The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is poised to publish its final report on Iran’s research related to nuclear weapons, concluding that the weaponization program was active through the end of 2003, and ceased virtually all “relevant” activities thereafter.
Though exact dates aren’t totally clear, the active program appears to have ended in 2003, never advanced beyond feasibility studies, and while some potentially tangentially related activities may have occurred beyond 2003, even those were halted by 2009.
Under the P5+1 nuclear deal, Iran had to make a final reckoning of all of its activities related to nuclear weapons, which is what this report, which is being published early, confirms took place. The report is meant to end all questions about Iran’s past activities, and affirm that the program ended many years ago.
The ultimate report appears largely in keeping with intelligence on the matter that’s come out in recent years, with Iran having once explored the idea of acquiring nuclear weapons, but abandoned it long ago.
I'd pay a lot of attention to what different phrasings there can be for pre 2003 research activities related to nuclear bombs. Coordinated program? Feasibility studies? Coordinated feasibility studies? Legitimate feasibility studies? Trying to make a bomb? Working on a bomb ? What was the timeframe for achieving their aims? I can guess what the press will do. 'weaponization program' is vague enough so it will be used and it will usually be interpreted as trying to make a bomb and that they were right. So it's going to be a mess and the IAEA will have contributed to it by overstating the evidence. I don't believe Iran was trying to make a bomb or achieve threshold capability the way Japan has it. General capability, sure. But what's the timeframe for going from general capability to a deliverable weapon? Years?
"…the weaponization program…" what weaponization program? from all reports,
they basically had a bunch of scientists doing basic feasability studies,
i.e. would this work? do we have the capacity to do this if necessary?
there was never any weaponization (webster's: Definition of WEAPONIZE.
transitive verb. : to adapt for use as a weapon of war) program, which is
proven by the lack of any specific detail, and the resorting to weasel words
like "research relevant to the development of atomic weapons".
what would that research be? perhaps studies to increase the carrying
capacity of tractors. useful in mining, but perhaps 'relevant' to missile
launchers.
as promised, the report will be just vague enough to give the us congress
cover to delay dropping sanctions.
Looks like the NIE estimates of 2007 and 2011 were absolutely right. The Neocons and Israeli's were as usual totally wrong.