This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/28/world/middleeast/netanyahu-warns-that-iran-bombmaking-ability-is-nearer.html

The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Netanyahu Warns Iran Is Close to Making a Bomb Nod to Obama by Netanyahu on Iran Bomb
(about 7 hours later)
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel told the United Nations on Thursday that he believes Iran’s ability to make an atomic weapon will be irreversible by next spring or summer — a far more specific time frame than he had asserted before — and he argued that a “clear red line” must be drawn to warn the Iranians they must halt their nuclear fuel enrichment before then. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel told the United Nations on Thursday that Iran’s capability to enrich uranium must be stopped before next spring or early summer, arguing that by that time the country will be in a position to make a short, perhaps undetectable, sprint to manufacture its first nuclear weapon.
Mr. Netanyahu also thanked President Obama for his speech at the United Nations two days earlier in which he warned that he would not tolerate a nuclear-armed Iran. The Israeli leader’s speech emphasized Israel’s solidarity with the United States and appeared to be an attempt to smooth over differences over the urgency of what both view as the Iranian nuclear threat. In his speech at the annual General Assembly, Mr. Netanyahu dramatically illustrated his intention to shut down Iran’s nuclear program by drawing a red line through a cartoonish diagram of a bomb. But the substance of his speech suggested a softening of what had been a difficult dispute with the Obama administration on how to confront Iran over its nuclear program.
Mr. Netanyahu’s speech at the annual United Nations General Assembly was largely devoted to what he described as the existential threat posed by a nuclear-armed Iran, which he equated to a nuclear-armed Al Qaeda. Only two weeks after that dispute broke into the open, Mr. Netanyahu on Thursday praised the warning Mr. Obama gave Iran in his own General Assembly speech on Tuesday.
Mr. Netanyahu even held up a diagram of a cartoonish-looking bomb with a fuse to show the Israeli view of Iran’s progress in achieving the capability to make a nuclear weapon. He drew a red line through the level at which Iran would have amassed enough enriched uranium to make a bomb — which he said would be in the spring or summer of 2013. “I very much appreciate the president’s position, as does everyone in my country,” he said. The Israeli leader’s speech also suggested that his deadline for a military strike was well past the American presidential election and into 2013 — perhaps as late as next summer.
“The relevant question is not when Iran will get the bomb,” he said. “It is at what stage can we stop Iran from getting the bomb.” While such a strike seemed like a receding possibility in recent weeks, it had remained a possible “October surprise” that worried the White House and military planners.
Iran has consistently denied it is seeking a nuclear weapon and has insisted its uranium enrichment program is meant for peaceful purposes. Mr. Netanyahu said in an interview on “Meet the Press” on NBC that was broadcast on Sept. 16 that he believed Iran was six months from amassing most of the enriched uranium needed for a bomb. “You have to place that red line before them now,” he said. But his General Assembly speech on Thursday was more explicit about his time frame for a military strike.
Mr. Netanyahu also used his speech as a rejoinder to the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, who earlier had harshly denounced Israel from the General Assembly podium with a litany of grievances, including attacks by settlers and Israeli land policies in the occupied territories. Mr. Netanyahu’s softened tone may also have also reflected Israel’s reading of the American presidential polls, which have shown Mr. Obama’s lead widening somewhat since the prime minister’s harsh words in mid-September, when he said the United States had no “moral right” to hold back Israel from taking action against Iran because the Obama administration refused to set a red line of its own.
Mr. Abbas said he believed that Israel intended to destroy the basis for a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict. He also received widespread applause in declaring that “there is no homeland for us except Palestine, and there is no land for us but Palestine.” “It seems that Netanyahu’s Iran policy is becoming more Obama-friendly,” Meir Javedanfar, an Iranian-Israeli lecturer at the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya, Israel, said in an e-mailed reaction to Mr. Netanyahu’s speech.
In response, Mr. Netanyahu said, “We won’t solve our conflict with libelous speeches at the United Nations.” “What was most impressive was that he drew a red line, without committing himself to it,” Mr. Javedanfar said. “He also did it in a way which takes the pressure off Obama, illustrated by the fact that he pushed back the timelines to next year.”
Michael Herzog, a former chief of staff to Israel’s defense minister and an Israel-based fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said it was implicit in Mr. Netanyahu’s remarks that “there are six or seven months more to continue to pressure the Iranians. The international buzz before was that Israel had to act before the November elections.”
Mr. Netanyahu’s speech also came against a backdrop of revived international diplomacy with Iran, which has insisted its nuclear program is peaceful. Foreign ministers from the so-called P5-plus-1 group of countries — the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council plus Germany — met to discuss how to advance negotiations with Iran that have been stalled since June.
“All of the ministers were unified in their belief that diplomacy is the much preferred way forward,” a senior Obama administration official said after the meeting.
Much of Mr. Netanyahu’s speech was devoted to what he described as the existential and increasingly ominous threat that would be posed by a nuclear-armed Iran, which he equated to a nuclear-armed Al Qaeda. He portrayed a Middle East increasingly in the hands of Islamic radicals, many threatening Israel’s existence.
But it was his description of Iran’s nuclear progress that was at the heart of his speech. Perhaps mindful of the experience of former Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, who laid out an ultimately flawed case against Iraq nine years ago in the same hall, the prime minister revealed no new intelligence — he just urged his audience to do some math based on the public findings of international nuclear inspectors.
With an almost professorial air, Mr. Netanyahu held up a diagram of a bomb with a fuse to show the Israeli view of Iran’s progress in achieving the capability to make a nuclear weapon. He drew a red line through the point at which Iran would have amassed enough medium-enriched uranium to make a bomb — which he said would be in the spring or summer of 2013.
His calculus turned on a stockpile of medium-enriched uranium — uranium enriched to the level of 20 percent — that Iran has produced, ostensibly to fuel a research reactor, provided to the country by the United States in the days of the shah. Right now, Iran does not possess enough of that fuel to make a single weapon. In fact, its stockpile of it has declined in recent months, as it has converted some for the research reactor.
But based on current production rates, Mr. Netanyahu said it would have enough in its stockpile by the middle of next year, a conclusion shared by many nuclear experts who have examined the reports of the International Atomic Energy Agency.
The Obama administration does not dispute Mr. Netanyahu’s math, but it does challenge his logic. Its officials, in background conversations, have insisted that if Iran wanted to convert its uranium to bomb-grade fuel, which is much higher purity than 20 percent, it would have to throw out the nuclear inspectors and take steps that would be easily detectable.
“We’d almost certainly see it,” one of Mr. Obama’s top advisers said two weeks ago.
Mr. Netanyahu challenged that assessment in his speech, asserting that the actual assembly of a bomb could be done clandestinely anywhere in Iran.
“Some who claim that even if Iran completes the enrichment process, even if it crosses that red line that I just drew, our intelligence agencies will know when and where Iran will make the fuse, assemble the bomb, and prepare the warhead,” he said. “Do we want to risk the security of the world on the assumption that we would find in time a small workshop in a country half the size of Europe?”
Iran has consistently denied it is seeking a nuclear weapon and has insisted that it was producing the uranium to fuel the reactor. But in separate meetings with reporters and academics in the past three days during the General Assembly, Iranian officials, including President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, declined to rule out the possibility that Iran would continue producing 20 percent-enriched uranium, even though it has now made enough to keep its medical reactor running for the next 6 to 10 years.
Mr. Netanyahu also used his speech as a rejoinder to the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, who earlier had harshly denounced Israel from the General Assembly podium with a list of grievances, including attacks by settlers and Israeli land policies in the occupied territories.
Mr. Abbas said he believed that Israel intended to destroy the basis for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He also declared his intention to pursue full-member status at the United Nations as an alternative path to statehood, an effort begun last year that has faltered because of Israeli and American objections.
“There is no homeland for us except Palestine, and there is no land for us but Palestine,” Mr. Abbas said to heavy applause.
In response, Mr. Netanyahu said, “We won’t solve our conflict with libelous speeches at the U.N.”

Rick Gladstone reported from New York, and David E. Sanger from Washington. Jodi Rudoren and Isabel Kershner contributed reporting from Jerusalem, and Steven Lee Myers from New York.

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:
Correction: September 27, 2012

An earlier version of this article misidentified at one point that day on which Prime Minister Netanyahu addressed the United Nations.
As the article noted correctly elsewhere, it was Thursday, not Wednesday.