Subscribe to Print Edition | Sat., May 09, 2009 Iyyar 15, 5769 | | Israel Time: 21:50 (EST+7)
Haaretz israel news English
web haaretz.com
Haaretz Toolbar
Diplomacy
Defense Jewish World Opinion National
Print Edition
Car Rental
Books Haaretz Magazine Business Real Estate Focus U.S.A. Travel Week's End Anglo File TLV 100
Last update - 19:38 06/05/2009
ANALYSIS / Loss of nuclear monoply - an Israeli nightmare
By Yossi Melman, Haaretz Correspondent
Tags: Barack obama, NPT 

It is unclear whether the U.S. assistant secretary of state's call to Israel to sign on to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty indicates a change in Washington's policy toward Israel's nuclear program, or even if the move was anticipated by the White House.

It is clear, however, that where there's smoke, there's fire. The U.S. has been protecting Israel for years, creating a diplomatic umbrella and pushing away any attempt, in any international debate, to discuss the nuclear weapons the entire world believes Israel possesses.

A
Advertisement
merica's protection of Israel began as early as 1969, when then-president Richard Nixon entered the White House along with National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger.

Nixon halted visits by American inspectors to the Dimona nuclear reactor, a process which began as a result of John F. Kennedy's pressure on Israel and continued during Lyndon Bates Johnson's administration.

These visits were less than effective, howeverm since Israel in fact deceived the inspectors.

As former Israeli foreign minister, Abba Eban, once testified, Israel erected a double array of buildings in Dimona in order to throw off inspection. But it is doubtful whether inspectors were really deceived, or if they just wanted to be deceived.

American diplomacy was aided by the indirect support it received from Israel. This help came in the form of Israel's "ambiguous" nuclear policy. This policy relied on a linguistic stroke of brilliance uttered by Shimon Peres in the early 1960s, during his tenure as deputy defense minister.

Israel has never affirmed nor denied that it possesses nuclear weapons. It has consistently asserted that it would not be "the first to introduce nuclear weapons to the Middle East."

Even though the world does not always buy Israel's word, and is rather convinced that it does indeed have nuclear weapons, it this policy of ambiguity that makes it possible to repel any attempt at portraying Israel as a nuclear-capable country.

From 1969 until now, only the Arab nations have taken to protesting or confronting Israel's supposed nuclear arsenal. These nations insist in every United Nations forum - and especially in those held by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) ? on bringing the issue to the agenda.

Israel is not the only nation which has not yet signed on to the NPT - Pakistan and India are not signatories either. Israel has refused to join the treaty despite considerable pressure ? exerted by the U.S., as well - when the pact was first drafted in the 1960s and 70s.

The reason for Israle's refusal lays in its ambiguous nuclear policy. Joining the treaty would mean that Israel would have to let IAEA inspectors visit the Dimona nuclear reactor, something it is just not interested in doing.

However, the IAEA, of which Israel is a member, does monitor the small, hardly operative nuclear plant in the Soreq Nuclear Research Center.

The IAEA has access to that reactor because it was supplied by the U.S. in 1960 as part of then-president Dwight Eisenhower's Atoms for Peace program. The supply agreement indicated that the reactor would be used for research alone, and would be supervised by the IAEA.

Although India and Pakistan also do not allow IAEA inspection of their nuclear faculties, they ? unlike Israel - have conducted nuclear tests and overtly affirmed their possession of nuclear weapons.

Israel is now seen by the world as the only county which has nuclear weapons but does not declare so.

However, increasing international pressure on Iran to dismantle its nuclear program has once again brought Israel to the forefront of discussion.

"Why do you ask us to relinquish nuclear arms and not ask the same of Israel?" Iran has asked the Western powers.

Iran's argument is beginning to find more receptive ears ? and not just in the third world. The question has started to infiltrate consciousness in Western countries as well. As international tensions mount and the problems of how to deal with Iran's nuclear program arise, so too criticism edges closer to Israel.

For years IAEA Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei has proposed declaring the Middle East a nuclear-free zone. Israel's internal Atomic Energy Committee does not object to this proposal.

However, Israel insists that the issue be raised only after a comprehensive peace is achieved in the Middle East and after all countries - including Iran - acknowledge Israel's right to exist, and sign peace agreements and security pacts with it.

Even then, Israel says, any discussion of a nuclear-free zone would have to be intimately tied to a regional disarmament of other weapons of mass destruction, both chemical and biological, and to downsizing the number of missiles in every country's possession.

As a result of the difficulty in consolidating Israel's stance with the Arabs', every now and again new ideas rise to the surface.

One proposed program - a "freeze frame" on the current situation - was highly encouraged during Bill Clinton's administration. Clinton even initiated an international treaty to that tune, called the Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty (FMCT).

The idea was that countries possessing fissile materials would hold on to their existing stockpile, but without producing any new material. The planned treaty, however, never came into fruition.

Maybe now the Obama administration will adopt former president Clinton's design. It has become clear to the Americans that as fears grow of worldwide nuclear proliferation, they can no longer protect Israel as though it were a precious only child.

Even if the Americans do not tie Mideast peace talks in with their ferocious approach to Iran's nuclear program, the administration is nevertheless aware that it will have to takes steps to reduce - if not eliminate - the world's nuclear arsenal.

The biggest concern now ? for Israel, as well - is that unless Iran's nuclear program is halted, other Mideast countries, such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Turkey will sooner or later begin to develop their own nuclear cache.

The fear of breaking Israel's nuclear monopoly is a nightmare to Israel, the U.S. and other western countries. The more nuclear weapons multiply and proliferate, so grows the danger of it purposely or accidentally being used by an irresponsible regime or extremist organization.

Related articles:
  • 'Making Israel sign NPT won't be miracle cure for world ills'
  • Netanyahu to AIPAC: We want peace with Arab world
  • Lieberman: Take action against Iran if no talks in three months
    • Bookmark to del.icio.us  
     
    'Okay to kill Jews'
    Journal sheds light on beliefs of suspected Wesleyan killer.
    Rejection redux
    Hamas leader says group won't accept the two-state solution.
      1.   Another reason for peace 19:42  |  John 06/05/09
      2.   The reason why the same is not asked of Israel 19:52  |  Van 06/05/09
      3.   World Nightmare-Extremist Israel with Nukes 19:55  |  Robert 06/05/09
      4.   Israel should keep its` nukes. Iran should also have them. 19:59  |  Lou Medel 06/05/09
      5.   #3 Robert you are dead wrong. 21:27  |  Lou Medel 06/05/09
      6.   4 21:28  |  zionist forever 06/05/09
      7.   I Agree With Lou 21:32  |  Binyamin 06/05/09
      8.   Asdrúbal 21:50  |  el Bello 06/05/09
      9.   even in its darkest moments in 1973, israel did not use its nucl- 21:51  |  candid arab 06/05/09
      10.   Israel needs to tell Obama not interested 21:55  |  Shepherd 06/05/09
      11.   Fair`s fair 22:10  |  Don 06/05/09
      12.   It was an American nightmare too 22:36  |  Mark Lincoln 06/05/09
      13.   "Nuclear ambiguity" and the law of unintended consequences 22:42  |  Natallie Durson 06/05/09
      14.   nukes and Israel 22:50  |  agokoy 06/05/09
      15.   Whose security? 02:29  |  Murat 07/05/09
      16.   SHOW ME YOURS 02:33  |  Ed 07/05/09
      17.   Shepherd 02:41  |  Edwin 07/05/09
      18.   Another consequence of Israeli nukes... 02:43  |  Johnboy 07/05/09
      19.   Read Ezekiel 38 and 39 03:22  |  John 07/05/09
      20.   Rogue states with Nuclear weapons 03:27  |  David 07/05/09
      21.   # 13, Durson puts her anti-Israel views ahead of history again 03:54  |  Mark Leaman 07/05/09
      22.   Israel`s Nuclear Test 04:06  |  matter 07/05/09
      23.   Loss of nuclear monopoly by Israel 04:52  |  abraham cohen 07/05/09
      24.   Mark Leaman # 19 who would Israel attack 05:11  |  American in NY 07/05/09
      25.   Israel, India,Pakistan 08:41  |  The Teacher/Instruct 07/05/09
      26.   #9 You might want to read up on that, candid arab 14:46  |  Johnboy 07/05/09
      27.   Nuclear monopolies are dangerous 15:48  |  WHG 07/05/09
      28.   zionist forever #6 It is about hangin on to conquored territories 20:13  |  American in NY 07/05/09
      29.   Nuclear monopoly 22:48  |  Archie1954 07/05/09
      30.   Israel is the only nation that can be trusted in the middle east. 18:36  |  Cody 09/05/09
      31.   Nuclear monopoly 21:11  |  WHG 09/05/09
     Haaretz Hot Topics
    Durban II conference
    Air strike in Sudan
    Israel 2009 election results: Voter breakdown
    Israel vs. Hamas
    Iran: Nuclear and regional ambitions
    More Headlines
    21:06 Hamas: We won't accept two-state solution
    19:32 Muslim Brotherhood: Obama aims to keep Arab world divided
    15:25 Pope: Catholic Church and Jewish people united by 'inseparable bond'
    20:26 'It's okay to kill Jews' says journal of suspected killer
    16:04 Hezbollah: UN envoy biased in favor of Israel
    21:40 ANALYSIS / Netanyahu is beginning to look worried
    18:57 U.S. rabbi gets 30 years for molesting his daughter
    21:58 WATCH: Daily news round-up from Israel
    13:28 Sadat's widow: Israel would be attacking Egypt if not for peace treaty
    18:34 Hamas: Egypt expected to resume Gaza ceasefire efforts next week
    15:09 19 hurt, 1 seriously, during altercation in southern town of Rahat
    08:22 UN team prepares to investigate alleged Gaza war crimes
    Previous Editions
    Special Offers
    Advertisement
    Spring Specials-Dan Hotels
    Jerusalem from 179$. Tel-Aviv from 223$. Herzliya from 336$
    The Meier on Rothschild Tower
    Masterpiece Residence in the Heart of Tel Aviv
    Dead Sea Skin Care
    Quality cosmetics from the Dead Sea. Coupon code HAARETZ for 12% off!
    Camp Kimama Israel 2009
    The best place for your children this summer
    Eldan Rent a Car
    Israel's leading car rental company offers you a 20% discount on online reservations
    Jewish Singles Personal Ads
    Find the love of your life on JDate.com
    Junkyard
    Junk a car - get free towing nationwide and a tax-deductible receipt
    Home | TV | Print Edition | Diplomacy | Opinion | Arts & Leisure | Sports | Jewish World | | Israel 2009 election results
    Site rules | Makom: Engaging on Israel | Search engine marketing
    Haaretz.com, the online edition of Haaretz Newspaper in Israel, offers real-time breaking news, opinions and analysis from Israel and the Middle East. Haaretz.com provides extensive and in-depth coverage of Israel, the Jewish World and the Middle East, including defense, diplomacy, the Arab-Israeli conflict, the peace process, Israeli politics, Jerusalem affairs, international relations, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, the Palestinian Authority, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, the Israeli business world and Jewish life in Israel and the Diaspora.
    © Copyright  Haaretz. All rights reserved