This month, two contradicting information about Iran’s nuclear weapons program were made public. Both studies provide valuable insight into how Tehran is accelerating its work on nuclear arms.
The initial report is from the , New York Times , which says US Intelligence has fresh observations on Iran’s weapons programme. The new information was further stated in the statement that President Trump’s group received it.
The second report comes from the , National Council of Resistance of Iran , (NCRI ). The NCRI is a pro-regime organization that runs inside Iran.
Iran is trying to develop a nuclear weapon “faster,” according to the US intelligence briefing, even though the end product will be” cruder.” US intelligence connects a disclaimer to its new knowledge, declaring that Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has certainly made a decision to build a nuclear weapons.
The New York Times does not reveal how Iran may have” cruded” a weapons despite the fact that no decision has been made regarding its progress.
The NCRI paints a unique portrait. It says that Iran has two significant nuclear facilities, one located at Sharad, which doubles as a storage start page, and the other at Semnan, that also has storage establish capabilities. Both cities are south of Tehran.
Sharad is maintained as a top-secret service, which is meant to launch contacts satellites. The majority of those activities are beneath, according to NCRI, which basically involves developing nuclear weapons. The Sharad start service features a new good fuel , Ghaem-100, a two-stage middle range ballistic missile. NCRI says that 3 Ghaem-100 weapons have already been launched, and a newer type, Ghaem 105 is being prepared for screening.
In , October, 2024 , Israel launched a hostile attack on Iran, knocking out important Persian air defenses and the business site , where Iran produces good rocket fuel , for weapons such as the Ghaem. To prevent Iran from using solid-fuel rockets to strike Israel, this was a proper decision.
Sharad is under the control of the , Egyptian Revolutionary Guard Corps , Aerospace Force. The general scientists and current commanders at Sharad have been identified by NCRI.
The next site at Semnan formally is the , Khomeini Space Launch Terminal. The website has just seen significant expansion. A special Geophysics Group is housed at the site under the leadership of the Organization for Advanced Defense Research ( SPND). Supposedly, the Geophysics Group is associated with Tehran University and its Earthquake Seismology section, providing a backbone for explosive component testing.
The Semnan service functions the , Simorgh , liquid-fueled weapon. Simorgh is similar to the North Korean , UNHA-1, an intermediate collection ballistic missile.
Solid-fuel rockets require much less set-up time to launch, replacing the long supporting process needed for older-type nuclear weapons.
One crucial factor of weapon design and development is shared by both US intelligence and NCRI reports.
According to the US Intelligence Report, Iran has never developed a tool capable of being launched from an intermediate collection ballistic missile. Reading between the lines, that indicates Iran’s attempt to minimize the use of a little enough weapon has not yet produced any results.
Uranium, which Iranian nuclear reactor you produce, would be used to power a small-sized nuclear weapon. Uranium bombs are known for their high level of executive and unique electronics, but they also require a high degree of success.
The” cruder” approach would be to turn to a uranium atomic bomb, similar to the one used at Hiroshima, which uses highly enriched uranium and a less complicated gun-type process to create a chain reaction and an atomic fire.
The uranium answer is probably the” cruder” strategy US intellect is reporting. It is interesting to note that the Hiroshima explosive was not thoroughly tested before being used. Iran may even believe it may launch a uranium bomb without having to show it by exploding it.
The Hiroshima weapon was very large, weighing 4, 400 pounds (9, 700 m. ). The plane had to be modified to allow the weapon to be lifted into the stomach of the B-29 from a particular lift in the floor beneath the aircraft in order to fit it into a four-engine bomber. A plutonium weapon used today may be lighter than the one used at Hiroshima, but it’s still most likely too big and heavy for a weapon.
Iran would likely need to place a tool like this on a military ship, as a result. Again on August 2, 1939 Albert , Einstein sent a letter , to President Franklin Roosevelt. Einstein noted in that email that a uranium weapons may be carried by a boat even though it probably would be too big for an aircraft. ” A second bomb”, Einstein told Roosevelt,” carried by vessel and exploded in a slot, might very well ruin the whole slot with some surrounding place”.
The NCRI report, in contrast to the US intelligence report, makes it clear that the IRGC is developing a weapon that can be delivered by missile, which would be a miniaturized plutonium bomb. It also acknowledges that Iran does not yet have a bomb it can mount on a missile.
Why doesn’t Iran have a useful warhead if it cooperates closely with North Korea on its nuclear and missile programs? Iranian ( and Syrian ) collaboration with North Korea has been ongoing for years, and the North Koreans claim they have missile-deliverable nuclear warheads.
According to the Federation of American Scientists, North Korea already has about 90 nuclear warheads, but it’s likely to have assembled closer to 50.
The US Defense Intelligence Agency ( DIA ) says that North Korea has built around 30 fissile material cores for use in nuclear weapons, including four-to-six two-stage thermonuclear weapons. While the DIA does not say the “fissile material cores” can be mounted on missiles, a Japanese report says that North Korea , can miniaturize nuclear warheads.
In September, 2007 in an audacious operation called” Operation Outside the Box”, Israel destroyed a nuclear reactor at al-Kibar in Syria. That reactor was a carbon-copy of North Korea’s Yongbyon 5 megawatt nuclear reactor, which , produces plutonium for North Korea’s nuclear weapons program. For the al-Kibar project, the North Koreans worked with Syria and Iran.
Had the reactor been operational, it would have been outside of the scope of the IAEA’s control and had the potential to have produced a significant amount of fuel for sophisticated plutonium bombs.
The bottom line
Iran may be attempting to produce both uranium and plutonium-fueled weapons, according to both reports. This would provide an analysis of how the US created the atomic weapons that eventually produced an entire nukes arsenal using a variety of delivery methods, including Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
The US intelligence claim that Iran’s supreme leader has not decided whether to launch nuclear weapons strikes them is untrue seems absurd. The IRGC, which really controls Iran, is investing billions in the project, which has been accelerated and intensified.
Stephen Bryen is a former US deputy undersecretary of defense for policy and a special correspondent for Asia Times. This article, which originally appeared on his Substack newsletter Weapons and Strategy, is republished with permission.