25 September 2009

United States Has Known of Iranian Facility “for Several Years”

Concern over Iran’s nuclear activities began in 2002 with the revelation of a uranium enrichment facility at Natanz.

By Stephen Kaufman
Staff Writer

Washington — The disclosure of Iran’s second uranium enrichment facility has sharpened the international community’s sense of urgency and its concern over Iran’s intentions, as well as the need for Iran to back up claims that its nuclear activities are peaceful in nature, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton says.

Speaking with Belgian Foreign Minister Yves Leterme in New York September 25, Clinton said the Obama administration fully supports an immediate investigation of the facility by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

“Clearly, this is an incredibly important disclosure that the world needs to digest,” she said.

The revelation “underscores Iran’s absolute need to engage seriously” when it meets with representatives from the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and Germany in Geneva on October 1.

Iran must “take immediate steps to demonstrate the exclusively peaceful nature of their nuclear program, which they have been claiming despite growing evidence to the contrary,” the secretary said.

U.S., U.K. AND FRANCE COMPILED INTELLIGENCE ON QOM FACILITY FOR YEARS

A senior Obama administration official, who declined to be identified, told reporters in Pittsburgh September 25 that the covert underground Iranian facility, located near the city of Qom, has been known to intelligence agencies “for several years,” and described it as “a very heavily protected, very heavily disguised facility,” but one that is not yet operational.

The United States, the United Kingdom and France have been sharing intelligence on the facility and gathering “irrefutable” evidence as they built up a case to show the IAEA that its intended use was for uranium enrichment.

The official said that when Iranian authorities learned that the secrecy of the facility was compromised, they sent a letter to the IAEA on September 21 which “in very vague terms disclosed that Iran was constructing a ‘pilot-scale enrichment plant.’”

The official described the Iranian letter to the IAEA as “too little, too late.”

“The letter … was very sparse, almost no detail and no promise of a follow-up. They talked about providing additional information at an appropriate and due time, whatever that means,” the official said.

Officials from the United States, France and the United Kingdom followed up the Iranian disclosure with a September 24 briefing to the IAEA on the facility “so that they would be able to conduct a proper investigation — not just of the facility itself, but of the support facilities that are producing materials and equipment for this facility,” as well as what “the Iranian decisionmaking process and intent was to build this facility,” the official said.

IAEA spokesman Marc Vidricaire told reporters September 25 that in response to the disclosure, “the IAEA has requested Iran to provide specific information and access to the facility as soon as possible” to allow the agency to “assess safeguards [and] verification requirements for the facility.”

The Obama administration official said that as more information is revealed about the facility at Qom, “I think it’s going to become even more difficult for the Iranians to mount a plausible defense” of their activities.

Iran’s actions have been inconsistent with its obligations to the IAEA, the official said. Its “very cursory admission” in the September 21 letter to the agency years after it had begun building the facility, along with its use for enriching uranium, “does not constitute living up to its obligations.”

The IAEA has also rejected Iran’s March 2007 claim that it is not required to disclose its nuclear facilities. Under the agency’s safeguards agreement, countries are obligated to report the construction of any nuclear facility in order to ensure that the facility’s safeguards fit with its technical characteristics. The official said the Qom facility was under construction even before Iran unilaterally claimed exemption from that requirement.

The official speculated that Iran’s decision to build a uranium enrichment facility at Qom came after existence of its underground facility at Natanz was revealed in 2002 and Iranian officials were forced to declare it to the IAEA and allow the agency’s inspectors to have continued access to the site.

“If the Iranians wanted to pursue a nuclear weapons option, the use of the Natanz facility was a very unattractive approach” because of the presence of the inspectors and their ability to notice if Iran tried to produce weapons-grade uranium there, the official said. Alternatively, expelling the inspectors would cause the international community to assume the action was taken so that Iran could engage in weapon-related activities.

“So the obvious option for Iran would be to build another secret underground enrichment facility,” the official said, and the facility at Qom is “the right size” for producing enough weapons-grade uranium to produce one or two bombs per year.

“We believe that it’s not yet operational. We think it’s most likely at least a few months, perhaps more, from having all of the centrifuges installed and being capable of operating if the Iranians made a decision to begin operating it,” the official said.

What happens next “is dependent on the choices that the Iranians make,” the official said. The international community “is more united and operating in a more consensual fashion than ever on this issue,” and Iran needs to take the opportunity presented by the October 1 meeting in Geneva to demonstrate that its nuclear activities are peaceful “because the evidence we have available certainly doesn’t suggest that.”

A transcript of remarks by Clinton and a transcript of the backgound briefing by the senior administration official are available on America.gov.

What foreign affairs decisions should President Obama consider? Comment on America.gov’s blog Obama Today.