This article was co-authored with Ploughshares Fund Research Assistant Reid Pauly
As a free Egypt transforms itself, analysts are nervously watching for signs of new nuclear ambitions. Concern revolves around three issues:
Before he became a special advisor to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Robert Einhorn analyzed Egypt's history in The Nuclear Tipping Point: Why States Reconsider Their Nuclear Choices: "Considering the factors that have historically motivated countries to acquire nuclear weapons, one might assume that Egypt would be a likely candidate."
Egypt has a nuclear and conventionally superior neighbor, Israel, with whom it has fought territorial wars. The military is well-respected in Egyptian culture (as evidenced by the smooth transition of power from Mubarak to the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces). The state has trained many nuclear scientists and has a long history of nuclear research. And, as a leader of the Arab world, Egypt wants to play a prominent role in world affairs. As Einhorn observed, these are some of the tell-tale signs of nuclear ambitions.
Unanswered Questions
In 2005, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) issued a report chastising Egypt for not disclosing a number of atomic research activities over the years. Just last year, the IAEA again launched an inquiry into the origin of highly enriched uranium particles that were detected at Egyptian research facilities in 2007 and 2008. Cairo has claimed that it had "differing interpretations" from the IAEA. But the concerns remain, especially in light of Egypt's refusal to sign the Additional Protocol -- allowing for tougher inspections -- until Israel accepts IAEA safeguards.
Why has Egypt never come clean about the full scope of its nuclear activities and experimentation?
Also troubling is Egypt's past chemical and biological weapons programs. Egypt used chemical weapons during the Yemen Civil War, making it one of a handful of states to have ever used them in wartime. Whatever chemical weapons it still may have are likely rusty in storage, more of an environmental danger than a military one. And there is no evidence that Egypt every constructed biological weapons, though intelligence agencies suspected research was conducted. Still, Egypt has never signed the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC) or the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), which it always links rhetorically to Israel's undisclosed nuclear weapons capabilities.
Chasing Nuclear Technology
Egyptian pursuit of nuclear technologies spans the political spectrum. The nuclear industry lobby, populist politicians distrusting Israel, Islamic fundamentalists with political ambitions, and parts of the military have flirted with nuclear weapons acquisition in the past.
In 1984, Defense Minister Abdel Halim Abu Ghazala sought President Mubarak's approval to begin a nuclear weapons program. Mubarak rebuffed him, but Ghazala began looking into nuclear material supply routes anyway and communicated with Iraqi officials about potential nuclear cooperation. When Mubarak found out, he fired Ghazala.
WikiLeaks cables contained unconfirmed reports of Cairo turning down black-market offers of nuclear technology from former Soviet states in the early 1990s. In more recent days, however, the Muslim Brotherhood has called for Egypt to develop a nuclear capability that could balance the threat posed by Israel. Mubarak kept a lid on Egyptian nuclear ambitions, but they never entirely disappeared.
Recently, Egypt has begun to accelerate its civilian atomic energy program, calling for international bids to construct the first of four planned nuclear reactors. Though permitted under the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), this could get tricky. The Obama administration has recently weakened its stand on countries' nuclear programs. After convincing the United Arab Emirates to voluntarily forswear any uranium enrichment or plutonium reprocessing capabilities (that could be used for nuclear fuel or nuclear bombs) as part of the nuclear cooperation deal struck with the United States, the administration has abandoned that principle.
In negotiations for nuclear trade deals with Vietnam, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia, U.S. officials have put state-to-state relations and business interests above national security. They have abandoned these "gold standard" safeguards supported by proliferation experts. If Egypt goes ahead with nuclear power plans now, it could insist on the right to get these dual-use technologies, complicating a nascent regional nuclear technology race.
Global Leadership
More positively, Egyptians have played a central role in the creation and strengthening of the global non-proliferation regime. Mohamed ElBaradei, now a prominent political opposition figure in Egypt, was Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) from 1997 to 2009. Egypt was also an early supporter of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and some Egyptians, particularly Mohamed Shaker, were instrumental in its negotiation and early implementation.
Egypt has made the creation of a Middle East Free of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) a central goal of its foreign policy. At the NPT Review Conference in 2010, agreement was reached only after all 187 nations agreed to the Egyptian-championed plan for a 2012 conference on the creation of a WMD-free zone in the Middle East.
While all Middle Eastern nations have committed to participate, much work remains to be done to ensure that the 2012 conference is fruitful. Even before Mubarak fell, David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security, feared that failure to make progress "could be a catalyst for [the Egyptians] to leave the NPT." This would be a disaster, as many nations have long followed Egypt's lead on these issues.
Conclusion
Overall, nuclear watchdogs have cause for concern. Egypt has played a central role in the creation of the global non-proliferation regime and will continue to be an important U.S. ally in the pursuit of a world without nuclear weapons. As Einhorn concluded in his study:
Egyptian leaders seem to have reached the conclusion years ago that a nuclear weapons capability would undermine higher national priorities, especially peace and stability in the region, economic development, and close ties with the United States.
It would take a major change in circumstances to get Egypt to alter its long-standing posture, including the combination of a serious external threat and a substantial change in the composition and orientation of Egypt's leadership.
This, however, is exactly the situation we now confront, with the advance of an Iranian nuclear program and a peaceful revolution that has transformed the core of Egyptian politics. In the months and years ahead, the United States must ensure that Egypt's dormant nuclear ambitions stay that way.
Follow Joe Cirincione on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Cirincione
http://www.npr.org/2011/02/08/133588036/the-new-republic-revolts-could-fuel-nuclear-desires
Sokolski draws the right conclusions about the need to include stricter non-proliferation standards in our nuclear cooperation agreements.
For example: "unlike Iraq, Syria, Libya, and Iran — all of which have been caught attempting to develop a nuclear weapons option"
What does exactly "nuclear weapons options" mean? And can you show me where Syria or Iran have been caught doing whatever that means. Libya voluntarily gave up their nuclear weapon development which was going no where and paid to PAN AM families to come out of the penalty box. Iraq disclosed their nuclear development, after the first desert war. Without reconstituting it, even though they were accused of it and invaded because of it.
Such a blatant mischaracterization and hype deems the whole article without any merit.
As for NPT, I think you live in a dream world. No democratic nation will sign NPT as it is, or will ratify it let alone making it stricter. A one sided agreement will never work, middle east is becoming democratic and they won't go for neo-colonial tools to be hit with on the head.
""Not quite:
http://wwwÂ.reuters.cÂom/articleÂ/2010/02/1Â8/us-nucleÂar-iran-iaÂea-idUSTREÂ61H4EH2010Â0218
"In unusually blunt language, an InternatioÂnal Atomic Energy Agency report for the first time suggested Iran was actively pursuing nuclear weapons capabilityÂ, throwing independenÂt weight behind similar Western suspicionsÂ." "
Amid the furor over Iranian duplicity, the IAEA passed a resolution calling on Israel to join the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and open its nuclear facilities to inspection.
The United States and Europe tried to block the IAEA resolution, but it passed anyway. The media virtually ignored the event.
The United States assured Israel that it would support Israel's rejection of the resolution -- reaffirming a secret understanding that has allowed Israel to maintain a nuclear arsenal closed to international inspections, according to officials familiar with the arrangements. Again, the media were silent.
Indian officials greeted U.N. Resolution 1887 by announcing that India "can now build nuclear weapons with the same destructive power as those in the arsenals of the world's major nuclear powers," the Financial Times reported.
Both India and Pakistan are expanding their nuclear weapons programs. They have twice come dangerously close to nuclear war, and the problems that almost ignited this catastrophe are very much alive.
Obama greeted Resolution 1887 differently. The day before he was awarded the Nobel Prize for his inspiring commitment to peace, the Pentagon announced it was accelerating delivery of the most lethal non-nuclear weapons in the arsenal: 13-ton bombs for B-2 and B-52 stealth bombers, designed to destroy deeply hidden bunkers shielded by 10,000 pounds of reinforced concrete.
http://www.chomsky.info/articles/20091105.htm
Iran, on the other hand, is a signatory, and is flouting its commitments. "In unusually blunt language, an International Atomic Energy Agency report for the first time suggested Iran was actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability, throwing independent weight behind similar Western suspicions."
The article speaks about for Egypt to develop a nuclear capability that could balance the threat posed by Israel." What threat does Israel pose to Egypt?
The article also comments on "neighbor, Israel, with whom it has fought territorial wars." Those wars were never for "territory". They were clearly wars of extermination, aimed at the Jewish state.
Pure unmitigated nonsense! The 1973 war was launched ( after Israel failed to respond to Sadat's peace overtures: Peace for the Sinai) by Egypt, specifically, to reclaim the territory it ( the Sinai Peninsula) lost to Israel as a result of Israel's attack on Egypt in 1967! Sadat had no intentions of destroying the Jewish state, which his earlier peace offering, and subsequent peace settlement, made clear!
Iran, unlike Israel, is signatory of the 1970 NNPT, which requires International Atomic Energy Agency to make frequent unannounced inspections in order to verify that country’s nuclear program remains within bounds of treaty. The IAEA has made over 2,700 snap inspections in Iran and have repeatedly stated that they have found no evidence of weapons program and that non-diversion of nuclear material is continually being verified.
IAEA, Mohamed El-Baradei, have repeatedly shown that Iran has no military component to its program. in July 2010, El-Baradei stated “I do not believe that the Iranians are actually producing nuclear weapons… in general, the danger of a nuclear-armed Iran is overestimated, some even play it up intentionally.”
One of the treaty’s main principles is non-proliferation. (U.S., France, United Kingdom, Russia, and China) agree not to transfer nuclear weapons. Yet IAEA and the media have completely disregarded that the U.S. has actively been contributing to proliferation of nuclear arms in Europe.
Not quite:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/02/18/us-nuclear-iran-iaea-idUSTRE61H4EH20100218
"In unusually blunt language, an International Atomic Energy Agency report for the first time suggested Iran was actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability, throwing independent weight behind similar Western suspicions."
"IAEA's new chief, Yukiya Amano, is seen as more inclined to confront Iran than his predecessor, Mohamed ElBaradei, who retired on December 1."
Vanunu spent 18 years in prison, including more than 11 years in solitary confinement. Released from prison in 2004, he became subject to a broad array of restrictions on his speech and movement. Since then he has been arrested several times for violations of those restrictions, including giving various interviews to foreign journalists and attempting to leave Israel. He says that he suffered "cruel and barbaric treatment" at the hands of Israeli authorities while imprisoned, and suggests that his treatment would have been different if he were Jewish (Vanunu is a Christian convert from Judaism).[3]
In 2007, Vanunu was sentenced to six months in prison for violating terms of his parole. "The organisation considers Mordechai Vanunu to be a prisoner of conscience and calls for his immediate and unconditional release."[4] In May 2010, Vanunu was arrested and sentenced to three months in jail on suspicion that he met foreigners in violation of conditions of his 2004 release from jail.
to have nuclear technology for peacefull purpose, but not
any muslim nation ?
If the US, Russia, France, Britain, China, India, Pakistan, Israel can have the bomb, so can Egypt or Iran.
The US is truly a perverse culture.