Dems seeking answers about report on Iran

Congressional Democrats are capitalizing on the latest intelligence estimate on Iran’s nuclear weapons development to question President Bush’s credibility amid an angry stalemate with the White House over funding government operations and the war in Iraq.

While many Democrats said they remain cautious about the National Intelligence Estimate’s (NIE) conclusion that Iran halted its nuclear weapons development program in 2003, several said that Congress should investigate the discrepancy between the Bush administration’s recent doomsday rhetoric on Iran and the NIE’s judgments.

{mosads}Democrats are drawing a comparison between this NIE, released Monday, and the flawed NIE on Iraq released shortly before the October 2002 Iraq war authorization vote.

“We’ve heard the president before, in his build-up to go to war in Iraq, try to lay the same foundation for going to war in Iran. We’ve heard it … and the sixth year is a daily reminder of us that that’s the case,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) told reporters Tuesday.

Reid charged that the president knew Iran halted its nuclear weapons program months ago even while he warned that the international community must prevent Iran from having the know-how to make a nuclear weapon and avoid “World War III.”

The president said Tuesday he was briefed on the NIE only a week ago and that the estimate has not changed his mind about the danger posed by Tehran. He added that the intelligence assessment opens a new opportunity for diplomacy.

“It’s a very powerful NIE,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), a member of the Intelligence Committee. “We all feel badly burnt by the Iraq NIE.” She added that her panel will look into the discrepancy between the Iran NIE and the administration’s recent rhetoric on the need for possible military action against Iran. It will also ask why the last Iran NIE, released in 2005, judged that Iran was much closer to developing nuclear weapons.

The NIE released Monday said that Iran would not be capable of building an atomic bomb until the next decade if it renewed its efforts. The assessment contradicts previous judgments of Iran’s intentions.

“It would be a good idea to try and learn more why there is such a difference between one report and the other,” said Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), a member of the Armed Services panel. “We are hoping that [the latest] estimate is right.” He warned that the United States should not let its guard down with regard to Iran and keep pushing for sanctions.

The intelligence community’s latest assessment on Iran’s nuclear intentions comes after a year of congressional prodding, including a study by the Senate Intelligence Committee of the intelligence community’s work regarding the collection and analysis of information on Iran.

That study concluded that the intelligence community has significantly improved the quality of its work since the 2002 Iraq estimate, according to a statement released by Senate Intelligence Chairman Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.).

“The key judgments show that the Intelligence Community has learned its lessons from the Iraq debacle,” Rockefeller said. “This demonstrates a new willingness to question assumptions internally, and a level of independence from political leadership that was lacking in the recent past.”

In the coming days, the intelligence committees will be meeting with intelligence officials to pour over the classified material of the report.

“I will be asking several questions. First, I will want to be fully informed about the classified sources upon which this estimate is based,” said Rep. Silvestre Reyes (D-Texas), chairman of the House Intelligence panel.  He said he will also ask where certain agencies dissented, why Iran suspended its program and what can be done in the future to prevent Iran from restarting it.

“There is absolutely no question that there should be oversight on this issue,” said Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) who for years has been trying to push legislation that would ensure congressional authorization for any military action with Iran.

President Bush’s “credibility is absolutely zero,” McDermott said in an interview. “We are dealing with a president who has no shame. Anyone who can turn down 10 million children [for health insurance] is not going to be turned off by a report,” he added.

He said that even though the report’s conclusion is not a victory he wants, it shows that the Democrats “told the American people the truth.”

As the Democrats attacked Bush, Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), the Republican Conference chairman, disputed the notion that Bush has no credibility on Iran.

“The president has been responsible for releasing the information which you are now talking about,” said Kyl. “If he wanted to keep a closer hold on that, as the person responsible for declassification, he could have. Nor do I think it’s inconsistent of anything he has said in the past.”

Meanwhile, Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.), a pro-Israel lawmaker who has opposed congressional action that could limit the administration’s Iran policy, found the change in the intelligence estimates over the past two years “troubling.”

“It makes one question which is more accurate, this one or the previous one which came to the opposite conclusion,” he said in a statement. “It makes one harken back to the flawed Iraq intelligence. It seems as if our intelligence agencies can’t make up their minds, and that is troubling.”

He added that Iran continues to “thumb its nose at the international community by enriching uranium” and warned that the U.S. should continue to push for strong sanctions on Iran.

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.), chairman of the Foreign Affairs subcommittee on terrorism, nonproliferation and trade, said that military action against Iran may not be needed in the near future. He said that the U.S. and international community should intensify economic and diplomatic pressure until Iran dismantles its enrichment facility at Natanz. Iran has declared that it has 3,000 centrifuges at Natanz, a fact confirmed by watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency, Sherman said.

“If they master their operation, the Iranians would be able to produce enough fuel for a bomb in less than a year,” he warned. “Once a country has the highly enriched uranium (HEU) needed for a bomb, the other components and know-how needed to assemble a bomb can be obtained in roughly a year. What emerges from the new NIE is that Iran will be able to produce the HEU needed for a bomb by the early or middle part of the next decade.”

Another Iran hawk, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), said that Iran “has at best made a tactical decision to halt certain elements of this program, in response to increased international pressure and scrutiny, and which it may restart at any time.”

Manu Raju contributed to this report.