Newsweek - National News, World News, Health, Technology, Entertainment and more... | Newsweek.com

Wealth of Nations

SPONSORED BY
Full Post
Posted Monday, October 26, 2009 6:00 AM

Iran Likely Concealing Other Secret Nuclear Sites

Newsweek

By Jerry Guo

The United Nations' inspection of Iran's clandestine nuclear facility outside Qum, slated as of press time for Oct. 25, was already treated as something of a coup in the West. With its air-defense batteries and centrifuges buried deep in the mountainside, the site smacked of dangerous nuclear intentions. But assuming the visit takes place, the progress it represents needs to be kept in perspective. By cooperating with the U.N., Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's regime gets to look as if it's opening a window on its nuclear program, slowing the momentum toward tougher international sanctions, when it's likely that Qum is only one of many secrets Iran is concealing. 

U.S. arms-control experts say that Qum is probably one of at least a half-dozen undeclared sites in Iran's "nuclear archipelago." At its present rate of production, Qum's estimated 3,000 antiquated IR-1 centrifuges would take two years to churn out enough highly enriched uranium for a single bomb, according to Gary Milhollin, director of the Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control. If Iran had another secret site, its parallel fuel cycle would cut down the waiting time to a year.

Advertisement

Furthermore, because Iran went to the trouble of hiding Qum, it's likely hiding other key components of a weapons program too. Take the conversion plant at Isfahan, which provides the uranium that goes into an enrichment facility--in this case, the site at Natanz. Both sites are being closely monitored by the International Atomic Energy Agency. The amount of uranium needed at Qum, some 7 to 16 percent of Isfahan's stockpile, would be too great a diversion to go unnoticed, says Andreas Persbo, an arms-control analyst at the U.K.-based Ploughshares Fund. 

The existence of Qum's secret enrichment facility thus implies a corresponding conversion plant, as well as mines to extract uranium ore, labs to turn the enriched fuel into a metal, and workshops to produce firing circuits and high-explosive ­lenses. Indeed, The New York Times recently reported that classified portions of the 2007 U.S. National Intelligence Estimate listed some dozen additional suspected nuclear sites in Iran. As the black sites multiply, chances are that Western intelligence agencies will not be able to keep tabs on all of them. It's a game of hide-and-seek that the West can't afford to lose.

You must be a registered user to comment.  Click here to register.  Already a user?  Click here to login.

Member Comments

Posted By: hassani1387 (October 27, 2009 at 10:36 AM)

The facility was not "clandestine" -- Iran reported its existence earlier than it was required. And quoting Gary Milholin of the Wisconsin Project on Arms Control shows that we're back to repeating the scaremongering over non-existent Iraqi WMDs -- it was the same Milholin who claimed in editorials in the Wall Street Journal that weapons inspectors in Iraq were "timid" and "irrelevant" due to their "failure" to find Iraqi WMDs. If Iran wanted to secretly build nukes, why did they offer to open their nuclear program to joint US participation -- an offer that was totally ignored by the US despite the fact that numerous US and international experts endorsed it???


Posted By: memo02 (October 27, 2009 at 7:46 AM)

We don't want this people here,they need stay at Guantanamo Bay,this people still as war prisoners,against USA,!..

.


Posted By: Mwalimu (October 26, 2009 at 7:54 PM)

Perhaps so, but the latest article I read in der Spiegel might shed new light on Iran's nuclear program. The article titled die Atom-Shlamperei by Dinah Deckstein, Frank Dohmen, and Cordula Meyer, points out that the European nuclear industry is almost at a stand-still. New plants are fraught with design failures and cost over=runs. Old plants would face costly modernization modifications. Either way, nuclear energy is losing its allure because if its cost.

To be sure China claims it is opening a bout 16 new nuclear reactors, but  Mycle Schneider, a foremost German expert on nuclear power, is extremely skeptical that these reactors do not have a lot of problems.

So what does this suggest about Iran? First of all, Iran is selecting an option that is not very cost-efficient or economical. Iran might skimp on safety procedures to save money. Further more, nuclear reactors require a lot of water. Where is Iran going to get this water. Interestingly enough some of Iran's smarter neighbors across the Persian Gulf, the famous or infamous oil shiekdoms are investing in solar energy. What might this suggest?

An old saying goes if you give a fool enough rope, he'll hang himself. That might apply to Iran's nuclear ambitions.