Intelligence in short supply in 'National Estimate' report

FRANK MIELE

You really have to wonder if the government of Iran could possibly be as stupid as the government of the United States.

But then you get a look at the declassified portion of the latest National Intelligence Estimate entitled "Iran: Nuclear Intentions and Capabilities," and you can stop wondering. There is no competition. Iran could not possibly match the stupidity of our own government.

Indeed, if global geopolitics were a television sitcom, then the government of the United States would be Boss Hogg, and Mahmoud and the gang in Tehran would be the Dukes of Hazzard. We may have more money and power, but them Duke boys always seem to get the last laugh.

Last week, the laughter could be heard all the way 'round the world as the U.S. "intelligence community" let the Tehran regime off the hook for its nuclear ambitions, judging "with high confidence" that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003.

Sure 'nuff, and them Duke boys are just a couple of hayseeds who could never outsmart the big fat guy in the white hat (so said the big fat guy in the white hat anyway).

But before we get carried away, patting Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the back for being such a jolly good fellow, let's just look at the facts, as laid out in the National Intelligence Estimate, and see what they actually say.

The initial Associated Press story got it about right:

"Iran halted its nuclear weapons development program in the fall of 2003 under international pressure but is continuing to enrich uranium, which means it may still be able to develop a weapon between 2010 and 2015, according to a new U.S. intelligence assessment released Monday."

As soon as the announcement was made, of course, the mainstream media was doing a major blitz of the airwaves with the claim that Bush and Cheney had misled the American people and the world by saying that Iran was a nuclear threat.

My simple question to them is: "What part of 2010 don't you understand?"

Folks, that's two (make that TWO!) years away. Two years until Iran may develop a nuclear weapon! The only thing we could do to make Iran more of a threat would be literally to drive President Ahmadinejad to the Los Alamos nuclear laboratory, hand him the keys and a security pass, and tell him to enjoy himself.

It's true that the NIE concludes "with high confidence" that "in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program." It's also true that the NIE concludes "with moderate-to-high confidence" that Tehran "at a minimum is keeping open its option to develop nuclear weapons."

We don't have any idea what kind of evidence the intelligence agencies are using to make these conclusions. It could be the same kind of bozos who said there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. It could be double agents who are working for the Iranian government in order to disseminate false information to over-eager American spies. It could be people who like getting paid for telling people what they want to hear. (If you think people who are tortured will say anything to stop the torture, just imagine what kind of lies people will confess to if you pay them generously enough.)

Be that as it may, even though we are not privy to the source of the information, let us assume it is all valid.

According to the NIE, Iran stopped its nuclear weapons program in 2003. But in the same report (on the same page, for goodness' sake) the National Intelligence Council tells us, "We assess [that] centrifuge enrichment is how Iran probably could first produce enough fissile material for a weapon, if it decides to do so." In the next sentence, the NIE tells us unblushingly, "Iran resumed its declared centrifuge enrichment activities in January 2006, despite the continued halt in its nuclear weapons program" (emphasis mine).

Does that mean what I think it means? That Iran has halted its nuclear weapons program… even though it is still doing exactly what it would be doing if it had a nuclear weapons program?

Is there some rule that intelligence estimates are supposed to be filled with gibberish and nonsense?

Here's another one:

"We judge with moderate confidence that the earliest possible date Iran would be technically capable of producing enough HEU [highly enriched uranium] for a weapon is late 2009…"

The report concludes that this is not likely to occur, but that's irrelevant. We are not talking about whether or not Iran WILL create a nuclear bomb; we are talking about their capacity to do so. And once they have the capacity, we may well have crossed beyond the point where nuclear war could be prevented. Besides, if they have the capability to produce a bomb, then they already have a nuclear weapons program, whatever you call it.

That's why President Bush and our European allies have been working so diligently to convince their counterparts in Tehran to abandon their nuclear ambitions now. Later is by definition too late.

Of course, what has raised the hackles of the left wing in this country is that this NIE report seems to raise the specter that President Bush has been misleading the public and the world about Iran's real threat level. Certainly, you have to concede that the National Intelligence Council seems to be writing propaganda for Iran rather than the United States in the way it framed the report. There it is in black and white that "in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program."

So it is not suprising that the report has fed the left's fears about the president by suggesting that Iran really has no such weapons program, and that therefore President Bush has just been trying to justify another war because he is insane or an idiot (I don't think I am exaggerating the rhetoric of his opponents).

But let's carefully compare the "key differences" between the "key judgments" of the 2007 NIE and the previous NIE issued in 2005, and see why it is this report itself which is the propaganda blunder. It is the intelligence community which should be tarred and feathered, not the president.

The new report says that, "We judge with moderate confidence that the earliest possible date Iran would be technically capable of producing enough highly enriched uranium (HEU) for a weapon is late 2009, but that this is very unlikely."

Now listen to the 2005 report: "Iran could produce enough fissile material for a weapon by the end of this decade if it were to make more rapid and successful progress than we have seen to date" (emphasis mine).

So the difference between the two reports on this point is… absolutely nothing! The conclusions are identical! Iran could produce uranium for a bomb by the end of this decade (also known as "late 2009"), but it is not likely to do so! BOTH REPORTS SAY THE SAME THING!

So why can't the endless liberal commentators who have lined up to bash Bush for the past week read the report for themselves? Why can't they understand plain English? And why would the intelligence community frame the report in such a way that it makes the president (the U.S. president, that is) look bad? Could it be incompetence? Or must every Boss Hogg have a Sheriff Rosco on the payroll to make himself look smart? (Sorry, that's my last "Dukes of Hazzard" analogy.)

If you think I am over-estimating the foolishness of this probably multimillion-dollar intelligence report, take a look at the final "key judgment" of the 2005 and 2007 NIE reports, and see how the evil King George has misled us.

In 2005, the National Intelligence Estimate concluded that the intelligence community had "moderate confidence" in projecting that Iran is unlikely to make a nuclear weapon "before early-to-mid next decade."

Then in the new report issued last week, dated November 2007, the NIE concluded "with moderate confidence" that "Iran probably would be technically capable of producing enough HEU [highly enriched uranium] for a weapon sometime during the 2010-2015 time frame."

So the dramatic new evidence that has Washington all a-twitter is that it turns out Iran is probably capable of producing a nuclear weapon sometime between 2010 and 2015 instead of "early-to-mid next decade."

Far be it from me to point out the obvious, but "IT'S THE SAME THING!" Early-to-mid next decade IS EXACTLY THE SAME as 2010 to 2015, no more and no less.

If this is the best we can get out of the National Clandestine Service, the National Security Agency, the National Geo-Spatial Intelligence Agency, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Bureau of Intelligence and Research, and the director of national intelligence, then we would be better off kicking the whole lot of them out the door and start over again with some recent college graduates who at least know how to read a calendar.

. Frank Miele is managing editor of the Daily Inter Lake. E-mail responses may be sent to edit@dailyinterlake.com.