A “Nuclear-Free Zone” in the Middle East? Why Israel will not Join the Non-Proliferation Treaty
By Timothy Alexander Guzman
Iran’s New President Hassan Rouhani has requested that Israel to sign
 and become a member of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) as he
 spoke for a second time at the United Nation General Assembly. “As long as nuclear weapons exist, the threat of their use exists,” Rouhani said, citing the American bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.  Rouhani is calling for “nuclear-free zone” in
 the Middle East.  Israel is the only country in the Middle East that 
had not and will not sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.  Israel 
would use nuclear weapons if it felt it was threatened by any nation in 
the Middle East.
The nuclear capability of Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) defensive 
capabilities just reached another plateau this past April.  It purchased
 its 5th nuclear submarine that can be deployed anywhere in the world 
with first strike capability.  The Israel News Agency reported that 
Israel purchased a fifth Dolphin class submarine called the “INS Rahav” 
from Germany.  The article headlined “Israel Launches Ninth Submarine, 
Ready To Strike Iran Nuclear Weapons.”  Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said “The
 submarines are a strong, strategic tool for the IDF. The State of 
Israel is ready to act anytime, anywhere – on land, sea and air – in 
order to ensure the security of Israel’s citizens.”  The submarines
 are equipped with Israeli-designed Popeye missiles that are capable of 
carrying nuclear warheads.  It is no secret that Israel has nuclear 
weapons.  Some estimates suggest that Israel has between 100 and 400 
nuclear weapons.  No one knows exactly how many nuclear bombs Israel 
possesses, but we do know they have the capability to produce them at a 
moment’s notice.
Mordechai Vanunu, a former Israeli technician at the Dimona nuclear 
research center in the Negev desert exposed Israel’s nuclear program to 
the world in the 1986 Sunday Times (UK).  Vanunu was kidnapped in Italy 
by Mossad agents and brought to Israel to face an Israeli court.  He was
 convicted and imprisoned for more than 18 years at Shikma Prison in 
Ashkelon, Israel.  Half of his prison term was in solitary confinement. 
 He was eventually released in 2004.  Since then, Vanunu has been 
arrested and even imprisoned for violating his parole.  He was also 
arrested for trying to leave Israel at one time.  Former Israeli Prime 
Minister and Noble Peace Prize winner Shimon Peres said “he was a traitor to this country”.
Since Israel is not a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation 
Treaty; the Dimona Nuclear Research center is not subject to inspections
 from the international community such as the International Atomic 
Energy Agency (IAEA).  According to the Federation of American Scientists in
 a 2007 report, Israel has between 75 and 400 nuclear warheads, but some
 estimates have their nuclear warheads at less than 200. It is also 
known that Israel has the ability to deliver them by intercontinental 
ballistic missile (ICBM) with a range of 5,500 kilometers or 3,400 
miles, the Jericho III missile named after the biblical city of Jericho,
 various aircrafts and of course submarines.  The report stated the 
following:
By the late 1990s the U.S. 
Intelligence Community estimated that Israel possessed between 75-130 
weapons, based on production estimates. The stockpile would certainly 
include warheads for mobile Jericho-1 and Jericho-2 missiles, as well as
 bombs for Israeli aircraft, and may include other tactical nuclear 
weapons of various types. Some published estimates even claimed that 
Israel might have as many as 400 nuclear weapons by the late 1990s. We 
believe these numbers are exaggerated, and that Israel’s nuclear weapons
 inventory may include less than 100 nuclear weapons. Stockpiled 
plutonium could be used to build additional weapons if so decided
Israel’s nuclear program began after World War II.  Israel’s first Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion once said “What
 Einstein, Oppenheimer, and Teller, the three of them are Jews, made for
 the United States, could also be done by scientists in Israel, for 
their own people”.  David Ben-Gurion wanted to establish a Jewish 
State with a military force that would repel an attack by any of its 
adversaries especially in the Arab world.  Ben-Gurion’s speech to the 
elected assembly of Palestine Jews on October 2nd, 1947 made it clear on
 the intentions of a new Jewish state:
Political developments have swept us 
on to a momentous parting of the ways – from Mandate to independence. 
Today, beyond our ceaseless work in immigration, settlement and 
campaign, we are set three blazing tasks, whereof fulfillment will 
condition our perpetuity: defense, a Jewish State and Arab-Jewish 
Cupertino, in that order of importance and urgency.
Security is our chief problem. I do 
not minimize the virtue of statehood even within something less than all
 the territory of the Land of Israel on either bank of the Jordan; but 
security comes unarguably first. It dominated our concerns since the 
Yishuv [Jewish community in Palestine] began from the start of 
colonization we knew we must, in the main, guarantee it ourselves. But 
recent upsets and upheavals in Palestine, in the Middle East and in the 
wide world, and in British and international politics as well, magnify 
it from a local problem of current safety into Zionism’s hinge of 
destiny. In scope, in intensity, in purport, it is entirely different 
now. Just think of the new factors that invest the problem with a 
political significance of unprecedented gravity – and I could add a 
dozen others: the anti-Zionist policy pursued by the Mandatory 
Government during the past ten years, the obliteration of European Jewry
 with the willing aid of the acknowledged leader of the Palestine Arabs,
 the establishment of an Arab League active and united only in combating
 Zionism, Bevin’s ugly war against the Jews, the crisis in Britain and 
its political and economic aftermath, the creation of armed forces in 
the neighboring States, the intrusion of the Arab Legion. And not a 
single Jewish unit exists.
We can stand up to any aggression 
launched from Palestine or its border, but more in potential than yet in
 fact. The conversion from potential to actual is now our major, 
blinding headache. It will mean the swiftest, widest mobilization, here 
and abroad, of capacity to organize, of our resources in economics and 
manpower, our science and technology, our civic sense. It must be an 
all-out effort, sparing no man.
By the late 1950s Shimon Peres had established LEKEM, or the ‘Science
 liaison Bureau’ a new intelligence service that would search for 
technology, materials and equipment needed for Israel’s nuclear program.
By 1952, Hemed Gimmel was under Israel’s Ministry of Defense to 
become the Division of Research and Infrastructure (EMET).    By June 
1952, The Israel Atomic Energy Commission (IAEC) was established with 
Ernest David Bergmann as the first chairman.  Hemed Gimmel was renamed 
Machon 4 which became the “chief laboratory” of the Israel Atomic Energy
 Commission (IAEC).  France was a major partner for Israel’s nuclear 
program.  France also sold weapons to Israel.  The France-Israel 
relationship was instrumental in the development of the Dimona Nuclear 
Research Center.  Israel signed American President Dwight Eisenhower’s Atoms for Peace, an agreement for peaceful nuclear cooperation between the U.S. and Israel along with Turkey to build a“small swimming pool research reactor” at Nachal Soreq.
It was the first step to building the Dimona nuclear research center 
in the Negev desert in collaboration with France who faced political 
turmoil in its former colonies in North Africa.  Israel also faced Arab 
hostilities in the Middle East, so the cooperation on matters regarding 
new military technology complemented each other.  On March 20, 1957 a 
public signing ceremony to build a “small swimming-pool research reactor” took
 place between France and Israel.  But the reality was that France and 
Israel collaborated to build a larger facility at Dimona.  In‘Israel and the Bomb’ by Avner Cohen, he describes Ben Gurion’s ambitious plan regarding Israel’s nuclear program was advanced through the Atoms for Peace Initiative:
With the return of Ben Gurion to 
power in 1955, nuclear energy became a matter of national priority.  Ben
 Gurion gave political backing and financial support to those in the 
Ministry of Defense who were committed to promoting nuclear 
energy-Peres, Bergmann, Mardor, and the nuclear enthusiasts at Machon 
4.  There was also a change in the international climate concerning 
nuclear energy, in the wake of Eisenhower’s December 1953 
Atoms-for-Peace initiative.  Until then, nuclear energy in the United 
States, Canada, and Britain, the three major countries dealing with 
nuclear energy, was largely closed to other countries.  The Atoms for 
Peace Initiative made nuclear energy technology available to the rest of
 the world.     
The United States under President Eisenhower allowed Israel to seek a
 nuclear program that would advance its defense capabilities 
militarily.  By 1958, the construction of the Negev Nuclear Research 
Center located in the Negev desert in secret through the Protocol of Sevres agreement.  
 It was a secret agreement between Israel, France and Great Britain at 
Sevres, France to overthrow Egyptian President Gamal Abdul Nasser 
through an invasion of Egypt after Nasser nationalized the Suez 
Canal. Four days after the Sèvres meeting, Israeli forces invaded 
Egyptian territory.  French and British forces invaded shortly after 
they vetoed a US sponsored UN Security Council resolution under the 
guise that they would separate both Israeli and Egyptian forces after 
Egypt refused their call to withdraw from the Suez Canal.
BBC News received secret documents that the British government also 
supported Israel’s nuclear program by sending illegal and restricted 
materials that started in the 1950′s.  In 1961, the Ben-Gurion informed 
the Canadian government that a pilot plutonium-separation plant would be
 built at the Dimona facility.  By 1962, the nuclear reactor at Dimona 
went “critical” meaning a critical mass with a small amount of fissile 
material was needed for a sustained nuclear chain reaction.  Shortly 
after, Israel secretly acquired more than 90 tons of uranium oxide 
(yellowcake) from Argentina to fuel the reactor.  By 1965 the Israeli 
reprocessing plant was completed and ready to convert the reactor’s fuel
 rods into weapons grade plutonium for a nuclear bomb.  After the 
Six-Day War, Israel went live producing nuclear weapons.  A new era 
began in the Middle East.  One that was a dangerous step to a nuclear 
disaster if Israel decided to use its nuclear weapons against an Arab 
country.      
In Seymour M. Hersh’s ‘The Samson Option: Israel’s Nuclear Arsenal and American Foreign Policy’ stated
 the concerns Israel’s leaders had, especially Prime Minister David 
Ben-Gurion if they did not obtain nuclear weapons.  Hersh wrote:
“What is Israel?” he was quoted by an
 aide as asking. “. . . Only a small spot. One dot! How can it survive 
in this Arab world?” Ben-Gurion believed that he understood Arab 
character and was persuaded that as long as Arabs thought they could 
destroy the Jewish state, there would be no peace and no recognition of 
Israel. Many Israelis, survivors of the Holocaust, came to believe in 
ein brera, or “no alternative,” the doctrine that Israel was surrounded 
by implacable enemies and therefore had no choice but to strike out. In 
their view, Hitler and Nasser were interchangeable. 
For these Israelis, a nuclear arsenal
 was essential to the survival of the state. In public speeches 
throughout the 1950s, Ben Gurion repeatedly linked Israel’s security to 
its progress in science.  “Our security and independence require that 
more young people devote themselves to  science and research, atomic and
 electronic research, research of solar energy . . . and the like,” he 
told the Israeli parliament, the Knesset, in November 1955.
 Ernst Bergmann explicitly articulated the ein brera fears in a letter two years later: “I am convinced
 . . . that the State of Israel needs a defense research program of its 
own, so that we shall never again be as lambs led to the slaughter.” 
Ben-Gurion, Shimon Peres, and Ernst 
Bergmann believed that Israel’s independent arsenal finally could 
provide what President Eisenhower would not—the nuclear umbrella.
Israel’s nuclear program was built on the belief that it had “no 
alternative” but to build a nuclear weapon to deter Arab aggression.  
Their experience with the Holocaust justifies their intentions on 
maintaining their nuclear weapons.  Israel’s believes that another 
Holocaust can be prevented, this time not from Germany but from Iran.  
But many Israeli’s during the development stages of nuclear weapons were
 not keen on obtaining a nuclear bomb because of the Holocaust:
“Less compelling to the military men was the moral argument 
against the bomb raised by some on the left and in academia: that the 
Jewish people, victims of the Holocaust, had an obligation to prevent 
the degeneration of the Arab-Israeli dispute into a war of mass 
destruction” Stated Hersh.  “ Those who held that view did not 
underestimate the danger of a conventional arms race, but believed that,
 as Simha Flapan, their passionate spokesman, wrote, “the qualitative 
advantages of Israel—social cohesion and organization, education and 
technical skills, intelligence and moral incentive—can be brought into 
play only in a conventional war fought by men.”
Another aspect of Israel’s foreign policy one should consider is the 
‘Samson Option,’ a policy that calls for a retaliation using nuclear 
weapons against an enemy who threatens the Jewish homeland of its 
existence.  Hersh explains:
Dimona’s supporters had convinced 
most of the leadership that only nuclear weapons could provide the 
absolute and final deterrent to the Arab threat, and only nuclear 
weapons could convince the Arabs—who were bolstered by rapidly growing 
Soviet economic and military aid—that they must renounce all plans for 
military conquest of Israel and agree to a peace settlement. With
 a nuclear arsenal there would be no more Masadas in Israel’s history, a
 reference to the decision of more than nine hundred Jewish 
defenders—known as the Zealots—to commit suicide in A.D. 73 rather than 
endure defeat at the hands of the Romans.
In its place, argued the nuclear 
advocates, would be the Samson Option. Samson, according to the Bible, 
had been captured by the Philistines after a bloody fight and put on 
display, with his eyes torn out, for public entertainment in Dagon’s 
Temple in Gaza. He asked God to give him back his strength for the last 
time and cried out, “Let my soul die with the Philistines.” With that, 
he pushed apart the temple pillars, bringing down the roof and killing 
himself and his enemies.  For Israel’s nuclear advocates, the Samson 
Option became another way of saying “Never again.”
[In a 1976 essay in Commentary, 
Norman Podhoretz accurately summarized the pronuclear argument in 
describing what Israel would do if abandoned by the United States and 
overrun by Arabs: "The Israelis would fight . . . with conventional 
weapons for as long as they could, and if the tide were turning 
decisively against them, and if help in the form of resupply from the 
United States or any other guarantors were not forthcoming, it is safe 
to predict that they would fight with nuclear weapons in the end. ... It
 used to be said that the Israelis had a Masada complex . . .but if the 
Israelis are to be understood in terms of a 'complex' involving suicide 
rather than surrender and rooted in a relevant precedent of Jewish 
history, the example of Sarnson, whose suicide brought about the 
destruction of his enemies, would be more appropriate than Masada, where
 in committing suicide the Zealots killed only themselves and took no 
Romans with them." Podhoretz, asked years later about his essay, said 
that his conclusions about the Samson Option were just that—his 
conclusions, and not based on any specific information from Israelis or 
anyone else about Israel's nuclear capability.] 
In a White House press conference on May 18, 2009, US President Barack Obama’s concern about “the potential pursuit of a nuclear weapon by Iran.” 
 The United States and other Western nations have not announced any 
plans to disarm Israel’s nuclear weapons but rather focused its 
attention on Iran’s nuclear program.  Obama said “Iran obtaining a 
nuclear weapon would not only be a threat to Israel and a threat to the 
United States, but would be profoundly destabilizing in the 
international community as a whole and could set off a nuclear arms race
 in the Middle East.”  Israel already won the arms race in the 
Middle East.  What is to stop Israel’s “Zealot” mentality from using 
nuclear weapons in the Middle East?  Israel has threatened Iran in the 
past.
In a 2006 interview with Reuters former Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres “the president of Iran should remember that Iran can also be wiped off the map.” It was a response after
 a false claim Israel and its allies made on Iranian President Mahmoud 
Ahmadinejad’s comment in a 2005 speech at the Ministry of Interior 
conference hall in Tehran called “The World without Zionism” when he said Israel must be “wiped off the map” which
 was misinterpreted.  Earlier this year, former Prime Minister Ehud 
Barak said that the US and Israel would take action against Iran, “I 
don’t see it as a binary kind of situation: either they [the Iranians] 
turn nuclear or we have a fully fledged war the size of the Iraqi war or
 even the war in Afghanistan,” Barak continued “What we basically say is
 that if worse comes to worst, there should be a readiness and an 
ability to launch a surgical operation that will delay them by a 
significant time frame and probably convince them that it won’t work 
because the world is determined to block them.”  Rouhani is seeking 
negotiations that would put Iran, the United States and Israel on a path
 to a peaceful resolution.  One that will recognize Iran’s right to a 
“peaceful” nuclear program for its country so that they can export more 
oil and use the revenues it earned for the benefit of the Iranian 
people.  But do not expect any significant breakthrough between Iran and
 the US/Israel alliance that seeks to dominate the Middle East 
politically, economically and militarily.
The Obama administration is not seeking any negotiations with Iran 
unless they stop its nuclear program which will not happen.  Iran will 
insist that they are signatories to the NPT and have an “inalienable 
right” to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.  Israel will not
 be a signatory to the NPT because “This resolution is deeply flawed
 and hypocritical. It ignores the realities of the Middle East and the 
real threats facing the region and the entire world” according to 
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.  Another reason Israel will 
not sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty is because they are victims of the
 Holocaust which is why they have violated hundreds of U.N. Security 
Council resolutions and has used chemical weapons on the Palestinians.  
The talks between Iran and the US that will be held in Geneva will fail 
come this October because the US wants to dominate Iran.  Iran has its 
principles it will stand by, but so will the US on Israel’s behalf.  The
 US and its staunch allies want Syria, Lebanon, the Gaza strip and the 
West Bank and every nation on earth under their rule.  That is the plan.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario