Congressional report on Iran’s N-programme alarmist, inaccurate

[KashifAsrar]

Congressional report on Iran’s N-programme alarmist, inaccurate

By Khalid Hasan

WASHINGTON: The Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) has challenged a congressional report on Iran’s nuclear programme saying it contains the same types of mistakes in assessing Iran’s nuclear weapons programme as the intelligence made on Iraq’s nuclear weapons programme before the 2003 invasion.

“Such errors do little to advance the objective of curbing Iran’s nuclear ambitions and serve poorly the larger objective of establishing an accurate public record of Iran’s nuclear capabilities and intentions,” David Albright and Jacqueline Shire of ISIS said in a statement on Friday. They called on the House Intelligence Committee to consider withdrawing the staff report and issuing a revised version that accurately reflects the status of Iran’s nuclear programme, or at least issue it with corrections. The report’s categorical assertion that Iran is seeking nuclear weapons is not supported by either the IAEA or the US intelligence. There is circumstantial evidence to suggest that Iran seeks a nuclear weapons capability, but none to support the conclusion that it is currently seeking a nuclear weapon, ISIS said.

The House report also is said to have misreported that the European Union (EU) had offered Iran to continue using a small uranium enrichment capability as part of an agreement. ISIS said the offer presented by the EU in June 2006 made explicitly clear that Iran would be entitled to no enrichment capability until all outstanding questions about its nuclear programme have been resolved to the satisfaction of the IAEA Board. Neither is it true, as asserted by the report that “Iran is currently enriching uranium to weapons grade using a 164-machine centrifuge cascade at this facility in Natanz”. ISIS pointed out that the IAEA had inspected the cascade at Natanz and reported on more than one occasion that Iran had only produced small quantities of low enriched uranium. The report is also wrong when it claims that it is Iran’s intention to install 3,000 centrifuges at Natanz by early 2007 so that it can produce a bomb worth of HEU in one year. ISIS says, “While technically accurate, the manner in which the information is presented implies that Iran is close to achieving this objective. A more balanced presentation would note that Iran is not close to installing that number of centrifuges and enriching any quantity of uranium past the point of low enrichment would amount to a smoking gun and a major repudiation of Iran’s stated objectives. It would also lead to Iran’s speedy referral to the United Nations Security Council and resulting consequences.”

ISIS points out that “another example of bias and inaccuracy” in the report is the statement that spent fuel from the reactor that Russia is building for Iran in the city of Bushehr could produce enough weapons-grade plutonium for 30 weapons per year if the fuel rods were diverted and reprocessed. According to ISIS, “In fact, the plutonium that would be typically discharged from a light water reactor in spent fuel rods would be far less than ideal for weapons purposes and under no circumstances should be labelled ‘weapons grade’.” Any attempt to divert plutonium from the Russian reactor would be detected by the IAEA long before any plutonium was reprocessed. ISIS expresses concerns with the “tone” of the committee’s report. It implies that Iran’s entire civil nuclear power programme is a front for a covert effort to develop a nuclear weapon. ISIS points out that Iran is entitled to maintain a civil nuclear programme. Many countries, including the United States, have at various times maintained poorly-justified nuclear power programmes. The evidence supports Iran’s claims that it seeks a nuclear power programme, though it may also seek a nuclear weapons capability. “The report’s conflation of these separate objectives is a serious flaw. It indicates that the report did not receive adequate review and the authors are selecting information without weighing other available information about a particular issue,” ISIS states.

ISIS says that the report also neglects the fact that the IAEA has not concluded that Iran maintains a weapons programme, having consistently stated in its reports that it continues to investigate a number of areas in which Iran has not been forthcoming. These inquiries may lead to concrete evidence that Iran maintains a hidden weapons programme, but they have not as yet. ISIS concludes its review by noting, “The report’s chief conclusion that better, more targeted intelligence on Iran is needed is reasonable, if obvious. The case built for this conclusion, however, has the appearance of selectively highlighting the most damaging information and presenting it in such a way that a casual reader might conclude that the United States is in imminent danger of being attacked by a nuclear-armed Iran. Given the recent experience with skewed, selectively-picked intelligence on Iraq’s WMD, such an approach here is especially troubling. We believe strongly that the case of better Iran intelligence needs no embellishment, and that the facts speak clearly for themselves.”

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2006%5C11%5C11%5Cstory_11-11-2006_pg7_49