Israel's Nukes: A Response

In reaction to my report that national leaders can act irrationally, and hence it is best if they cannot put their hands on weapons of mass destruction, I received a handful of messages. They held that as long as Israel had nuclear weapons there was no cause to complain about those which Iran may be acquiring. Not one of these commentators noted the fact that Israel has repeatedly declared itself willing to give up its nukes if other nations in the area would agree to form a zone free of weapons of mass destruction, as part of a comprehensive peace deal.

Before I proceed, I should note that I do not view criticizing Israeli policies as inappropriate, and surely not as anti-Semitic. Indeed, most Israelis criticize their nation's policies in no uncertain terms -- and they are Semites. Second, I consider Israel's commitment not to be the first to introduce nuclear weapons into the Middle East as sheer PR. What it means is that Israel has all the elements in place, and they can be assembled into a weapon on very short notice if it is attacked. However, Israel's offer to give up all nukes should not be ignored.

Take, for example, the comment of someone who does not disclose his or her identity and goes by the alias "jhNY": "Unless and until Israel's nuclear weapons are included in this anti-proliferation discussion, I'm going to believe that the discussions themselves are dishonest, in that certain facts (like the 150+ weapons Israel presently possesses) have been deliberately placed outside the bounds of discourse. Enough already." I assume that now that he or she has learned that Israel aspires to a zone free of WMDs and Iran does not, he/she will change his/her tune.

The same holds for the comment by someone whose alias is a least a bit revealing, namely "V4Vigilance" who writes "If I were Iran, I'd tell the U.S. and it's allies that it will agree to any nuclear inspection regime that Israel agrees to also abide by. Presumably this farce is being perpetrated in the name of Israeli security. That's fine, except that giving Israel a free pass to have a clandestine nuclear weapons program is a crock of sh*t. What's good for the goose, is good for the gander." Fair enough. How about the other way around? As Israel has agreed to much more than inspections, giving up these horrible weapons, can one now ask the same of Iran?

One more case in point: the comment by one Henry states "It is high time that we got a little bit ashamed of ourselves. I think that goes for our cousins (or is that subsidiary?) Israel. If Israel has nooks, why not Iran?" Fair enough. Let's "hook" all the nations in the Middle East -- and then the world -- into giving up their WMDs.

Finally, I agree that Iran has good reasons to fear that it will be attacked by the United States. Hence, I have repeatedly argued that the United States should agree to Iran's suggestions to form a non-aggression treaty, if this treaty entails putting all the other relevant issues on the table-- above all forming a zone free of WMDs. [For more on this, visit here and here].

All this does not change the fact that none of us can sleep safely as long as nukes are in the hands of irrational leaders, and I would add even the hands of those who seem rational. I agree: what is good for goose should be good for the gander, as well as all the other birds.

Amitai Etzioni is a professor of international affairs at The George Washington University and the author of Security First: For a Muscular, Moral Foreign Policy. www.securityfirstbook.com To contact him, write [e-mail]

Comments

[arvay]

The reason no one knows about this "offer" is that Israel hasn't repeated it, and officially refuses to say whether or not it has nuclear weapons.

If israel were sincere, they'd be repeating this "offer" every single day, as the opening position in its argument that Iran shouldn't be allowed to have nuclear weapons.

This is like all of those other israeli "positions" -- you know, no more settlements, a Palestinian state etc, ad nauseam, that Israel trots out in the hope that the rest of us will ignore its actions and pay attention to some irrelevant PR script.

Why does israel possess 150 nuclear weapons? The US consistently supplies Israel with more than sufficient arms to defeat any conventional attack by any combination of its neighbor nations. It even has enough left over to terrorize the Palestinians and Lebanese when it feels it can bomb them.

Nukes aren't cluster bombs to be used against a close-in civilian population or bands of insurgents.

So what are they for? Is Israel threatening to incinerate its neighbors? Europe? Is this some kind of Armageddon strategy in case it loses a battle? A threat to the world to create a world war?

If Iran has to answer questions about its uranium enrichment, (and the US intelligence services have declared it has no weapons program) Israel must answer to the world why it has these weapons in the first place.

We're all listening.

[Hass]

By targetting Iran, Israel is actually targetting the rest of the world. The real target of Israeli nuclear blackmail are the consumers of the oil that comes out of the Mideast.

[GLaB]

"Before I proceed, I should note that I do not view criticizing Israeli policies as inappropriate, and surely not as anti-Semitic. Indeed, most Israelis criticize their nation's policies in no uncertain terms -- and they are Semites."

You make an important point, which raises a question I have had for some time. Why do we only hear from the Israeli right wing here in the US? Why don't Israel's left and center have a lobbying presence here? Can it be that they are actually as dumb and ineffectual as the US Democratic Party?

_______________________________________________________________________________


This is the comment I was about to send - then I noticed a link under your article to "Progressive Jewish Group Runs New York Times Ad."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/23/progressive-jewish-group_n_108710.html

Maybe somebody finally gets it after all.

[JonSmiley]

Iran = Signed on to the NPT, hasn't started a war in 250 years.

Israel = Refuses to sign the NPT, has a long history of aggression, possesses nuclear weapons, in non-compliance of more UN resolutions than the rest of the world combined.

Case closed.

[SadSong]

Let me see if I have this correct, or if I'm missing something?

The claim is that the Israeli government that will not offically avow having nuclear weapons, has placed them on the table in offical negotiations?

Is that what we are supposed to believe?

[Liberal2]

Well, the anti-semitic wackos are talking bold. But as I see it, Israel isn't threatening or hoping for the wiping off the map of any country. As for Israel and the Palestinians, I suspect when palestinians stop sending crazies wearing the latest in explosive vests, Israel will move back to its original borders.

When the wackos will agree to a joint defense of Israel if they move back to the original borders by placing US forces in the field as in South Korea, the wackos might have a moral and ethical point. But the US history towards Jews tells me why Israel must rely on its own forces and strategy (see SS St Louis).

[edtastic]

"But the US history towards Jews tells me why Israel must rely on its own forces and strategy (see SS St Louis)."

What are you implying? It seems like your slamming America for not being a reliable supporter of Israel even though it is clearly Israel's #1 ally. Are you trying to say America has not done enough for Israel? People are not antisemitic, they are sick and tired of America being at the Mercy of some foreign country and its lobbyist. No matter what America does for Israel it is never enough for some people. You don't care about Arabs I guess they just are not your kind of people. Seems like you have a tinge of bigotry in your characterisation of Palestinians as being nothing more than suicide bombers. Last time I checked they were people men women and children trying to live a normal life under military occupation.

[S1m0n]

Anti-Israeli isn't anti-semitic. When you claim that an attack on Israel is the same as an attack on jews, you encourage people to blame Jews for Israel's actions.

And we aren't. Why are you trying to increase anti-semitism? Let Israel live with the consequences of it's own actions, and leave us the hell out of it.

[Hass]

Criticism of Israel is anti-Semtism, or to be more precise, "New Anti-Semitism".
According to the theory of "New Anti-Semitism", since Zionism is inherent in Judaism, therefore any distinction between anti-Zionism and Anti-Semitism is illusory, and any criticism of Israel that fundmentally challenges the basis of Israel is anti-semitic.

So, some criticism is allowed. Like saying "Gee, Israel has been having bad weather today"- that's OK. Or "Gee, Israel has been killing enough Palestinians lately" That's OK too.

But if you say something like "Israel should respect international law and respect the rights of the millions of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes" then you're being anti-Semitic.

Ta Da!

[Hass]

"There are no such things as Palestinians"
- Israeli PM Golda Meir.

Talk about attempting to wipe people off the map...

[arvay]

We all need to flush this kind of crap down the toilet where it belongs.

Here's the script, folks:

Someone points out Israel's many crimes and how it's disastrously affected US foreign policy.

A pro-Israel person/group calls that person an "anti-Semite.'

The person is either embarrassed/intimidated, and goes away. Or, the person stands by his/her opinion.

So the attacks become more pointed, more personal.

The optimum result is that the person gets angry, makes anti-Jewish remarks, and gets dismissed as a bigot.

Sony, Liberal2, most people are to smart for this cheap trick. No one is going to degrade themselves by acting the bigot.

RE: "Israel must rely on its own forces and strategy " GREAT NEWS! The US can keep the$3 billion it gives to Israel every year, and the 3 billion it gives the Egyptians to not attack. Plus we can start to mend our relations with the Muslim world, stop worrying about a nuclear fireball in the Mideast.

We all feel SO much better, thank you so very much!

[MasterPierpont]

This is a joke. Israel won't give up its nukes and you know it.

And there's zero evidence to suggest Iran even has nukes. However, Iran would be insane NOT to have nukes, when you consider Israel's complete dismissal of International Law and its notoriously hawkish foreign policy.

Thanks.

[jeanrenoir]

Everyone in America who has been opposed to the absurd debacle of Bush's proxy war for Israel in Iraq should now gear up to publicize and oppose as forcefully as possible, the bombing of Iran by EITHER Israel or its neocon tool Bush. Israel's recent air force exercises in the Mediterranean were obviously intended to warn Iran and the world that Israel is ready to bomb Iran at any time now. Similarly, one of Israel's key journalistic shills, Bill Kristol, announced to America on Fox Sunday that if Obama seems to be winning in the fall, naturally President Bush will need to bomb Iran, since, implicitly, Israel can't rely on Obama to be the ventriloquist's dummy for them that W has been. A highly respected oil economist predicted on NPR within the past two weeks that if Israel (or America) bombs Iran, the price of American gas at the pump will double or triple immediately. Needless to say, that would crater the US and world stock markets, and plunge the world into a massive Depression. If the American masses are angry over the prospect of $5 gas, what are they going to do when Israel, all by itself, produces $10 or $15 gas for Americans overnight? There will be no place for Israel or its political and journalistic supporters (like the arch-neocon Kristol) to hide from the public's rage if Israel causes such massive spikes in oil prices. And the rage will have nothing to do with anti-semitism.

[SeanC2]

What a load of bollocks. Contrary to your assertion, there is no evidence--none--that Iran possesses nukes or is trying to develop them. Iran is a signatory of the NNPT and has allowed inspectors in, while Israel is one of the few countries that refuses to sign or allow inspectors in. Israel's policy has always been to deny that it possesses nukes at all, so it makes your claim that Israel is willing to give up its nukes rather dubious. Even if it were true, Israel would assuredly renege on its promise to disarm by falsely claiming Iran or another ME state has nukes or is developing them, just as it does now.

You claim you fear nukes in the hands of unstable leaders, but many of Israel's leaders have been terrorists or war criminals, and many of its chief rabbis have called for the extermination of the Palestinian people. There is no reason to believe they would be any less ruthless towards the Iranians. Zionists and neocon fanatics as well as the Israeli lobby in this country are constantly calling for attacks, even nuclear war, against Iran based on false assertions like yours. Their Christian Zionist allies believe nuclear Armaggedon is a necessary precondition for the return of their messiah. I am much more terrified of nukes in the hands of proven warmongers like Bush or the religious whackos in Israel than I am of Iran having them.

[cj124]

israel will never give up their nukes, just like they will never uproot the squatters and honor the pre 1967 borders. iran has allowed inspectors, even with meddling of the us and israel, and belongs to the NPT, does israel

[RabidRightRebel]

The trouble with your assesment is that while Israel may say that it is willing to give up its nukes (this is news to me as I have yet to see them admit that they even have nukes) there is absolutely no evidence that they are willng to do so. It is like them saying they want a peace treaty witht the Palistinians and then continue to build settlements on occupied land. They are just empty words.

If they truely are serious about a nuclear free Middle East clearly the first stage it for them to be honest about having nuclear weapons. Without such honesty why should they be trusted any more than the Iranians when it comes to nuclear matters.

PS: When people like hopeless277 care more about the price of gas than the death of millions of people they truly have lost their humanity.

[dynadem]

Oh hey, Israel says it's willing to give up all its nuclear weapons as part of a comprehensive regional peace agreement? Let's ask Iran to wait around for that to happen. If they don't, then our military will take 'em out with surgical, bloodless strikes.

Maybe someday the Iranian government will act irrationally. Israel does so on a daily basis, supporting fanatical messanic settlers in the West Bank. Israel also launched that lunatic war on the civilians of Lebanon in a quixotic, doomed effort to eliminate Hezbollah missiles.

[Hass]

Rubbish. Iran first raised the creation of nuclear-weapons free zone in the Mideast since 1970s, and Israel has repeatedly refused that idea. Arab states have offered a comprehensive peace deal -- which Israel has refused.

TIME reported this back in 1981:

[Saudi King] Fahd stated that Israel could "live in peace" with its Arab neighbors provided it permitted the Palestinian population of the Israeli-occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip to form an independent state. That condition alone made the proposal unacceptable to the Israeli government, but U.S. and European officials said that they hoped the Fahd initiative might be a first tentative step toward working out some solution to the dangerous impasse in the Middle East.
In an interview with the official Saudi Press Agency, Fahd called for: 1) Israeli withdrawal from all territory that it had occupied since the 1967 war; 2) removal of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and other occupied areas; 3) guarantees of freedom of worship for all religious groups within these areas; 4) recognition of the rights of 2 million Palestinian refugees " from the 1948 war as well as the 1967 war " for repatriation or compensation; 5) U.N. trusteeship over the West Bank and Gaza Strip during a transition period of several months; and 6) establishment of an independent Palestinian state, with the Arab eastern section of Jerusalem as its capital."
(SEE http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,949373,00.html?iid=chix-sphere )

[hopeless277]

For all I care, Israel and Iran can go at each other with all the weapons at their disposal. If they can make sure the price of my own personal gasoline goes down. Kill as many of each other as you can. Just make sure not to increase gas prices.

[HeevenSteven]

Crap, there's nothing in the book of revelation about gas prices....

[SadSong]

lol, I think that's a matter of interpretation, Pat Robertson says it's in there. :-)