The release of a new International Atomic Energy Agency report on Iran was greeted as an ominous development by some major outlets. But are they playing down what could be the most important news in the report?
The IAEA’s latest made it to the New York Times (8/30/12) under the headline, “Inspectors Confirm New Work by Iran at Secure Nuclear Site.” Reporters David Sanger and William Broad write:
Iran has installed three-quarters of the nuclear centrifuges it needs to complete a site deep underground for the production of nuclear fuel, international inspectors reported Thursday, a finding that led the White House to warn that “the window that is open now to resolve this diplomatically will not remain open indefinitely.”
The findings indeed sound dramatic: Twice as many centrifuges as before, and what some think is a suspicious clean up job at the Parchin site, where some say Iran is conducting weapons research (an argument that is highly debatable).
The next day the Times was ramping up the talk of war, devoting a front-page piece to the debate inside Israel about how and when they might attack, presumably based on the same IAEA report. “Report on Iran Nuclear Work Puts Israel in a Box,” reads the headline, and it stresses the Israeli government’s interpretation in the lead:
For Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the International Atomic Energy Agency on Thursday offered findings validating his longstanding position that while harsh economic sanctions and diplomatic isolation may have hurt Iran, they have failed to slow Tehran’s nuclear program. If anything, the program is speeding up.
The piece goes on to claim that
the agency’s report has also put Israel in a corner, documenting that Iran is close to crossing what Israel has long said is its red line: the capability to produce nuclear weapons in a location invulnerable to Israeli attack.
The piece leans on anonymous sources in Israel and the United States, and frames the whole matter as a question of when Israel will decide to act:
The report comes at a critical moment in Israel’s long campaign to build Western support for stopping Iran from developing a nuclear weapon.
Of course, there is the obvious possibility that Iran is developing no such thing, but media too often assume the Iran is building a weapon–despite the fact that there is zero evidence to substantiate that claim.
But what should be the most important news in the IAEA report is being buried. Deep in the August 30 Times piece, readers learn this:
Some of the 20 percent fuel is in a form that is extremely difficult to use in a bomb, and most of the stockpile is composed of a fuel enriched at a lower level that would take considerably longer to process for weapons use.
Those findings are quite a bit at odds with the ominous talk of Iran crossing some sort of red line, and the need to strike sooner rather than later.
In the Washington Post, Joby Warrick had a piece that stressed the bad news first: “Iran dramatically increased its production of a more enriched form of uranium in recent months,” his August 30 article begins. But then he mentioned:
The report said Iran has 255 pounds of uranium enriched at 20 percent, up from 159 pounds in May.
But the IAEA also found that Iran had converted much of the new material to metal form for use in a nuclear research reactor. Once the conversion has taken place, the uranium can’t be further enriched to weapons-grade material, Obama administration officials said.
The dispute over Iran’s nuclear program has led to harsh sanctions that affect everyday life in the country. There is a very real chance that the United States and/or Israel will attack Iran. If the new report presents evidence that a significant part of Iran’s uranium stockpile cannot be used for weapons-making, it’s hard to fathom why news accounts wouldn’t lead their stories with this fact. Instead, we get stories that give Israeli officials one more chance to warn that war is inevitable to stop a nuclear weapons program–one that very well might not exist.
For decidedly less alarmist take on the latest IAEA report, read this Iran Affairs piece.
What’s made me mad over the NYT’s coverage is that they highlight how Iran is building centrifuges in an underground bunker that is hard for Israeli bombs to reach. That is supposed to be an ominous sign that shows that Iran isn’t dealing faithfully with the rest of the world over its intentions and its nuclear program.
However, there is another explanation that never gets mentioned. Perhaps, Iran is doing that because on an almost daily basis someone from the US or Iran in a high-level office position threatens to bomb them. If you are constantly being threatened, if you country has had aggressive, starvation inducing sanction imposed on it, if your technology has been destroyed by cyber-viruses from foreign countries, then naturally you seek to protect yourself.
If Iran didn’t feel threatened, perhaps they would build these centrifuges on ground level. But there is no guarantee that Israel and the US wouldn’t bomb them to stone-age no matter how much evidence Iran provides to prove they aren’t trying to make a nuclear bomb. Iraq had NO nuclear weapons, and said as much repeatedly and tried everything they could think of to dissuade Bush from invading and bombing their country, but to no use. We bombed anyway. Why should Iran think anything different will happen with them? Thus it only makes rational sense for them to protect their investment.
Yeah, completely agree with Brett on this. I’d add two things.
First, it’s possible Iran is building their program underground to protect their population from the fallout if it were to be bombed (not just to protect the investment). I don’t know the reasoning that the Iranians are giving, but I’m sure they don’t want another Chernobyl if Israel decides to target their nuclear facilities.
And, second, on top of cyber-attacks and bombing threats, it’s widely believed that Israel assassinated Iran’s nuclear scientists. In almost any other country in the world, a foreign nation assassinating government scientists would lead to a declaration of war. Instead, Iran is simply sheltering and protecting its nuclear facilities. Everyone should count themselves lucky that Iran is less hot-headed than the US and Israel. In any event, the assassinations are an *obvious* act of war and any country being subjected to them would be stupid *not* to protect it’s most valuable infrastructure, as Iran is doing.
Ahhh that’s right Peter, I completely forgot about the nuclear scientists. See NYT is causing me to be misinformed!!!
My question is why Broad & Co (sucessors to Judy Miller) stress the increase in the number of centrifuges at Fordow as counted by IAEA inspectors. Iran announced that a week or so ago, so why is it news only when IAEA says it? Also don’t readers need to be told thsat the Fordow site has alwars been open to inspectors?
It’s only “hard to fathom” why the corpress is providing cover for the warmongers if you believe they otherwise operate in a rational manner.
Last time I checked, Mr. Spock wasn’t on the editorial board of the Times or the Post.
Live long and prosper?
Not bloody likely, if these bastards continue to fulfill their function as flacks for the folks with the fortunes.
Not to worry – after all, the President is a Nobel Peace Prize laureate, and his perspective on using threats and sanctions against a whole society is tempered by his “Christian” upbringing…just as is his notorious secret kill-list… If you believe such things, then I have a bridge here in New York that I can sell you for a song and a dance, i.e., one Hora and a Hava Nagila…
Here’s my analysis of the earlier coverage a day before the IAEA reporting when the Foreign Minister of Iran called for the abolition of nuclear by 2025, in accordance with a proposal fromn the 120 member Non-aligned movement, and it went unreported in the Times, They have yet to mention that this is Iran’s position. htPublished on Tuesday, August 28, 2012 by Common Dreams
Iran Call for Nuclear Abolition by 2025 is Unreported by New York Times
by Alice Slater
The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), formed in 1961 during the Cold War, is a group of 120 states and 17 observer states not formally aligned with or against any major power bloc. The NAM held its opening 2012 session yesterday under the new chairmanship of Iran, which succeeded Egypt as the Chair.
Significantly, an Associated Press story in the Washington Post headlined, “Iran opens nonaligned summit with calls for nuclear arms ban”, reported that “Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi opened the gathering by noting commitment to a previous goal from the nonaligned group, known as NAM, to remove the world’s nuclear arsenals within 13 years. ‘We believe that the timetable for ultimate removal of nuclear weapons by 2025, which was proposed by NAM, will only be realized if we follow it up decisively,’ he told delegates.”
Yet the New York Times, which has been beating the drums for war with Iran, just as it played a disgraceful role in the deceptive reporting during the lead-up to the Iraq War, never mentioned Iran’s proposal for nuclear abolition. The Times carried the bland headline on its front page, “At Summit Meeting, Iran Has a Message for the World”, and then went on to state, “the message is clear. As Iran plays host to the biggest international conference …it wants to tell its side of the long standoff with the Western powers which are increasingly convinced that Tehran is pursuing nuclear weapons”, without ever reporting Iran’s offer to support the NAM proposal for the abolition of nuclear weapons by 2025.
Surely the most sensible way to deal with Iran’s nascent nuclear weapons capacity is to call all the nations to the table to negotiate a treaty to ban the bomb.
Surely the most sensible way to deal with Iran’s nascent nuclear weapons capacity is to call all the nations to the table to negotiate a treaty to ban the bomb. That would mean abolishing the 20,000 nuclear bombs on the planet—in the US, UK, Russia, China, France, India, Pakistan, North Korea and Israel—with 19,000 of them in the US and Russia. In order to get Russia and China to the table, the US will also have to give up its dreams of dominating the earth with missile “defenses” which, driven by corrupt military contractors and a corporate- owned Congress, are currently being planted and based in provocative rings around Russia and China.
The ball is in the U.S. court to make good faith efforts for nuclear abolition. That would be the only principled way to deal with fears of nuclear proliferation. The US must start with a genuine offer for negotiations to finally ban the bomb in all countries, including a freeze on further missile development. It should stop beating up on Iran and North Korea while it hypocritically continues to improve and expand the US arsenal, with tens of billions of dollars for new weapons laboratories and bomb delivery systems, and fails failing to speak out against the nuclear activities of other nations such as the enrichment of uranium in Japan and Brazil and the nuclear arsenal of Israel.
tp://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/08/28-3
The Non-Aligned Movement has long tradition since Soekarno, Tito, and Sadat. Just the meeting of 120 countries, and some fifty or so head of states and the presence of Ban Ki-Moon is the moment is an special occasion for the exchange of views by the governments attengint the Teheran meeting. Fortunately the US imperalistic attitude is slowly loosing ground due to its economic problems due partly to the huge expenses in keeping a large naval fleet, eight hundred military bases abroad, and starting a new war every decade,
There is not only a insanely repulsive and racist double standard going on here, it should be obvious that even HAVING a nuclear weapon is far from the same as USING it. I would ask, “Does anyone really believe that Iran is suicidal enough to USE a nuclear weapon except in self defense?” That, however, would imply that someone with a brain bigger than a raisin is thinking. The assumption that Iran does not have a realistic RIGHT to defend itself is downright obscene and vulgar in its racism.
Tom Saltsman says: “Does anyone really believe that Iran is suicidal enough to USE a nuclear weapon except in self defense?” —
Bingo! If they were to call up and declare that they would ‘fire this nuclear missle if you don’t comply’ would be then followed in about one minute by the phrase “Oh shit”, when they realise they would be about to become a glow in the dark parking lot for the rest of the folks around.
Wow, what surprise! I will go into shock and die from the shock of finding out that Iran is trying to hurry up it’s nuclear program so that it won’t be dependent on Oil, and the sanctions that have been applied forthwith. And Why them meaning, how dare they bury their fuel centers somewhere where we can’t just blow them up any ol time. Can we say “Bush/Clinton/Bush” name one that did bomb the others regardless of evidence.
And then we when we check, lo and behold those rotten bastages have lied to us by telling us they were making fuel for reactors, and then did it. Why how evil can you get, telling us your going to do one thing, and then you actually do it. What is wrong with their government lying by telling the truth….
Boy you just can’t trust people these days, next thing you know they will be building reactors and putting us out of the Oil business… And that my friends scares the wholly living bejebus out the Oil boys.
Would anyone care to bet on whose finger really is on the button? And do we really need to wonder why the press, who makes a tidy profit off all the advertising that oil does, is going to push to stop a country that would effectively cut their income?
Am I the only one who’s terrified at how much this seems like the run-up to Iraq?
Padre Im glad for your question.Yes I do believe it.They believe that the end of the world is coming.Brought on by the coming on the 12th imam.They will ignite the world in a sea of flame to do so.Their leaders have stated such clearly and unequivocally.You see they are nuts.Just as it was damn near impossible to see Hitlers rational….so it is with this lot of loonies.
Second they have plenty of oil.Nuclear power is not needed in any way shape or form to their energy needs.And their is no need under Gods green earth to enrich their rods to the degree that they are.
No this is their call. They can easily defuse this.
Insane Dominionist and other Christian outlier-freaks in the US – who comprise a substantial minority – also believe the world is coming to an end via conflict in the Middle East which will usher in the return of this or that religious figure and a new age.
Many carbon resource rich countries want more civilian nuclear power – starting with the US. The reasons for this as well as the drawbacks are well known, starting with the finiteness of carbon resources. Even in Iran. In fact, Iran’s nuclear power started under the Shah, okayed and supplied by the US…for just the reason that oil won’t last forever.
However crazy or paranoid the religious nutcases in Iran are we in the US can match them mullah for mullah, starting with lying and fact inured constapo posting right here on this board.
Oh Bullshit
Comparing the few outliers here who have no discernible voice, or power to effect this nations foreign policies….. to a country RUN by crazies,who threaten the world daily is idiocy.
As far as them needing nuclear power,they can have it.And no one has a problem with it.Russia has even offered to build the plants(with certain safeguards)Iran has refused.Safe guards and being under regulation of the INRC is the last thing they want.Because ……they want to enrich uranium to weapons grade potential.And that is not used in any realm of energy needs.It is for one thing and one thing only.Nuclear weapons.Like comparing a sling shot to a bazooka.Yet as they do this… they actually get morons with no scientific understanding to plead their case as to their needs for energy.
The House alone is littered with religious freaks who either believe the earth is under 10,000 years old, that humans and other higher primates did not share a common ancestor, that human activity is not affecting the climate system, or are willing to pretend to be anti rational in these matters for electoral purpose. Talibangelicals. They are surely intellectual outliers, but not numerical ones.
Since you’re one step below Birthers on the intellectual ladder I will ignore the rest of your idiotic reply for now.
‘The house alone is littered with religious freaks”Did you honestly just say that?If I remember my history(and i do)…. didn’t the pilgrims head this way for religious freedom and escape from prosecution for their religious views.?Well they got it…….and your everlasting derision as well.Obama is pretty faith driven.Um is he a religious freak as well?How about his VP.His cabinet?His supreme court nominations?Im just wondering how far you think this conspiracy runs.
Birthers?????Oh those folks who thought Obama was not telling the truth because he um….lost his birth certificate?No Im not one.I am a “schooler”.Since Obama has never released one school record, and has them all sealed- I don’t believe he got past the 9th grade.Like Jethro Bodine.Im also a fast a furious-er.Can’t figure why he wont release that information.Oh Im a land dealer too.He wont release any information on his shady as hell land deals.Im a reverend Wright-er.Think you get the point.
Hey disingenuous, ignorant freak, I clearly listed some of the attributes which define the religious freaks in the House, of which there are many. Obama does not fit that pattern, you anti rational, Birther cretin.
You should learn to read.
Nuclear WEAPONS program ?
Netanyahu wants to end Iran’s nuclear program.
For Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the International Atomic Energy Agency on Thursday offered findings validating his longstanding position that while harsh economic sanctions and diplomatic isolation may have hurt Iran, they have failed to slow Tehran’s nuclear program.
Israel is paranoid – they won’t be happy with Iran making nuclear FUEL for their nuclear power plants.
No need for any evidence that Iran is working on nuclear weapons – Israel is not happy with Iran maybe even thinking about considering it sometime in the next 2 decades…
corrective (probably is) unconscious.
You did a weak job at defining anything.You simply pointed a finger.Remember Foxworthy’s line “you might be a redneck if”?Let me play with that.You might be a religious freak- racist ,black separatist if you spent 2 years in Rev Wrights church or were close friends with the very confused and lost man of God.If you spent 25 years there……….Careful how you point that religious freak sign pal.Obama will not get off scott free himself.And I told you that I was never a birther.I always believed he sealed his past so that it would be hard to trace his parents and family,friends and radical acquaintances.Those people hardly reflected traditional American values.The certificate was one of many things he just wanted hidden.In his early writings his publisher acknowledged that Obama saw ,and allowed it to be written in the jacket, that he was born in Kenya.Not because he was….but because it helped his ambitions(getting into schools his grades would never allow)at that time.He is a slippery character.Lots of dead ends to his life story.Someday when the press needs him not,the truth will be told.
Ashurbanipal
Our president,along with Israel and a great deal of the world body, believe Iran is making a bomb.The intel is said to be overwhelming.And of course their stone silence when questioned as to why they would be enriching uranium to a grade used only for weapons is disheartening. So Iran has sworn on the Koran that they are not building a bomb.You have chosen to believe them……..or declare it is their right to have the bomb in any case.
A bit like putting a hungry tiger in your little daughters bedroom, and believing he is a vegetarian or has the intrinsic right to eat whatever he damn well pleases.
Again, the markers for anti rational, right wing, religious freaks are quite clear: a Dominionist, End Times outlook, belief in such anti scientific fantasies as the “earth is 6000 (or 8000) years old or that humans and higher primates did not share a common ancestor. These sorts of views correlate with climate change denial, Birtherism, belief that a vaccine’s perforation is the Mark of the Beast, and so on. We all know this cohort. They should be officially categorized as clinically insane and treated as learning impaired.
The fact remains that our House has as many such anti rational idiots as does the mullah laden leadership in Iran (or with Republican Congressmen willing to pretend in order to pander to their talibangelical electorate.) And it is obvious that Obama and other mainstream Christians do not fall into this group.
It’s really not so much a culture war on social issues as it is a war over the very existence of facts or of reason.
As a long-time FAIR subscriber, I have been increasingly dismayed by Hart’s rabid anti-Israel tilt, particularly offensive given FAIR’s role as a putative watchdog against media bias.
But lately Hart has been crossing the line from bias to outright disinformation. In the 8/31 piece above, Hart claims that “there is zero evidence” to substantiate the claim that Iran is developing nuclear weapon technology.
This is simply preposterous. Of course there is abundant evidence that Iran is developing a nuclear weapon capacity, including – as confirmed by the latest IAEA report – the doubling of the stockpile of fuel enriched to 20% purity, as well as the cleansing of the Parchin site.
In fact, Hart’s claim that there is “zero evidence” that Iran is developing nukes is BELIED BY HIS OWN REPORTING. In the 8/31/ piece above, Hart writes of “the obvious possibility that Iran is [not] developing [nuclear weapons].” Of course is it one thing to argue it is “possible” that Iran is not developing nuclear weapons, and quite a different thing to claim that there is “zero evidence” for this.
Even more damning to Hart’s contention is the link to the phrase “zero evidence” in the 8/31 piece. That link is to a previous article by Hart from January 2012, in which engineering professor Muhammed Sahimi is said to have written that a previous IAEA report’s “allegations about Iran’s high-explosives research…are not necessarily linked to nuclear work.” Not necessarily? Israel should rely on that?
In that January 2012 piece, Hart goes on to assert that the IAEA report “acknowledges that ‘there exist non-nuclear applications, albeit few, for detonators like EBWs.'” In other words, Hart here establishes that it is conceivable (albeit just barely conceivable) that Iran is not engaged in nuclear weapons development.
In short, the most that Hart should have claimed (or that any fair and rational person could have claimed) is that it is possible that Iran is not developing nukes. But that’s a far cry from claiming that “there is zero evidence” that Iran has a nuclear weapons program – that claim is simply ridiculous, AS CONFIRMED BY HART’S OWN REPORTING.
So why does Hart attempt to twist the facts in such a blatant manner? Most likely because he doesn’t want to answer the real question, namely:
–Given that there is abundant evidence that Iran is developing nuclear weapons, and given that Iran has repeatedly threatened to annihilate Israel, and given that Iran could annihilate Israel with only a few nuclear weapons, can Israel afford not to act?
Of course that still leaves open the further question of how to explain Hart’s zeal to bury Israel. Why would a self-proclaimed progressive media watchdog go out of his way to distort the facts in order to indict Israel and defend a theocratic-fascist state?
The precise psychological mechanism at work here is difficult to identify (and maybe too unpleasant to contemplate), but the bizarre manifestations are not. For example, in another piece on Iran (dated 8/20/12), Hart wrote, “Iran has consistently stated that it is not pursuing any [nuclear] weapons program.” And so? What credibility are we intended to ascribe to Iran’s leadership? Can you imagine Hart writing the following: “Columbia has consistently stated that it is not murdering union activists”? Or how about this one: “Nuclear power advocates have consistently stated that nuclear power is perfectly safe”?
Speaking of which, for many years I was involved in the anti-nuclear power movement, and the chief argument made against nuclear power was always its inextricable and apocalyptic link to nuclear weapons development.
But not in the case of Iran? Not where Jewish survival is at stake?
Corrective
You really are bizarre.Id rather you just be honest as Bill from Mars and say “anyone who believes in God is insane,and not fit for leadership”.It is so much quicker than trying to tell us all what everyone believes(as if you know).It is as stupid as saying everyone on the left in the house and Senate is a union thug who breaks knees in their spare time.It does not make it true just to have you speak it.
I don’t think you would do well as an advisor to the president.You are not thinking rationally.
William, you’re confusing nuclear “capability” with nuclear “weapons”. Any country with a basic degree of technological development is “capable” of making nukes. In fact according to the IAEA, 40 countries are already “capable” of making nukes:
http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2002041473_nukes21.html
And in fact as weapons inspector Robert Kelley pointed out, contrary to the IAEA report there are lots of civilian applications for Explosive Bridgewire Detonators — especially in oil producing nations which use them for building pipelines.
So your characterization of “abundant” evidence that Iran seeks nukes is not only baloney but also goes against Israeli and US intelligence assessments.
Nice try, Hass, but your attempt to rehabilitate Hart is an abject failure. The Seattle Times article you cite confirms that “Iran’s enrichment program has been the focus of increased world concern because of suspicions Iran may not be truthful when it says it is interested in the technology only to generate power.”
There certainly is abundant cause for suspicion in Iran’s case, including Iran’s “cleansing” of sites where explosive experiments are suspected to have taken place, and its enriching of far more uranium than is required for peaceful purposes.
Then there are the repeated calls for the destruction of Israel by Iran’s leadership. Somehow these are all said by Iran’s apologists to be taken out of context. How about the wife of assassinated Iranian scientist Mostafa Roshan, who said, “Mostafa’s ultimate goal was the annihilation of Israel.” No doubt this is another “big misunderstanding.”
However, Hass, there’s no reason for me to elaborate the case against Iran any further because Hart’s own words accomplished that. Again, the most that Hart’s own reporting over the past year has suggested is that it may be possible that Iran is not seeking to build nuclear weapons. Which is why Hart’s claim that there is “zero evidence” for this is either incredibly sloppy or an outright lie.
William is right. Iran has taken many concrete steps that suggest the existence of an active program to develop nuclear weapons technology. The bridgewire detonators are just one element cited in IAEA reports. Others include:
– Experimental production of polonium-210, which can be used as a neutron initiator for nuclear weapons
– Re-engineering the payload chamber of the Shahab 3 missile re-entry vehicle in a way that would accommodate a new warhead to be made using enriched uranium
– Testing a multiple initiation system whose dimensions were consistent with the dimensions for the re-engineered Shahab 3 payload chamber
– Developing a “prototype firing system that would enable the payload to explode both in the air above a target, or upon impact of the re-entry vehicle with the ground”; the IAEA concluded that “any payload option other than nuclear… could be ruled out”
– Manufacturing simulated nuclear explosive components
– Constructing a large explosives containment vessel in the Parchin military complex for hydrodynamic experiments, which the IAEA says are “strong indicators of possible weapon development”; in its latest report, the Agency complains it is still being denied access to the Parchin complex
And let’s not forget that many of Iran’s nuclear laboratories are under the authority of the Ministry of Defense. It shouldn’t take a nuclear rocket scientist to figure out what that means.
Peter Hart is grossly misleading FAIR readers by claiming that there is “no evidence” for an Iranian nuclear weapons program. Whatever happened to fairness and accuracy in reporting?
Iran is going after the bomb.The fact that they have sworn on a stack of Korans that they are not,will only prove the level of their deceit when and if -they detonate one.
Im sorry David but you’re just making up stuff. Iran’s explanation for Polonium experiments was resolved, to Iran’s favor, by the IAEA. Iran has not manufactured any sort of miniature nuclear explosive, and explosives containment chambers are normal industrial equipment that can be bought on Google. In fact former weapons inspector Robert Kellwy addressed these allegations: http://www.sipri.org/media/expert-comments/the-iaea-and-parchin-do-the-claims-add-up
Specifically re: Polonium, the IAEA reported:
“Based on an examination of all information provided by Iran, the Agency concluded that the explanations concerning the content and magnitude of the polonium-210 experiments were consistent with the Agency’s findings and with other information available to it. The Agency considers this question no longer outstanding at this stage.”
In fact both the Israeli and the American intelligence agencies who have said that there is no sign of a nuclear weapons program in Iran, so if you think there’s proof of a nuclear weapons program in Iran I suggest you inform them of it