Why does Israel get to keep its nukes? What is the foreign policy rationale? Is our policy essentially that Muslims shouldn’t have nuclear weapons? That seems to be the case with Libya and Iran, for instance. Post 9/11, if Pakistan had not gotten on board in the “War Against Terrorism”, would their nuclear capabilities gotten them invaded, or at the least sanctioned? Was their motivation for supporting the US, at least ostensibly, related to some degree to the fact they are a nuclear nation, a Muslim one at that? After all, they cannot afford to lose the deterrent, lest they forfeit Kashmir entirely. Interesting to ponder.
Well, what do y’all think? Is it really “Jews with bombs, good - Muslims with bombs, bad”?
No, that’s what would keep them from being invaded. Once a nation has nukes they are not easily deterred by conventional arms. And they were given sanctions, as was India.
As far as Israel, [ul]
[li] They are horribly outnumbered, and if the Arabs could ever field competent militaries, Israel could be overwhelmed. They act as a deterrent. OTOH, a handful of nukes from an unkown sources could destroy Israel, who would have no clear target to counterattack. [/li][li]Once a nation has nukes, they can pretty much keep 'em. The US would have a pretty tough time taking 'em away from Israel now even if they wanted to.[/li][li]I think there is more trust in the Israelis to keep them secure. The chances of a “broken arrow” are much greater in most Arab countries. [/li][/ul]
In the beginning US policy was to prevent anyone from getting nukes, the theory being that we were trustworthy not to use them offensively but nobody else was. When the Soviets got them, everything changed. Now, instead of being the sole nuclear power, we had to rely on the Soviets’ own sense of self preservsation to prevent their using them against us. Thus was born MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction).
If you remember, every attempt was made to prevent the Israelis, too, from getting nuclear capability. When they got the secrets anyway from sympathetic Americans, we killed Julius and Ethel Rosenberg. Guess it taught them a lesson. Now that Israel has nuclear weapons we have to trust that they also will not use them offensively.
The case of Arab nations is different. Israel is still primarily a secular state, whose main goal is self-protection. Arab states (or, more accurately, Muslim states) are theocracies, most of which have at the least large minorities who have stated openly that they believe in killing Infidels. They have no interest in living in peace with their neighbors. If the fanatics gain control of these countries and they have the means to mount a once-and-for-all Jihad they will likely do so.
Boiled down, we trust Jews not to nuke anybody except in self defense, but we fear that Muslim extremists like the now-de-fanged Saddam Hussein, if they have both political power and nuclear power at the same time, will use nukes against us.
I mean, I’m still concerned about Muslim extremists trying to fly planes into nuclear power plants in the U.S., or exploding a suitcase bomb here, etc. Do I need to list the number of terrorist actions done by extremist Muslims? The USS Cole. Dozens of marine barracks / embassy bombings around the world. Trains in Spain. Synagogues in Turkey. Nightclubs in the Philipines. Suicide bombings in Israel (remember: against civilians, not military targets… whatever your politics here, those are war crimes according to international law). Two separate attacks on the WTC (one more successful than the other). Murdering Olympic athletes. Hijacking planes. TWA flight 800.
Plus, the govts of most Arab countries are dictatorships and/or as religiously extreme as the terrorists themselves. And their schools frequently teach nothing but the Koran (no modern math, social studies, history, science, etc), ensuring their children are as devoted to the downfall of Western civilization as they are.
Plus, the stated goal of the Arabic countries to not rest until Israel is driven into the sea.
That’s why we should NEVER let them have nukes.
Then there’s Israel. The ONLY Democracy in the region. And when the Arab residents there aren’t uprising, Israel lets them live in total peace. Look at the period from the 80’s to the late 90’s, before the current uprising. There were occasional terrorist attacks there, but Arabs were free to live and work in Israel as they pleased. Heck, there’s an Arab mosque smack dab on top of the holiest site in Jewish history, but Israel has not knocked it down. Could you imagine a synagogue being allowed to stand on the site where Mecca is?
Frankly, that’s why they’re allowed to have nukes. It’s called restraint, plus their stated goal of peace with their neighbors.
When the Israelis start a global terrorist campaign, then we can go in and take their nukes away from them. In the meantime, I hope their “live and let live” policy spreads to their neighbors in the near future, but I won’t be holding my breath.
Not getting into the racial/ethnic/political aspect of the issue, I think it boils down to the fact that Isreal already has Nukes. It is one thing to prevent someone from developing nuclear weapons, but taking away nuclear weapons some already has is a completely different story.
The answer surely is - because America wants it that way.
It is like homosexuality in the military - the US don’t ask the Israelis don’t say. It might be a better question to ask why the US allows Israel to develop nuclear weapons, and the extent to which they may have assisted that process, as indeed once a country has them it is much more difficult to do something about it.
Israel together with India and Pakistan are known nuclear powers who have not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, so whilst double standards do apply to the US stance against Israel and their stance against certain Arab countries Israel are not actually in breach of any treaty obligations here. Of course America, or any other NPT signatory, would be if they had assisted in the process of aquisition/development.
I actually heard something about it on CNN (I think) the other day. Apparantly some documents have appeared which seems to show that the US tried to stop Israel gaining nuclear weapons - although that does not mean of course that other parts of the US machine were activly helping them gain them. Israel have of course never admitted having nucks. When there was a push (defeated) withing the Knesset for a full debate on the issue, Ramon made the classic statement of official government policy included the pledge that
which he repeated four times, over constant interruptions.
He went on to say that Israel supports the principle of nuclear non-proliferation,
(“The Knesset’s Nuclear Farce”, Gerald Steinberg, The Jerusalem Post, February 8, 2000)
The CNN report interestingly though did highlight a document exchange between Israel and the US that explained the Israeli definition of “introduction” DID NOT extend to the possible possession of nuclears but only to making explicit any such possession (i.e. a nuclear test, or actual use) with the ME.
Does anybody know more about the US role here? Explicitly or complicitly assisting Israel? Opposing Israeli development?
Personally I do not trust Israel not to spark off WW3 or a general regional war, or not to use nukes. I am not impressed by with their “restraint”. I will not bother to get into a shouting match with **filmyak ** and his post apart from to observe it is full of the usual lies.
The Rosenbergs were tried for spying on behalf of the Soviets, not Israel
Saddam Hussein wasn’t (isn’t ?) a muslim extremist, quite the opposite - he initially represented himself as a socialist / secularist.
Describing Israel as a primarily secular state could be a little misleading - many of Israel’s actions are predicated by religious tradition (cf Jerusalem, settlers etc) and the religious extremists have a strong voice in governmant. Any Israelis on the boards might be able to fill in the details here.
As for why Israel has nukes - well, they have the technology, the connections, and tacit support from the US.
Has Irael actually officially acknowledged having nuclear weapons ?
More of a general question and certainly a hijack, but I’ve always been told that it was France which fueled Israel with informations when they were developing their nuclear programm. Am I wrong?
Thanks. Yes, strangely enough, right after having posted this I read the paper and there was an article about his liberation with a side comment about the french participation in the Israeli nuclear programm.
Who is allowing anything? The US, the established nuclear poweres, and most of the rest of the world are against nuclear proliferation, but not to the extent of seriously hurting themseleves in that cause. What punishment did Pakistan receive for being the worlds nuclear shopping mall? Nothing less than designation as an American Major Ally, which should let them buy weapons that we have been holding for a decade or so. What other middle eastern countries have seriously tried to build nukes. Iraq is the only one I can think of and the only reasons they didn’t build one or continue development is Israel took out their development reactor (after Saddam Hussein stated Israel would be the target) and Post Gulf War I ceasefire agreement/sanctions regime.
As for Israel’s ongoing need for nukes, it should be noted that Egypt and Jordan have signed peace treaties with Israel. Syria’s conventional forces are a joke and Syria is apparently relying on a questionable chemical arsenal as a deterrent to any agressive moves by its neighbors. Admittedly Lebanon is a basket case with outstanding grievances against Israel, but hardly a threat one-on-one. So I am not sure that the threat of nukes are the only thing holding back a sea of hostile Arab armies. However, as long as the Israeli nuclear arsenal increases their sense of security with respect to their neighbors (and therefore hopefully moderates their behavior), I have no problem with them retaining their weapons. Not that there’s much anyone can do about it anyways.
Israel has spied on us.
In addition, a certain member of the neocon cabal trusted by the WH has been caught supplying Israel with classified national security info, yet retains access to such material.
So I’m not sure what kind of trust you’re implying here.
As evidenced by North Korea and Pakistan, there’s no “allowing” involved here. Israel has the bomb because they had the means to build it and the U.S. didn’t actively stop them from doing so - same as India, Pakistan, and North Korea. Anyone who thinks this is a case of keeping Muslims from having nukes has a lot of ‘splainin’ to do concerning Pakistan, the world’s second most populous Muslim country, owning them. Granted, Pakistan’s not Arabic, but it’s a lot closer to the neighborhood than North Korea.
I assume you want the citation for Richard Perle passing classified info to the Israeli embassy.
Here’s one:
**He was investigated in 1980s for possible ties to the Israeli espionage case involving Jonathan Jay Pollard. (Steinberg 10-26-2001)
“An FBI summary of a 1970 wiretap recorded Perle discussing classified information with someone at the Israeli embassy. He came under fire in 1983 when newspapers reported he received substantial payments to represent the interests of an Israeli weapons company. Perle denied conflict of interest, insisting that, although he received payment for these services after he had assumed his position in the Defense Department, he was between government jobs when he worked for the Israeli firm.” (Findley 1989, chapter 5; see also Saba 1984) **
an another:
Perle’s second brush with the law occurred a year later in 1970. An FBI wiretap authorized for the Israeli Embassy picked up Perle discussing with an Embassy official classified information which he said had been supplied to by a staff member on the National Security Council. An NSC/FBI
investigation was launched to identify the staff member, and quickly focused upon Helmut Sonnenfeldt. The latter had been previously investigated in 1967 while a staff member of the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research, for suspected unauthorized transmission to an Israeli Government official of a classified document concerning the commencement of the 1967 war in the Middle East.