U.S. still believes Iran not on verge of nuclear weapon

WASHINGTON Thu Aug 9, 2012 5:52pm EDT

EDITORS' NOTE: Reuters and other foreign media are subject to Iranian restrictions on leaving the office to report, film or take pictures in Tehran. A general view of the Bushehr main nuclear reactor, 1,200 km (746 miles) south of Tehran, August 21, 2010. REUTERS/Raheb Homavandi

EDITORS' NOTE: Reuters and other foreign media are subject to Iranian restrictions on leaving the office to report, film or take pictures in Tehran. A general view of the Bushehr main nuclear reactor, 1,200 km (746 miles) south of Tehran, August 21, 2010.

Credit: Reuters/Raheb Homavandi

Related Topics

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States still believes that Iran is not on the verge of having a nuclear weapon and that Tehran has not made a decision to pursue one, U.S. officials said on Thursday.

Their comments came after Israeli media reports claimed U.S. President Barack Obama had received a new National Intelligence Estimate saying Iran had made significant and surprising progress toward military nuclear capability.

Later, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak suggested that the new U.S. report, which he acknowledged might be something other than a National Intelligence Estimate, "transforms the Iranian situation into an even more urgent one."

But a White House National Security Council spokesman disputed the Israeli reports, saying the U.S. intelligence assessment of Iran's nuclear activities had not changed since intelligence officials delivered testimony to Congress on the issue earlier this year.

"We believe that there is time and space to continue to pursue a diplomatic path, backed by growing international pressure on the Iranian government," the spokesman said. "We continue to assess that Iran is not on the verge of achieving a nuclear weapon."

U.S. officials would not directly comment on whether there was a new National Intelligence Estimate on Iran, which is a compilation of views of the various U.S. intelligence agencies.

The last formal NIE on Iran in 2007, partially made public by the administration of President George W. Bush, became highly controversial because it said Tehran had halted nuclear weaponization work in 2003, although other aspects of the overall program continued. A later update to that report retained that central assessment, sources have previously said.

James Clapper, U.S. director of national intelligence, said in congressional testimony in January: "We assess Iran is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons, in part by developing various nuclear capabilities that better position it to produce such weapons, should it choose to do so. We do not know, however, if Iran will eventually decide to build nuclear weapons."

Another U.S. official said the United States regularly exchanges intelligence reporting with its allies, which would include Israel.

The United States has been concerned that Israel may conduct a unilateral strike on Iran's nuclear sites, adding to turmoil in the Middle East.

Israel sees an atomic armed Iran as a threat to its existence and there is persistent speculation over whether it will launch a pre-emptive military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities.

Tehran denies it is trying to build nuclear bombs, saying it is enriching uranium only for peaceful purposes.

Washington has tightened sanctions on Iran and sought to ramp up international diplomatic pressure to curb Tehran's nuclear ambitions.

Barak told Israel Radio: "There probably really is such an American intelligence report - I don't know if it is an NIE one - making its way around senior offices (in Washington)."

"As far as we know it brings the American assessment much closer to ours ... it makes the Iranian issue even more urgent and (shows it is) less clear and certain that we will know everything in time about their steady progress toward military nuclear capability."

Israel, widely believed to have the Middle East's only nuclear arsenal, says little time remains before Iran achieves a "zone of immunity" in which Israeli bombs would be unable to penetrate deeply buried uranium enrichment facilities.

(Reporting by Tabassum Zakaria and Mark Hosenball in Washington and Maayan Lubell in Jerusalem. Editing by Warren Strobel and Christopher Wilson)

FILED UNDER:
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 (12)
MassResident wrote:
Having lived with a Nuclear Soviet Union and Chins for most of my life, I can’t understand why Iran is even an issue. Besides, if anyone is going to fire an ICBM at us, it will be North Korea. It is time to stop supporting Israel’s determination to be the only nuclear power in the Middle East. Iran isn’t the one threatening to launch a first strike, they are only threatening to retaliate if attacked. Everyone has that right.

Aug 09, 2012 6:41pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Logical123 wrote:
The claims that, “Tehran has not made a decision to pursue [nuclear weapons],” and “Iran is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons,” are pure poppycock. It is all based on pure speculation and assumes that we can read people’s minds. All we know is that Iran has no nukes and is not building any. Also, Khamenei has issued a Fatwa against nukes. So, what is the basis for the repetition of these stupid speculative statements?

Aug 09, 2012 7:29pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
CadronBoy wrote:
MR – You make a valid point. I don’t see why it is alright for the US to have nuclear arms and use them to kill tens of thousands of people yet deny everyone else that same right. Iran and North Korea are sovereign countries and if they want to use their resources to develop nuclear arms so be it — if not then we need to take their sovereignity away from them. Otherwise we need to respect their rights and get out of the way. Perhaps we should even arm all countries with nuclear arms to assure parity across the board — I bet if the South and North Sudan both had nuclear arms at their disposal they’d be the best of friends.

Aug 09, 2012 7:30pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.