Clinton Bastin, a nuclear scientist, chemical engineer, and former Department of Energy official, was interviewed on the recent IAEA report on Iran's nuclear program.
As the various threats posed by Iran's nuclear efforts become increasingly clear to the international community, most published assessments of the regime's strategy continue to overlook the role of religion. Because Iran is a theocracy, any attempt to fashion an effective policy toward its nuclear program must account for the religious values, beliefs, and doctrines that shape the country's decisionmaking.
By Seymour M. Hersh. Is Iran actively trying to develop nuclear weapons? Members of the Obama Administration often talk as if this were a foregone conclusion, as did their predecessors under George W. Bush. There is a large body of evidence, however, including some of America’s most highly classified intelligence assessments, suggesting that the United States could be in danger of repeating a mistake similar to the one made with Saddam Hussein’s Iraq eight years ago––allowing an...
As Stuxnet cyber attack pinned on US and Israel, US embassy cable reveals advice to use undercover operations. The United States was advised to adopt a policy of "covert sabotage" of Iran's clandestine nuclear facilities, including computer hacking and "unexplained explosions", by an influential German thinktank, a leaked US embassy cable reveals.
Reviving a confidence-building proposal on Iran’s nuclear program dormant since late last year, the presidents of Brazil, Iran, and Turkey agreed May 17 on a plan by which Iran would export half of its low-enriched uranium (LEU) stockpile to Turkey in return for fuel for a medical research reactor. The terms of the arrangement are nearly identical to a proposal on which France, Russia, the United States, and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the so-called Vienna Group, reached an agreement in principle with Iran last October. ...
JOINT DECLARATION BY IRAN, TURKEY AND BRAZIL (17 May 2010) Having met in Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran, the undersigned have agreed on the following Declaration: 1. We reaffirm our commitment to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and in accordance with the related articles of the NPT, recall the right of all State Parties, including the Islamic Republic of Iran, to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy (as well as nuclear fuel cycle including enrichment activities) for peaceful purposes without discrimination. ...
For the past few years, a political consensus has formed in the United States that Iran is covertly pursuing a nuclear-weapons program under the cloak of a civilian nuclear-power program. That conclusion has been based largely on a set of supposedly purloined top-secret Iranian military documents describing just such a covert program during 2002-03. The documents have often been referred to as the "laptop documents," but they include documents in both electronic and paper form and were called the "alleged studies" documents by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)."
After President Obama's press conference at the G20 summit, some experts were quick to declare that the Qom facility represented a gross violation of Iran's Safeguards Agreement, which it had signed in 1974. The chorus of hawkish U.S. senators and congressmen, who have been trying to get the Obama administration to impose crippling sanctions on Iran, or even possibly to launch a military attack, also followed. The crucial question though is whether Iran violated its obligations under the Safeguards Agreement by failing to notify the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) of its intention to construct the Qom facility in a timely manner, and whether it violated the agreement by proceeding with its plan, again without first declaring it to the IAEA? If it has, it would indeed represent a gross violation of Iran's international obligations.
It is always difficult to evaluate a nuclear weapons program without access to concrete intelligence information. This study is based on open sources and we do not claim to be one hundred percent accurate and complete. The aim of the study is to try and get some insight into the level the Iranian Nuclear Program has progressed, and if the intent of the leadership is to produce nuclear weapons then what would the possible timeline be. Based on these estimates the study then addresses the possibility of an Israeli strike against the Iranian nuclear facilities, with the objective of either destroying the program or delaying it for some years. The success of the Strike Mission will be measured by how much of the Enrichment program it has destroyed, or the number of years it has delayed Iranian acquisition of enough Uranium, or Plutonium produced from the Arak reactor, to build a nuclear bomb.
2009-01-13U.S.-Iran Nuclear Negotiations in 1970s Featured Shah's Nationalism and U.S. Weapons Worries. Newly Declassified Documents Revea
Newly Declassified Documents Reveal Remarkable Continuity with Today's U.S.-Iran Nuclear Controversy. During the 1970s the Shah of Iran argued, like current Iranian leaders today, for a nuclear energy capability on the basis of national "rights," while the Ford and Carter administrations worried about nuclear weapons possibilities, according to newly declassified documents published today by the National Security Archive for the first time. Uranium enrichment capability is now the major point of controversy between Tehran and the world community, while during the 1970s Washington's greatest concern was that Iran sought a capability to produce plutonium, but in both instances the implication was that a nuclear weapons option might not be far away. ...