Admit It, Already!
"An Iranian-hosted ...conference ...demanded that Israel join the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) to ensure a nuclear-weapons free Middle East."
Nasser Karimi of the Associated Press, April 19, 2010.
The NPT, which became effective on March 5, 1970, recognized five countries as "Nuclear Weapons States" : the United States, the Soviet Union (now Russia), Britain, France and China. Another 184 nations signed-on as "Non-Nuclear Weapons States" (NNWS). The treaty requires that the states having these weapons will not provide them to any NNWS, and the latter group agrees not to acquire them. Moreover, the NNWS signatories also agree to inspection of their nuclear facilities by International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to verify that they are not diverting nuclear materials to weapons production.
Three nations declined to sign the NPT: Israel, India and Pakistan. Although the NPT was signed under the authority of the Shah of Iran, the Islamic Republic of Iran (established in 1979) claims to adhere to the NPT, but has refused to allow IAEA inspections of some reactors. North Korea signed the NPT, but withdrew in 2003 after admitting that it had built atomic weapons and openly testing them.
India and Pakistan have also tested nuclear weapons, and show no signs of giving them up. Israel has neither admitted nor denied having "nukes", but a 1991 book entitled "The Samson Option" by Seymour Hersh (1) disclosed that Israel has been a nuclear power since late 1966, years before the NPT was even enacted. Since the book was published, former President Jimmy Carter has confirmed that Israel had nuclear weapons during his presidency (1977-1981); unlike Mr Hersh, Carter had access to CIA intelligence at the time. In 2008, Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul, a Texas congressman, estimated that Israel had about 200 atomic bombs.
In light of all this evidence, it is absurd for the Israeli government to continue the pretense that it may not be a nuclear power. Instead, I contend that Israel should offer to sign the NPT as a Nuclear Weapons State, if the treaty can be amended to permit the addition of new ones. Signing on this basis would encourage India and Pakistan to also sign-on as nuclear powers, which would subject them to the obligation not to transfer atomic weapons technology or materials to any NNWS.
Of course, if new nations were added to the five recognized nuclear powers of the NPT, that would be an admission that the NPT had failed in its core mission of preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons. But, since none of the three (India, Israel and Pakistan) had ever agreed to be bound by the NPT at all, bringing them in as nuclear powers would actually increase the jurisdiction, as so the binding force, of the treaty. It would also acknowledge reality, which is always an improvement over illusion.
Of course the Iranians will ask, "If its OK for Israel to have the Bomb, why not Iran?" (But that is equivalent to asking. "If its OK for China, why not Israel?" Israel's strategic position is a lot more perilous than China's, and so it has a greater need for the ultimate "Equalizer" weapon.) A facile answer is that Iran agreed to be bound by the NPT, but Israel did not, which is why the UN has sanctioned Iran for refusing IAEA inspections but never sanctioned Israel ( or India or Pakistan, for that matter. ) But a more realistic answer is that Israel has had the Bomb for more than forty years and never used it, despite repeated threats and missile attacks. Israel does not threaten to destroy any other country, even those that have threatened its very existence. Iran, on the other hand, is led by a man who has repeatedly threatened to destroy Israel. Such a nation cannot be trusted with nuclear weapons, but Israel can. This reasoning will not sit well in Tehran.
In today's world, power is respected more than any other attribute of a nation. Even rogue North Korea, a very small nuclear power widely reviled in the civilized world, is apparently to be spared the kind of "regime change" that was inflicted upon NNWS Afghanistan and Iraq. With Israel as an acknowledged nuclear nation, those leaders who threaten it will have to face down their own countrymen who would rather not be incinerated in return.
In his book The Prince, Niccolo Machiavelli concluded that it was better to be feared than loved. Since Israel is certainly not loved in this crazy world, I ask only that it be feared.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Published by Random House, New York.
Nasser Karimi of the Associated Press, April 19, 2010.
The NPT, which became effective on March 5, 1970, recognized five countries as "Nuclear Weapons States" : the United States, the Soviet Union (now Russia), Britain, France and China. Another 184 nations signed-on as "Non-Nuclear Weapons States" (NNWS). The treaty requires that the states having these weapons will not provide them to any NNWS, and the latter group agrees not to acquire them. Moreover, the NNWS signatories also agree to inspection of their nuclear facilities by International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to verify that they are not diverting nuclear materials to weapons production.
Three nations declined to sign the NPT: Israel, India and Pakistan. Although the NPT was signed under the authority of the Shah of Iran, the Islamic Republic of Iran (established in 1979) claims to adhere to the NPT, but has refused to allow IAEA inspections of some reactors. North Korea signed the NPT, but withdrew in 2003 after admitting that it had built atomic weapons and openly testing them.
India and Pakistan have also tested nuclear weapons, and show no signs of giving them up. Israel has neither admitted nor denied having "nukes", but a 1991 book entitled "The Samson Option" by Seymour Hersh (1) disclosed that Israel has been a nuclear power since late 1966, years before the NPT was even enacted. Since the book was published, former President Jimmy Carter has confirmed that Israel had nuclear weapons during his presidency (1977-1981); unlike Mr Hersh, Carter had access to CIA intelligence at the time. In 2008, Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul, a Texas congressman, estimated that Israel had about 200 atomic bombs.
In light of all this evidence, it is absurd for the Israeli government to continue the pretense that it may not be a nuclear power. Instead, I contend that Israel should offer to sign the NPT as a Nuclear Weapons State, if the treaty can be amended to permit the addition of new ones. Signing on this basis would encourage India and Pakistan to also sign-on as nuclear powers, which would subject them to the obligation not to transfer atomic weapons technology or materials to any NNWS.
Of course, if new nations were added to the five recognized nuclear powers of the NPT, that would be an admission that the NPT had failed in its core mission of preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons. But, since none of the three (India, Israel and Pakistan) had ever agreed to be bound by the NPT at all, bringing them in as nuclear powers would actually increase the jurisdiction, as so the binding force, of the treaty. It would also acknowledge reality, which is always an improvement over illusion.
Of course the Iranians will ask, "If its OK for Israel to have the Bomb, why not Iran?" (But that is equivalent to asking. "If its OK for China, why not Israel?" Israel's strategic position is a lot more perilous than China's, and so it has a greater need for the ultimate "Equalizer" weapon.) A facile answer is that Iran agreed to be bound by the NPT, but Israel did not, which is why the UN has sanctioned Iran for refusing IAEA inspections but never sanctioned Israel ( or India or Pakistan, for that matter. ) But a more realistic answer is that Israel has had the Bomb for more than forty years and never used it, despite repeated threats and missile attacks. Israel does not threaten to destroy any other country, even those that have threatened its very existence. Iran, on the other hand, is led by a man who has repeatedly threatened to destroy Israel. Such a nation cannot be trusted with nuclear weapons, but Israel can. This reasoning will not sit well in Tehran.
In today's world, power is respected more than any other attribute of a nation. Even rogue North Korea, a very small nuclear power widely reviled in the civilized world, is apparently to be spared the kind of "regime change" that was inflicted upon NNWS Afghanistan and Iraq. With Israel as an acknowledged nuclear nation, those leaders who threaten it will have to face down their own countrymen who would rather not be incinerated in return.
In his book The Prince, Niccolo Machiavelli concluded that it was better to be feared than loved. Since Israel is certainly not loved in this crazy world, I ask only that it be feared.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Published by Random House, New York.
posted by Gerald S Glazer at 9:29 AM
1 Comments:
You have forgotten the most important point with regard to Israel and that is there is no logic or equal treatment of Israel by the world community whether that is the UN or any international organization. To make conclusions and suggestions based on the assumption that Israel be treated like any other country is naive.
Israel is doing exactly what it shouLd and that is ignoring the internationaL community as much as it can with as much as it can whenever it can.
Israel is never treated equally or fairly by the international community and now with Obama Israel is also not treated equally or fairly by the USA.
Israel is now alone in the world and it must act accordingly and that means not trusting that any country will do anything.
Mr Glazer writes: "Instead, I contend that Israel should offer to sign the NPT as a Nuclear Weapons State, if the treaty can be amended to permit the addition of new ones. Signing on this basis would encourage India and Pakistan to also sign-on as nuclear powers.."
This is wishful thinking and has no basis in the facts of history. What Israei does or does not do is NEVER taken as an obligation of any other nation.
Mr Glazer further writes: "Israel's strategic position is a lot more perilous than China's, and so it has a greater need for the ultimate "Equalizer" weapon.)"
No country will make this case or do anything based on this. The world does not recognize Israel let alone recognize any peril Israel faces by anyone.
Mr Glazer seems not to live in the same world that I live in. I do not recognize at all the international commumnity that Mr Glazer seems to see.
Post a Comment
<< Home