Wednesday, December 26, 2007

Europe Not Buying the US NIE Labeling Iran's Nuclear Program "Civilian"

This is rather an interesting turn of events. Europe has consistently embraced "soft power" to deal with Iran. But that was changing as the crescendo rose to do something about Iran’s ongoing nuclear weapon’s program that clearly presents an existential threat to Europe and the entire West. The push was on for at least one round of very biting sanctions to convince Iran to verifiably end their nuclear program as the last alternative to our use of overwhelming force. At least, the crescendo was rising until the internal coup by our intelligence agencies who drafted an NIE that labeled Iran’s ongoing nuclear enrichment as "civilian" and claimed that Iran had stopped its nuclear weapons program in 2003.

I will admit that, given the past history of our European allies, I fully expected that they would use our NIE as an excuse to once again refuse to implement any meaningful sanctions that would bite into the extensive trade they have with Iran. Perhaps I was wrong, but I still have very deep doubts that are only marginally placated by the statements below. But if not else, readers should take note of just how ridiculously inexplicable it is to label Iran’s enrichment program "civilian:"

On December 13, 2007, Neil Crompton, Hans-Peter Hinrichsen, and Nicholas Roche addressed a Policy Forum at The Washington Institute. Mr. Crompton is a political counselor at the British embassy who served until recently as Iran coordinator and head of the Iraq Policy Unit at the British Foreign Office. Dr. Hinrichsen, first secretary for political affairs at the German embassy, has long worked on non-proliferation issues. Mr. Roche is a counselor at the French embassy who has focused extensively on the Iranian nonproliferation file. The following is a rapporteur's summary of their remarks.

NEIL CROMPTON: Much of the reporting in the United States about the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) has been misleading. The European and international concern about Iran's nuclear ambitions has never been about weaponization, but rather the other elements essential to having nuclear weapons, namely uranium enrichment and missiles. Iran is actively pursuing enrichment, which is the most complicated and time-consuming part of the nuclear program. Also, it proudly displays missiles that are too inaccurate to be useful with conventional warheads.

International concern over Iran's nuclear program is also not based on highly sensitive intelligence material. The concern reflects the activities surrounding the declared program, the fact that Iran concealed that program for eighteen years, and that Iran has not resolved significant questions about its past activities. There has been some speculation that the NIE will weaken pressure for sanctions. Actually, the NIE could have the opposite effect. There has been much concern in Europe that sanctions will inevitability lead to military action. However, now that the prospects of a military strike have been reduced, there might be more willingness in some countries to pursue more sanctions. . .

HANS-PETER HINRICHSEN: The NIE has not had a significant impact on Germany's policy towards Iran. German policy has never been based on Iran's hidden nuclear program, but on its large enrichment program and the heavy water reactor it is building. That reactor has no civilian use, and it is very instructive to look around the world to see who has such reactors and what have they have done with them. Considering Iranian behavior is one of the crucial factors when judging whether Iran's nuclear program is exclusively for civilian purposes. Ahmadinezhad's aggressive rhetoric towards Israel gives the international community basis to be concerned about whether Iran's intentions are peaceful -- a test set out by the UN Security Council resolutions.

There is a misconception that there is not enough communication with the Iranians, and a related misconception that the United States is not involved in discussions with the Iranians. In fact, Javier Solana has met repeatedly with the Iranians. He is inaccurately described in the American media as speaking for the Europeans. In fact, he is talking with Iran on behalf of the EU 3 + 3, that is, the United States, Russia, and China, plus Britain, France and Germany. He speaks for all six countries. The UN sanctions are reflective of world unity on this issue and a clear message needs to be sent to Tehran through another round of sanctions. The EU will take measures to reinforce and complement the UN sanctions so that they can be more effective, and will take care to ensure that its actions do not substitute for or undermine the sanctions. Sanctions on Iran have so far proven effective. They have induced Tehran to answer some of the open questions with the International Atomic Energy Agency because the sanctions have made business life difficult in Iran. For example, German exports to Iran dropped 7 percent in 2006 and 16 percent in 2007.

NICHOLAS ROCHE The NIE has made more noise in Washington than in Europe. France's strategy has always been based on certain simple facts, not intelligence judgments.

First, the Iranians have possessed a clandestine nuclear program for eighteen years, procuring technology from the A.Q. Khan network, which is not known for its expertise in electricity production. Second, the Iranians have developed an enrichment program with no foreseeable civilian use. It is worth emphasizing that the Iranians have not mastered the technology for producing fuel rods. Russia, which will provide the fuel for the Bushehr power reactor, will not under any circumstances provide Iran with the information it would need for Iran's fuel to be used in that reactor. This begs the questions, why is Iran enriching uranium, and what will it do with the material?

The appropriate course now is to continue the sanctions and to finalize a third UN resolution. Although at some point it may become necessary to reconsider this strategy, France does not see any particular "red line" that would force a change in approach. That said, there is always room for maneuvering on the current policy, such as on the modalities of negotiation. Enrichment suspension is the key element to regain confidence in Iran's peaceful intentions. There cannot be negotiations while Iran continues to advance its nuclear program. Without suspension, the ongoing Iranian program would give Iran the capability to build nuclear weapons very quickly.

Read the entire article. I do not believe that the European's embrace of soft power will force a change in the theocracy's actions. Then again, at least they are honest about the threat Iran poses. That puts them a step ahead of our intelligence agencies and those on the far left who are embracing the NIE as if it was carved on stone by fire coming from a burning bush.


1 comment:

Frank said...

It's good to hear that the European's aren't jumping on the American bandwagon. Europe's been no friend of Israel in the past, but maybe now they recognize the overwhelming evidence of the Iranian threat. With America backing down, Israel may have to act on its own in the event of an aggresive move by Iran, but it's good to know that they just might offer some support, even if it's only in the form of their silence. Look at this report for a more in depth look at Israel's intelligence on Iran.


http://jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DRIT=1&DBID=1&LNGID=1&TMID=111&FID=376&PID=0&IID=1948&TTL=Decoding_the_U.S._National_Intelligence_Estimate_on_Iran’s_Nuclear_Weapons_Program