World Threats

The chief of British MI6 intelligence service says Iran is set to have a nuclear bomb by 2014, but that is dependent upon British intelligence being accurate and complete. Iranhas admitted that it lies about its nuclear program, and the record of Western assessments of Weapons of Mass Destruction programs is spotty, to say the least.

Western projections may be too optimistic if reports by Iranian opposition sources on secret nuclear sites are accurate. One such source, Reza Kahlili, will be doing a webinar forRadicalIslam.org on December 10.

The U.S. expresses confidence that it knows right where the Iranian nuclear program is at, with White House Press Secretary Jay Carney saying “We have eyes, we have visibility into the program.” This means that the U.S. believes it will detect any move by Iran to produce weapons-grade uranium and will be able to act before an actual bomb is assembled.

Intelligence estimates on Iran have turned out to be too comforting in the past.

Click here to read the rest of my RadicalIslam.org article.

Michael Ledeen reports that the Natanz uranium enrichment site has been shut down after a mysterious blast happened “in the next-to-bottom level of the underground structure.” A second explosion has struck a site in Zarin Dasht that is used for producing warheads and missile fuel and 7 people are missing.

What is remarkable about these two alleged explosions is that they happened in the underground portions of the facilities—that is, the most secure parts. If foreign hands are responsible, then the Iranian regime must be panic-stricken.

An overview of these “accidental” explosions and mysterious assassinations makes it clear that a major campaign has been underway to damage the Iranian nuclear program. During the past 12 months:

Click here to read the rest of my RadicalIslam.org post.

Opponents of a tough policy towards Iran are fond of mentioning Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s multiple fatwas against the possession of nuclear weapons. It is argued that Khamenei would not lie in an official religious ruling and wreck his credibility as an Islamic leader. As logical as that viewpoint sounds, it is wishful thinking.

It is true that Khamenei has declared the possession and use of nukes to be forbidden by Islam on multiple occasions. In 2009, he said that the ban is “because of our ideology.” In 2010, he said it is because “our religious beliefs and principles prohibit such weapons as they are the symbol of destruction of generations.” Most recently in February, he said Iran would “never pursue nuclear weapons” because it is a “grave sin.”

This sounds unequivocal and everlasting but these declarations come with caveats and are subject to change based on circumstances.

One of the reasons Khamenei said his regime is not interested in nukes is because his country can face down its enemies without them. It isn’t hard to envision Khamenei one day declaring that the possession of nuclear weapons is no longer a “grave sin” because they are needed in order to defend the country and religion. Whereas before the weapons were a “symbol of destruction of generations,” Iran’s possession of them would symbolize the saving of generations, he could argue.

After all, Khamenei’s regime has worked on technology with no possible civilian application, such as nuclear “triggers” and warheads. The IAEA report from November even disclosed that Iran has made preparations for an underground nuclear test. If Khamenei’s fatwa was unconditional, his regime would not be working on nuclear weapons capabilities in any way.

Click here to read the rest of my analysis for the Institute on Religion and Democracy.

While Iran has not accepted these offers, we have made our bottom line clear: For the safety of our people and the peace of the world, America will not allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon.

–George W. Bush, December 5, 2008

Iran is breaking rules that all nations must follow — endangering the global non-proliferation regime, denying its own people access to the opportunity they deserve, and threatening the stability and security of the region and the world.

– Barack Obama with French President Nicolas Sarkozy and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, September 25, 2009

According to who you ask, Iran is not far from nuclear weapons capability. Israeli officials are stating that Iran is near or past the ‘point of no return’ while others put the program just six months from enough uranium to construct a weapon. Even opponents of military action or apologists for the Islamic Republic will admit that Iran is not far from a nuclear breakout activity.

With all of the pressure that the international community is heaping on Iran, it should seem unlikely that that same world would allow the country to acquire nuclear weapons. However, to many, the diplomatic and military options to stop such a program are at a higher risk factor than doing simply nothing.

Over the last decade, Iran has benefited from various missteps or lack of action from the Western powers and even Israel. For years, the Western powers would warn Iran was nearing a nuclear device and put in place various sanctions to try and slow their progress. Many of these sanctions were either superfluous or cosmetic while the intelligence agencies in the West were deathly afraid of political blame that backlashed after the 2003 Iraq War. The 2007 NIE report that claimed Iran had suspended its nuclear program was an intelligence fiasco, bolstering Iran’s position while showing the skittishness of the American intelligence agencies.

It was a well-known “fact” that the Bush Administration would not leave office while Iran was moving closer to the bomb. It was widely believed that the White House would bomb Iran before leaving office in January 2009. No such bombing occurred. True, there was Stuxnet, but even with the relative success of the malware, it did not stop the program.

The Obama Administration has often times carbon-copied the Bush Administration’s approach to the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program. The sanctions and diplomatic pressure have been ramped up, now with Europe finally agreeing to stop purchasing Iranian oil. Meanwhile, sanctions on Iran’s Bank Melli (Central Bank) could hobble the country’s financial system. Or maybe not.

The Obama Administration is in a quandary. Nine months before the election, any military operation within Iran will have unexpected consequences, even if Iran’s nuclear program is set back significantly. With Hezbollah and Hamas prepared to act on Iran’s behalf, Obama’s re-election team could see any military action as possible electoral defeat.

Obama’s stricter line on sanctions and imports is welcome, but could show that the Administration is betting that these actions will work– or will be the last non-military options. China and Russia would not condone an attack, and the instability in oil prices and supply could crush the American and European economies during this fragile period.

If Obama will act on Iran (unless directly provoked), he will likely wait until after the election.

But what about Israel, you ask?

Israel’s capability to launch a successful attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities is likely lower than advertised. The Iranians learned from Saddam Hussein’s nuclear program to have the facilities spread out, hidden, and buried. A multi-pronged Israeli attack is unlikely to do the damage necessary. Killing Iranian scientists and sabotaging facilities has worked somewhat well, but has not stopped the program.

Put simply: even the Mossad and the IDF would have great difficulty stopping Iran’s nuclear program in an attack or even series of attacks. Sure, tactical nukes would work, but would be diplomatic suicide.

What may very well happen over the next year is that the focus on Iran’s nuclear program will shift. Rather than trying to stop Iran’s nuclear-weapons capability, the West and Israel may shift to trying to stop only the final stage: the actual deployment of these warheads. Any early Iranian device would likely not be miniaturized and ready to put on a missile. The new refrain could become “It’s okay, they may have the bomb (or get it soon) but it will be years before they can actually use it.”

This new red line will effectively reset the game. The moment that the United States shifts to this focus, it (almost) neuters Israel’s ability to act unilaterally. It will also act as a sigh of relief for many of the European powers, Russia, and China, who can then just start importing more Iranian oil.

This kicks the can down the road five more years, for the next President to deal with. The fear of losing re-election or putting the economy into a tailspin may be just what is needed to give Iran what it’s been coveting.

The Iranian regime announced yesterday that a new line of centrifuges have been activated and domestically-produced fuel rods are being used. The revelations in the state media were scarier: The underground Fordo nuclear site, clearly designed for nuclear weapons production, has become “fully operational,” potentially bringing Iran only a few short months from having bomb-grade uranium.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad proudly announced that Iran had produced its own nuclear fuel rods and installed them into a medical research reactor in Tehran. Iran previously bragged that it made its own rods and the site has no weapons-related purpose. Judith Miller of the Manhattan Institute described the announcement as a “photo opportunity” and “publicity stunt.”

Ahmadinejad also claimed that Iran manufactured 3,000 new “fourth generation” centrifuges for its Natanz site that will have larger and faster output. They will begin making low-enriched uranium called yellowcake next year, the regime said. Experts have serious doubts about the validity of Iran’s boasts in this area.

The announcement on Iran’s state media is of much more concern. The underground enrichment site at Fordo near Qom, built to withstand air strikes, will become “fully operational” in the matter of days. When Israeli Defense Minister warned of Iran reaching an “immunity zone” when military action is no longer viable, he was referring to this site specifically and others built underground and deep in the mountains. The U.S. and Europe point out that the structure of the site makes it incompatible with a peaceful nuclear energy program as Iran claims, but very suitable for nuclear weapons production.

Iran says it is going to enrich uranium at the Fordo site to 20% for use in medical research. A nuclear weapon needs uranium enriched to about 90% but in the words of former Revolutionary Guardsman Reza Kahlili, that 20% threshold brings Iran “9/10 of the way to weaponization.”

Click here to read the rest of my FPM article.

The world has been waiting to see what Iran’s “big” nuclear announcement his week will be. It is now being widely-reported that it will be that the underground Fordo nuclear site, built deep enough to withstand an airstrike, has become “fully operational.”

Former Iranian Revolutionary Guardsman Reza Kahlili reports that Iran will also announce that the site has enriched some uranium to 20%, which is “9/10 of the way to weaponization.” Uranium must be enriched to about 90% to act as fuel for a nuclear weapon, but that can be done in the matter of a few short months.

Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak recently compared Israel’s predicament to the Six-Day War of 1967 when Israel had to pre-emptively attack its neighbors to ensure its survival. He said that Iran must be stopped before it reaches the “immunity zone” where its nuclear work goes underground and cannot be bombed if necessary. Defense Secretary Panetta warned of a “strong likelihood” that Israel would attack Iran by June based on this concern.

Apparently, Iran has now reached this “immunity zone,” which would mean that Israel waited too long or was bluffing. Luckily, there is one thing stopping Iran from going nuclear: The regime is still allowing IAEA inspectors to have access to the site. Iran will have to kick out these inspectors before using the site for bomb creation. If that happens, it’s probably the last chance Israel has to undertake military action before Iran gets the nuke.

The Israeli military-intelligence director says that Iran has enough uranium for four nuclear weapons, but is still 3 years away from being able to place a nuclear warhead onto a ballistic missile. Israel may have decided that its “red line” isn’t the creation of a nuclear bomb, but the ability to putting together of a missile to deliver it.

By the way, if you wanted a reminder as to why Israel takes Iran so seriously, look at this column by Charles S. Faddis, a former CIA operative. He describes how, several years ago, he met with a senior Iranian asset the Middle East for a debriefing. They began discussing international sanctions on Iran.

“You really don’t have any idea who you are dealing with, do you?” the Iranian asset told Faddis.

He asked what he meant. The asset explained that the Iranian regime truly believes its duty is to bring about the arrival of the Hidden Imam, who the Hadith says will come after three years of war, chaos and disasters to save the world. The asset told Faddis that the U.S. must understand that the Iranian regime believes that this conflict will reach its end very soon, bringing victory for Islam as the regime sees it.

The question is when Iran believes that 3-year period began. The regime views the Arab Spring as the fulfillment of Islamic End Times prophecy, so if the period begins in 2011, then that brings us to 2014. That’s when Ahmadinejad’s term expires and is the same timeframe recently given by a pro-Khamenei strategist for the wiping out of Israel’s Jewish population.

While the Arab League and Western nations are pushing a U.N. Security Council vote to oust Syrian strongman Bashar Assad from power peacefully, Russia – along with China, and India – are defiantly standing against any plan to interfere on the behalf of anti-Assad protesters as the country nears civil war.

Reportedly 10 of 15 Security Council members are onboard with the plan, but both Russia and China have veto power over any proposed resolution, and considering the alliance Moscow has with Syria’s government on military matters (arms purchases and naval bases) that veto would definitely be used.

But the real story isn’t Russia and China defending human rights abuses in Syria, which they do on a fairly regular basis, but India, who is supposedly allied with the West on democracy and economics, opposing the United States for the second time this week in regards to Middle Eastern instability.

India has announced, despite the European Union and United States increasing sanctions on the Iranian regime, that they will continue, along with China, to import oil from the belligerent Persians, who have threatened to shut down the Straits of Hormuz, and are moving towards obtaining a nuclear weapon.

Their reasons are supposedly based on economics, but Europe’s going to take a massive hit for uniting with America on this very important issue, so do they prefer cheap oil to a nuclear armed Iran gunning for war with Israel? Apparently so, and they didn’t support the Western world when we went to war in Libya, either.

I don’t understand the Indians on this. Are they trying to remain neutral with potentially the greatest threat to mankind right now for the continuing sale of cheap oil? I hope not, considering they might secure a seat on the U.N. Security Council one day and could use that position to veto action against Iran someday to benefit their own needs.

Russia recently imparted a warning to the West, evidently having come to the conclusion that sanctions will “stifle” the Iranian economy. In remarks at a news conference, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said that Western nations should instead return to focusing their efforts on reviving talks with Iran.

Lavrov also cautioned the West against launching a military strike, insisting it “would pour fuel on the hidden smoldering fire of Sunni-Shi’ite confrontation.” In truth, the sectarian conflict has fueled friction between Iran and Saudi Arabia, and between Iran and Bahrain where Shi’ite populations have mounted uprisings against the Wahabi and Sunni regimes. Read the rest of this entry »

A blast killed a prominent Iranian nuclear scientist in Tehran today. The attack bears many similarities to other similar fates faced by Iranians working on the clandestine nuclear program. Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan was killed when two people on a motorcycle placed a magnetic bomb to his vehicle. There has been at least one similar attack in the past, which the Islamic Republic blamed on the United States and Israel.

Roshan was a chemistry expert who was involved in building polymeric layers for gas separation, which is the use of various membranes to isolate gases. He was also deputy director of Natanz uranium enrichment plant, in central Iran, for commercial affairs. According to conservative news website mashreghnews.ir, Roshan was in charge of purchasing and supplying equipment for the facility.

Natanz is the centerpiece of Iran’s efforts to make its own nuclear fuel. But Iran said earlier this week it was expanding some operations to a bunker-like site south of Tehran protected under 300 feet of rock. The existence of the Fordo facility has been known for more than two years, but some Western officials fear the opening of the labs could be another step toward developing nuclear arms.

This comes as tensions are visibly rising. Iran is also being squeezed by new oil sanctions, which could spark conflict.

In recent weeks, Defense Secretary Panetta (and several other officials before him) publicly warned of how horrible a U.S. or Israeli strike on Iran would be and that it would only delay their nuclear ambitions by 1-2 years. If you’re a mullah in Iran, you’re going to interpret that as a sign that the military option has been taken off the table.

Panetta has done the right thing now and on December 20, said that the U.S. would use military force if necessary to stop Iran from getting a nuclear bomb. He said it would be about a year before Iran gets the bomb, “perhaps a little less,” but that if Iran is operating a hidden enrichment facility that we don’t know about, it could happen within a year.

The reporter asked him about a possible strike and he said, “That’s a red line for us and that’s a red line, obviously, for the Israelis. If we have to do it, we will deal with it.” He was then asked if “it” meant military action and he replied, “There are no options off the table. A nuclear weapon in Iran is unacceptable.”

Stronger language is needed. A cocky Iranian official could still find some comfort in that statement. Panetta didn’t specifically say military force would be used to stop Iran, only saying that it would be “unacceptable” and a “red line” that “we will deal with.” Even saying the words, “We will deal with it,” makes it sound as if that’s a strategy against Iran after it gets the bomb.

If the U.S. actually is determined to stop Iran from getting the bomb and isn’t bluffing, then Iran needs to be specifically told that military action will take place as a last resort if nothing else stops them from getting the bomb. Anything less will look like the U.S. is making wiggle room so it can excuse itself from action.

There’s been yet another “accidental” explosion in Iran targeting its nuclear weapons program. This comes after the destruction of the IRGC long-range missile base where warhead work was ongoing and the explosion at Isfahan in the tunnel leading to a raw uranium stash.

On December 11, an explosion happened in a “privately-owned” steel plant in Yazd, killing 7 and wounding 12, including unidentified foreigners. The Washington Post notes that a German newspaper reported last month that North Korea was providing Iran and Syria with maraging steel used in centrifuges. The material is also used in exhaust systems for missile engines. There is no publicly-available information connecting the plant with the nuclear program, Ynet News reports.

Michael Ledeen has more to say over at PJ Media. He writes that the steel is used in creating the nose cones for missiles. He also breaks a big story about another unreported explosion in Khorramabad a few days ago after the destruction of the missile base.

I tried finding out more about the alleged Khorramabad explosion and all I could find was a story about an October 12 explosion at an IRGC ammunitions stockpile that killed 18 Revolutionary Guards and wounded 14.

Ledeen says that according to his sources, the explosions are the handiwork of Iranian dissidents without (as far as he knows) foreign backing. They claim that the objective of the base attack was simply to kill the top missile engineer (and they succeeded), and that they did not know about the North Korean rocket fuel that set off the massive explosions. He says that the imported fuel doubles the range of the Iranian missiles. The perpetrators of the attack died in the explosion, as did 4 North Koreans. Ayatollah Khamenei has been informed that a total of 377 people died, Ledeen reports.

An update on the previous post: WorldNewsTribune.com reports that Western intelligence believes that the perpetrators physically got inside of the Isfahan nuclear site and that it was “wrecked.” The uranium conversion facility, along with the stock of uranium at the site, was destroyed.

That means that two sites vital to Iran’s nuclear weapons program were destroyed within one month. We’re not talking about an accidental explosion that takes out some centrifuges or the killing of some important personnel. We’re talking about the complete disabling of nuclear sites.

An intelligence source quoted in the link said, “This has struck terror in the hearts of Iranian nuclear chiefs.”

That terror will make them more likely to defect and cause chaos and distrust within the regime’s security services. There is already a serious split between the Khamenei and Ahmadinejad camps in the regime, along with the split between the population and the regime as a whole. The covert campaign against Iran has an important psychological component.

More information has come in on that explosion in Isfahan, Iran that regime officials said was an “accident” and then denied ever happened. Satellite imagery shows that the explosion took place at the uranium conversion site in the city, after another “accidental” explosion on November 12 destroyed a Shahab-3 missile site and killed the top Revolutionary Guards missile engineer.

Unnamed Israeli intelligence officials told the London Times that it was “no accident.” I highly doubt they would put their careers on the line to confirm the obvious without authorization. It is probable that these officials were told to hint at foreign hands, which most would conclude were Israeli and possibly American. The goal would be to create panic within the Iranian regime by sending the message that its most secret programs have been penetrated and are vulnerable.

A retired Israeli Major-General said the same thing during a speech at Israel’s Defense Ministry, as did an intelligence official. Sounds to me like the Israelis want to take some credit.

The Washington Post reports that there has been a “fivefold increase in explosions at refineries and gas pipelines since 2010.” In 2008 and 2009, there were three explosions at Iranian gas pipelines. In 2010, there were 17. At least a dozen explosions have damaged refineries since 2010. The article also notes that an explosion happened on November 23 in southern Lebanon where Hezbollah reigns.