm
The other a non-signer and violator of the world's only sensible policy toward disarmament.
As a signer the US is OBLIGED to assist Iran to not only achieve the benefits of nuclear energy, which the US is also obliged to HELP, but also to protect Iran's INALIENABLE rights to enrich its own uranium on its own soil.
So, case closed.
Except that finally, if EITHER the US and/or Israel had ANY PROOF that Iran had a nuclear weapons program, then they are both obliged to provide that information to the IAEA so that it can be investigated, which they haven't.
Because it doesn't exist.
What we have is an open-ended fishing expedition, for which Iran has responded it is tired.
End the sanctions, reinstate the Additional Protocol and put some meat on the bones of the saber-rattling rhetoric of the US and Israel.
I love it how things Must be true because they make sense to you.
I'll point out that you admit they SHOULD want them BECAUSE we THREATEN them, at least you admit that much.
Hey: either provide PROOF - or SHUT UP.
This is ABSOLUTE RUBBISH.
The BIG DIFFERENCE between Iran and Israel is that Iran is a signatory to the NPT which means that it has been under intense IAEA inspections for more than 6 years now, and not an iota evidence has emerged to show that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons. In fact, even the US doesn't accuse Iran of pursuing nuclear weapons -- rather they accuse Iran of pursuing a nuclear weapons "capability" which is a nonsense charge since any country with a perfectly legal nuclear program can theoretically be "capable" of making nukes -- including Brazil, Argentina and Japan.
Unlike what you claim, the Iranians have said repeatedly that nuclear weapons would NOT help their security, but would in fact increase their insecurity. And the Iranians have offered to place additional limits on their nuclear program -- beyond their existing legal obligations -- to further ensure that the program can't even theoretically be used to make bombs (for example, but opening the program to multinational participation) but the US insists that Iran totally give up the program. WHy? This isn't about nuclear weapons -- this is about control over the nuclear fuel production capability that the US wants to monopolize. THis is has been an ongoing conflict between developed and developing nations for many decades. The "nuclear weapons" issue is simple a pretext for economic domination.
Yeah and I should believe the Mullahs and Ahmadinejad! You are in denial.
You should believe the IAEA.
I apoloize in advance leonardox1, but I really think you are the one in denial. I completely agree with Hass. It sounds, by your comment, that you have bought all of the propaganda Bush has sold for the last 8 years and it has now somehow become your truth.
Money does make the world go round'.
Do you actually read out loud what you write. It is absolute nonsense. That's right US wants to control nuclear fuel production, that's why US lags far behind Russia and France in such production. Why would Iran need to produce nuclear fuel when it can buy it super cheap from Russia. Do you understand economic burdens Iran is enduring over such production. It is in the hundreds of billions a year. It will never make up these loses.
"Why would Iran need to produce as opposed to buy it super cheap from Russia."
Why should Iran depend on Russia when it has uranium deposits of its own? Why should Iran depend on Russia for its fuel? Why should Iran depend on countries which can use this as an economic and political tool? Why are illegal sanctions imposed on Iran right now for no reason but simply because it is pursuing its inalienable right granted to her under the NPT.
Why should Iran depend on countries who have abrogated their agreements with her in the past?
Have you noticed how Russia cuts off fuel to Georgia and Ukraine during the freezing cold if they don't do as Russia dictates?
Why is the U.S. trying to wean off its dependence for its gasoline from other countries?
What you say make sense if we were living in a perfect world were the economic laws of competitive advantage served the benefit of nations. Unfortunately, we are not living in a perfect world.
Countries must demonstrate that they are all equally bound to international law and agreements. However, when certain super powers see themselves above the law, and use their muscle to push the weaker countries around their is a lack of confidence and trust.
This is why Iran has no interest in depending on Russia or any other country for that matter.
"Why would Iran need to produce as opposed to buy it super cheap from Russia."
Funny, because Cheney himself accused Russia of practicing energy blackmail.
Why would the US extract its own oil when it can buy it from Iran? Here's a deal: the US would promise never to extract its own oil and only buy oil from Iran, and Iran would only promise to import nuclear fuel from abroad. OK?
What guarantees do we have Iran will not use its nuclear weapons against Israel? Israel might have nukes but it had acted responsibly.
YEah -- responsibly in massacing Palestinians in places like Deir Yassin and shelling UN compounds in places like Qana and carrying out atrocities in places like Sabra and Shatilla.
Liar, Liar pants on fire. It has been proven that Qana incident has been staged. Sabra and Shatilla was not perpetrated by Israel, but rather Christian Lebanese.
Israel acts responsibly because it is not under attack...a
Boo hoo...cry me a river Israel...
What do you know about it? Did you live in Israel? You should visit Sderot and tell me that Israel is not under attack
really. Acted responsibly? I guess bombing lebanon and gaza back to the stone age is acting responsibly according to you
It could have been worse and Israel could have used its nukes but it did not in all its wars against the Arabs. Iran would in a heart beat.
I am quite sure that you would not respond if your next door neighbors started lobbing rockets into your back yard. Also if they started saying they would love nothing more than to kill you and your family because G-d told so, you would remain cool as a cucumber. I guess Israel has a long way to go achieve moral equivalence with you.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
