E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (second left) visits the Natanz nuclear enrichment facility, 217 miles south of Tehran, in April 2008.
VIENNA -- Iran is still relying on decades-old technology to expand its nuclear program, a fact that suggests it might be having difficulties developing more modern machines that could speed up production of potential bomb material, experts say.
A report by the U.N. nuclear watchdog last week said Iran was significantly stepping up its uranium enrichment, a finding that sent oil prices higher on fears tensions between Tehran and the West could escalate into military conflict.
Israel has threatened to launch pre-emptive strikes to prevent Iran getting the bomb and Defense Minister Ehud Barak has said Tehran's continued technological progress mean it could soon pass into a "zone of immunity," suggesting time was running out for an effective military intervention.
But, contrary to some Western media reports in the run-up to Friday's International Atomic Energy Agency report, Iran does not yet seem ready to deploy advanced enrichment equipment for large-scale production, despite years of development work, experts said.
Instead, the IAEA document showed Iran was preparing to install thousands more centrifuges based on an erratic and outdated design, both in its main enrichment plant at Natanz and in a smaller facility at Fordow buried deep underground.
"It appears that they are still struggling with the advanced centrifuges," said Olli Heinonen, a former chief nuclear inspector for the Vienna-based U.N. agency.
"We do not know whether the reasons for delays are lack of raw materials or design problems."
Nuclear expert Mark Fitzpatrick said Iran had been working on "second-generation models for over ten years now and still can't put them into large-scale operation."
Iran says it is refining uranium to fuel a planned network of nuclear power plants so that it can export more of its oil and gas. The United States and its allies accuse it of a covert bid to develop nuclear bombs.
Tehran often trumpets technical advances in its nuclear program, including the development of new centrifuges — machines that spin at supersonic speed to increase the concentration of the fissile material in uranium.
Remains recovered of GI slain by Iran-backed group
The million dollar question
In mid-February, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Iran had a "fourth generation" centrifuge that could refine uranium three times faster than previously.
"Iran unveiled a third-generation model two years ago and then never said more about it," said Fitzpatrick, of the International Institute for Strategic Studies think tank.
"Now it says it has a fourth-generation model, which is probably a variation of the problematic second-generation machines."
The IAEA, which regularly inspects Iran's declared nuclear sites, has little access to facilities where centrifuges are assembled and the agency's knowledge of possible centrifuge progress is mainly limited to what it can observe at Natanz.
Asked whether Iran may keep more modern centrifuges at a location which U.N. inspectors are not aware of, an official familiar with the issue said: "That is, of course, the million dollar question."
If Iran eventually succeeded in introducing the newer models for production, it could significantly shorten the time needed to stockpile enriched uranium, which can generate electricity or, if processed much further, nuclear explosions.
But it is unclear whether Tehran, subject to increasingly strict international sanctions, has the means and components to make the more sophisticated machines in bigger numbers.
Peter Crail of the Arms Control Association, a Washington-based research and advocacy group, said Iran had been testing its second-generation centrifuge models for several years but its ability to mass produce them remained uncertain.
Syrian tells NBC: 'You hear the sounds of torture all the time'
The U.N. Security Council has long called on Iran to suspend uranium enrichment and Tehran's failure to comply has earned it four rounds of sanctions, as well much tougher U.S. and European Union measures that take direct aim at its biggest export, oil.
Western experts say Iran's stockpile of low-enriched uranium could be enough for about four atomic bombs if refined much more, should the Iranian leadership decide to do so.
Cracking the code
Iran has for years been trying to develop centrifuges with several times the capacity of the 1970s-vintage, IR-1 version it now uses for the most sensitive part of its atomic activities.
Marking a potential step forward, Iran last year started installing larger numbers of more modern IR-4 and IR-2m models for testing at a research and development site at the enrichment facility near the central town of Natanz.
But last week's IAEA report suggested Iran was encountering problems testing them in interlinked networks known as cascades, said David Albright of the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) think tank.
"The testing of advanced-centrifuge production-scale cascades ... is going far more slowly than expected," he said in an analysis. Iran's "advanced centrifuge program appears troubled," the ISIS report added.
The IAEA said Iran had informed it in early February of plans to install three new types of centrifuge — IR-5, IR-6 and IR-6s - as single machines at the Natanz R&D site.
When so many models are tested simultaneously, "it indicates that Iran has not yet reached a point where it can decide which would be the next generation centrifuge to be deployed," Heinonen, now at Harvard University's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, said.
Fitzpatrick said: "Sooner or later Iran will probably crack the code on advanced centrifuges and introduce them in larger numbers, but so far that hasn't been possible."
More from msnbc.com and NBC News:
Syria OKs new constitution as shelling continues
Report: Plot to kill Putin foiled
Photoblog: Greece kicks off Lent with 'flour war'
Culture of illegal payments at Murdoch paper
Suspected Islamists attack police, church in Nigeria
Argentina turns away British cruise ships in ongoing Falkland dispute
Leave a Comment:
I guess that it does not help that Iranian scientist are being picked off by explosions.
Expect yet another war right after the Nov. elections, however; it may come sooner if Israel tires of waiting.
So long as nuclear-armed Israel threatens to attack Iran, so long as American troops occupy Iraq to Iran's west and Afghanistan to Iraq's east, and so long as America's devastatingly deadly warships maintain vigil in the Persian Gulf, why would Iran abandon development of what it considers it's most effective defense?
Ahmadinejad has been threatening Israel for some time now. He has vowed to "erase Israel from the pages of history".
Iran and Syria have been sponsoring Hezbollah and other groups that regularly attack Israel.
We have warships in the gulf because Iran has threatened shipping of 20% of the worlds oil supply in international waters. That is illegal according to international law, and would be an act of war should he fire on any ship in these waters.
Israel has been armed with nuclear arms as a deterrent against further attacks, and has shown to exercise great prudence. Israels attack on Palestine came after years of rocket attacks on civilian targets; over 2,500 of them.
The attacks were coming from civilian neighborhoods, thus, that was what the Israelites were forced to target. Perhaps the Palestinians should have fought from non-populated areas instead of hiding behind women and children using them as a shield.
I have read many of your past posts; You clearly favor the complete destruction of Israel and its people.
Genocide is wrong, and so are you.
Sonar Guy, I am concerned that choices are being made that are irrevocably leading to catastrophic war. I do not want to see anybody destroyed, particularly American soldiers in no-win wars. I have made comments about religious fanaticism as an impediment to rational and humane approaches to solving problems in this increasingly interconnected and dangerous world.
Its most effective defense at this point would be to abandon its nuclear program and not threaten other governments or support terrorism. Simply put, Iran should just stfu and live a quite life while focusing on the prosperity and freedom of its citizens. Unfortunately, Iranian leadership has chosen a very different path, which is already causing major unhappiness among its citizens due to the sanctions imposed by the west and their economy is suffering. If Iranian leaders actually cared about their people they would focus on trying to modernize their economy and try manufacturing goods and get off their dependency on selling oil instead of trying to win ideological battles against the west that theyll 99.9% will lose. But hey, no one said Islamofascists were smart
I agree with Cooker: One can accuse or twist logics of those opposed to wars as they like.
Israel used its brain first in Iraq and led the US, British and European polticians.
Then it handed over the brain to Saudis, oil companies and their lobbyists and then these people started leading and handing over their decisions to the US, British and European rulers.
The dramas we see on Iran were played before 1991 and 2003 Iraqi wars.
George Bush, Sr got the decisions from Saudis and co and attacked Iraq in 1991. It was a success.
Then came 9/11 as a result of the first Iraqi war.
Here again Saudis, Pakis and UAE were responsible.
George Bush, Jr got his nations mixed up and attacked Afghanistan in 2001.
It is 2012, just see how the battles are being fought!
Where are the planners of all brands and they can use Israeli and Saudi brains too to do the thinking!
Bush, Jr used the brains of Saudis and co and attacked Iraq in 2003.
Only Saudis and Bush, Jr could attack Iraq without stabalizing Afghanistan, one of the toughest battle fields in earth. And next is Iraqi region.
Hope some at least can remember the recent history.
Despite spending huge monies in Iraq and losing lives of soldiers and many maimed for life, can some war mongers explain how the US withdraw troops from Iraq?
Now Irag is beyond repair and beyond the brains of Saudis, Bushes, Clintons, Bidens and others and the latest and best arms and planning of gung-ho military leaders and around them!
What we got in return?
Oil prices which were hardly $30 a barrel shot up to $140 a barrel.
Since 2003, future traders, rating agencies, Wall Street and oil companies and their lobbyists transferred, five trillion dollars from oil importing countries to oil exporting nations.
Islamic radicals and terrorists are rampaging due to their ME Sunni rich sharks (Saudi Arabia in particular) funding their Salafi and Wahhabi mosques all over the world.
These days, on Iran and Syria, Saudi puppets and their politicians in the US, Britain, and EU, badly battered from all sides, have limited options!
So better leave Iran alone and remove the sanctions to reduce oil prices. Let us worry about ourselves first!
Just watch Iran and others destroy themselves in ME!
sonar guy that is a lie, the clown president of Iran said "Zionism will fade from the pages of History", the Western media translated wrong, perhaps on purpose and it has been repeating the same lie until most idiots believe it.
Zionism is an ideology, not a country or people.
Iran has a stupid religious-fanatic government
This is one reason why I'm not afraid of a nuclear-armed Iran: these people are horribly backward and technologically incompetent, yet they're trying to master one of the most powerful and complex technologies known to modern physics (albeit one that has been researched and explored considerably). It's true that a nation can be deficient in almost every way and still manage to build working nuclear weapons (see Pakistan and PROBABLY North Korea), but by the time they finish building them up and attaching them to their decades-obsolete rockets, we could develop a dozen weapon systems to blow up their launch sites the moment their silos open, or knock out their missiles in transit and scatter nuclear material all over their egg-covered faces.
It's annoying listening to all the fearmongering and panicking just because a few inept dictators want their nukes, even though we can already wipe them off the face of the planet at the push of a button. Let the crybabies have 'em, and then see if they like where they are once their country has rotted away for the sake of their multi-billion dollar toys sitting uselessly in their silos, unable to be used without inviting complete annihilation.
No need to go to war over something like this.
What system do we currently have that can knock nukes out of the sky after being launched 100% of the time? Also don't forget we still don't have any system in Europe to even attempt to do such because Russia told us not to put them there. Also hypothetically if they have a nuke that they could launch we'd only be able to attack them after they launched not before. Also I'm not sure if they have a sub that can launch a nuke yet but I'm sure Russia would sale them one.
Even Pakis stole most of the technologies!
But the immediate problems for the Saudis, oil companies, lobbyists and their puppets are that oil prices were going down.
Without inventing some wars and sanctions on oil producing nations, Saudis and their greedy gangs can't manage with low prices.
In the US, Britain and many EU nations, many are on streets and still there are huge numbers not on the streets.
So without inventing wars, Saudis and co will not be even able to even swing their beastly desert dresses!
Iran but couldn't hide. These clowns are lucky if they can tie their shoe laces. They'll poison themselves if they ever get any fissionable material collected.
Iran ruled by religious fanatics. In their attempts to develop a nuclear weapon, will probably have an accident and destroy itself.
Does it take so much time to understand the Islamic religious mad people?
Is it not strange that many are still in George Bush, Jr era with that mindset despite being in wars in ME since 1991?
Let the Iranians jump sky high with all their nuke technology business. It will be worthless even after a decade.
Buy off some Sunni militants after a decade and ask them to blow them off, it can be done most easily!
Just ignore their dances and see the net results.
Most of the Shiites and Sunnis will be battling each other and enjoy them from sidelines.
More the George Bushes worry about oil or act as worrying about it, more will be the problems!
The amount of 90% enriched U235 necessary to create a Nagasaki gun type A-bomb is about 50 lbs. Seeing as how raw Uranium contains only about .7% U235, the ball park amount of natural Uranium required for this enrichment task is at least 5000 lbs even with very efficient centrifuges. I know Iran has a few Uranium deposits but the highest quality ore is Uranium Yellow Cake found in Africa and that supply is in all likely-hood carefully rationed. I heard that Iran had managed to enrich a number of samples up to 20% which is high for most reactors. It is possible that without the large quantities of commercially enriched Uranium, 3 to 5% necessary to run a large power plant, this type of enrichment would be intended for use in a breeder reactor for the production of Plutonium. Plutonium weapons do not require a critical mass to explode because a non-critical amount of it will become critical as it is compressed by an implosion of chemical explosives. Non of this stuff is secret, the Manhattan project is well documented. The best book of this program is Richard Rhodes The Making of the Atomic Bomb, a fantastic read. That said, Iran is not being kind to themselves by being so secret and paranoid about their nuclear program. The international inspectors should be able to account for the Uranium fuel cycle if allowed to by the Iranian government and this problem and the threat of military intervention would go away.
Excellent post. However, you have not accounted for the fact that Iran's enrichment process is inspected by the IAEA. As long as the inspectors are there, there is no possibility Iran can ever achieve the enrichment required to make a viable nuclear weapon.
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Military/2012/0216/Threats-to-US-Pentagon-officials-drop-three-surprises/Doubts-about-Iran-s-nuclear-ambitions
Doubts about Iran's nuclear ambitions
Despite the hype surrounding Iran’s pursuit of nuclear technology, the country's leaders are “not likely” to develop weapons unless attacked, the panel said.
The same goes for plans to close the vital Strait of Hormuz waterway, according to General Burgess. Though Iran can close the strait (“at least temporarily”), launch missiles, and even tap terrorist surrogates worldwide “if attacked,” military-intelligence officials assess that it is “unlikely to initiate or unintentionally provoke a conflict.”
What’s more, senior intelligence officials expressed some doubt that Iranian officials are actively interested in developing a nuclear weapon.," said Meir Javedanfar, an analyst and lecturer on Iranian issues at the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya, Israel. "In the short term, I don't think Israel has too much to worry about because the site is still under inspection.
If these comments from experts cannot clear up the muddied thinkling of ther war mongers on this forum, what can?
1992: Israeli parliamentarian Benjamin Netanyahu tells his colleagues that Iran is 3 to 5 years from being able to produce a nuclear weapon – and that the threat had to be "uprooted by an international front headed by the US."
1992: Joseph Alpher, a former official of Israel's Mossad spy agency, says "Iran has to be identified as Enemy No. 1." Iran's nascent nuclear program, he told The New York Times, "really gives Israel the jitters." Wow- Enemy #1 and that was before Ahminejad said anything.
1992: Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres tells French TV that Iran was set to have nuclear warheads by 1999. Wow -Its 2012 and still no nukes.
1992: Israeli parliamentarian Benjamin Netanyahu tells his colleagues that Iran is 3 to 5 years from being able to produce a nuclear weapon – and that the threat had to be "uprooted by an international front headed by the US." As early as 1992, Israel was trying to get the US to attack Iran and they wonder why Iran doesn't like them.
1992: Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres tells French TV that Iran was set to have nuclear warheads by 1999
how was it that China, Russia and the US de veloped the bomb rather quickly...but Iran is taking this long......
This story is a smokscreen to give the Iranians more time to destroy US and Israel.
Mike - The answer is simple. Iran is taking this long, because they are not really trying to build a bomb. All 16 US intelligence agencies have concluded that Iran does not have a nuclear weapons program.
The idea Iran is trying to build a bomb is based on Israeli paranoia and the fear that Israel will not be able to dominate the ME militarily, if Iran ever attains a nuclear deterent. Israel's plans for expansion and domination would be severly curtailed.
Get out of the middle east now, Ron Paul 2012
Another cover story for the Iranians. Why do you carry their water? Do you have a death wish for American and Israel?
The nut job President of Iran, Ah mad in ejd thinks by causing mass destruction and turmoil on earth it will foster the return of the twelfth Imam. This Imam after rising out of a well will cure all the ills and problems on earth. It would be like a Moslem fairyland. The leaders of Iran reason that losing seven million of their countrymen is a good outcome to vaporize seven million Jews. Ah mad thinks that is a fair trade. Hey, we have seventy million, they have seven million. Losing one Iranian to kill one Jew is no problem! On a one to one comparison, Ah mad has plenty of Iranians to spare.
The nut job President of America, Bar ack O bama thinks in a similar fashion. Causing economic and moral destruction of America, an era of Progressive enlightenment will also arise from the ashes. This would be a Progressive fairyland. Ah mad’s savior will come from the ground, mine will descend from Heaven. That’s all that needs to be said! Maybe Barry climbed out of a well or a lava tube straight from Hell.
Yes MSNBC - the images are really kegs of beer!
Jeremy Bernstein of the New Yorker wrote an interesting e-single on Iran's developing nuclear program. Worth reading, for those interested: tk0fx
The war mongers and other toadies for Israel see the world only through the prism of what is good for Israel and the cause of zionism ... never for what is best or desirable for the West or particuarly the US, but only what is good for the Jews in Israel.
so all of this blather about the security of Israel is hogwash ... no one has threatened Israel except to warn her that genocide of the Palestinians is not acceptable behavior. Ahmadinejad repeated what someone else had already said ... that in time the zionist regime in Israel would disappear from the pages of history as it surely will ... but never that the Jews would be harmed or killed. He did not vow that Jews would be exterminated ... that is a lie but the dogs of war for Israeli aggression keep repeating this line like a boy keeps slinging mud against a wall hopeing that some of it will stick.
We know more about Iran's alleged attempts to gain a bomb than we do about the 200+ ready nukes that Israel already possesses ... now as the man once said there is something wrong with that scenaro, and both countries are in the so-called Middle East or close to it. So why is a bomb so forbidden for Iran, a Persian nation of 75 million, while it is fine and dandy for Israel a small nation of barely 6 million citizens? Is it thought that only Iran would use the bomb in that area which would also contaminate her citizens, while Israel would not use any such bombs regardless of how may millions of Moslems and Arabs surround her? Any thinking or rational person would easily conclude that it would be Israel who would first use the bomb and not the other way around since she is the one that could not possible win any war against her neighbors without it. To stablize the Middle East the first thing that needs to be done is to disarm Israel of these nuclear bombs. but that is why the Israeli toadies and war mongers are in here for... to help stop any logicial conclusion of the problem which is being formented by Israeli aggression and ME domination against the people of that area.
1) The treaty is not mandatory. India, Israel, and Pakistan have not signed it. North Korea signed and withdrew from it. Iran is suspected to be in violation of it. I have personally never inspected their sites, or even been to Iran (I ran so far away...)
2) How many nuclear weapons do the "official" nuclear powers that signed the treaty still have? Enough to vaporize the universe countless times over.
3) To my knowledge there is no deadline for nations to get rid of their nuclear weaponry.
4) Please choose A or B (no write in's will be accepted) to the following question. Which nation used nuclear weaponry on another nation: A) Israel B) USA
hint on question number 4: It's not Israel.
5) if genocide is being done to the Palestinians (as said my myself and many others) by Israel, then Israel is terrible at it.
In reality... the NPT is toothless. Ban Ki Moon is going to give stern warnings, and shake his finger around many many times. Catherine Ashton is going to parade around and give speaches... that's just about it.
You really cant be serious that all the trouble in the world today is because of the Israel Palestine issue. Assad seems to be intent on killing his own people, and that has nothing to do with Israel. There are still people who hate Jewish people and there are still people who hate Moslems, and that more has to do with prejudices and upbringing than actual events.
The only reason anyone gives a darn about whether Iran is or is not pursuing nuclear weapons is because they signed the treaty. As far as i am aware they can withdraw from the treaty and then all the armchair quarterbacks like you and me can say who should and should not possess nuclear weaponry.
(no one... but since it exists... i find it to be a wonderful reminder of why not to use nuclear weaponry on another nation... because your nation [general your] will be reduced to a similar state shortly after)
(It's a shallow, stupid victory.)