a track record of misjudgments about weapons of mass destruction.
The main
reason, according to a classified joint intelligence assessment
presented to Congress, is that the deal requires Iran to provide an
unprecedented volume of information about nearly every aspect of its
existing nuclear program, which Iran insists is peaceful. That data will
make checking on compliance easier, officials say, because it will
shrink Iran's capacity to hide a covert weapons program.
"We
will have far better insight (into) the industrial aspects of the
Iranian nuclear program with this deal than what we have today," James
Clapper, the director of national intelligence, told an audience last
month at the Aspen Security Forum.
Outside
experts don't dispute that. But they question — considering past
analytical blind spots in the Middle East — whether American spying will
really be able to catch every instance of Iranian cheating.
"The
intelligence community can rarely guarantee, 'We're going find the
secret site,' " said David Albright, a former weapons inspector who
heads the Institute for Science and International Security. "They have
found them before in Iran and that's good, but I think they are going to
have to do more work and bolster their capabilities to find secret
sites in Iran in an environment when Iran is taking counter measures
against them."
Skeptics of
the deal note that Iran is one of the world's hardest places in which to
spy. Iran's intelligence agencies have penetrated CIA front companies,
executed Western agents and captured a sophisticated U.S. drone.
The CIA has never had much
success developing and keeping good intelligence sources in Iran, says
Reuel Marc Gerecht, who worked as a CIA operations officer.
"The
truth is that the CIA and the NSA are largely flying blind inside the
Islamic Republic on the nuclear question," he wrote recently in the
Weekly Standard.
Intelligence officials dispute that, saying their insights into Iran have improved considerably in recent years.
The
CIA has "a reasonably high degree of confidence that we would be able
to detect Iran if it were trying to deviate from the requirements that
they've signed up to," David Cohen, the agency's deputy director, said
at the Aspen Security Forum.
The
United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany reached the
agreement with Iran on July 14 that would curtail its nuclear program in
exchange for billions of dollars in relief from economic sanctions. The
U.S. Congress is expected to vote next month on a resolution rejecting
the agreement.
As part of the deal, Iran agreed
to disclose nearly every element of its nuclear supply chain, including
people, places, companies and infrastructure — "their entire
nose-to-tail process for uranium production and processing," as one U.S.
intelligence official put it, speaking on condition of anonymity
because he was not authorized to speak publicly.
Those
disclosures would vastly increase the chances that intelligence
agencies would catch cheating, officials told Congress in classified
briefings. That's because any illicit activity would have to take place
outside the established network that had been laid bare to the West.
Once the CIA knows all the places Iran has been importing and processing
nuclear material, the country would have to develop new avenues to
evade detection— a major undertaking. The briefings and the assessment
were described by officials only on condition of anonymity.
The intelligence assessment presumes Iran will try to cheat, say officials familiar with it.
Even
after 15 years, when restrictions on Iranian nuclear activities are
lifted, Iran will still be prohibited from developing a nuclear weapon,
and the U.S. will have more ability than it does now to detect any
attempt, officials insist.
History provides reasons to be skeptical of U.S. ability to detect and gauge secret Iranian nuclear activity.
Foremost among them are the
massive misjudgments in intelligence that helped justify the Iraq war.
Nearly every U.S. spy agency concluded with some level of certainty that
Saddam Hussein possessed active chemical and biological weapons
programs. They were flat wrong.
Officials
point out that the Iraq war debacle led to changes. On Iran, for
example, agencies brought in "red teams," both from inside and outside
to probe for weaknesses, question assumptions and ponder unlikely
scenarios. The Iran analysis has withstood such probing, officials say.
Still,
the American intelligence community has misjudged a number of major
developments since then, including the Arab Spring, the Russian move
into Ukraine and the swift military advance of the Islamic State.
The
record on nuclear weapons development is particularly spotty. The CIA
missed India's plan to test nuclear weapons in 1998, for example.
Source: AP
No comments:
Post a Comment