United Nations agency has gathered in the last two years on what it calls the “possible military dimensions” (PMD) to Iran’s nuclear program, Reuters reported.
The sources, who declined to be identified due to the sensitivity of the issue, suggested the more recent material concerned extra detail about research and experiments that were covered in the November 2011 report. A new IAEA report would probably include “updated information on PMD” which could have “reinforced the concern” about Iran, an official has said.
The IAEA’s dossier in November 2011 contained a trove of intelligence indicating past activity in Iran which could be used for developing nuclear weapons, some of which it said might still be continuing.
It helped Western powers to step up the sanctions pressure on Iran, including a European Union oil embargo imposed in 2012, showing the potential significance of a decision on whether to publish the IAEA’s findings.
Since then the agency has said it obtained more information that backs up its analysis in the 2011 document, which detailed allegations ranging from explosives testing to research on what experts describe as an atomic bomb trigger.
Other issues it wants Iran to address are detonator development, computer modeling to calculate nuclear explosive yields, and preparatory experimentation that could be useful for any atomic test.
It says the “overall credible” information in the 2011 dossier – contained in an annex to a wider quarterly report – came from member states, believed to include Western powers and Israel, as well as its own efforts.
One source said it was believed that the Vienna-based IAEA had received more information on suspicions of nuclear yield calculations, but it was not known to what extent this would have made it into a new report on Iran.

IRAN SAYS CLAIMS BASELESS
“The agency has obtained more information since November 2011 that has further corroborated the analysis contained in that annex, “ it said on February 20 in a regular quarterly report on Iran’s nuclear program. It has been investigating accusations for several years that Iran may have coordinated efforts to process uranium, test explosives and revamp a missile cone in a way suitable for a nuclear warhead.
The sources said that last year’s planned report would probably have amounted to a wider review of the Iranian nuclear file, including PMD and other outstanding issues.
They said the idea was raised internally when the IAEA’s long-running efforts to get Iran to cooperate with its investigation appeared completely deadlock in mid-2013.
In follow-up talks on Feb 8-9, Iran agreed for the first time to address one of many PMD issues in the 2011 report, regarding so-called exploding bridge wire detonators, which can have both civilian and military applications.
“While other experiments with possible military dimensions must be addressed and soon, progress on the bridge wire detonators issue would be an important first step toward resolving these issues,” said the Arms Control Association, a U.S. research and advocacy group, in a February 26 analysis.
But it remains uncertain when and how the IAEA will be able to look into more sensitive areas, including long-sought access to the Parchin military base southeast of Tehran, where it suspects explosives tests that could be used for nuclear bomb development took place a decade ago.
The 2011 report portrayed a concerted weapons program that was halted in 2003 – when Iran came under increased Western pressure – but it also indicated that some activities may later have resumed.
Western diplomats and nuclear experts say the IAEA needs to complete its inquiry to establish what happened and to be able to provide assurances that any “weaponization” work – expertise to turn fissile material into a functioning bomb – has ceased.
They say clarifying this is also important in being able to quantify the time Iran would need to dash for a nuclear weapon, if it ever decided to do so.
 “Some analysts have argued incorrectly that issues like Parchin and alleged military dimensions do not matter. According to their reasoning, these issues are in the past and should be overlooked,” the Institute for Science and International Security, a U.S. think-tank, said this week.