Stupid Intelligence on Iran

Wall St. Journal ^ | December 19, 2007 | JAMES SCHLESINGER

[nuconvert]

Stupid Intelligence on Iran

If Tehran did slow its weapons program, Bush policies probably had something to do with it.

JAMES SCHLESINGER

The release earlier this month of "key judgments" from the National Intelligence Estimate--including the bald assertion "that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program"--has caused both astonishment here at home and consternation overseas, where it has resulted in confusion about America's policy goals and steadiness.

Let us stipulate that the intelligence community has acquired evidence sufficiently persuasive to lead it to reverse its prior judgment that Iran was hard at work developing nuclear weapons. For that it has been praised, particularly in traditional intelligence quarters, for "speaking truth to power," and thereby dissipating some of the distrust generated by its faulty earlier judgments on Iraq.

The NIE's about-face on Iran's nuclear weapons program represents a reversion to an earlier style of intelligence analysis--featuring a renewed determination not to get beyond the "hard evidence." But as we shall see, this has led to a decision not to consider several crucial elements that lay behind the presumed 2003 decision in Tehran.

Clearly, the key judgments in the NIE were overstated. And that, in turn, may reflect the very late decision to declassify the key judgments, written in a kind of shorthand, and thus incautiously phrased.

The crucial decision, hidden in a footnote, was to define the "nuclear weapons program" which had been halted to mean only "Iran's weapon design and weaponization work and covert . . . uranium enrichment-related work." Thus it excludes Iran's overt enrichment program monitored by the International Atomic Energy Agency.

We have long understood that the production of fissile material, whether overt or covert, remains "the long pole in the tent" in the development of a nuclear capability. Thus the NIE defines away

[IncPen]

Clearly, the key judgments in the NIE were overstated.

When the bomb goes off in London, or New York, or LA, or Chicago... will the NIE give us our money back?

[Sender]

...will the NIE give us our money back?

No. The NIE is only an estimate. It only covers replacement of pads and shoes and machining rotors. Other more serious information will easily double or triple the cost of repairs. Some settling may occur during shipment. Your mileage may vary. Some users report swelling, dizziness, nausea and abdominal pain. Not intended to portray any actual threat, whether living or deceased. Copyright 2007, GetBush International, all rights reserved.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Mr. Schlesinger is a former secretary of defense, secretary of energy and director of the Central Intelligence Agency.

More:

James R. Schlesinger
CSIS Counselor and Trustee

Served under Nixon and Carter.....He has seen a lot....

[elhombrelibre]

9/11 and moma’s advice to judge people by what they do and not what they say gives me the better-safe-than-sorry outlook on this. Bomb Iran’s mad mullahs’ nuke program and lower the risk they’ll use a nuke on civilized peoples.

[Marine_Uncle]

Schlesinger’s statements clearly appear to contain no bias in this case. Will his views be echoed by so called editorial experts in the many L/MSM news rooms, most probably not, since most of them are rather shallow and often clueless.

[SunkenCiv]

Imagine, no one from the Dark Side of the Force ever doubts any intelligence report if it fits their agenda, while fighting anything that doesn’t.

Thanks Ernest.

[dixiechick2000]

"9/11 and moma’s advice to judge people by what they do and not what they say gives me the better-safe-than-sorry outlook on this."

Agreed!

I, also, agree with Fred Thompson on the NIE.

I don't trust it.