U.S. Army Captain Michael Kelvington, commander of the Battle company, 1-508 Parachute Infantry battalion, 4th Brigade Combat Team, 82nd Airborne Division, bows next to remains of Gulam Dostager, a member of Afghan Local Police who was killed in the blast of an Improvised Explosive Device (IED) during the joint Tor Janda (Black Flag in Pashtu) operation, in Zahri district of Kandahar province, southern Afghanistan May 25, 2012.  REUTERS/Shamil Zhumatov  (AFGHANISTAN - Tags: MILITARY CIVIL UNREST CONFLICT TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY)

Reuters Photojournalism

Our day's top images, in-depth photo essays and offbeat slices of life. See the best of Reuters photography.  See more | Photo caption 

Members of the U.S. Navy Blue Angels fly over the World Trade Center in lower Manhattan as part of the 25th annual Fleet Week celebration in New York, May 23, 2012.  REUTERS/Eduardo Munoz (UNITED STATES - Tags: MILITARY ANNIVERSARY TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY)

Fleet Week

The U.S. Navy takes Manhattan for a week.  Slideshow 

Photo

The SpaceX mission

A privately owned unmanned rocket blasts off on a mission to be the first commercial flight to the International Space Station.  Slideshow 

Pentagon: Iran needs 3-5 years to build usable atom bomb

Related Topics

A technician at the uranium conversion facility in Isfahan, south of Tehran, February 3, 2007. REUTERS/Caren Firouz

A technician at the uranium conversion facility in Isfahan, south of Tehran, February 3, 2007.

Credit: Reuters/Caren Firouz

WASHINGTON | Wed Apr 14, 2010 4:13pm EDT

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Iran could produce enough highly enriched uranium for a single nuclear bomb in as little as one year but would probably need three to five years to assemble, test and deploy a "usable" atomic weapon, top Pentagon officials said on Wednesday.

The new timeframe presented to Congress comes as President Barack Obama presses a reluctant China to back swift sanctions on Iran and U.S. intelligence agencies sought to complete a new National Intelligence Estimate that will assess Tehran's nuclear progress.

Lieutenant General Ronald Burgess, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, said available information suggested the centrifuges at Iran's enrichment plant at Natanz were producing low-enriched uranium and were not yet being used to make highly enriched uranium at a level needed for nuclear weapons.

The United States believes Iran has yet to make the decision to shift production to highly enriched uranium, according to officials.

But when asked how long it would take Iran to produce enough highly enriched uranium for a single nuclear weapon if the leadership decided to do so, Burgess told the Senate Armed Services Committee:

"The general consensus -- not knowing again the exact number of centrifuges that we actually have visibility into -- is we're talking one year."

General James Cartwright, vice chairman of the U.S. military's Joint Chiefs of Staff, concurred: "They have enough low enriched uranium now that, if they further processed and enriched that, that in a year ... they would have enough material for one weapon."

But the one-year estimate referred only to how long it would take Iran to produce enough fissile material for a weapon. Far more time would be needed to finish work on a bomb, such as assembling and testing, officials said.

"Experience says it is going to take you three to five years" to move from having enough highly enriched uranium to having a "deliverable weapon that is usable,... something that can actually create a detonation, an explosion that would be considered a nuclear weapon," Cartwright told the panel.

Western powers fear Iran wants to develop nuclear weapons under the cover of a civilian atomic program. Tehran says its program is intended only for peaceful power generation.

MILITARY OPTION OUT OF FAVOR

Michele Flournoy, under secretary of defense for policy, said President Barack Obama has made clear that "all options are on the table" to rein in Iran's nuclear program.

"We see it as the Department of Defense's responsibility to plan for all contingencies and provide the president with a wide range of military options should they become necessary," she said.

"But ... military options are not preferable and we continue to believe that the most effective approach at this point in time is the combination of diplomacy and pressure."

Cartwright said taking military action against Iran might delay its nuclear development but was unlikely to be decisive in stopping the program for good.

While voicing confidence that the U.S. military could undertake a large-scale operation that involves physically occupying Iran to ensure the nuclear program is disbanded, he cautioned: "I think that there would be consequences to our readiness and to the challenges that we already face in this nation economically to pay for a war."

The United States is now fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, both bordering Iran.

Views within the intelligence community have long varied on how long it will take Iran to build a nuclear weapon.

A 2007 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) judged with "moderate confidence" that Iran would "probably" be technically capable of producing enough highly enriched uranium for a weapon sometime in the 2010-2015 timeframe.

Burgess said production of a new NIE was currently under way but that "the decision on when it will be released and when it will be finished has not been determined yet."

Jane Harman, chairwoman of the U.S. House of Representatives Homeland Security Subcommittee on Intelligence, said on Tuesday that the new NIE was "essentially complete".

(Editing by Cynthia Osterman)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (5)
Israel can’t wait that long. We should let them unload on Iran now

Apr 14, 2010 1:05pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
EstherHaman wrote:
How did we come up with this guesstimate? Our Intelligence services, including the Zionists, have said Iran don’t not have an active nuclear bomb program or a weponization program for such devices.

What is becoming more clear is that we are hopping that they become a nuclear power on the military scale. Why you ask? We be spending more money on new weapon program for one, things like “Star Wars”.

The Negative and dark side to this wishful thinking come from the Ultra Right wing Christian organizations, which would like to see the biblical stories to come true and the Armageddon to take place. The first part of this wishful thinking according to them has already taken place in Iraq and the next phase is about to start. I really would like to prove them wrong. Don’t you?

Apr 14, 2010 1:21pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Fleetfox wrote:
The thing I don’t get about the Christian crowd, if all things are part of God’s plan, shouldn’t they just shut their mouths and start praying for the enemy? Such hypocritical and two faced.

Apr 14, 2010 1:25pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.