McClatchey has a “bunch of them”:http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/17090786.htm for you BDA junkies.
The “article”:http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/17090786.htm also notes something that I don’t recall hearing before….that the US may have cracked down on the bank because it was helping North Korea sell gold.
*Update:*
Jane “has more.”:http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/1466/show-me-the-money
Some people are not going to be happy about this.
In the interview I cited in “this post,”:http://www.totalwonkerr.net/1403/iran-still-does-not-have-3000-centrifuges Gholamreza Aqazadeh indicated that Iran is still working on new types of centrifuges and intends to build new uranium conversion facilities.
Iran has made similar centrifuge comments “in the past,”:http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2006_05/iransecuritycouncil.asp but I think this interview [full text in comments] provides a glance at Iran’s current R&D efforts.
Here’s the relevant portion:
[Anchorman] Mr Aqazadeh, how many thousand centrifuges is needed to produce the fuel for a 1,000 megawatts power plant? Does it need to be four thousand centrifuges or three thousand is enough?
[Aqazadeh] It depends on the type of the machine. I mean there are some old generation machines which require more. Because the amount of fuel it produces is low. Imagine if we inject 80 grams of UF6 in a chain to achieve five per cent enrichment we would get one eighth or one tenth of this amount. And in order to get the required fuel we would have to increase the number of chains. *If the new generation machines, especially those which are Kevlar [as heard] and are of synthetic material and the world are relying on them, suddenly you see that the same machines can provide fuel for three or four power plants instead of one. It means that both their intake and output are great. Therefore this is an industry that we need to keep ourselves upgraded through research. We should work on new generations, technologies. I can tell our people that we have passed the stage of complete mastery over designing the machines.*
*[snip]*
[Aqazadeh] As I already said this depends on the type of machines we use. *With the present generation of machines we can produce one-fifth of the needed fuel.* I cannot exactly give you the answer, but if we know what type of machines we are talking about, then I can give you an answer.
*There are machines on which we are working. If we develop the appropriate machines, because of their great capabilities, we will quickly be in need of far less number of machines. We are considering a 20 year perspective. In view of the rapid development of new generation of machines in Iran, we may be able to say in the near future that we have achieved the capability to produce a generation of equipment that need far less number of machines.* Based on our developed capabilities, we would then be able to speak more seriously about the 1,200 tons of fuel and that how much of it can be produced within the country.
Presumably, the “synthetic material” refers to the P-2 centrifuge (or something similar), “the rotor of which is made of carbon fiber.”:http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/1386/pimp-my-cascade
The increased SWU capacity of the new centrifuges that Aqazadeh hints at also suggests that he’s talking about P-2’s (and probably more-advanced centrifuges as well).
Mark Fitzpatrick drew a similar conclusion “in _Survival_”:http://www.world-nuclear.org/reference/pdf/fitzpatrick.pdf from President Ahmadinejad’s April 2006 claim that Iran was working on improved centrifuges ” ‘that would quadruple Iran’s enrichment power.’ ” Fitzpatrick noted that the “German-origin P-2 centrifuges…are rated at 5 SWU,” which is considerably “more than”:http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/1032/collected-thoughts-on-iranian-leu Iran’s P-1.
Anyhow, stop reading blogs and watch “this instead.”:http://www.kickedinthenuts.com/index.asp
It’s probably not in the same league as anything on ” _Mind: The Perpetual Intercourse_”:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind:_The_Perpetual_Intercourse, but the other day Iranian Esfahan provincial television broadcast “Nuclear Know-How,” which it described as Iran’s “nuclear song.” The song celebrates “Tehran’s purported ability”:http://www.totalwonkerr.net/1403/iran-still-does-not-have-3000-centrifuges to enrich uranium on an industrial scale.
p{float: right; margin-left: 10px}. !/images/11.jpg!
Here’s the description of the song (and accompanying video) from the broadcast:
A caption was shown at the beginning of the song…saying that the song was presented to “young scientists” working on the country’s nuclear technology.
The song is cut to pictures showing Iranian nuclear scientists at work. Video shows inside shots of a nuclear facility, scientists dressed in white working with various types of equipment, looking at video screens, large demonstrations in streets of the capital Tehran, demonstrators waving pictures of the spiritual leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamene’i, more inside and outside shots of nuclear facilities and a group of demonstrators pulling an American and an Israeli flag tied together on the ground.
*Some of the words of the song are: “O Iran, O proud Iran, the most capable Iran, your name at the peak of glory. Your scientists have reached new horizons, nuclear know-how, nuclear know-how.”*
At the end of the song a caption shows the following words attributed to Ayatollah Khamene’i: “Nuclear technology and nuclear fuel cycle are the inalienable right of the Iranian nation”.
I’m disappointed that “Nuclear Assault”:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handle_with_Care_(Nuclear_Assault_album didn’t do this song back in the day. In any case, download it to your iPod, along with “this track”:http://www.totalwonkerr.net/1331/greatest-song-title-ever from the North Koreans.
Shocking, I know.
Asked about “Iran’s annoucement”:http://www.totalwonkerr.net/1400/more-on-iran-and-centrifuges that it was beginning “industrial-scale” production of enriched uranium, IAEA DG Mohamed ElBaradei, according “to Reuters,”:http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSL1238351120070412 told reporters that
bq. There are various definitions of industrial scale production. Iran is still at the starting stage of creating a uranium enrichment plant.
More precisely, he said that Iran still only has “hundreds” of centrifuges.
If you don’t wanna take ElBaradei’s word for it, check out what AEOI head Gholamreza Aqazadeh said a few days ago. Asked during an Iranian TV broadcast whether Iran has actually installed 3,000 centrifuges in the Natanz facility, he seemed to say “no.”
Here’s the relevant portion of the interview:
During my comments [earlier in the day about Iran’s centrifuge advances] *I didn’t give a number on purpose and for a number of reasons. The most important reason is that I was worried that if mention was made of the number of centrifuges, some ambiguities would arise regarding whether we planned to only install 3000 centrifuges or more.* This is whilst we have invested and made plans to install 50,000 centrifuges in Natanz. The infrastructure which has been built and all the equipment such as the ventilation, electricity and air conditioning systems, and all the logistical equipment which is needed for this industry, have been built to cover 50000 centrifuges.
He also elaborated on what Iran means by “industrial-stage.” As far as I can tell, the term means that Iran is proceeding with plans to install 50K+ centrifuges. That was, of course, already Tehran’s declared policy.
Aqazadeh said:
*When we announce that we have entered the industrial stage, there are no limitations. I didn’t want this fact to be used as a pretext to say that Iran has now installed 3000 centrifuges and that’s it. No, it’s the opposite. When we enter the industrial stage the installation of equipment continues permanently until the stage where all the 50000 centrifuges are installed.* As a result, I thought that this issue may be misused especially by foreign media and make them think that with the installation of these 3000 centrifuges, Iran’s nuclear case will be closed. This was the main reason why I didn’t mention a number in my speech and talked about entering the industrial stage. The reality is that we have all the necessary infrastructure for the development and completion of the whole programme and God willing, we will continue it.
This “pretext” argument makes no sense to me. I think another quote confirms that Tehran’s announcement was more diplomatic than technical:
[The West] can see that Iran is following this path in a fast pace and with steadfastness. Time is not against us and they can see that clearly. This is why they are issuing resolutions one after another and putting us under pressure to halt this trend and dissuade us. I think stopping this move is a very difficult task.
What happened today in Natanz is an undeniable reality. One cannot deny all these facilities, equipment, installations and production machines; therefore this is a reality. I think *the world should change its literature. After all, it is in their own interest to deal with Iran through interaction, dialogue and confidence-building rather than exerting pressure.*
Get back to work.
Or maybe he just gets paid to write crap. Evidence “here.”:http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/04/irans_nuke_program_advances.html
I commend “this post”:http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/1457/iran-enriching-on-industrial-scale and “this post”:http://www.totalwonkerr.net/1400/more-on-iran-and-centrifuges to him.
[Apologies “to Atrios.”:http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_05_07_atrios_archive.html#114705830668276581 ]
I am “not the first”:http://www.matthewyglesias.com/archives/2007/01/cavalier/ to point this out, but I recently looked up “the oft-quoted December 2001 Rafsanjani sermon”:http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iran/2001/011214-text.html where he talked about Israel and nuclear weapons and thought I’d share the relevant portion.
It seems clear to me that Rafsanjani was arguing that Israel’s current military superiority would be limited by other regional powers’ acquisition of nuclear weapons. However, some have argued that Rafsanjani was threatening an Iranian nuclear attack on Israel.
Anyway, here it is:
The colonialists will keep this base as long as they need it. Now, whether they can do so or not is a separate issue and this is my next point. Any time they find a replacement for that particular instrument, they will take it up and this will come to an end. This will open a new chapter. Because colonialism and imperialism will not easily leave the people of the world alone. Therefore, *you can see that they have arranged it in a way that the balance of power favours Israel. Well, from a numerical point of view, it cannot have as many troops as Muslims and Arabs do. So they have improved the quality of what they have. Classical weaponry has its own limitations. They have limited use. They have a limited range as well. They have supplied vast quantities of weapons of mass destruction and unconventional weapons to Israel. They have permitted it to have them and they have shut their eyes to what is going on. They have nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and long-range missiles and suchlike.*
If one day – changes thought Of course, that is very important. *If one day, the Islamic world is also equipped with weapons like those that Israel possesses now, then the imperialists’ strategy will reach a standstill because the use of even one nuclear bomb inside Israel will destroy everything. However, it will only harm the Islamic world. It is not irrational to contemplate such an eventuality.* Of course, you can see that the Americans have kept their eyes peeled and they are carefully looking for even the slightest hint that technological advances are being made by an independent Islamic country. *If an independent Islamic country is thinking about acquiring other kinds of weaponry, then they will do their utmost to prevent it from acquiring them.* Well, that is something that almost the entire world is discussing right now.
Now, *even if that does not happen, they can still inflict greater costs on the imperialists. That is possible as well. Developments over the last few months really frightened the Americans. That is a cost in itself. Under special circumstances, such costs may be inflicted on the imperialists by people who are fighting for their rights or by Muslims.* Then they will compare them to see how they could advance their interests better or what they can do. However, we cannot engage in such debates for too long. *We cannot encourage that sort of thing* either. I am only talking about the natural course of developments. The natural course of developments is such that such things may happen.
Full text is “here.”:http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iran/2001/011214-text.html
Jeffrey beat me to the punch with “this post”:http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/1457/iran-enriching-on-industrial-scale about Iran’s announcement that it has begun industrial-scale enrichment.
I agree that there’s little new to this. I can add little value to what Jeffrey wrote, but I will try.
First, Iran almost certainly does not have 3,000 centrifuges installed. Some important facts:
* Iran missed its stated goal of installing 3,000 centrifuges by March 2007.
* Iran “told the IAEA”:http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Board/2007/gov2007-08.pdf that it would “continue progressively with the installation of…18 cascades of [sic] the 3000-machine hall and to bring them gradually into operation by May 2007.”
* Press reports from late March indicate that Iran wasn’t even close to 3,000. For example, Michael Adler from AFP reported 29 March that a “diplomat said Iran had installed six cascades of 164 centrifuges each at Natanz and was test-running four of the cascades.”
Similarly, George Jahn from AP wrote 31 March that
bq. Two diplomats on Friday said that Iran had already linked up more than 900 of the devices and was ready to introduce uranium gas in them, starting the process of enrichment on a larger scale than previous attempts.”
FWIW, I have also heard from reliable source that Iran has a little under 1,000 centrifuges installed at the facility.
p=. *Iran Enriching Uranium?*
Is Iran enriching uranium in the larger Natanz facility? Well, Larijani “seemed to indicate”:http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSBLA82551420070409?src=040907_1302_TOPSTORY_nuclear_nation&pageNumber=1 that this is the case. And it’s certainly possible that Tehran’s claim to have begun fuel production means that Iran has now begun running the cascades with UF6.
But I remain curious. According to the IAEA,
bq. Iran informed the Agency of its plan to start feeding UF6 into the cascades installed at the Fuel Enrichment Plant (FEP) by the end of February 2007
I have seen no press reports since then saying that Iran has begun enriching uranium, though I certainly may have missed something. Adler reported that “Iran has not yet put in the uranium feedstock gas used to make enriched uranium.”
And I am still interested in this bit from “the IRNA story”:http://www2.irna.ir/en/news/view/line-22/0704093757194438.htm Jeffrey linked to that quoted the AEOI’s Mohammad Saiedi:
bq. He [Saiedi] declined to comment on whether Iran’s entry into the stage of fuel production on industrial scale meant injection of gas to 3,000 centrifuges.
p=. *Exaggerating Size*
Jeffrey listed several reasons for Iran to exaggerate its claims. I would add one more. As I “told Elaine Shannon,”:http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1608169,00.html
bq. Iran has been creating facts on the ground as part of its negotiating strategy…The further along the program, the more of it they will be able to keep in the future — so their thinking goes.
It’s also worth mentioning that, given the technical difficulties with Iran’s enrichment program, I think today’s industrial-scale enrichment claim is really one of the few benchmarks of progress that Iran can point to publicly, at least for now.
p=. *So What is Industrial-Scale Enrichment?*
Jeffrey addressed this issue already, but I thought I’d highlight what Saiedi himself said:
…asked how many centrifuges were needed for start fuel production at the industrial level, Saiedi said, “We enter the industrial stage after passing the pilot stage.”
When questioned about number of centrifuges Iran used in the pilot stage, Saiedi said, “Our pilot stage included two cascades of 164 centrifuges; we passed the stage and entered the industrial level.” In response to a reporter who said installation and operation of more than 3,000 centrifuges meant entry to the industrial level from the IAEA viewpoint, Saiedi said, “That’s the view of you reporters.”
Now to look for houses in Montana…
Just wanted to add a little to a “good post”:http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/1444/policy-changes-podvig-on-russia-and-bushehr from Jane about the Bushehr project. Specifically, I think that discussions of Russian motivations for completing the reactor frequently ignore Russia’s desire to maintain/establish its reputation as a reliable nuclear supplier for -countries other than Russia- potential customers outside of Iran.
As Pavel Podvig says in the “_BAS_ column”:http://www.thebulletin.org/columns/pavel-podvig/20070326.html that Jane cites:
*Rosatom most likely understands that abandoning Bushehr now would deal a serious blow to its reputation as a commercial partner.* In this situation, resorting to delays and hoping that the situation will somehow resolve itself is the only option.
I think there’s a lot to this…I first thought of it when I heard Vladimir Orlov’s “presentation”:http://www.carnegieendowment.org/static/npp/2005conference/2005_conference.htm#Iran at the most recent Carnegie conference. He didn’t make the supply credibility argument but did point out that the project isn’t worth all that much to Russia:
bq. Economically, we are not gaining much from nuclear cooperation with Iran. I’m sorry, but the numbers, the amounts we were discussing about only Bushehr content are much lower than they were publicized. And probably in the mid-90s that was something not of little importance for the Russian impoverished ministry of atomic energy. Currently, the situation in Russia and its economic growth is quite different, so actually what we got from Iran economically from Bushehr is not that much attractive.
I would be remiss if I didn’t point out Jane’s argument that Russia has already done a few things to damage its reputation as an energy supplier:
bq. Russia’s cut off of gas to Ukraine in January 2006 and of oil through Belarus in January 2007 has partners hesitating in relying too much on Russia in the future. Regardless of whose fault these dispute really were, Russia clearly has the capacity and the will to cut off very significant energy flows in times of disagreement.
This is in the context of fuel supply, rather than reactor construction, but it’s a good point.
Orlov, BTW, added this amusing anecdote:
bq. …[a] senior Russian official once asked – I think in the 101st time – but what finally Russia feels about nuclear cooperation with Iran. Are you still partners? He was probably so exhausted with that question, he said, oh yes. We, of course, are partners with Iran. From the times of Mr. Griboyedev, we are partners with Iran. And of course, without the context, it could be difficult to understand what it means. The context was simple. Mr. Griboyedev is a famous Russian poet of the 19th century who was also diplomat decapitated by Mog in Teheran. So we are of course strategic partners, but with some footnotes, right?
Happy Friday.
I haven’t listened to it, so I have no idea how much I rambled. The IR theory part especially drew on some very old memories.
Anyway, Sean-Paul and Ian are really nice guys and the podcast can be found “here.”:http://agonist.org/sean_paul_kelley/20070405/radio_agonist_with_paul_kerr
I’m not sure this has anything to do with anything, but I just found this bit of a 21 March North Korean radio broadcast:
On 16 March, during an interview with a daily, Iranian Foreign Minister Manuchehr Mottaki reiterated, once again, his country’s right to peaceful use of nuclear energy.
He said that Iran has the right to use nuclear energy for a peaceful purpose and uranium enrichment activity is a central issue for his country.
Given that, he stressed that his government will continue to promote uranium enrichment activity and Iran will never give up its basic right whatever price it has to pay.
It _is_ an example of the North Koreans watching what the Iranians do…not trivial, given the lack of available public evidence.