Thomas Fingar, NIE author, in 2001: For those seeking nuclear weapons, ‘access to fissile material is a critical impediment’

Thomas Fingar, one of the three principal authors of the new and controversial National Intelligence Estimate, makes my point for me -- or at least he made the point in 2001.

The most difficult thing a trouble-maker has to do to make an atomic bomb, he said six and a half years ago, is obtain the highly enriched uranium (or plutonium) for the weapon.

Yet Fingar concludes in the new NIE report that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in the fall of 2003. He reaches this conclusion despite knowing that Iran today is obtaining highly enriched uranium by producing it IN PLAIN SIGHT.

‘Difficult ... to produce.’ Fingar, deputy director for analysis to the U.S. Director of National Intelligence, testified Feb. 13, 2001, before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence:

“[A]lthough the basic understanding of nuclear weapons physics is widespread, nuclear weapons are, fortunately, the most difficult kind to produce or acquire. Access to fissile material is a critical impediment.”

The “critical impediment” is finding the highly enriched uranium, which a nuclear device can split with devastating effect. At this moment, Iran’s theocracy has at least 3,000 centrifuges enriching uranium, producing a bomb’s critical ingredient.

Of, course, the mullahs say the enriched uranium is for nuclear reactors to make electricity. But considering how Fingar and the others contributing to the NIE agree that Iran did have a nuclear weapons program before 2003, what makes them think with “high confidence” or even “moderate confidence” that Iran’s regime truly has halted the program?

‘Determined to develop.’ Just four months ago, Fingar told the House Armed Services Committee:

“We assess that Tehran is determined to develop nuclear weapons -- despite its international obligations and international pressure. This is a grave concern to the other countries in the region whose security would be threatened should Iran acquire nuclear weapons.”

What happened between then -- July 11 -- and three days ago, when the NIE declared the Iranian regime probably stopped the weapons program four years ago?

Short of mental telepathy, how can our intelligence community conclude that the Ayatollah Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader, isn’t pursuing a nuclear weapon?

Secret ‘military notes.’ There is some evidence supporting the NIE. Apparently, in August of this year, intelligence services obtained the minutes of conversations and deliberations of Iranian military officials. The “military notes” indicate these military officials were angry that their superiors cut off work on fitting a nuclear warhead onto an Iranian missile.

Exactly how long does it take to draw up and build a shell capable of carrying an atomic bomb atop a missile? Iran already has launched conventional warheads on its missiles. If Iran has the nuclear bomb design -- and most in the intelligence community assume Iran does have it -- cradling it in a nose-cone is the least of the ayatollah’s problems.

Based on the “military notes” from Iran, the NIE finds the weapons program has been inactive. Why? The Iranian officials in the “military notes” discussions obviously weren’t the ones who made the decision on the nuclear program; otherwise they wouldn’t have been complaining so “bitterly,” as The New York Times puts it.

No hint of a reason. If the program was shut down, what was the reason? Says The Times:

[A]ccording to the intelligence and government officials, they [the notes] give no hint of why Iran’s leadership decided to halt the covert effort.

So it’s possible the ayatollah and then-President Mohammad Khatami told most of Iran’s military leaders in 2003 that the program was on hold, when in fact a small group still was moving full-speed ahead on the warhead design.

Even if the design has been suspended four years, note that the intelligence agencies also say Iran had been working on nuclear weapons from the 1980s to 2003. In the 1940s, it took the U.S. four years to build an atomic bomb, and then we had no idea which design would work -- or if it would work at all. With all the time Iran has had, its design work could be complete.

‘Come clean.’ That’s why President Bush said yesterday that Iran’s regime has to “come clean.” He said:

“It is clear from the latest NIE that the Iranian government has more to explain about its nuclear intentions and past actions, especially the covert nuclear weapons program pursued until the fall of 2003, which the Iranian regime has yet to acknowledge.

“The Iranians have a strategic choice to make. They can come clean with the international community about the scope of their nuclear activities and fully accept the longstanding offer to suspend their enrichment program and come to the table and negotiate, or they can continue on a path of isolation that is not in the best interest of the Iranian people. The choice is up to the Iranian regime.”

Meanwhile, as Russia and China point to Fingar’s new NIE as proof that Tehran is nothing to worry about, Iran has thousands of centrifuges spinning, enriching uranium, overcoming the “critical impediment.”

Frank Warner

* * *

Humor: ‘I ran’: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad comes out of the closet on ‘Saturday Night Live.’

See also: A Soldier on leave laments ‘hate and vengeance,’ in Iraq and U.S., that slows progress in war.

Comments

[Danny L. McDaniel]

The NIE report is what it is claimed to be: an estimate. Estimates have been known to be completely wrong, many times they are wildly wrong. What is missing in this process is on the ground eye-witness reporting and inspection. This critical lack of information makes the NIE nothing more than a well writtem undergraduate college termpaper. This report contains many statements that cannot be verified or tested. Critics of President Bush might want to ask themselves What the difference is between an estimate and a questimate? The answer: nothing.

This report is more spectulation than factual. It is nothing more than a report written by committee to cover the collective rear-ends of a bunch of career track bureaucrats. This filmsy piece of fiction is what the US is basing national security upon. Cold comfort if it wrong if only by a few months.

Danny L. McDaniel
Lafayette, Indiana

[SDN]

I'm curious why the Left believes the CIA now, but won't even let their recruiters on campus.

And of course, I'm waiting for President Bush to get on prime time, and say:"They stopped work in 2003. Hmmmm. What else happened in 2003? Well, we smashed the sh*t out of another rogue state that wouldn't come clean. Looks like the Iranians and the Libyans drew the correct conclusion. Of course, our Copperheads will never admit this, in whatever reality they live in.... but they've managed to give aid and comfort to the enemy, making him believe it can't happen again."

[Paul]

In his UN presentation, didn't Colin Powell cite "intercepted radio conversations" as proof Iraq was hiding chemical weapons?

[Steve in Utah]

The new N.I.E will go down in history as the Neveil Chamberland moment of our time.

[Shawn]

Good point, Paul! So what makes this intel any more reliable than the Iraqi WMD reports? Also, some reports cite the NIE as containing close to 150 pages. The public gets a little less than 10. That's a considerable knowledge deficit.

[Jabba the Tutt]

This NIE is government corruption. This is a scandal. Where are the GOP and honest Democrats Members of Congress? Where are the members of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees? This is not a scandal about wide stances or frozen cash, this is corruption that is have effects around the world. Russia and China are already changing their foreign policies. IMHO this scandal puts Americans at greater risk and the world at greater risk of heading into a nuclear war.

[Frank Warner]

There is a useful side to all this. As I said yesterday, the new NIE may reduce the incentive for Iran’s dictatorship to complete an atomic weapon.

Before the report, the Iranian people took pride in the idea that they were building nuclear weapons. After the report, they’re more likely to take pride in the idea that they’re not building nuclear weapons.

Let's work with this idea, and ask them diplomatically to prove just how peaceful their intentions are.

This could be one of those rare high-stakes win-win situations.

Ted Koppel said the same thing today on NPR.

[kwo]

Exactly how long does it take to draw up and build a shell capable of carrying an atomic bomb atop a missile?

It's actually quite difficult. Remember it took U.S. scientists years to go from "Fat Man" and "Little Boy" to the more compact designs that first sat atop the Atlas.

[Dennis]

I suspect that my memory is failing me...but didn't we just go through this identical scenario with North Korea and THEIR madman Kim Jong Il. I believe we even provided them food and warmth while they spent their time secretly building an arsenal of Nukes. Of course, we were appropriately surprised...like... who could have possibly foreseen such a thing.

[Frank Warner]

We're not concerned only with secretive regimes capable of delivering atom bombs on missiles.

We're concerned about secretive regimes capable of delivering atom bombs, period.

[No Oil for Pacifists]

Agreed: "If Iran quit bomb-building half a decade ago, why did it block International Atomic Energy Agency inspections required under its commitments to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty?"

[Neo]

The whole debate has been reduced to saying .. it’s safe now that they have suspended making a gun, while they continue to make the bullets.

[jj mollo]

To this day, I am not worried that France and the UK and Israel have the bomb. I was very worried about the USSR, especially during its collapse. I was not worried at all when the drunken lunatic, Boris Yeltsin, was running Russia. I am worried again, now that the suave and businesslike Vladimir Putin seems to be expanding his scope of influence. Do you share my feelings on this?

I am not particularly worried about Pakistan, though some would say I should be. I'm not worried at all about India. I am a little worried about the mini-me in North Korea, but not enough to lose sleep over. Why do you suppose that is?

With Iran, however, I am worried. There's nothing particular I can do about it but fret and write a few words, but I still worry. I'm worried by their IEDs. I'm worried by their kidnap teams. I'm worried by their business dealings with Russia and China. It's funny. Australia does a lot of business with China and I don't worry too much about that. I'm worried about Iran's dealings in Syria and Lebanon and the Gaza Strip. I'm worried about pistachios and dates. I'm very worried about oil. Everything about Iran makes me worry. Do you think that the Bush/Cheney propaganda has gotten to me? No doubt we want to steal their oil; it worked out so well in Iraq. Maybe we want to steal the pistachios.

When I think of Iran, I can't help but think about Manhattan and Omaha for some reason. I think about the city of Bam and rescue dogs. I think about the liquor stores that were closed in Basra and the drunks on Bourbon Street. I think about the greenhouses that Israelis turned over to the Palestinians in Gaza. I think about the Buddha statues in Afghanistan and Buddha statues in Chinatown. I think about Teddy bears and cartoons and Auschwitz and David Irving and Theo Van Gogh. I think about Fallujah and Jonestown, the sack of Berlin and the Banzai Cliff at Saipan. I think about people who clear minefields with goats and children. I think about a guy I know who tours baseball fields and makes balsa wood models of them. I think about the nimbus that circled the head of a certain Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and how the trees lay in a circle around Tunguska.

I know that such imagery is no substitute for logical thinking. I believe in logical thinking. The NIE report, I'm sure, is a masterpiece of logical thinking. It does not, however, comfort me in the slightest.

[jj mollo]

This, however, gives me some comfort. (by way of Tigerhawk)

[Frank Warner]

Wow, maybe everything is a hoax!

I kid.