Many Angry Gerbils

US Intelligence on the futility of bombing

This is a passage from the NIE that I've yet to see in the media:

In our judgment, only an Iranian political decision to abandon a nuclear weapons objective would plausibly keep Iran from eventually producing nuclear weapons—and such a decision is inherently reversible.

To me, this looks like saying that bombing could only ever delay Iran were it to decide to develop nuclear weapons. This could be spun as justification for "regime change" but the US, it seems, simply does not have the clout left to undertake another full scale invasion while it remains immersed in Iraq and Afghanistan. The "surgical strikes" option was the one that seemed to have gained favour.

What is really needed is a long term political solution for the entire region like, say, turning it into a nuclear free zone -a proposition to which the US is only formally committed and Israel is implacably opposed.

NIE: No Iranian Bomb until 2013

The US has released its National Intelligence Estimate for 2007. Its findings, which purportedly represent the consensus  of the US intelligence community, include the conclusion that Iran “halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003”. Furthermore, even if it were to resume its efforts, it would require a minimum of two years to produce enough enriched uranium and would be unlikely to have a weapon before 2013.

Of course, there are some who will dismiss the NIE on the grounds that, five years ago, a flawed report stated that Iraq had chemical and biological weapons and was intent on restarting its nuclear programme. Indeed, today’s New York Times devotes a paragraph to this. Yet, anyone familiar with the record of cherry-picked intelligence that served as the pretext for the Iraq invasion will know why that study was “flawed”. This current study, with conclusions certainly inconvenient to the hawks, may well be evidence that the intelligence community are adding their efforts to “put the crazies back in the box”.

The assessment also seems to make a guarded statement on current US ‘diplomacy’ when it states 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,” (my emphasis)

That may be a reference to Iran’s long-standing attempt to get some sort of security guarantee from the US. It also suggests strongly what many on the left have suggested, that any attempt by Iran to develop nuclear weapons would be fuelled not by their alleged mania for destroying Israel but as a deterrent. Of course, many in the US Government are doubtless keen for Iran not to have a weapon precisely because it would act as a deterrent – to them.

This is sure to make life more difficult for the Cheney-led campaign to bomb Iran but they should not be underestimated: if required they will simply switch to an ancillary pretext, such as alleged Iran assistance for the Iraqi Resistance.