Iran's Nuclear Shell Game

A Brave New World in the Making?

(Tickers: GULF, TRAMX, TRIAX, ISL, XISLX, NOC, RTN, ATK, LMT, BA, IWM, TWM, IWD, DIA, SPY, QQQQ, NYX, DOG, SDS, QLD, XLF, IWM, TWM, IWD, SDK)

The recent G-20 Summit in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania provided the setting for the P5+1 talks held in Geneva, Switzerland during the latter part of last week. On September 23, Iran notified the International Atomic Energy Commission that it was indeed constructing a second nuclear enrichment facility. The "new" facility is located some 30km north of Qom, in central eastern Iran. Qom, as many are aware is the center of Iran's clerical teaching and a holy city for the followers of Shi'ism. (Shi'ism is the state religion of the Islamic Republic of Iran).

Iran's Nuclear Shell Game

IAEA Director General Mohamed El-Baradei met with Iranian officials on October 3, 2009 to begin the verification and inspection process of the Qom facility.

The announcement by Iran, one day before President Barak Obama announced this news was seen by many as progress on the issue of Iran becoming more transparent about their nuclear program. For others, this was old news, as the existence of a second site was common knowledge among intelligence circles for several years.

The site of the facility is located on a military base under the command of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps. As seen from satellite photographs, the facility, which is built on a mountain, has a large building with triple layered steel reinforced concrete. Nearby ventilation shafts indicate that a large portion of the facility may be built underground. Three anti aircraft batteries protect the facility as well.

According to Iran, the facility has 3,000 centrifuges for the refinement of nuclear fuel. According to military analysts, this is more than needed for a civilian facility, but enough for possible military needs such as nuclear weapons production.

Iran claims that their nuclear energy program is for peaceful purposes, ostensibly to enhance domestic energy supplies. The West, Israel and neighboring states dispute this, claiming Iran's large nuclear program and dispersion of nuclear facilities is geared towards the production of nuclear weapons. Looking at Iran's nuclear program and its facilities, and then looking at Iran's rapid development of ballistic missiles, and President Ahmadinejad's call for Israel's total destruction does little to dissuade these fears.

Iran has numerous nuclear facilities; in the south, along the Persian Gulf are the nuclear reactors at Bushehr. Bushehr has two water pressurized water reactors. To date, Russia has not yet completed delivery of enriched uranium needed to bring the facility fully on line. Other reactors are located in Arak and Isfahan. The Arak facility includes a heavy water reactor; however this has raised concerns. Heavy water is used to moderate the nuclear reaction (as far as is known). Heavy water is also used in the production process whereby uranium is converted into weapons grade plutonium.

Enrichment facilities include: Qom with an estimated 3,000 centrifuges; Natanz with 4,592 working centrifuges and another 3,716 installed but not yet operational; Ramandeh and Lashkar-Abad. Another enrichment site is suspected to exist at Darkhouin. Uranium ore purification and uranium conversion are performed at Ardakan and Fasa, respectively. A heavy water plant is situated in Khondab. The uranium conversion facility at Isfahan can convert uranium into three forms: hexafluoride gas, uranium oxide (a nuclear fuel, although not compatible with Iran's existing reactors) and metal. The metal form is used in nuclear weapons; according to sources, Iran's existing reactors do not need this form to operate.

Uranium ore is extracted in central Iran near the city of Yazd. Mining facilities are located in Saghand, Narigan, Zarigan and Yazd.

Most of the research facilities are located in northern Iran and include: Tehran where the headquarters of Iran's Atomic Energy Office is located, Sharif University and the Kalaye Electric company (which produces components for the centrifuges). Other research facilities are located in: Tabriz, Bonab, Chalus (which is also a weapons and research and development center), Karaj, Jabr Iban Hagan, Damarand and Gorgan.

Several of Iran's missile research, development and testing facilities are located in or neighbor the same sites as the nuclear research facilities. These include Isfahan, Arak, Qom, Karaj and Tehran. Things that make you think: "Mmmm…."

The P5+1-Iran talks gets its moniker from the nations meeting to discuss Iran's ongoing nuclear program: The United States, United Kingdom, France, Russia, China, Germany and Iran. The goal of the meetings is to get Iran to open fully its nuclear program, including IAEA inspection of the "new" Qom facility. It is also hoped that Iran can be persuaded from further developing its (potential) capability to develop nuclear weapons. If not, the United States will aim for "crippling sanctions" against Iran's telecommunications, business and energy sectors.

In aiming for sanctions in the event of Iranian non-compliance, President Obama is attempting to secure, as well as portray, a "world" front against Iran. The P5 nations are also the permanent members of the U.N. Security Council. German inclusion seems more as a nod to the European Union (EU).

The idea of crippling sanctions is feasible, but only if Russia and China agree to do so. In the planned sanctions regime, President Obama seeks to cut Iran's energy supplies from the outside, including supplies from Russia. Although Iran pumps a lot of oil, it refines very little. Iran exports its own oil overseas for refinement and retransport back to Iran.

Iran's lack of refineries is due to lack of investment and construction due to current US law, although sanctions against Libya have expired. The Iran-Libya Sanctions Act of 1996 blocks US companies and their subsidiaries from working in, or dealing directly with, Iran; and blocks Iranian companies from dealing with, and working in, the United States. Foreign companies dealing with American finance and energy firms are also subject to numerous provisions of this Act. Iran has also chosen to spend its own monies on other projects including subsidizing domestic oil prices. Foreign firms have also held back due to the uncertainties and hostility of the Iranian regime.

Russia has grudges against the United States, centering on acknowledging Russian dominance in Eastern Europe including Poland, and the Baltic nations, all four of which are NATO members (also the Ukraine and the Trans-Caucasia). This issue remains unresolved in Russia's eyes, and Russia could very well use Iran as leverage against the U.S. It is also uncertain whether or not China would follow a sanctions regime.

Sanctions against Iran's telecommunications sector might also be difficult as French and German firms have interests in Iran.

President Obama's plan for "crippling sanctions" is also geared to temper Israel's response to Iran's nuclear program. Obama's hope is that Iran can be nudged into opening up its program and not producing nuclear weapons. Israel, taking to heart President Ahmadinejad's threats to "wipe Israel off the map," has warned that if its national interest and existence is threatened, it will attack Iran... and if need be, unilaterally.

How things proceed from here may very well define Obama's presidency. Foreign states and their leaders perceive the American president as new, but weak and easily distracted. American protection is also doubted by Russia and several NATO allies (Poland and the Czech Republic) due to America's reversal of basing missile defenses in both countries. Israel is beginning to think that American protection, if not outright alliance, could be sacrificed in order to mollify Iran or other Middle Eastern states.

How these perceptions and how the reality of any sanctions play out is yet to be seen. Future actions will decide on how both sides reach each other, and how and what type of intelligence is available and believed. The following could apply and occur:

1. Iran's acceptance of inspections progresses as hoped for: Most likely, Iran only shows what it wants to be shown. The inspectors don't get to see everything. Their reports will only be partially accurate. This could split the P5+1. The U.S. and U.K. favoring tough sanctions and more transparency would be set against France, Germany, Russia and China, who favor a more "pragmatic and gentle approach."
   
   This scenario does nothing to strengthen America's point of view or goals. It will also weaken President Obama's credibility and standing. It will also set the stage for Israel to more strongly feel it stands alone, and that it will need to exercise its right to self protection for national self preservation.


2. Sanctions occur and begin to work: Under the best of circumstances, this assumes both Russian and Chinese cooperation. Iran could very well insulate itself. Raising oil prices would limit domestic consumption. Even though economically strapped, Iran could pay for "black market" refined oil. Played the wrong way, this could also help the Ahmadinejad regime by fostering a sense of the outside world against Iran. Iranian citizens may back their government more, including even the regime's adversaries.
   
   How long Iran and the rest of the world would be willing to play this game is anyone's guess. Keep in mind that any feasibly effective sanctions regime could remove 8% of the world's oil from the global market. Is it really reasonable to expect Iran, with 70 million people and a nation the size of two-thirds of the continental United States to buckle first?
   
   Assuming that the sanctions regime proved effective, but did not end quickly, what would the perception be in the remainder of the Islamic and oil producing states?


3. Iran could also retaliate, and quite hard: One of the most feared options would be Iranian ships mining the Straits of Hormuz, literally closing down the Persian Gulf. This would remove 40% of the world's oil supply from the market. Immediate havoc on the economic recovery would trash that recovery very quickly.
   
   Iran's cragged coastline offers numerous launching points for mine laying craft. Most would be small boats, many privately owned and not regular navy ships. In the initial stage, it would be almost impossible identifying civilian craft from naval or IRGC owned craft.
   
   Iran could also consider attacking some of the Persian Gulf's existing oil and gas facilities in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates and Oman. This would bring others into play, and none alone are suitably able to defend against or attack Iran. Iran could easily let its submarine fleet out to the Persian Gulf and if need be, into the Arabian Sea to lay mines, interdict commercial ships or challenge American warships.
   
   Iran could also launch terror attacks on its own, have Hezbollah and Hamas attack Israel, or attempt to destabilize Iraq. Any of these options would distract Europe, Israel and the U.S.
   
   Scenario 3 opens the possibility of direct American military action. One reason would be to reopen the Persian Gulf. Disruption of the world's oil supply and the ensuing economic mess would be directly blamed on the United States. Failure in this would not be an option as America's political influence in the Middle East would be made or broken depending on how this scenario ended. The credibility and strength of America's military and military strategy would also be under extreme scrutiny.


4. The second worst case: Either Israel or the U.S. attacks Iran. Israel could decide, after a time (or if conditions indicate Iran has developed a functional nuclear weapon) to attack Iran on its own.
   
   Iran's known nuclear facilities are numerous (about twenty). Several facilities are spread out, thus constituting multiple targets. A few are located directly in urban centers. Israel's air force is a capable force, but not numerous enough to attack all facilities, and not all at one time. Even if such an attack were launched, America would be implicated regardless of our involvement or not. Any successful air strike by Israel would mean flying across Iraqi air space, which is controlled by the U.S.
   
   A joint attack might be a more realistic outcome. The U.S. does have the ability to take out many of Iran's facilities, including those built into mountainsides. It also has the capability to shut down most anti aircraft opposition.
   
   The outcome of such actions have yet to be written, but there is a chance that some of Iran's nuclear and missile capabilities could survive.


5. Worst case scenario: Iran achieves the ultimate goal by creating functioning nuclear weapon. Question for future generations to analyze would include: Did this occur due to a U.S. / Western acquiescence on the issue? How was Iran able to successfully hide the full extent of its nuclear program?
   
   Iran's successful ability to build and produce a functioning nuclear weapon would very well change power politics in the Middle East. Would American or European credibility have any value? Would President Obama be able to defend this turn of events? What effect would this have on the neighboring countries, including Russia?
   
   Such a scenario would leave a trail of nuclear armed states stretching from the Mediterranean straight across Asia to the Pacific Ocean.

A "Brave New World" indeed.


Please see our disclosures at the Wall Street Greek website and author bio pages found there.