Iran To Go Nuclear In Six Months?

Its possible says IAEA chief Mohamed ElBarade in a recent interview...

From the Middle East Media Research Institute:

If It Wants To Produce Nuclear Weapons, Iran Would Have To "Leave The NPT, Expel The IAEA Inspectors, And... It Would Need At Least Six Months to One Year"

Mohamed ElBaradei: "If Iran wants to turn to the production of nuclear weapons, it must leave the NPT, expel the IAEA inspectors, and then it would need at least... Considering the number of centrifuges and the quantity of uranium Iran has..."

Interviewer: "How much time would it need?"

ElBaradei: "It would need at least six months to one year. Therefore, Iran will not be able to reach the point where we would wake up one morning to an Iran with a nuclear weapon."

Interviewer: "Excuse me, I would like to clarify this for our viewers. If Iran decides today to expel the IAEA from the country, it will need six months..."

ElBaradei: "Or one year, at least..."

Interviewer:"... to produce [nuclear] weapons?"

ElBaradei: "It would need this period to produce a weapon, and to obtain highly-enriched uranium in sufficient quantities for a single nuclear weapon." [...]

That goes a long way towards explaining Israel's recent war games However ElBaradei warns against a preemptive strike at this point noting that such action would cause Iran's nuclear program to go into high gear with popular support.

ElBaradei: "Much worse, because a military strike would mean, first and foremost, that even if Iran does not produce nuclear weapons today, it would implement a so-called 'crash course,' or an accelerated plan to produce a nuclear weapon, with the agreement and blessing of all the Iranians - even the Iranians living in the West."

Israel however is interested in seeking to prevent even the testing of a nuclear weapon. Which definitely adds a sense of urgency to the situation. As a result we and our Middle Eastern allies are preparing for Iran's response to such an attack...

Possible scenarios include:

A terrorist attack on the Saudi oil port of Ras Tanura, an export point for oil bound for Asia. Saudi and American officials have in the past disrupted Al Qaeda plots on the facility, such as an attack on the Abqaiq oil processing plant near Dammam, Saudi Arabia, that killed two guards.

A naval assault on the U.S. 5th Fleet in the Persian Gulf. Iran still has warships equipped with Russian-designed Shkval torpedoes that it could fire at American vessels. Another possible attack would be suicide boat sorties similar to the one that bombed the USS Cole.

The commencement of a new round in the war between Hezbollah and Israel, with Hezbollah firing its Shihab missiles into Haifa and possibly the northern suburbs of Tel Aviv.

Hezbollah or Iranian intelligence terrorist operations on soft targets, such as shopping malls and community centers, in third countries and possibly even America.
A renewed effort to stir an uprising in Iraq through Moqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army or the special groups controlled by Iran's Revolutionary Guard.

Its becoming apparent that our ten year time line for Iran having nuclear weapon capabilities is getting shorter. We need to seriously ramp up international diplomacy and sanctions against Iran if we are to succeed in preventing military actions against Iran.

With the presidential elections less than five months away this should be a major issue to consider when choosing a candidate because should such an attack be carried out on Iran the war in Iraq could suddenly take a sharp turn for the worse and gas prices will very likely skyrocket possibly sending the US economy into a deep recession. McCain's promise to continue our current policy towards Iran gives me cause for concern. After all when the last time you settled a disagreement with someone by not talking to them?

I swear if I could cherry pick from McCain's and Obama's positions I could build a perfect candidate.

Thanks to Center Face for linking to this post.

NIE: No Nukes in Iran

A declassified version of the 2006 national intelligence estimate of Iran was released today and according to it Iran has no nuclear weapon program and could not achieve that capability (on its own) before 2010.

From the NY Times:

WASHINGTON, Dec. 3 — A new assessment by American intelligence agencies concludes that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003 and that the program remains frozen, contradicting judgment two years ago that Tehran was working relentlessly toward building a nuclear bomb.
...
The assessment, a National Intelligence Estimate that represents the consensus view of all 16 American spy agencies, states that Tehran is likely keeping its options open with respect to building a weapon, but that intelligence agencies “do not know whether it currently intends to develop nuclear weapons.”
...
The new report comes out just over five years after a deeply flawed N.I.E. concluded that Iraq possessed chemical and biological weapons programs and was determined to restart its nuclear program — an estimate that led to congressional authorization for a military invasion of Iraq, although most of the report’s conclusions turned out to be wrong.

That certainly undermines any argument for military action against Iran in the short term. However it leaves the door open enough for this to be a cause for concern. I say that because if I were an Iranian nationalist hardliner given the fact that America invaded two of my neighbors for supporting terrorism I'd want the capability of deterring the US from invading my country for the same reason. After all if they punished my neighbors for actions they also accuse me of it would be logical to assume I'm next on the list.

Unfortunately I don't think W is going to deal with this on his watch. Like Iraq and Afghanistan he is going to pass that buck onto the President. Fotunately we have a little breathing room in which to allow sanctions and diplomacy to have an effect before we have to seriously start considering any meaningful military action against Iran. Given the fact that 2010 will roll around on the next POTUS' term you should take a really hard look at your preferred candidate's position on dealing with Iran. This weight will fall on their shoulders after all and you need to make sure that their strategy is one you can live with.

IAEA approves atom bomb shutdown mission to N.Korea

I forgot to blog this the other day...

More nuclear good news:

VIENNA (Reuters) - The U.N. nuclear watchdog's governing body agreed on Monday to send monitors to North Korea to verify a shutdown of its atomic bomb program, launching what is likely to be a long and arduous disarmament process.

It would be the first International Atomic Energy Agency mission in the reclusive Stalinist state since it expelled IAEA inspectors in 2002 after Washington accused it of a clandestine effort to refine nuclear fuel.

Clearance for IAEA monitors to fly into North Korea was expected once Pyongyang receives a first batch of fuel later this week, pledged as part of its February disarmament accord with the United States and four other powers.

South Korea said a ship carrying the fuel would leave on Thursday on a voyage likely to take two days.

In a special session, the IAEA's 35-nation Board of Governors approved by consensus the return of nuclear monitors to North Korea 10 days after senior IAEA and North Korean officials agreed ground rules for verifying the atomic halt.

Diplomats said nine monitors would install security cameras and place seals on infrastructure in Yongbyon, including its 5 megawatt reactor where North Korea has produced plutonium, leading to its first test nuclear explosion last October. more

Another case of a poor economy, sanctions, and diplomacy getting results. In both N. Korea and Iran's case I'm curious as to whether or not this just appeasement to get the sanctions lifted. If so we'll start seeing them stall and restricting access to facilities shortly after sanctions are lifted. But I'd love for this current positive trend to continue.