Debate Over Iran's Alleged Nuclear Weapons Program Remains Contentious

[poe]

Middle East


     Feb 3, 2005




US keeps the powder dry
By David Isenberg

The debate over Iran's alleged nuclear-weapons program remains contentious. On Saturday Mohamed ElBaradei, director of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), said he lacked useful intelligence on Iran's nuclear program and urged states that accuse Tehran of seeking an atomic bomb to provide evidence.

"There's a lot of talk about somebody believes that Iran has a nuclear-weapons program. We cannot work on the basis of belief, we have to work on the basis of fact," ElBaradei said at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. "If people have information on the basis of which they are coming to the conclusion that this is a weapons program, I'd like very much for them to share with us."
For example, the group GlobalSecurity, in Alexandria, Virginia, has the best open-source analysis of the military feasibility of attacking Iranian nuclear facilities. It notes that there are perhaps two dozen suspected nuclear facilities in Iran. The 1,000-megawatt Bushehr nuclear plant would likely be the target of such strikes. Also, the suspected nuclear facilities at Natanz and Arak would likely be targets of an air attack. 

US air strikes on Iran would vastly exceed the scope of the 1981 Israeli attack on the Osirak nuclear center in Iraq, and would more resemble the opening days of the 2003 air campaign against Iraq. Using the full force of operational B-2 stealth bombers, staging from Diego Garcia or flying direct from the US, possibly supplemented by F-117 stealth fighters staging from al-Udeid in Qatar or some other location in theater, the two dozen suspect nuclear sites would be targeted.

Satellite imagery from Diego Garcia, taken after the tsunami that devastated parts of Asia on December 26, posted on GlobalSecurity's website, showed multiple aircraft, including nine B-1 bombers. Also, B-52s and B-2s from the continental US could be used. The US also has aircraft at Iraq, Kuwait, Qatar, Oman and the United Arab Emirates.

GlobalSecurity director John Pike said, "I don't think that such a large campaign would be required. Most people who have thought about it seem to conclude that hundreds of bombs on one day, rather than thousands of bombs over a week, would do the trick."

Pike predicted that the US would seek to carry out a strike by next year, or even by the end of this year. He noted that a strike would not prevent Iran from starting over, but it might set the program back 15-20 years. He said, "You would especially do damage if you target the housing which is co-located by the facilities." Such housing is where foreign scientists and technicians reside.

However, overt military action is not the only option available to the US. Other measures include harassment or murder of key Iranian scientists or technicians; introduction of fatal design flaws into the critical reactor, centrifuge or weapons components during their production, to ensure catastrophic failure during use; disruption or interdiction of key technology or material transfers through sabotage or covert military actions on land, in the air or at sea; and sabotage of critical facilities by US intelligence assets, including third-country nationals or Iranian agents with access to key facilities.

/www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/GB03Ak01.html