"Iran halted nuclear weapons programme in 2003"

[[R-MOD]Saobh]

Iran halted its nuclear weapons programme in 2003, intelligence agencies said today, in an unexpected finding that boosts hopes of a diplomatic solution to the problem.

A new national intelligence estimate on Iran concluded, in contrast to two years ago, that Tehran had halted its nuclear weapons programme in 2003, prompting a conciliatory message from the White House.

"The estimate offers grounds for hope that the problem can be solved diplomatically, without the use of force, as the administration has been trying to do," said Stephen Hadley, the national security adviser.

Hadley said the latest finding suggested that George Bush had the right strategy - intensified international pressure with a willingness to negotiate a solution that serves the interests of Tehran while ensuring that the world will never have to face a nuclear-armed Iran.

The Bush administration is leading efforts to tighten UN sanctions against Iran after its refusal to halt uranium enrichment despite two previous rounds of sanctions.

Javier Solana, the EU foreign policy chief, last week expressed disappointment at the lack of progress in talks held in London with Iran's top nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili.

"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," stated the unclassified summary of the secret report.

However, the report said Iran's decision to continue with its uranium enrichment programme means it may still be able to develop a weapon between 2010 and 2015.

Iran's decision to halt active weapons development was the key finding of the latest intelligence estimate on the country's nuclear programme. National intelligence estimates represent the most authoritative written judgments of all 16 US spy agencies.

Mike McConnell, the director of national intelligence, decided last month that the key judgments of NIEs should not, as a rule, be declassified and released.

But intelligence officials said an exception was made in this case because the last assessment of Iran's nuclear programme in 2005 has been influential in public debate about US policy toward Iran and needed to be updated to reflect the latest findings.

To develop a nuclear weapon Iran needs a warhead design, a certain amount of fissile material, and a delivery vehicle such as a missile. The intelligence agencies now believe Iran halted design work four years ago and as of mid-2007 had not restarted it.

But Iran's uranium enrichment programme for its civilian nuclear reactors leaves open the possibility that fissile material could be diverted to covert nuclear sites to produce enough highly enriched uranium to make a bomb.

Iran would not be capable of technically producing and reprocessing enough plutonium for a weapon before about 2015, the report states, pushing back any need to use force well past the end of the Bush administration.

But ultimately Iran has the technical and industrial capacity to build a bomb "if it decides to do so", the intelligence agencies found.

Hadley said of current US strategy: "The bottom line is this: for that strategy to succeed, the international community has to turn up the pressure on Iran with diplomatic isolation, United Nations sanctions, and with other financial pressure and Iran has to decide it wants to negotiate a solution."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,,2221318,00.html

[USMC[KILLER]]

nice find.

[Hotrod525]

you know why American didnot attack Iran ? cause they got a powerfull army, it will not be easy at all to invade Iran. They will need Canadian and European Army to make it easily.

[WNxLT7]

you know why American didnot attack Iran ? cause they got a powerfull army, it will not be easy at all to invade Iran. They will need Canadian and European Army to make it easily.

you have the answer to everything dont you?

Iran doesn't have a powerful army but a dedicated one. Supposedly a 7 million(questionable) militia along with their current military. Iran battled Iraq, a highly untrained military, for 8 years trying to fend them off. Often resulting in the use of suicide tactics by the Iranians, hence one of the most popular figures in Iran is a young boy who killed himself -.-

The US already has the support of the French and that is more than enough to take down Iran. The problem is what to do after the "war"? It will turn into another Iraq but worse. Iran is full of dedicated citizens who would die for their country in an instant. How can any military try and police a country 4x the size of Iraq with 3x the people?

[Ringo876]

Originally Posted by Hotrod525

you know why American didnot attack Iran ? cause they got a powerfull army, it will not be easy at all to invade Iran. They will need Canadian and European Army to make it easily.

Learn correct english grammer and punctuation.

[[R-MOD]Saobh]

Here's the press briefing by National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley on this subject:

The question and answer part (which I haven't quoted, its already long enough ) is also of interest. As he states that the president and vice-president where briefed on this only last Wednesday.

MR. HADLEY: Good afternoon, I'm Steve Hadley, the President's National Security Advisor. I want to talk a little bit about the recent National Intelligence Estimate that was released to the executive branch and to the Congress today. There was an earlier briefing this afternoon by the Deputy Director of National Intelligence, Don Kerr, and also by the Director of Central Intelligence, Mike Hayden. And I wanted to give a little bit more context and set the findings of the NIE in a broader historical perspective.

The introduction is going to go on a little bit; there's a lot to tell. This is a complicated estimate. The unclassified key judgments that were released today are a little difficult to sort through and I want to try and lay this out for everybody, so I'll have an opening statement, probably 15-20 minutes, but there will be lots of time to answer questions at the end.

The Director of National Intelligence has today released the unclassified key judgments from the intelligence community's latest estimate of Iran's nuclear weapons efforts and its uranium enrichment program. The classified version of this National Intelligence Estimate was briefed to the President last Wednesday, November 28, and has been delivered to relevant congressional committees this morning.

On balance, the estimate is good news. On one hand, it confirms that we were right to be worried about Iran seeking to develop nuclear weapons. On the other hand, it tells us that we have made some progress in trying to ensure that that does not happen. But it also tells us that the risk of Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon remains a very serious problem.

The estimate offers grounds for hope that the problem can be solved diplomatically, without the use of force, as the administration has been trying to do. And it suggests we have the right strategy: intensified international pressure, along with a willingness to negotiate a solution that serves Iranian interests while ensuring the world that it will never have to face a nuclear-armed Iran. But the bottom line is that for that strategy to succeed, the international community has to turn up the pressure on Iran -- with diplomatic isolation, United Nations sanctions, and with other financial pressure. And Iran has to decide that it wants to negotiate a solution.

This is a complicated subject and the new Intelligence Estimate is a complicated document. Let me summarize the key judgments and then try and walk you through it and answer your questions. First, let me summarize the key judgments. The IC has high confidence -- high confidence -- that Iran had a covert nuclear weapons program that it has never acknowledged and continues to deny. The intelligence community has high confidence that Iran halted its covert nuclear weapons program in the fall of 2003. And they have moderate confidence that it had not restarted that program as of mid-2007.

They judge with high confidence that the halt in other nuclear-related decisions was directed primarily in response to increasing international scrutiny and pressure, resulting from exposure of Iran's previously undeclared nuclear work involving uranium enrichment. The intelligence community says they do not know whether Iran currently intends to develop nuclear weapons, but they assess with moderate to high confidence that Tehran at a minimum is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons. And the intelligence community assesses with moderate confidence that convincing the Iranian leadership to forgo the eventual development of nuclear weapons will be difficult.

Let me see if I can unpack this a bit and put it in context. First, remember how we got here. A little background: If a state is looking to become a nuclear-weaponed state, it needs three things. It needs weapons-grade nuclear material. It needs the technical know-how to fashion this nuclear material into a weapon. And it needs a means to deliver the weapon on a target, like a ballistic missile. The hardest step in today's world is acquiring weapons-grade nuclear material. Unless you steal it, there are two ways to get it: If you have a nuclear power reactor you can reprocess spent fuel coming out of that reactor, or you can create nuclear material by a process called uranium enrichment. This process produces fuel for nuclear power reactors, but it can also create weapons-grade nuclear material for a nuclear bomb.

In 1968, Iran signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and pledged never to seek to acquire nuclear weapons. That's what Iran undertook to do. It signed what is called a safeguards agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency, or the IAEA, under which it was to declare all its nuclear-related activities and open itself up to inspections by the IAEA.

In August 2002, an Iranian opposition group revealed the existence of a secret uranium enrichment plant in Iran at a place called Natans. The plant was secret. It had not been declared, as required, to the IAEA. Iran at that time had no operational nuclear power reactors, so why did it need a uranium enrichment plant? Iran was actively developing ballistic missiles. These facts raised a real concern that this was all part of an effort to develop nuclear weapons. So the IAEA, the International Atomic Energy Agency, backed by the international community, began a vigorous effort to convince Iran to suspend its enrichment activity, and thus reassure the world that it did not intend to develop nuclear weapons.

And the pressure seemed to work. In October 2003, Iran agreed to cooperate with the IAEA and suspend its uranium enrichment activities. Considerable further diplomacy involving both the IAEA and what's called the EU-3 -- representatives of Britain, France and Germany -- resulted in what's called the Paris Agreement of November 2004. In this agreement, Iran reaffirmed and extended the suspension of its enrichment activities. And the EU-3 agreed to negotiate long-term technology, economic and security arrangements for Iran.

Despite this progress, the intelligence community in May of 2005 assessed with high confidence that Iran currently was determined to develop nuclear weapons. The intelligence community maintained this assessment throughout this year, 2007. Indeed, Director of National Intelligence Negroponte told an open session of the House intelligence community on January 1, 2007, that, "our assessment is that Tehran is determined to develop nuclear weapons." DNI McConnell later told a Senate panel in open session on February 27 that, "We assess that Tehran seeks to develop nuclear weapons."

The irony is that one month after the intelligence community released this assessment, in June of 2005, Ahmadinejad wins a runoff election and becomes Iran's President. On August 1, 2005, just two months after taking power, Ahmadinejad informs the IAEA that he has decided to resume uranium enrichment, and does so beginning in January 2006.

For the next two years, through a whole series of IAEA Board of Governors resolutions urging Iranian compliance, through two U.N. Security Council sanctions resolutions, sweetened by negotiating offers by the EU-3 and the promise that the United States would join those negotiations, the international community tried unsuccessfully to get Iran to suspend its uranium enrichment activities, and those efforts to get the suspension continue today.

Also during this period, the President directs the intelligence community to enhance its capabilities to gather intelligence on Iran's nuclear programs.

Earlier this year, Congress called for a new National Intelligence Estimate on Iran. It is in part delayed in order to process -- the finalization of that NIE is delayed in part in order to process new intelligence, some of which has been received in the last few months.

The National Intelligence Estimate released today reveals that there was a covert nuclear weapons program. It also reveals that, unknown to us, that program was halted in the fall of 2003. So the covert nuclear weapons program was unknown to us, suspected, unknown; now confirmed. But what was also unknown was that the program was halted in the fall of 2003. That secret -- that covert nuclear weapons program was halted at the same time the Iranians publicly announced that they were suspending their public and declared uranium enrichment program.

So where does that leave us? One, we have good reason to continue to be concerned about Iran developing a nuclear weapon, even after this most recent National Intelligence Estimate. In the words of the NIE, "Iranian entities are continuing to develop a range of technical capabilities that could be applied to producing nuclear weapons if a decision is made to do so." For example, Iran's civilian uranium enrichment program is continuing. And as you know, once a country masters the technology to enrich uranium for use even in a civilian nuclear power program, it could readily use the same technology to produce weapons-grade uranium. As we have said, weapons-grade uranium is the long pole in the tent for a nuclear weapon.

And Iran continues to develop, test and deploy ballistic missiles -- a very attractive delivery system for a nuclear weapon. For example, the Iranian Defense Minister publicly acknowledged a medium-range ballistic missile called the Ashura, which could reach much of Eastern Europe.

Finally, we are very unsure of Iran's attentions [sic], even with respect to the covert nuclear weapons program that Iran has halted. Again, let me quote the National Intelligence Estimate: "We do not have sufficient intelligence to judge confidentially whether Tehran is willing to maintain the halt of its nuclear weapons program indefinitely while it weighs its options, or whether it will or already has set specific deadlines or criteria that will prompt it to restart the program."

Again from the NIE: "We assess with moderate confidence that convincing the Iranian leadership to forgo the eventual deployment of nuclear weapons will be difficult given the linkage many within the leadership probably see between nuclear weapons development and Iran's key national security and foreign policy objectives."

But the NIE gives us reason to believe that our current strategy stands the best chance of convincing Iran to give up its nuclear ambitions. Again, let me quote for a final time from the NIE: "Our assessment that Iran halted the program in 2003, primarily in response to international pressure, indicates Tehran's decisions are guided by a cost-benefit approach, rather than a rush to a weapon irrespective of political, economic and military costs. This in turn suggests that some combination of threats of intensified international scrutiny and pressures, along with opportunities for Iran to achieve its security, prestige and goals for regional influence in other ways might, if perceived by Iran's leaders as credible, prompt Tehran to extend the current halt to its nuclear weapons program. It is difficult to specify just what such a combination might be."

We have been pursuing this very strategy for over two years, since Iran resumed its nuclear enrichment. If we are to avoid the grim choice between accepting an Iran on the path to nuclear weapons or considering the use of force, we need to intensify our pressure on Iran, while making clear that if they do suspend enrichment, there is an opportunity for better relations with the international community.

And with that, I'll stop and I'd be pleased to answer your questions.
...

source: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...071203-10.html

[ryan d ale]

Originally Posted by Ringo876

Learn correct english grammer and punctuation.

No mate. That is English with a capital E and grammar with a lower case A, not a lower case E. Did it ever occur to you that English isn't the first language of the chap?

Notice in his signature - "Quebec". It's not only English they speak over there.

[[R-MOD]Saobh]

Originally Posted by ryan d ale

No mate. That is English with a capital E and grammar with a lower case A, not a lower case E. Did it ever occur to you that English isn't the first language of the chap?

Notice in his signature - "Quebec". It's not only English they speak over there.

Stay on topic people. thanks

Its interesting to see how the "Teddy teacher" is getting all the light in the news media, while this pretty important information is getting kicked pretty quickly to the 2 or 3 page.
I especially love Foxnews title on it: "Bush Intel Chief: 'Iran Good at Keeping Secrets'"

[TheOldDog]

Great... just great... what a total and utter cock up. For years the US administration has been milking the Iran war cow for all its worth, building the public hate and fear up to a frenzy. Hell it moved people in here to create whole threads on it both scary and satirical. Wasn't it just a couple of days ago Bush raised the specter of WWIII because of Iran, yet he was briefed about this radically different intel MONTHS ago? Sheesh... unfreakin believable.

[Harrod200]

"All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country." -H. Goering

Bush is simply following the old protocol to get what he wants; more war. This little story would very quickly expose him to the majority who would lose faith in his spin.