<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  

Intelligence Fiasco Footnote

October 8 2009 at 11:10 PM
No score for this post

  (Login MikePapa1)
Administrator

Intelligence Fiasco Footnote
The authors of the 2007 Iran NIE have some explaining to do.



When it comes to politicized intelligence in the Bush years, the critics may finally have a point. Perhaps the work of America's intelligence agencies was manipulated to suit the convenience of a small group of willful officials, intent on getting their way against the better judgment of their colleagues.

Except the intelligence was about Iran, not Iraq, and the manipulators weren't conniving neocons but rather the Administration's internal critics on the left.

That's one way to look at last month's revelation that Iran is building a secret second site to enrich uranium, among other emerging intelligence details. The Qom sitetoo small for civilian purposes but ideal for producing weapons-grade uraniumis supervised by Iran's Revolutionary Guards and was only declared to the International Atomic Energy Agency after Tehran got wind that the nuclear watchdogs knew about it.

But the more telling detail, as a recent White House "guidance paper" acknowledges, is that the U.S. has been "carefully observing and analyzing this facility for several years." That timeline is significant, because it was less than two years ago, in December 2007, that a National Intelligence Estimate on Iran's nuclear programs asserted with "high confidence" that Tehran had "halted its nuclear weapons program" in the fall of 2003.

The NIE was a political sensation, seized on by Democrats and Iraq war critics as another case in which the Bush Administration had supposedly politicized intelligence. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called the NIE a "declaration of victory," and it derailed any hopes for the Bush Administration to garner international support for tougher sanctions on Iran.

Yet some of us noted at the time that the NIE added, in a crucial footnote, that by "nuclear weapons program" it meant "weapon design and weaponization work and . . . uranium enrichment-related work," rather than Iran's "declared" nuclear facilities. The NIE's main authorsincluding former intelligence official Tom Fingar and other internal critics of Bush Administration policiesdownplayed this critical detail. Never mind that it was precisely Iran's "declared" nuclear facilities that constituted the core element of any nuclear-weapons program.

Fast forward to the present, and it turns out the NIE was misleading even on its own terms: Iran did have a covert facility, perhaps for enrichment, and the intelligence community knew or at least strongly suspected it. We are also learning that the NIE's judgment puts the U.S. intelligence community at odds with its counterparts in Britain, Germany and Israel, which have evidence to show that Iran resumed its weaponization work after 2003.

The Wall Street Journal Europe reported on July 30 that Germany's foreign intelligence agency, the BND, "has amassed evidence of a sophisticated Iranian nuclear weapons program that continued beyond 2003. This usually classified information comes courtesy of Germany's highest state-security court. In a 30-page legal opinion on March 26 and a May 27 press release in a case about possible illegal trading with Iran, a special national security panel of the Federal Supreme Court in Karlsruhe cites from a May 2008 BND report, saying the agency 'showed comprehensively' that 'development work on nuclear weapons can be observed in Iran even after 2003.'"

The 2007 NIE also contradicts the findings of the usually hypercautious IAEA, which concluded in a recent analysis that Iran "has sufficient information to be able to design and produce a workable implosion nuclear device." The word "implosion" is especially significant because it means Iran is likely seeking to design a warhead compact enough to be fitted atop one of its increasingly capable ballistic missiles.

It's of course possible that the U.S. has it right and everyone else has it wrong. But given the stakes if Iran does get the bomb, and given everything we know about Iran's history of deception, the obligation of intelligence agencies is not to issue politically skewed "estimates" that derail U.S. policy to stop the Iranian program. Getting it wrong on Iranthe most crucial intelligence question of the decadewould be no small footnote in the CIA's history of intelligence blunders.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704471504574447412969599476.html

Jack.gif [linked image]


Provost

Nothing in the world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan 'Press On' has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race.

Calvin Coolidge, President of the United States 1924-1929

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
AuthorReply

(Login oneman28)
Member

Re: Intelligence Fiasco Footnote

No score for this post
October 8 2009, 11:31 PM 

Intelligence Fiasco?

No. CIA serves US's political and economical interests very well. It always provides "evidence" on time when the US leaders need.

When US needs a war in Iraq, then it provided the "links" between Iraq and Bin Laden and the "Strong evidence" of Weapon of mass destruction in Iraq.

Now, US wants a war against Iran, then CIA is working on the "links" between Iran and other terrorist groups.


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Dolphins win
(Login coalde)
Moderators

Re: Intelligence Fiasco Footnote

No score for this post
October 10 2009, 2:55 AM 

"Now, US wants a war against Iran, then CIA is working on the "links" between Iran and other terrorist groups. "

Yeah, it is handy how they fabricated that 30 page German legal opinion and got the BND to present it.

You might want to adjust you tinfoil hat...and remove any fillings you have. happy.gif

But seriously, since Hezbollah is considered a terrorist group and Iran quite proudly and openly admits their support for those freedom fighters, I don't think the CIA or anyone else needs to fabricate any links.



"Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it."
George Bernard Shaw


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Current Topic - Intelligence Fiasco Footnote  Respond to this message   
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index