Obama's new nuclear age doesn't bode well for Israel
The United States' latest update of nuclear strategy will do nothing to stop Iran acquiring a bomb.
By Reuven Pedatzur Tags: Barack Obama Iran nuclear Israel newsThe custom is for every American president to put together a working paper that re-examines the government's stance on nuclear weapons. The document is in effect a summary of the main principles of the incoming administration's nuclear policy and a statement of the new president's intentions on the future of America's nuclear stockpile. Two presidents have produced such documents since the end of the Cold War: Bill Clinton in 1994 and George W. Bush in 2002. Now it's Barack Obama's turn to publish a statement that will set out his nuclear policy.
Expectations are especially high this time around. Since the beginning of his term, Obama has repeatedly declared his intentions to inaugurate a new and secure nuclear age. He laid out his plans last April in a speech to an enthusiastic audience in Prague. His statement that "as the only nuclear power to have used a nuclear weapon, the United States has a moral responsibility ... to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons," was greeted with applause. America must "put an end to Cold War thinking," he said, hinting at his predecessor's path.
But whoever expects Obama to lead the United States and the world into a new and optimistic nuclear age will be disappointed by the working paper's details. A world without such weapons is a long way off, and despite announcements and promises, Obama's policy is a direct continuation of Bush's.
Paradoxically, the goals of U.S. strategy for using nuclear weapons actually widened after the Cold War, instead of narrowing. Clinton and Bush enlarged the aims of a nuclear attack to include the prevention of chemical or biological warfare on American soil, and even to target extra-governmental organizations.
While Obama said he intends to "reduce the role of nuclear weapons in our national security strategy," his government retains the right to use such weapons first. That is, just like his predecessors, Obama will not promise that the United States will not use nuclear force first. "Make no mistake," Obama told the crowd in Prague. "As long as these weapons exist, the United States will maintain a safe, secure and effective arsenal to deter any adversary, and guarantee that defense to our allies."
Nonetheless, Obama committed the United States "to begin the work of reducing our arsenal." But even a reduction of several thousand nuclear warheads will not bring him much closer to the goal of a nuclear-free world. The Americans have 9,400 such warheads, of which 2,126 are strategic (intercontinental). In the negotiations between Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev on a follow-up agreement to dismantle nuclear weapons, the Americans agreed to cut the number of strategic weapons to around 1,500, but just a third of this amount is enough to destroy any potential Russian target.
This agreement does not include the 15,000 nuclear warheads that the United States and Russia have in storage as backup for weapons which are ready for operation. And the future of the approximately 480 nuclear bombs the Americans have put in six European NATO countries is unclear at this point. In addition, the Obama administration plans to budget $7.3 billion in 2011 for laboratory work connected to the American weapons stockpile, which does not seem to indicate an intention to disarm.
Whatever is written in the working paper that Obama signs, it seems that U.S. nuclear policy will not change and a nuclear-free world will remain a utopian vision for years to come. While Obama has good intentions, in a world with 23,000 nuclear bombs in the hands of nine states, good intentions will not suffice.
Regarding Iran, Obama does not intend to change the current policy of using diplomacy and sanctions to block Iran's nuclear plans. This of course will not stop Iran; the American answer as it appears in the working paper is a defensive anti-missile system against the ayatollahs' nuclear threat.
The American statement does not bode well for Israel.
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
Algeria 500,000 to 1 million in the war of independence. 100,000 in the civil war in the 90?s Sudan 2.6-3 million murdered by Arab Moslem regime Afghanistan 1 million to 1 1/2 as a result of invasion. One million in civil war Somalia 400,000 ?550,000 in civil war Bangladesh 1.4-2 million as a result of Pakistan invasion Indonesia 400,000 killed by army of hugi Mohamed Sokarto. 100,000-200,000 killed in east Timor because of Indonesian invasion Iraq 450,000-650,000 killed during war 200,000-300,000 curds Iran 450,000-970,000 in Iran Iraq war Lebanon 130,000 Muslim Druze and Christians killed in civil war Jordan 10,000-25,000 killed by Jordanians in refugee camps. Well this should have you in Hysterics
It's the one trying to discredit the real authentic, giving loving Natalie. So,"At least he is good for a chuckle in the classic style of Ghadaffi, Idi Amin, and Avigdor Lieberman." Idi Amin? Really. Can you see now folks? This is a FAKE. No don't thank me real Nat, I realise you don't personally insult anyone.
Mr. Pedatzur fails to explain why a revised U.S. nuclear weapons policy that reduces the role and number of nuclear weapons is not in Israel's interest. Nuclear weapons are a threat to Israel and the rest of the world and serve no purpose other than to deter the use of nuclear weapons by others. If you're going to make the claim to say Obama's policy somehow weakens Israel, you and the Haaretz editors have a responsibility to back it up with some kind of logic ... not a simplistic and counterintuitive assertion.
anything for a chuckle...
It is always worth a smile when Israelis get into a contest of comparing the outrages and inequities of other nations versus Israel. In the end Israels supporters always justify or ignore the fact that Israel has killed more civilians, killed more children, violated more human rights, and is more pleased with its actions than any oppressive regime you can name. Iran, Syria, Hamas, Hizbollah, and all the rest pale in comparison to Israel. In order to make themselves look better, Israelis often goes to the history books to compare themselves with some of the all time evil and violent regimes. Even then the comparison is not always as dramatic as they think it is.
Israel beats American women for not riding in the back of the bus, kills photographers who are attempting to photograph the IDF in action, runs over protesters with bulldozers, and oppresses and brutalizes millions of people for the crimes of a few. In addition, Israel killed hundreds of Lebanese children in the 2006 war and hundreds more in the Gaza op. It really is an ugly picture and I am just getting started.
um ... North Korea?
The gracious president is aghast, the Russians have snubbed him, they are not interested in downgrading their nuclear arsenal. Of course their are many reasons. One reason is that Russia cannot keep up its arms industry, except producing RPG·s and Kalashnikov s, for their Navy rusts and their latest aircraft factories need retooling. Many a dissatisfied country are returning fighter aircraft due to technical failures. That is why Russia is purchasing 4 Mistral Class French vessels. To the ire of NATO and the Baltic States. Israel, produces the latest weaponry. Israel will not fall into some ambitious yet controversial nuclear free world so envisaged by this gracious yet naive unseasoned leader of the so called free world. Good day.
Ninth state = North Korea
It was going to be President Bush's crowning achievement please make up your mind. AND again there is absolutely no reason for israel to act unilaterally and stop Iran achieving parity with Israel. So why doesn't Israel act to solve what is clearly a problem only for Israel.
another war in the Middle East has been taken off the table by the Obama administration. Consequently there is now a concerted effort to try and discredit the Obama administrations entire nuclear policy. Which perversley is exactly the same as that of previous US administrations, which is to reduce the number and therefore the cost of maintaining a nuclear arsenal. Israel needs to understand that after 10 years of war, the people of planet earth will not forgive their politicians starting another one. Especially one on behalf of Israel's national interests. Israel wants a nuclear free Iran, guess Israel will have to declare war on Iran.
One Caliph would rule them all ,his Grand Visier Soros and Grand Eunuch Yosemite would assure Peace on Earth and in Heaven
Re; Your learned comment. You seem to care about 'Israhel' at least to the extent of writing to an Israeli newspaper.If you think,buddy, that iranian weaponry isn't aimed at the U.S well enjoy your dreams!
iran is a real terror state. iran kills young girls for the crime of being raped. the girls are first flogged and then hanged. boys are killed too if caught by the vice police. ahmadinejad also kills and rapes opponenets of both sexes. iran also has the tendency to prepare the young for martyrdom operations. such operations including acting as human mine sweepers by young boys during the war with iraq. even the iraqis were horrified. the number of innocent civilians killed by iranian proxies in iraq, afghanistan, yemen, lebanon and gaza cannot be counted--but they are very many.
iran is no threat to us and we got lots better things to do than worry about 6 million jews in the sand in arabia
The text says: "in a world with 23,000 nuclear bombs in the hands of nine states" Who is the ninth state? There are the US, France, Britain, Russia, China as official nuclear powers. There are Israel, India and Pakistan as unofficial nuclear powers. But those are only eight. So who, does the author think is the ninth state?
Nataniahu knows three things 1) A Israel attack on Iran won't blow all Iranian atomic facilities, although they will be serously damaged. Probably for some years. 2) An Israel attack will trigger a war of several years. Nataniahu is convinced that such a war will directly involve the United States, Europe and the Gulf countries against Iran. HE KNOWS THAT THEY HAVE NO CHOICE. They might be mad at Israel but they won't stay neutral, at least not the United States. The Gulf countries are already in coalition with Israel fighting Iran. 3)In order to cement the coalition Nataniahu will have to make some concessions in Jerusalem, and will have to resume a dialogue with palestinians. For that he has to reshape his coalition. A "peace coalition" with Kadima most likely means "war against Iran".
Israel is not bound by NPT, and has shown in past it's colours in these situations. but this paper is hypocritcal in that the in the same way that people critique the UNHRC, well CJ, Labrhas, Johnboy, Durson et al don't, for the fact that as haaretz noted, a slim majority of lunies run the asylum, the only nation, and that said a great, if not greatest one, to have used such a horrible weapon, is the same one to be urging its restraint but that said, people are imperfect and Jesus was right regarding need for forgiveness Biological weapons were used on "American" soil b4 1776 by Brits against aboriginal, using care packages of tabacco alcohol and blankets infested with small pocks as aboriginals didn't domesticate animals and build antibodies like Europeans, this at first contact would be one of the largest killers of aboriginal ppls in NA as per Jared Diamon Guns Germs Steel drunk Eli
the nyt is reporting that the u.s. military and intelliigence are not receiving clear directives from obama regarding iran. it is clear that neither sanctions nor containment will deter iran from going nuclear. obama's greatest achievement as president will be a nuclear iran.
Some people seem to think that Ahmadinejad is crazy. Perhaps he is just "colorful". One thing I do know. Almost every Israeli Prime Minister has more innocent blood on his hands than Ahmadinejad does. I am not referring to the blood of militants. I am referring to the blood of innocent civilian families. Israel always gives them a good knock whenever they are in the neighborhood. If this is sane and acceptable behavior, I opt for Ahmadinejad. At least he is good for a chuckle in the classic style of Ghadaffi, Idi Amin, and Avigdor Lieberman.
In 1947/48,Israel had to improvise guns,had to buy guns in czekoslovaquia and rebuild tanks bought in scrape yeards...In 1956,the bits and the french turned tail,and left Israel by itself.Whe finaly Israel was victorious,dulles forced a widraw...in 1967,Johnson was goi ng to send an interantional flotilla to break the egyptian blokade of the straits of tiran...The flotilla is still on its way...Thanks G-d,Kissinger helped Israel with some replacements in 1973,but the war was already strategically won and Israel was forced to let the egyptian army off the hook...ISRAEL IS ALONE ONCE MORE,TO DEAL WITH iran...NOTHING NEW,JUST MORE DANGEROUS
The Israeli government has worked diligently since Ahmadinejad assumed the presidency in Iran to spread the line that Iran is going to get the bomb next Sunday morning and destroy Israel by lunchtime. And the corrupt Bush Administration and the spineless Obama one have been only too happy to play along. Iran with one or even one hundred nuclear weapons would be a credible threat to neither Israel nor the United States. Since Persia lost a significant part of its empire to Russia in the early 19th century, it has displayed an extraordinary lack of adventurism in its international relations. The world should be more concerned with Israel's nuclear weapons, its self-righteous belligerency, and its use of the Masada complex as an instrument of blackmail.
The American People will be able to vote again about this in 2012. If they don't like Obama they will vote for someone else. That's all. It appears to me that our main problems are Ahmadinejad and Khameini. Maybe I'm wrong but I don't think Mousavi is nuts but Mahmoud is. That Holocaust Conference with the KKK was the last straw for me. Ahmadinejad needs to go away now and that's my final answer.