Tuesday, December 04, 2007



Intelligence agencies say Tehran halted weapons programme in 2003

Ewen MacAskill in Washington
Tuesday December 4, 2007
The Guardian

US intelligence agencies undercut the White House yesterday by disclosing for the first time that Iran has not been pursuing a nuclear weapons development programme for the past four years. The secret report, which was declassified yesterday and published, marked a significant shift from previous estimates. "Tehran's decision to halt its nuclear weapons programme suggests it is less determined to develop nuclear weapons than we have been judging since 2005," it said.

The disclosure makes it harder for President George Bush, to justify a military strike against Iran before he leaves office next year. It also makes it more difficult to persuade Russia and China to join the US, Britain and France in imposing a new round of sanctions on Tehran.

Bush and vice-president Dick Cheney have been claiming without equivocation that Tehran is bent on achieving a nuclear weapon, with the president warning in October of the risk of a third world war. They were briefed on the national intelligence estimate (NIE) on Wednesday.

The White House national security adviser, Stephen Hadley, at a press conference yesterday, denied there were echoes of the intelligence failure over Iraq's phantom weapons of mass destruction. He said that Iran was "one of a handful of the hardest intelligence targets going" and the new intelligence had only arrived in the past few months. As soon as it did, both the president and Congress had been briefed. He warned that there would be a tendency now to think "the problem is less bad than we thought, let's relax. Our view is that would be a mistake."

The NIE, which pulls together the work of the 16 American intelligence agencies, is entitled Iran: Nuclear Intentions and Capabilities. It concluded: "We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003 Tehran halted its nuclear weapons programme." It had not been restarted as of the middle of this year.

In a startling admission from an administration that regularly portrays Iran as the biggest threat to the Middle East and the world, the NIE said: "We do not know whether [Iran] currently intends to develop nuclear weapons." That contradicts the assessment two years ago that baldly stated that Tehran was "determined to develop nuclear weapons".

The British government, which is planning to discuss the report with its US counterparts during the next few days, has also repeatedly said it suspects President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's government of seeking a nuclear weapons capability. It will claim that the weapons halt shows that diplomacy - in particular the threat of sanctions - can work.

The weapons halt roughly coincided with a visit by British, French and German foreign ministers to Tehran in October 2003.

The Iranian government has insisted throughout that it is only pursuing a civilian nuclear programme.

Although a halt to the nuclear weapons programme is significant, the NIE is far from a clean bill of health for Iran. Tehran is pushing ahead with its uranium enrichment programme, which has only limited civilian use and could be quickly converted to nuclear military use. The NIE warned that Iran could secure a nuclear weapon by 2010. The US state department's intelligence and research office, one of the agencies involved, said the more likely timescale would be 2013. All the agencies concede that Iran may not have enough enriched uranium until after 2015.

The White House will continue to try to intensify international pressure on Iran. Russia and China, two of the permanent members of the UN security council, have scuppered attempts by the US over the past six months to impose tough new sanctions on Iran.

The decision to publish the NIE is aimed at trying to recover the public credibility lost when the agencies wrongly claimed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction in the years leading up to 2003.






Elana Schor in Washington
Monday December 3, 2007
Guardian Unlimited

Democrats on Capitol Hill welcomed today's new US intelligence estimate on Iran as a valuable check on White House tough talk, urging George Bush to pursue diplomatic channels with Tehran.

The party's presidential candidates also used the estimate, which concluded that Iran ceased developing nuclear weapons in 2003, to fuel their simmering debate over a vote earlier this year that linked the US presence in Iraq to Iran.

"I hope this administration reads this report carefully and appropriately adjusts its rhetoric and policy vis-à-vis Iran," said the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada.

Reid urged Bush to take a cue from Ronald Reagan and sit down for talks with the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, despite the enmity between the two men.

Senator Russell Feingold of Wisconsin, one of the Democrats' strongest critics of the Iraq war, advised both the Bush administration officials and lawmakers to "take a deep breath and reconsider" moves toward military action against Iran.

"Iran's nuclear program remains a serious concern but it is clear from the [intelligence estimate] that vigorous and coordinated diplomacy is the right way to approach it," Feingold said.

The spectre of war with Tehran has trailed Democratic presidential candidates throughout the campaign, particularly New York senator Hillary Clinton. The former first lady's foes have criticised her for backing a September resolution that linked the US military presence in Iraq to the behaviour of Iran, creating what liberals considered a new justification for war.

The September resolution, called "Kyl-Lieberman" after its two Senate sponsors, stated "it is a vital national interest of the US" to prevent Iran from gaining influence through Shia militia in Iraq, also urging the Bush administration to designate Iran's revolutionary guard corps a terrorist organisation. Clinton was the only Democratic presidential candidate to support it.

Her White House rivals were back on the case following the report's publication. John Edwards said the new Iran intelligence estimate underscores the need to "avoid radical steps" such as the September resolution, while Connecticut senator Chris Dodd took a more oblique shot by decrying "reckless talk by the administration and reckless votes by some members of Congress."

Lee Feinstein, the Clinton campaign's national security director, issued a statement contending that the new intelligence estimate ratifies her preferred approach to Iran.

"Neither sabre-rattling nor unconditional meetings with Ahmadinejad will stop Iran's nuclear ambitions," Feinstein said. "Senator Clinton has the strength and experience to conduct the kind of vigorous diplomacy needed to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons." Clinton's chief rival, Barack Obama, has said if he were elected, he would meet with Ahmadinejad without setting pre-conditions.

Jay Rockefeller, the West Virginia Democrat who chairs the Senate intelligence committee, praised US spy agencies for releasing an estimate that conflicts with 2005 findings on the Iranian nuclear programme.

"The key judgments show that the intelligence community has learned its lessons from the Iraq debacle," Rockefeller said. "It has issued judgments that break sharply with its own previous assessments, and they reflect a real difference from the views espoused by top administration officials."

Senator Kit Bond of Missouri, the senior Republican on the intelligence committee, was one of a few in his party to make public comment on the estimate. Bond offered only guarded optimism, warning that the "Iran problem" remained unsolved.

"At first blush, this looks like a good news story," Bond said in a statement. "Good because the intelligence community was willing to reconsider an important intelligence judgment. More importantly, it's good news that Iran doesn't appear to be currently working on a bomb."

Five Democratic senators requested the new intelligence estimate in May 2006 and followed up by requiring it in a law passed several months later. Although the director of national intelligence had signalled a break with usual practice in releasing the estimate publicly, Congress already had called for a declassified report.

No comments: