ANALYSTS' VIEW: Reaction to Iran's uranium enrichment plans

(Reuters) - Following are analysts' reactions to Iran's announcement Sunday that it plans to build 10 new uranium enrichment plants in a major expansion of its atomic program.

MARK FITZPATRICK, CHIEF PROLIFERATION ANALYST AT LONDON'S

INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR STRATEGIC STUDIES

"There is no doubt that at least some of the new enrichment plants have been in the planning stages for some time, given that sites have already been chosen for five of them. And of course, the outing of the plant at Qom made clear the likelihood of there being more secret plants.

"But announcing 10 new sites is typical braggadocio. And when feeling cornered, Iran's response is to pound its puffed out chest....

"Given the recent leveling off of centrifuge operations at Natanz and the continued difficulty Iran has obtaining materials and components abroad, it is unlikely that Iran will have the capacity to outfit and operate additional industrial-scale facilities for some time....

"I am sad to say that Iran's announcement makes a military attack on the facilities more likely. If so, it will be a more target-rich environment."

DAVID ALBRIGHT, PRESIDENT, INSTITUTE FOR SCIENCE AND

INTERNATIONAL SECURITY, WASHINGTON

Albright said Iran was incapable of building 10 new uranium enrichment plants.

"They don't have the capability. They'd like to have it," he said.

On Iran's threat generally, he said, "It's a crazy idea ... But you have to look under the surface. They're mad about the IAEA resolution ... It's playground behavior in a way."

Further sanctions against Iran were likely, Albright said.

FLYNT LEVERETT, DIRECTOR OF THE IRAN PROJECT AT THE NEW

AMERICA FOUNDATION

On whether Iran could build 10 new plants: "There are a lot of uncertainties about how many centrifuges they would be able to assemble ... We don't really know the extent of their ability to fabricate these things on a very large scale."

Leverett said it was unclear how much uranium feed stock Iran could produce.

But, he said, "it would be imprudent to dismiss it out of hand as something they would be incapable of doing."

"The fact that they announced this two days after the IAEA resolution is not coincidental."

Continuing to insist on zero enrichment by Iran is unrealistic and counter-productive, Leverett said. "The harder we push on it, the less access we get ... We should recognize that the Iranians are going to enrich on their own soil." That would lead to greater access.

"By continuing to insist on zero enrichment, I think we are taking things in the wrong direction...What Iran can't accept is a situation in which they are being singled out."

JACQUELINE SHIRE, SENIOR ANALYST, INSTITUTE FOR SCIENCE AND

INTERNATIONAL SECURITY

"From a political perspective this is going to aggravate existing tensions. Technically, this is very head-scratching to me. It isn't clear that Iran could build and sustain a program of this magnitude."

"They don't have enough uranium ore to sustain an enrichment program of the size that they're proposing here. So the whole thing sounds like a lot of posturing in response to the IAEA resolution."

(Reporting by Kevin Drawbaugh in Washington and Sylvia Westall in Vienna, editing by Mark Trevelyan)