U.S. Support for Israel's Nuke Policy Eroding -Herb Keinon
Cracks are appearing in the nearly half-century U.S. policy of upholding Israel's right to maintain its "nuclear ambiguity," as Israeli nuclear capabilities are, for the first time, scheduled to be on the IAEA agenda.
[I]n the past the U.S. killed such discussions in international forums, while this time it failed to do so.
Emily Landau, a senior research fellow at the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University, said the U.S. was not assuming its role as the shield of Israel's nuclear capabilities to the degree it had in the past.
Obama, according to Landau, has embraced the agenda of nuclear disarmament, as well as the norm of "equality" that is embedded in the NPT, meaning that all countries should be treated equally on the nuclear issue.
(Jerusalem Post)
New U.S. "Nuke-Free" Strategy a Dangerous Initiative -Eytan Gilboa
America preferred to ignore Israel's nuclear weapons...
However, Obama's new nuclear policy may change America's traditional stance on Israel's nukes.
Obama's nuclear strategy is dangerous and problematic, premised on a certain degree of naivete and unfounded idealism. The U.S. position completely ignores the weakness of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, under which states such as Iraq and Libya developed infrastructure for the production of nuclear weapons. In recent years, Iran has been doing the same.
The new American strategy also blurs the distinction between the nature of the governments. The problem is not the U.S., Britain, France, India, or Israel. The main issue has to do with radical, authoritarian and violent regimes such as Iran, which threatens to destroy Israel and turn all Mideastern regimes into radical Islamic ones.
[T]he preoccupation with Israel will merely serve Tehran's aims by diverting attention. Moreover, the focus on nuclear weapons ignores other weapons of mass destruction such as chemical and biological means, which are held by some of Israel's foes.
The vision of a nuke-free Middle East is appropriate and worthwhile, yet it could only be realized after all of Israel's close and distant neighbors, including Iran, secure stable peace treaties with it, cut back their armies, and eliminate their WMD arsenals.
The issue of nuclear weapons cannot be separated from the other major issues of war and peace in the Mideast.
(Ynet News)
UPDATES:
Calls for a Nuke-Free MidEast Disregard Reality -Ephraim Asculai
The reemerging campaign to persuade/force Israel to sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty is strange at best. Asking Israel to join the NPT is ludicrous in today's world, with Iran calling for the destruction of Israel, Syria amassing chemical weapons and trying to develop nuclear ones, and with rockets threatening almost every part of the country.
The voices [for] nuclear disarmament are disregarding reality.
(Jerusalem Post)
*
Israel's Right to the Dimona Reactor -Ari Shavit
According to foreign reports, the nuclear reactor at Dimona built in the early 1960s is not there for peaceful purposes. Why should Israel be permitted that which is prohibited to other states?
Why has the international community agreed that it should exist inside a cloud of ambiguity? Because the international community of the second half of the 20th century was moral. It remembered that for more than a millennium the Jewish people was the persecuted "Other" of Europe, and that between 1940 and 1945 a third of its number were murdered, and even Roosevelt and Churchill didn't lift a finger to save the one million Jews who could still have been rescued in 1944.
The international community could see that the Jewish state was surrounded by a sea of enmity. It also understood that precisely because the nuclear reactor was not for peaceful purposes, it would ensure peace. It is Dimona that stabilizes the Middle East.
Israel did not boast or behave ostentatiously, or in any way misuse the capability that was attributed to it. Even in difficult circumstances, it acted with deliberation and composure. It never unsheathed the sword that those foreign reports describe as a terrible one.
If the international community of the 21st century tries to force fashionable norms on the Dimona reactor, it will cause a disaster to itself. History will not forgive anyone who undermines the order that is based on Dimona, or anyone who tries to crack the glass that protects the Jewish state from those who want to do away with it.
(Ha'aretz)
*
Cracks are appearing in the nearly half-century U.S. policy of upholding Israel's right to maintain its "nuclear ambiguity," as Israeli nuclear capabilities are, for the first time, scheduled to be on the IAEA agenda.
[I]n the past the U.S. killed such discussions in international forums, while this time it failed to do so.
Emily Landau, a senior research fellow at the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University, said the U.S. was not assuming its role as the shield of Israel's nuclear capabilities to the degree it had in the past.
Obama, according to Landau, has embraced the agenda of nuclear disarmament, as well as the norm of "equality" that is embedded in the NPT, meaning that all countries should be treated equally on the nuclear issue.
(Jerusalem Post)
New U.S. "Nuke-Free" Strategy a Dangerous Initiative -Eytan Gilboa
America preferred to ignore Israel's nuclear weapons...
However, Obama's new nuclear policy may change America's traditional stance on Israel's nukes.
Obama's nuclear strategy is dangerous and problematic, premised on a certain degree of naivete and unfounded idealism. The U.S. position completely ignores the weakness of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, under which states such as Iraq and Libya developed infrastructure for the production of nuclear weapons. In recent years, Iran has been doing the same.
The new American strategy also blurs the distinction between the nature of the governments. The problem is not the U.S., Britain, France, India, or Israel. The main issue has to do with radical, authoritarian and violent regimes such as Iran, which threatens to destroy Israel and turn all Mideastern regimes into radical Islamic ones.
[T]he preoccupation with Israel will merely serve Tehran's aims by diverting attention. Moreover, the focus on nuclear weapons ignores other weapons of mass destruction such as chemical and biological means, which are held by some of Israel's foes.
The vision of a nuke-free Middle East is appropriate and worthwhile, yet it could only be realized after all of Israel's close and distant neighbors, including Iran, secure stable peace treaties with it, cut back their armies, and eliminate their WMD arsenals.
The issue of nuclear weapons cannot be separated from the other major issues of war and peace in the Mideast.
(Ynet News)
UPDATES:
Calls for a Nuke-Free MidEast Disregard Reality -Ephraim Asculai
The reemerging campaign to persuade/force Israel to sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty is strange at best. Asking Israel to join the NPT is ludicrous in today's world, with Iran calling for the destruction of Israel, Syria amassing chemical weapons and trying to develop nuclear ones, and with rockets threatening almost every part of the country.
The voices [for] nuclear disarmament are disregarding reality.
(Jerusalem Post)
*
Israel's Right to the Dimona Reactor -Ari Shavit
According to foreign reports, the nuclear reactor at Dimona built in the early 1960s is not there for peaceful purposes. Why should Israel be permitted that which is prohibited to other states?
Why has the international community agreed that it should exist inside a cloud of ambiguity? Because the international community of the second half of the 20th century was moral. It remembered that for more than a millennium the Jewish people was the persecuted "Other" of Europe, and that between 1940 and 1945 a third of its number were murdered, and even Roosevelt and Churchill didn't lift a finger to save the one million Jews who could still have been rescued in 1944.
The international community could see that the Jewish state was surrounded by a sea of enmity. It also understood that precisely because the nuclear reactor was not for peaceful purposes, it would ensure peace. It is Dimona that stabilizes the Middle East.
Israel did not boast or behave ostentatiously, or in any way misuse the capability that was attributed to it. Even in difficult circumstances, it acted with deliberation and composure. It never unsheathed the sword that those foreign reports describe as a terrible one.
If the international community of the 21st century tries to force fashionable norms on the Dimona reactor, it will cause a disaster to itself. History will not forgive anyone who undermines the order that is based on Dimona, or anyone who tries to crack the glass that protects the Jewish state from those who want to do away with it.
(Ha'aretz)
*
No comments:
Post a Comment