New IAEA chief visits Israel in bid to improve relations
Director General Ukia Amano's visit to Israel so soon after taking up his post at the nuclear energy agency is markedly different from his predecessor, who visited just twice in 12 years.
By Yossi MelmanThe new Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency began a low profile visit in Israel on Monday in what is seen as being a bid to improve relations between Israel and the United Nations nuclear watchdog.
The visit will be Ukia Amano's first since taking the role of Director General of the IAEA in December. Amano's decision to visit Israel so soon after beginning his role as Director General indicates special relations with Israel. His predecessor, Mohamed ElBaradei, visited Israel just twice in his 12 years as Director General of the IAEA, only one of them being a public visit.
 |
Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Yukiya Amano at the IAEA's board of governors in Vienna on June 8, 2010. |
| Photo by: AP |
ElBaradei's tenure as Director General was marked with tensions with Israel, who opposed him extending his term with the IAEA. Under Amano's leadership, there are high hopes that relations with Israel will improve.
Amano is visiting at the request of Director-General of the Israel Atomic Energy Commission, Dr. Shaul Horev. During his visit, which he requested be kept "low-profile", Amano will meet with Dr. Horev, Intelligence Minister Dan Meridor, Strategic Affairs Minister Moshe Ya'alon, and President Shimon Peres. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is on vacation and will not meet with Amano.
Shortly after Amano's Israel visit, the IAEA is expected to address in a general meeting the demand made by some Arab countries to discuss Israel's nuclear program and their refusal to sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Israel's refusal to sign the treaty prevents the IAEA from inspecting their nuclear plant in Dimona.
Despite this, IAEA specialists have inspected Israel's small nuclear research plant in Nahal Soreq. Israel allows inspectors at this plant, as it was given to them by the United States at the end of the 1950's on the condition that it would be able to be inspected by the IAEA.
Amano's visit is taking place under the framework of Iran's continuous refusal to stop enriching uranium, which has led to sanctions from the United Nations Security Council as well as additional sanctions put in place by countries throughout the world, who fear that Iran is developing a nuclear weapon.
Just this week, Iran began fueling its Bushehr nuclear power plant, in a move that shows it is forging ahead with its nuclear program despite condemnations from the rest of the world.
Iran denies an intention to develop nuclear weapons, saying it only wants to generate power with a network of nuclear plants it plans to build.
Why Facebook Connect?
Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.
- Latest
- Most Viewed
- Most Rated
- Open all
They don't understand NPT If you haven't signed NPT in theory you are free to develop nuclear technologies NPT Is in place so that nation A who has nuclear tech can sell hardware expertise and tech to nations who having signed it agree to only use it for peaceful purposes if you have never signed it you are not bound to it An example of the above is Israel who finished Dimona before the enactment if NPT. An example of a rogue NPT nation is north Korea, Pakistan and India who unlike israel signed received tech then withdrew. All three have conducted test blasts unlike Israel The argument that since israel may have nukes Iran is entitled to them as well is a bs propagandist argument. If Iran wishes to developed nukes let it: withdraw from NPT, return al tech and hardware, discover and enrich kraken sovereign uranium sources and exile all who have a knowledge of nucleartech and fission Of course Iran won't do this as it seeks the easy cheating way Lastly durson is correct that NPT is flawed but wrong on it's flaws notably it should be amended to tel israel to open up and become the 6th NWS as it us unlawful to say that you developed nukes before they were NPT and as such demand their return. Why should NPT be retroactive? Are GCs retroactive? Does America, Canada Australia owe aboriginals tw rights and protections and as such compensation for crimes committed under a retroactive reading of GCs? If no, than why does the principle apply for NPT?
Those states refusing to sign the NTP should be considered as terrorist states by the UN and they should be subject to the international sanctions.
If some nations such as Israel and North Korea consider it in their interests to refuse to sign the NPT and there is no down side for them, then why would anybody sign the NPT. Israel has always been about gaining privleges without gaining responsibility. Signing the NPT gives nations added responsibilities, so I can see why Israel would prefer not to sign. The problem is that Israel still has all the privleges associated with nuclear power and a nuclear arsenal, but has not taken on the associated responsibility to the international community. Nations that refust to sign the NPT such as Israel and North Korea, and any others, should pay some price for their non-cooperation. If they do not, then the NPT is pointless.
You talk about responsibility. But, when has Israel ever threatened any nation with a nuclear attack, or ever threatened to destroy another nation? Answer: Never. But Arab and other Muslim states continually promise to wipe Israel off the map. No nation is forced to sign the NPT. As a sovereign nation, no one has to. Other nations signed, because it was in their interest to do so. We will probably never know what incentives many were given if they promised to sign.As for Israel, no other nation in the world has been completely surrounded by enemies, since it's birth, trying to wipe it out of existence, so it is a unique circumstance. And still, it has never tried to wipe another nation off the map, or threatened to use nuclear force against another country. Not even against Iran, it's biggest threat.
Israel was a founding member of the IAEA and relations between the organization and Israel are fine and have been. Mr. El Baradi did not often visit Israel as there was no need to do so. Read the list of whom Mr. Amano is meeting and you will quickly get the picture of what is going on. He is meeting security officials and not, with a single exception, people involved in Israel's nuclear programs. The IAEA has inspectors watching all known Iranian facilities, and fuel is being loaded into the Bushehr reactor.
What's the point when Israel is less compliant than Iran? There is nothing for him to do expect for drinking tea and exchanging pleasantries.
Actually as a non signatory Israel has no obligations under the NPT and hence is fully compliant with all of it's (non-existent) obligations. As I'm sure you know, countries are not obliged to sign any treaty unless they wish to sign. Any claim otherwise has no basis in law or precedent.
Israel anyway does what it wishes, obeys the international laws if it wishes and doesn't if it doesn't wish. Nothing new here.
True, Israel is not a signatory of the NPT. So what? Israel is a founding member of the IAEA and the IAEA works with Israel all the time. For example, the IAEA safeguards the Israeli Research Reactor ! (IRR-1) at the Soreq Nuclear Research Facility. The IAEA does far more than police the NPT.
The IAEA has trained physicists and engineers present at the fueling of the Bushehr reactor as well as at all enrichment facilities. There is much to discuss, especially as there is intense pressure from the radical right to attack Iran right now.
israel is the only nation that havent signed the NPT in the region, guess why..
China signed the NPT after it developed nuclear weapons and was accepted as a nuclear weapons nation.
Here's the thing. First of all, we have no idea if Israel has nuclear capabilities or not. It is commonly accepted that it does, but it works largely in Israels benefit to let the world believe that. A nuclear device is a deterent. The belief or fear that you have one is as useful as actually having one. Seconly, if Israel does have a nuke, it must be about 30 years old now. Probably rusty, and mothballed. If it ever actually worked. Two things to note, a nuclear reaction is quite difficult to trigger, which is why countries that develop nukes test them out. France was testing theres out less than 5 years ago. The other important point is that stationary nuclear devices and balistic nuclear devices are very different. To create a balistic nuclear device requires many more calculations due to the changing nature of pressure, temperature, oxygen saturation, etc. If Israel has a nuke, it cannot be launched at anyone, and meant only as a deterent.
Jack's definition of "region" deliberately leaves out India and Pakistan - neither being NPT signatories, and both now declared nuclear powers. Otherwise he couldn't say "Israel is the only nation". He also fails to note that Syria and Iran both signed the NPT, yet they remain in violation of their NPT obligations. The game of "shift the focus" has a long history. It's used, for example to claim how little of "Palestine" the Palestinians might get from Israel, forgetting that 78% of the original Mandate went to Transjordan. Or that Israel has sovereignty over roughly 1/6 of 1% of Jack's "region".
There is no other nation than israel in the region (except india paki) that havent signed the NPT, guess why..because they have those weapons stashed.
Iran and Syria have never VIOLATED the NPT. On the other hand have US done it many times.
Received tech through purchase and trade with other NPT signatories and then withdrew both conducting tests after NPT was enacted Contrasted by israel who developed Simons bedew NPT existed and never tested That us Avery big difference and highlights a crucial flaw in those who wish to critique israel as by comparison israel is an angel who never broke a rule that it, a sovereign state willingly accepted