The Corner

Why Iran’s Nuke Program Could Be Even Bigger than You Might Think

Early today, the Washington Post’s Glenn Kessler included a chart from my think tank, the Center for Security Policy, in a “Fact Checker” column that awarded President Obama three “Pinocchios” for making inaccurate statements about the Iran nuclear issue.

Kessler’s piece was a surprise to me because it’s basically unheard of for the mainstream media to cite data from conservatives on arms-control issues. A rival piece by PolitiFact cited the usual experts, who echoed the same inaccurate perception of Iran’s nuclear program and the nuclear talks presented by Mr. Obama on Tuesday.

When challenged today on Twitter about these contradictory pieces by a Democratic friend of mine, Kessler said:

While I don’t always agree with Kessler and I think he’s often too tough on Republicans, I believe he tries to be fair. It took guts for him to buck the Obama administration and the foreign-policy establishment by concluding the president’s statements on Iran in the SOTU were mostly untrue. Although I believe the president’s Iran statements were entirely untrue and deserve five “Pinocchios,” Mr. Kessler article is an important contribution to the current debate in Washington.

Kessler said two arms-control experts thought there were slight technical issues with the Center for Security Policy’s chart and cited comments from one of them, Ollie Heinonen, a former IAEA official who now teaches at Harvard University’s Kennedy School.

The chart:

Kessler wrote the following about Heinonen’s reaction to it:

“This graph should say that material available (red) is UF6 [hexafluoride], which can be used as such for further enrichment, Heinonen said. “The rest (blue minus red), about 4 tons uranium in various chemical forms, can be reconverted to UF6. Iran has stated that it is not constructing  such a facility. If converted, the number of “bombs” would be higher.”

I was pleased that Kessler cited Mr. Heinonen since I consulted with him when I prepared this chart. Heinonen’s comments to Kessler reflect what he told me last November, that my figures understated the status of Iran’s nuclear program. I decided not to take Heinonen’s advice to increase the estimated output of Iran’s centrifuges because I wanted this assessment to be consistent with multiple experts and I was concerned we’d be accused of exaggerating the threat. 

That said, I believe Heinonen is right: Iran probably can make more than eight nuclear weapons – possibly as many as 11 – from the uranium it has enriched since 2009. 

— Fred Fleitz followed the Iranian nuclear program for the CIA, State Department, and House Intelligence Committee. He is now a senior fellow with the Center for Security Policy. Follow him on Twitter @fredfleitz

Fred Fleitz, president of the Center for Security Policy, served in 2018 as deputy assistant to the president and to the chief of staff of the National Security Council. He previously held national-security jobs with the CIA, the DIA, the Department of State, and the House Intelligence Committee staff.

Most Popular

Elections

A Reckoning Is in Store for Democrats

The crisis of the Democrats is becoming more evident each week. Those of us who have been loudly predicting for years that the Russian-collusion argument would be exposed as a defamatory farce, and that the authors of it would eventually pay for it, are bemused at the fallback position of the Trump-haters: that ... Read More
Politics & Policy

Ilhan Omar: A Hostage Situation

‘It has to stop,” says Representative Ilhan Omar. No, it does not. Representative Omar, the Jew-hating Minnesota Democrat, is engaged in one of her usual games of misdirection, a pattern of hers that by now is familiar enough to be predicted: She says something outrageously stupid, offensive, ... Read More
Elections

Why ‘Stop Sanders’?

'Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge?” T. S. Eliot asked. “Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?” And where is the intelligence we have lost in cleverness? Cleverness is the plague of our political classes, an influenza of the intellect. The consultants are always trying to ... Read More