Trending Topics:

It’s time to put an end to Israel’s ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ nuclear policy

Israel/PalestineMiddle East

The negotiations this week in Geneva between Iran and the “P5+1” (the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council — Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States — plus Germany) offer a promising vehicle for avoiding another destructive war. The talks came on the heels of a virtual uprising by the American people that stopped President Barack Obama’s plan to attack Syria, clearly demonstrating their desire to solve conflicts at the negotiation table rather than at the point of a gun.

However, Israel and its allies in the U.S. Congress continue to lobby against a deal that would meet Iran in the middle, insisting on a “zero-enrichment” policy that is a deal-breaker for Iran.

The Israeli cabinet said in a statement Tuesday that “Israel does not oppose Iran having a peaceful nuclear energy program. But as has been demonstrated in many countries, from Canada to Indonesia, peaceful programs do not require uranium enrichment or plutonium production. Iran’s nuclear weapons program does.”

The ‘elephant in the room’: Israel and the bomb

The Israeli cabinet’s statement is more than ironic, in light of Israel’s own nuclear-weapons program — often called the world’s “worst-kept secret” because of the taboo surrounding any public discussion of its existence.

The Washington Post’s Walter Pincus is one of the few journalists openly questioning this obvious hypocrisy. He writes, “When the Israeli prime minister asked (at the UN), ‘Why would a country that claims to only want peaceful nuclear energy, why would such a country build hidden underground enrichment facilities?’ I thought Dimona.”

Israel’s nuclear facility at Dimona, a city in the Negev desert, reportedly has six underground floors dedicated to activities such as plutonium extraction, production of tritium and lithium-6, for use in nuclear weapons.

Whereas Iran signed the Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), giving the international community the right to demand inspections and controls, Israel has not — and is therefore not subject to external oversight.

According to Avner Cohen, author of “Israel’s Bargain with the Bomb,” David Ben-Gurion began planning how to arm Israel with a nuclear shield even before the creation of the Jewish state, soon after the United States dropped its own atomic payload on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The first president of Israel took action to initiate a nuclear-development project by the end of the new state’s first decade, with its successful “birth” on the eve of its 1967 occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

The U.S. government got wind of the project and objected strenuously. But when the Israelis brought it to fruition regardless and refused to give up their new arsenal, a covert agreement was struck between Prime Minister Golda Meir and President Richard Nixon – rather like the old U.S. policy of “don’t ask, don’t tell” for gays in the military. The Israelis agreed to keep their newfound strength under wraps, and the Americans pledged to pretend it didn’t exist.

Cohen uses the Hebrew term amimut (opacity) to describe the taboo that developed within Israel around any sort of public acknowledgement of its nuclear arsenal – which estimates peg at up to 200 warheads. To this day, there is total censorship within Israel of any mention that the weapons exist, and the United States actively plays along.

Edward Snowden’s predecessor

In fact, there is an eerie similarity between the stories of Israeli whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu, a nuclear technician who revealed details of Israel’s nuclear weapons program to the British press in 1986, and Edward Snowden. Both held junior positions in organizations serving the defense industry, in which they had access to sensitive national secrets. Both became convinced their employers were responsible for immoral acts and decided to violate their oaths of secrecy to tell the world about them. They both shared what they learned with a British newspaper and set off an international storm. And both have been persecuted since then by their governments, in retaliation for their leaks.

While Snowden has so far evaded capture by his government, Vanunu spent 18 years in prison, including more than 11 in solitary confinement. Although released in 2004, he has been subjected to a broad array of restrictions on his speech and movement, including several re-arrests for giving interviews to foreign journalists and attempting to leave Israel. Yet, just as activists, foreign governments and others would never have known the U.S. government is tapping their emails and phone calls without Snowden, the world would have known very little – if anything – about Israel’s weapons of mass destruction without Vanunu.

‘Blowback’ from Israel’s nuclear lead

Although Israel, the United States and its European allies continue to dance around the subject, Israel’s nuclear capacity is widely known and has changed the dynamics in the region in dangerous ways. On Sept. 19, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said that “Syria came into possession of chemical weapons as an alternative to Israel’s nuclear weapons.”  (It’s also worth noting that while Israel was one of the first countries to sign the Chemical Weapons Convention in 1993, it remains one of only six countries that has not ratified it.)

Some analysts believe that Israel’s insistence on zero enrichment for Iran is designed to ensure that no deal is struck at all – allowing Israel to maintain its military superiority in the region. “Netanyahu ultimately fears the success of diplomacy, not its failure,” explains Trita Parsi, founder and president of the National Iranian American Council, in Foreign Affairs.  “Israel…understands that a resolution to the nuclear standoff would significantly reduce U.S.-Iranian tensions and open up opportunities for collaboration between the two former allies. This is what Israelis refer to as the fear of abandonment — that, once the nuclear issue is resolved or contained, Washington will shift its focus to other matters while Israel will be stuck in the region facing a hostile Iran, without the United States by its side.”

Neither the world, nor Israel, is served legally or morally by continuing to condone a practice of don’t ask-don’t tell for an issue that is so central to global security and safety. As long as Israel refuses to acknowledge its possession of nuclear weapons or even that it has produced weapons-grade materials, it is difficult, if not impossible, to engage it in any meaningful arms control or other nuclear-related diplomacy. It certainly makes it impossible to move towards a nuclear-free Middle East—a goal to which the entire international community should aspire, and that has been endorsed by the new Iranian president.

Isn’t it time for the world to start asking, and for Israel to tell?

Medea Benjamin
About Medea Benjamin

Medea Benjamin, cofounder of CODEPINK for Peace, is the author of The Kingdom of the Unjust: Behind the US-Saudi Connection.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

32 Responses

  1. NormanF
    NormanF
    October 17, 2013, 12:43 pm

    Israel’s policy of “nuclear ambiguity” is not welcomed by the Left? I find that surprising!

    Israel has no wish to trigger a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. At the same, its clear that if Iran cannot be prevented from obtaining a nuclear bomb, Israel will have to establish a first use massive nuclear retaliatory strike policy to deter a future Iranian nuclear attack on the Jewish State.

    To make it clear, Israel has never threatened its neighbors with destruction. On the other hand, Iran has repeatedly vowed to wipe the Jewish State off the map. Its in that context, Israel’s concern about Iran’s nuclear program should be seen. Israel is prepared to give the world time to peacefully address it.

    But if that is not possible, I would not be surprised if Israel officially becomes a full fledged member of the nuclear weapons state club.

    • annie
      annie
      October 17, 2013, 1:17 pm

      Israel will have to establish a first use massive nuclear retaliatory strike policy

      pre emptive nuke strike oh yeah!

      Israel’s concern about Iran’s nuclear program should be seen.

      as opposed to israel being silenced! as opposed to the world not knowing how israel feels! israel is like the screaming toddler in the middle of the room sucking up everyones attention. our concern about Israel’s nuclear program is what should be seen.

      Israel is prepared to give the world time to peacefully address it.

      oh, how very benevolent of them.

      I would not be surprised if Israel officially becomes a full fledged member of the nuclear weapons state club.

      as opposed to israel’s unofficial full fledged membership of the nuclear weapons state club? everybody already knows israel is armed to the teeth. we should demand they come out of the closet and stop this charade.

    • Woody Tanaka
      Woody Tanaka
      October 17, 2013, 2:24 pm

      “Israel’s policy of “nuclear ambiguity” is not welcomed by the Left? I find that surprising!”

      Why? This game the zios are playing only leads to regional instability. If the people in Syria who were killed in Syria from the chemical weapons were attacked by the Syrian government, they would have died, in part, because of israel, because it’s WMD program leads other actors in the region to have WMD programs of their own.

      israel should be subject to crippling sanctions (including a complete bar to trade, banking, etc.) until it purges itself of its weapons or comes under international inspection regimes, but it never will, given the traitors and fifth columnists in the US and the US gov’t.

      “Israel has no wish to trigger a nuclear arms race in the Middle East.”

      No, it wishes to be the only nuclear armed power in the ME, so it can be a regional hegemon in order to suppress and oppress the other people in the region. But if it really had no wish to trigger a nuclear arms race it would have chosen not to, you know, trigger a nuclear arms race by illicitly obtaining nuclear arms.

      “At the same, its clear that if Iran cannot be prevented from obtaining a nuclear bomb, Israel will have to establish a first use massive nuclear retaliatory strike policy to deter a future Iranian nuclear attack on the Jewish State.”

      Nonsense. It needs nothing more than it has now. There is no strategic or tactical reason for Iran to have an offensive nuclear weapon system. It would be madness. If it were to obtain a nuke, it would be to blunt the USAipac/israel aggression. (Remember, when President Chimpy McHitler called Iran, Iraq and North Korea, the Axis of Evil, the Iranians saw the results: the nuclear state was untouched and the non-nuclear state was invaded and 1/2 million + Iraqis were Operation Iraqi Freedom-ed into their graves. Doesn’t take a genius to figure out which one Iran would like to be like…)

      “To make it clear, Israel has never threatened its neighbors with destruction. ”

      Lie. It has not only done so, but has worked toward the destruction of Palestine and the Palestinian people, for one. It’s also threatened, attacked and committed acts of war against every single state in the region, from Egypt to Iran.

      “On the other hand, Iran has repeatedly vowed to wipe the Jewish State off the map.”

      Lie.

      “Its in that context, Israel’s concern about Iran’s nuclear program should be seen.”

      Only if one is a sucker. Israel is concerned about Iran’s nuclear program for one reason: if it succeeds in building a bomb, then Israel fears it will be forced to act as decent, civilized people towards Arabs and they have an ideological aversion to that prospect. It will no longer dominate them, humiliate them and murder them at will.

      “Israel is prepared to give the world time to peacefully address it.”

      Well, since it has no vote on the matter, it can do whatever it wants.

      “But if that is not possible, I would not be surprised if Israel officially becomes a full fledged member of the nuclear weapons state club.”

      It already is. The only people who go along with the farce are the israelis, (who are fooling no one, but are torturing a hero and political prisoner like Vanunu–one of the few decent israelis ever) and the Americans because it lets them pretend to operate foreign policies on principles of decency, goodness and human rights, (a lie that has never been true.)

    • Gart Valenc
      Gart Valenc
      October 17, 2013, 2:57 pm

      As far as we know, Iran does not have nuclear weapons. But let’s assume, for argument sake, it manages to develop them: does anyone seriously think Iran will use nuclear weapons against Israel?

      We have to ask ourselves: who is more likely to use nuclear weapons, Israel or Iran? Can anyone imaging what would happen to Iran should it decided to attack Israel? By the same token, who would retaliate against a nuclear Israel, should it decide to attack Iran?

      NormanF says that

      «[…] Israel has never threatened its neighbors with destruction.»

      Well, we better keep this always in mind:

      http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/did-israel-ever-consider-using-nuclear-weapons-1.317592

      Gart Valenc
      Twitter: @gartvalenc

    • amigo
      amigo
      October 17, 2013, 3:02 pm

      “To make it clear, Israel has never threatened its neighbors with destruction. On the other hand, Iran has repeatedly vowed to wipe the Jewish State off the map.”NF

      Oh please , put on a different record.That one is worn out.

    • Citizen
      Citizen
      October 17, 2013, 3:09 pm

      @ NormanF

      Please show some evidence Iran has repeatedly vowed to wipe the Jewish State off the map. The former Iranian president merely said that in time the Zionist regime will vanish (like the USSR did). Perhaps you can point to some Iranians who actually said what you say, and threatened attack on Israel? Name some of them. Also note that Israel has often threatened Iran, and various Israeli politicians and religious leaders have also done so. And note that Syria obtained CW as the “poor man’s defense” against Israel’s nuclear weapons. And that Syria is now getting rid of its CW stockpile, while Israel is not, and that Israel never ratified the CW treaty, and, unlike Iran, never signed the NPT, as Phil pointed out in case you didn’t actually read his article, subject here.

    • talknic
      talknic
      October 17, 2013, 3:38 pm

      @ NormanF “Israel has no wish to trigger a nuclear arms race in the Middle East”

      It has by getting nukes

      “At the same, its clear that if Iran cannot be prevented from obtaining a nuclear bomb”

      They don’t want nukes. They advocate a nuclear free M East

      “Israel will have to establish a first use massive nuclear retaliatory strike policy to deter a future Iranian nuclear attack on the Jewish State

      Iran doesn’t want nukes. They urge a nuke free M East

      “To make it clear, Israel has never threatened its neighbors with destruction”

      To make it clear, having nukes IS A THREAT of destruction

      “Iran has repeatedly vowed to wipe the Jewish State off the map”

      It was said, allegedly, ONCE. Israel repeats what it alleges Iran said

      “Israel is prepared to give the world time to peacefully address it”

      Israel has had 65 years to get out of non-Israeli territory

      “I would not be surprised if Israel officially becomes a full fledged member of the nuclear weapons state club”

      You’re late by decades

    • lysias
      lysias
      October 17, 2013, 5:22 pm

      if Iran cannot be prevented from obtaining a nuclear bomb, Israel will have to establish a first use massive nuclear retaliatory strike policy

      She doesn’t have one already?

    • eljay
      eljay
      October 17, 2013, 5:45 pm

      >> … if Iran cannot be prevented from obtaining a nuclear bomb, Israel will have to establish a first use massive nuclear retaliatory strike policy …

      Funny, the supremacist “Jewish State” of (Greater) Israel seems more interested in a “first-use, massive, nuclear pre-emptive ‘self-defense’ strike” policy.

      Or maybe it’s just Zio-supremacists who are itching for the “Jewish State” to attack a non-aggressor nation in “self-defense”.

    • Tobias
      Tobias
      October 17, 2013, 8:28 pm

      Norman, if memory serves me didn’t Moshe Dayan want to use Nuclear weapons in 1973 and wasn’t there some right wing lunatic ministers urging a nuclear response to the Iraqi scud missiles in 1991?

      Perhaps English is not your first language and be that as it may, but only in the madness of militant Zionism could your oxymoronic proposal that Israel establish a first use nuclear retaliation be considered anything other than psychopathic .

    • DICKERSON3870
      DICKERSON3870
      October 17, 2013, 9:57 pm

      RE: “Israel’s policy of ‘nuclear ambiguity’ is not welcomed by the Left? I find that surprising! Israel has no wish to trigger a nuclear arms race in the Middle East.” ~ NormanF

      MY COMMENT: Israel does not maintain ‘nuclear ambiguity’ for fear of triggering a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. Israel maintains its ‘nuclear ambiguity’ for fear of losing billions of dollars per annum in U.S. aid.

      SEE: “AIPAC-Drafted US Aid to Israel Illegal”, by Grant Smith, Antiwar.com, 9/24/13
      Israel’s nuclear weapons render it ineligible for US aid

      [EXCERPT] . . . The AIPAC-sponsored U.S.-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act of 2012, signed into law by President Obama on July 27, 2012, makes unprecedented demands on U.S. taxpayers and diplomats. It mandates American economic largess to Israel via high technology, agriculture, medicine, health, pharmaceutical, and energy transfers. It demands funding for Israel Aerospace Industries (a corporation only recently linked to Israeli espionage activities against the U.S.) missile-defense programs and air-refueling tankers and munitions Israel could use to unilaterally set off a wider war with Iran. Israel even won a detour of used weapons from U.S. forces departing Iraq. The aid law extends already generous loan guarantees to Israel.
      However, the package also requires the U.S. president to issue to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations and House Committee on Foreign Affairs a report on the status of Israel’s “qualitative military edge” by Jan. 23, 2013. It is finally time for some hard truths. An honest presidential response to this AIPAC-mandated reporting rider would wipe clean all current and future U.S.-taxpayer-funded obligations to Israel. A truthful presidential assessment would finally tell the American people the following: “Israel has deployed a clandestine nuclear arsenal with some components and materials stolen from the United States. Our foreign aid laws therefore make Israel ineligible for further taxpayer dollars.”
      Such a truthful declaration would turn the tables on AIPAC and its small group of donors now pushing Americans to steal from themselves
      by systematically violating the Symington and Glenn amendments to U.S. foreign aid laws. Ending aid would disentangle unwitting Americans from Israel’s unending conflicts, illegal settlements, systematized abuse of Palestinians, and clandestine nuclear proliferation in the Middle East.

      ENTIRE ARTICLE – http://original.antiwar.com/smith-grant/2012/09/23/aipac-drafted-us-aid-to-israel-illegal/

      • DICKERSON3870
        DICKERSON3870
        October 17, 2013, 10:03 pm

        P.S. SOME BACKGROUND ON ISRAEL’S DUPLICITY REGARDING ITS NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM:
        “How Israel Out-Foxed US Presidents”, By Morgan Strong (A Special Report), ConsortiumNews.com, 5/31/10

        [EXCERPT]
        ● Secret Nukes and JFK
        . . . Even as it backed down in the Sinai [following its invasion in 1956], Israel was involved in another monumental deception, a plan for building its own nuclear arsenal.
        In 1956, Israel had concluded an agreement with France to build a nuclear reactor in the Negev desert. Israel also signed a secret agreement with France to build an adjacent plutonium reprocessing plant.

        Israel began constructing its nuclear plant in 1958. However, French President Charles de Gaulle was worried about nuclear weapons destabilizing the Middle East and insisted that Israel not develop a nuclear bomb from the plutonium processing plant. Prime Minister Ben-Gurion assured de Gaulle that the processing plant was for peaceful purposes only.
        After John F. Kennedy became President, he also wrote to Ben-Gurion explicitly calling on Israel not to join the nuclear-weapons club, drawing another pledge from Ben-Gurion that Israel had no such intention.
        Nevertheless, Kennedy continued to press, forcing the Israelis to let U.S. scientists inspect the nuclear reactor at Dimona. But the Israelis first built a fake control room while bricking up and otherwise disguising parts of the building that housed the plutonium processing plant.
        In return for allowing inspectors into Dimona, Ben-Gurion also demanded that the United States sell Hawk surface-to-air missiles to the Israeli military. Kennedy agreed to the sale as a show of good faith.
        Subsequently, however, the CIA got wind of the Dimona deception and leaked to the press that Israel was secretly building a nuclear bomb.
        After Kennedy’s assassination, President Lyndon Johnson also grew concerned over Israel’s acquiring nuclear weapons. He asked then-Prime Minister Levi Eshkol to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
        Eshkol assured Johnson that Israel was studying the matter and would sign the treaty in due course. However, Israel has never signed the treaty
        and never has admitted that it developed nuclear weapons. [For details, See “Israel and The Bomb” by Avner Cohen.] . . .

        ENTIRE REPORT – http://www.consortiumnews.com/2010/053110.html

  2. Mike_Konrad
    Mike_Konrad
    October 17, 2013, 2:53 pm

    According to Avner Cohen, author of “Israel’s Bargain with the Bomb,” David Ben-Gurion began planning how to arm Israel with a nuclear shield even before the creation of the Jewish state, soon after the United States dropped its own atomic payload on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

    What was he thinking? He needed a nuke against fellahin?!

    • Eurosabra
      Eurosabra
      October 18, 2013, 2:44 am

      No, against the USSR. There is a theory that the Six-Day War was the result of “Foxbats over Dimona” (cf. the book of the same title) and a possible Soviet troop landing on the coastal plain with the intent of destroying Israel under the guise of evacuating relevant civilians.
      http://yalepress.yale.edu/book.asp?isbn=9780300123173

      • lysias
        lysias
        October 18, 2013, 10:09 am

        Avner Cohen was talking about the period 1945-47. There was no such Soviet threat to the Jewish community in Palestine at that time. Quite the contrary.

        As for 1967, I suppose it is conceivable that the Soviets would have liked to destroy or see destroyed the nascent Israeli nuclear capacity at that time, but what is altogether inconceivable is that Soviet troops would have been used to destroy Israel at that time. The USSR was far more cautious than that.

  3. Gart Valenc
    Gart Valenc
    October 17, 2013, 3:29 pm

    Whether Israel decides to voluntarily acknowledge its nuclear arsenal publicly, one thing is for sure, Iran should take advantage of current and future nuclear negotiations to demand a quid pro quo: decommission of Israel’s nuclear arsenal. The minimum Iran should achieve in its talks with the P5+1 group is Israel’s agreement to allow IAEA inspections.

    Gart Valenc
    Twitter: @gartvalenc

    • Talkback
      Talkback
      October 18, 2013, 9:29 am

      Gart Valenc says: “The minimum Iran should achieve in its talks with the P5+1 group is Israel’s agreement to allow IAEA inspections.”

      Since 1981 Security council resolution 479 calls the Zionist Apartheid Junta of Palestine to put its facilities under IEAE safeguards.

  4. seafoid
    seafoid
    October 17, 2013, 3:52 pm

    Zionism’s nuclear ambiguity is like Madonna’s virginity.

  5. James Canning
    James Canning
    October 17, 2013, 6:27 pm

    Bravo, Walter Pincus.

    And high time Israel signs NPT and gets rid of its nukes.

  6. rpickar
    rpickar
    October 17, 2013, 10:49 pm

    Very important aspect of Israel’s nuclear weapon program: it is assumed that the Israelis have never used them, and that they sit quietly “in the basement”. That is not true.

    The Israelis were caught *in flagrante* using a nuclear weapon in their attack on Mt. Qasaioun, outside Damascus, on May 5 of this year.

    Please see http://www.jimstonefreelance.com/rogue2.html . and also http://m.youtube.com/index?client=mv-verizon-us&desktop_uri=%2F%3Fclient%3Dmv-verizon-us .

    The video, shot by a syrian in his car, goes from nighttime to pure white from left to right, in 1/20 of a second. the weapon exploded 4 km away from the observer. Only a nuclear weapon can do this.

    • lysias
      lysias
      October 18, 2013, 10:05 am

      Has anybody detected radioactivity at the site? Couldn’t a technologically new non-nuclear weapon also do this?

      • rpickar
        rpickar
        October 18, 2013, 11:09 am

        lysias,

        Apparently the weapon is of a type called MRR, for minimum residual radiation. the radiation is all alpha particles, which are easily blocked by a sheet of paper, or a few feet of air. Syria will not admit to being nuked, because that would necessitate a response, and they dont want to escalate with Israel.

        Regarding the issue of it being a new non-nuclear technology, only nuclear reactions produce the kind of light intensity seen in the video. As Jim Stone explains, the pixels are saturated to 255 in red, green, and blue, or pure white. I totally agree with Jim Stone’s conclusions on this issue.

        Israel is also well understood to have used a small nuclear device in the Bali nightclub bombing of 2002. please see http://balitruth.kk5.org/ . there are other likely nuclear weapon usages by Israel, that dont have as much documented evidence as these two cases.

      • lysias
        lysias
        October 18, 2013, 6:53 pm

        Such a weapon wouldn’t leave behind a residue like tritium at the site?

      • rpickar
        rpickar
        October 19, 2013, 6:32 pm

        lysias,

        i think that the tritium would have to be in water, and if there was no standing water (which is the case) there would be no way to detect tritium. google “gordon duff israel nukes syria” to find gordon duff’s additional articles. BTW, he mentions (he really insists) that syria destroyed an israeli dolphin submarine on may 2, and the nuke was in retaliation on may 5. while there is good solid evidence that the nuke went off, i don’t know how to confirm the submarine story. not impossible, just not confirmed outside of syrianews.cc and Gordon Duff.

  7. eileenfleming
    eileenfleming
    October 18, 2013, 7:35 am

    Correction required: Vanunu did NOT “attempt to leave Israel” what he did on 21 December 2004, was get in a cab in east Jerusalem to TRY to go to Christmas Eve mass at the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem but Israel arrested him and put him in jail for the night!

    Israel’s Nuclear Facility at Dimona thanks to Mordechai Vanunu’s photos from 1985:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nSOlG6Wpr8

    In 2005, I was an American writer in Jerusalem researching my first historical novel. I became a reporter because Vanunu told me:

    “President Kennedy tried to stop Israel from building atomic weapons…The Prime Minister said, ‘The nuclear reactor is only for peace.’

    “When Johnson became president, he made an agreement with Israel that two senators would come every year to inspect. Before the senators would visit, the Israelis would build a wall to block the underground elevators and stairways. From 1963 to ’69, the senators came, but they never knew about the wall that hid the rest of the Dimona from them.

    “Nixon stopped the inspections and agreed to ignore the situation. As a result, Israel increased production. In 1986, there were over two hundred bombs. Today, they may have enough plutonium for ten bombs a year.”
    http://j.mp/cuBTuV

    On 2 October 2009, The Washington Times reported that Obama agreed to keep Israel’s nukes ‘secret’ and reaffirmed a 4-decade-old understanding that has allowed Israel to keep a nuclear arsenal without opening it to international inspections.”

    In “The Worst-Kept Secret: Israel’s Bargain with the Bomb” Dr. Avner Cohen-a leading expert in Israel’s nuclear policy of deception, which is spun as ‘Ambiguity’ spoke about a late-1969 meeting between Golda Meir and Nixon:

    “The United States and most of the Western world agreed to accept Israel’s special nuclear status. In other words, Israel did not join the Non-Proliferation Treaty, but it received special status, and pressure was not exerted on it with regard to this topic. Ambiguity is the Israeli-American policy. Without the West’s agreement, there would be no ambiguity….

    HELP FREE Vanunu and END Israel’s Nuclear Deceptions:
    https://www.causes.com/VANUNU

  8. NickJOCW
    NickJOCW
    October 18, 2013, 7:47 am

    Nuclear weapons are less for dropping than for doing business with, and in that respect the potential to produce them is as good as actually having them, even better perhaps because there is so much more flexibility in potential than possession. Iran and Israel cannot fail to know this, the evolving difference, however, is that whereas Iran had a preemptive strike to fear, that fear is daily fading from view, while Israel faces an increasingly uncomfortable future of isolation and irrelevance.

    “…Nor Hell a fury like a woman nation scorned”.

Leave a Reply