On Sunday, an angry Iran refused to comply with a demand by the IAEA to cease work on its Qom nuclear fuel enrichment plant.  The resolution, which President Ahmadinejad now calls, “illegal,” criticized Iran for defying its obligations under multiple UN Security Council requirements and rebuked the country for its secret uranium enrichment activities near the city of Qom.  Iran further escalated the confrontation by declaring it would construct 10 more such plants.

This threat has created speculation in the blogosphere, but is it bluster or a realistic possibility?

Although the ability of Iran to deliver on all 10 sites seems questionable at best, Joshua Pollack at Arms Control Wonk speculates that secret plans to build new facilities may have been in place for some time, with construction already underway:

One way to see it, then, is that the Iranian side has seized the opportunity to get tough by coming clean, or to come clean by getting tough.  In the two-level game of international diplomacy and Iranian domestic politics, this sort of Janus-faced response may be as close to a win-win outcome as ever happens.

Adding fuel to this fire, the U.S. National Intelligence Estimate in 2007 “listed more than a dozen suspect locations” for nuclear weapons facilities in Iran.

While the Washington Times and the Wall Street Journal ready themselves for military strikes, Max Bergmann at the Wonk Room notes that the Bush administration’s previous refusal to engage Iran prevented an international consensus from emerging.  

The IAEA’s vote to censure Iran was not only “symbolic,” it represents a rare measure of unity within the group.  Moscow and Beijing have not previously been on board with efforts to punish Iran for its nuclear defiance, either acting to prevent new Security Council measures or pushing for lighter sanctions.  Bergmann notes that:

While Obama has been engaging Iran, he has also been working to significantly strengthen the international community’s stance on sanctions should the Iranians walk away.  The US and Europe, which were frequently at odds during the Bush administration, are now largely in sync.

The resolution was endorsed by six world powers — the U.S., Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany.  Only Cuba, Venezuela and Malaysia voted against the document.

A vote on the resolution is expected to take place Friday.  If the resolution is adopted, it will be transmitted to the Security Council for further action, a move that has not taken place since 2006.  The IAEA’s 2006 censure of Iran increased initial public speculation as to the nature of the country’s nuclear program and prompted another four UN Security Council resolutions, three of them with sanctions.  This second referral may likewise signal the beginning of more serious action toward Iran.

In an otherwise interesting look at the state of Iran’s nuclear program and disputes among American and Israeli intelligence officials about how close Iran is to the bomb, The New York Times’ David Sanger gets away with a big whopper:

It is unclear how many months — or even years — it would take Iran to complete that final [nuclear weapon] design work, and then build a warhead that could fit atop its long-range missiles. [emphasis mine].

Now perhaps Sanger meant to say something along the lines of “and then build a warhead that could fit atop a future or yet to be developed long-range missile.”  But that is not what the above sentence suggests.  What it suggests is that Iran currently possesses long-range missiles, which, as NoH readers know, is, ummm, not true.  

According to a recent Congressional Research Service (CRS) report on Iran’s ballistic missile programs,

traditionally, the United States has defined long-range or Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs) as those ballistic missiles capable of ranges greater than 5,500 kilometers (about 3,400 miles).  To date, five countries have deployed operational ICBMs (all with nuclear weapons): the United States, Russia, China, France, and Britain.  Other countries such as Iran, are believed by some observers to have ICBM programs in varying stages of development.

In other words, Iran does not now have any long-range missiles.  Iran does possess medium-range missiles that “may have range capabilities of 1,500-2,500 kilometers.”  While such missiles could reach targets in Israel, Turkey, and portions of southeastern Europe, they could not threaten the rest of Europe or the United States.  And while Iran may be seeking to develop long-range missiles, without substantial foreign assistance, Iran is not likely to possess a ballistic missile capable of threatening all of Europe and/or the United States within the next ten to fifteen years.

Better fact-checking, please.