Gary Sick writes: How serious is Iran’s threat to build ten more nuclear enrichment sites?

A proposed new 10 enrichment sites were reportedly “decided” by Ahmadinejad and his Cabinet earlier today. There are several aspects of this announcement that raise real questions in my mind. The most important may be the fact that the so-called decision was taken by the Cabinet, even though it is the Supreme National Security Council that is normally responsible for major security decisions. The major power centers, e.g. the Revolutionary Guard and the Supreme Leader, are not represented directly in the Cabinet. Perhaps they were consulted, but that is not clear.

But there are a couple of other factors that occur to me on first reaction:

1 -  Ahmadinejad is calling for a total of 500,000 centrifuges. Fabrication of centrifuges by Iran began in a major way about the year 2000. Iran to date has constructed and installed fewer than 9000 centrifuges, of which only about half are actually producing low enriched uranium (LEU). Taking the actual record of adding roughly 1000 working centrifuges per year over 10 years as a baseline, it would take 500 years to complete the program as announced.

2 – Everyone today is aware of the so-called Fardo enrichment site that was recently disclosed on a Revolutionary Guard base near Qom. Iran says its construction began in 2003. If that is true, in 6 years they have installed the piping and fittings for a total of 3000 centrifuges; but no centrifuges have actually been installed, and the site is actually scheduled to be completed by 2011. Using a rough estimate of 9 years per site, it could require 90 years to build ten more, if the sites were developed sequentially.

But Ahmadinejad was talking about ten new sites the size of the major facility at Natanz, which is eventually intended to house 54,000 centrifuges. Natanz has two underground halls buried deep in a mountain under masses of concrete and constituting two halls of more than 60,000 square feet. Constructing ten of these enormous underground sites would place immense pressure on Iran’s ability to excavate and equip such a vast array of production sites. Given the amount of time Iran has spent developing Natanz, and the problems they have encountered, the project imagined by Ahmadinejad would be limited by the very size of the Iranian economy and its manufacturing capabilities.

At a minimum, this is a project that would require Iran to mobilize all of its resources in a national effort over many years. It is not something that could be done quickly. It also may not appeal to other parts of the government in light of Iran’s huge economic deficiencies.

In my view, this is a classic Ahmadinejad blustery response to the recent IAEA resolution that criticized Iran. It is also the kind of ante-raising that one might expect in a negotiating game of “chicken.” We have also heard various Iranian commentators in the past few days say that Iran might withdraw from the Non-Proliferation Treaty and others threaten that Iran would enrich their own fuel cells to power their nuclear research reactor (though they don’t have the technology to manufacture the fuel cells), etc. These statements appear to be political hot air coming from people who don’t know what they are talking about.

Unless and until we hear any of these “decisions” from responsible decision-makers in Iran, I think it is premature, as our British friends might say, to get our knickers in a twist.

gary

Iran should not arouse concern. Georgia is the most dangerous flashpoint. The Bible says: “At the appointed time [the king of the north = Russia] will return back [will regain the influence, which it lost after the break-up of the Soviet Union] and come into the south [many indicate that this might be Georgia], but it will not be as the former [1921] or as the latter [2008]. For the dwellers of coastlands of Kittim [the West] will come against him, and he will be humbled, and will return.” (Daniel 11:29,30a) Then Iran will be humbled also. “But ships will come from the direction of Kittim, troubling Asshur [Russia] and troubling Eber [inhabiting on the other side the Euphrates].” (Numbers 24:24a, BBE)

At that time, peace will be taken from the earth and the “great sword” - nuclear sword - will be used. (Revelation 6:4)

Iran should not arouse concern. Georgia is the most dangerous flashpoint. The Bible says: “At the appointed time [the king of the north = Russia] will return back [will regain the influence, which it lost after the break-up of the Soviet Union] and come into the south [many indicate that this might be Georgia], but it will not be as the former [1921] or as the latter [2008]. For the dwellers of coastlands of Kittim [the West] will come against him, and he will be humbled, and will return.” (Daniel 11:29,30a) Then Iran will be humbled also. “But ships will come from the direction of Kittim, troubling Asshur [Russia] and troubling Eber [inhabiting on the other side the Euphrates].” (Numbers 24:24a, BBE)

At that time, peace will be taken from the earth and the “great sword” - nuclear sword - will be used. (Revelation 6:4) However, it will be neither the great tribulation nor “the end of the world” (Armageddon). As Jesus foretold, that will be “the beginning of birth pains”. (Mathew 24:7,8)

If the Heavens planned a full return of Russia (and much suggests this) the present economic crisis will deepen. Then also the European Union and NATO will not stands. 

In the same way the earlier prophecy had fulfilled: “And (he) [the king of the north = Russia] will go back (to) his land with great wealth [1945]; and his heart (will be) against the holy covenant [state atheism]; and will act effectively; and turned back to his own land [the break-up of the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact, the return of Russian troops to country].” (Daniel 11:28)