At the time being, the only country that possesses nuclear weapons in the Middle East is Israel, which may have as many as 200 warheads. According to Israel’s sympathizers, these weapons of mass destruction have been produced only to defend Israel from hostile Arab enemies seeking the destruction of Israel. The idea that Israel’s nuclear arsenal was built to be a deterrence is simply ludicrous and is in direct contradiction with facts. One rather obvious flaw in this explanation of the WMD, who does Israel so desperately need to protect itself from? No Arab countries process nuclear weapons, and the only Muslim country that has nuclear weapons, Pakistan, is governed by an American ally. Israel is allied with the greatest military power in the world, and an attack on Israel would mean certain annihilation for any country in the world.
A more fundamental problem with this explanation is apparent to anyone with even a superficial knowledge on the history of Israel’s arsenal. During the 1980s while Israel was proliferating, it kept its weapons program top-secret from the entire world. The international community only learned about the WMD when Mordechai Vanunu, a technician working on the weapons, leaked details of the program to the British press. Vanunu was subsequently abducted by Mossad, the Israeli intelligence agency, and forced to serve 18 years in prison, 11 in solitary confinement. If Israel were trying to build weapons to serve as a deterrence, why didn’t they want anyone in the world to know? When North Korea felt it needed to defend itself against a foreign threat, it did what any rational country fearing its safety would do, it began advertising the fact that it had nuclear capabilities, in all likelihood before it actually had these capabilities, so that no country would be willing to attack it for fear of being dealt a nuclear attack. If Israel was truly worried about being attacked, it would have done the same thing. Only a country intending to use weapons offensively would build them secretly.
This should serve as proof to anyone who thinks otherwise that Israel does perhaps have imperial interests, once it has ethnically-cleansed all of historic Palestine, to expand into other neighboring lands as it did in 1967 in service of American imperialism, and perhaps at some point independently of the US' wishes. As for Vanunu, the heroic prisoner of peace is still to this day denied basic human rights, rights which are not his, claim members of Likud, because he is not human [1]. He is still forbidden to go abroad, to speak with foreigners, and to give interviews. He is regarded in Israel as a traitor, which is odd, since Israel’s nukes could not serve there defensive purpose that they apparently serve had Vanunu not leaked the truth. Mordechai Vanunu ought to be regarded as a great hero for all those who wish to see peace in the Middle East, for without him, Israel’s murderous weapons might still be secret, or worse, might have been used.
I've just been reading through your blog, and I'm very impressed; your
understanding of complex foreign policy issues is profound. This is
especially impressive given your age of 16 years. (I'm sure you're sick
of comments about this so I'll leave that subject alone.)
I do think you err when you say that Israel expanded its borders
"in service of American imperialism". The US had no great strategic
interest in Palestine, and I think that you'll find that the actions of
our country usually serve Israeli imperialism. Israel has been pressed
into service on occasion to perform our dirty work, but the relationship
has worked to our extreme disadvantage in most cases. The US usually acts
as Israel's client.
Comment by Jack Moriarty— 2005/07/17 @ 04:00 PM — (Reply)
although I suppose it's better for people to think I'm a precocious
teenager than an occasionally stupid adult.
I think I might have mistated my point here. I know that Israel has imperial
ambitions outside of the US' imperialism. They did it for their own reasons,
but it did serve America's imperial interests to have Nasser wiped out.
Thanks for your post, david.
Comment by David Baake— 2005/07/17 @ 10:11 PM — (Reply)
Thanks for the reply David. Please keep up the great work.
Jack
Comment by Jack Moriarty— 2005/07/18 @ 07:40 AM — (Reply)
You write, "Israel is allied with the greatest military power in the world, and an attack on Israel would mean certain annihilation for any country in the world."
The Israelis would be foolish to depend on eternal U.S. support. Saddam Hussein once had the support of the U.S., and where did that get him?
You ask, "Who does Israel so desperately need to protect itself from?"
Keep in mind that when Israel was building its nuclear arsenal in the 1980s, the U.S. was arming both Iran and Iraq. Both countries were hostile towards Israel, and either country could have presented a serious existential threat: Iraq with its advanced conventional and non-conventional weaponry, and Iran with its sheer manpower. In this situation, Israel's nuclear weapons served an important defensive role.
As to why Israel didn't make any official announcement of its nuclear capabilities, keep in mind that the Cold War was still going on. Israel was widely (and not unfairly) viewed as a U.S. client state. If Israel had publically acknowledged its nuclear arsenal, the Soviets would have viewed this as a license to arm all of their client states (such as Cuba) with nuclear weapons. Establishing Israel's nuclear arsenal as a "well-known secret" was a way of walking this political tightrope.
All of this being said, Israel's nuclear arsenal no longer serves any useful purpose. Its continued existence is counterproductive -- it is the largest single impediment to global non-proliferation efforts. Israel should follow the example of South Africa, Argentina, and Brazil, and disarm for the sake of its own security. Otherwise, the Israelis will have no right to object if Iran or other countries in the region develop nuclear weapons.
With regard to your broader claims about Israel's "ethnic cleansing" and "imperialism," it is undeniable that a certain sector of the Israeli political sphere favors these goals. It is equally true that certain Arabs favor the destruction of Israel and the annihilation of all Jews in the Middle East. Sick, crazy, and bloodthirsty idiots abound on both sides.
Hopefully, however, voices of conscience and reason will eventually prevail.
Comment by Dave Palmer— 2005/10/15 @ 09:39 AM — (Reply)
Hi David,
great blog! I pretty much agree with you. Israel's imperial ambitions are fairly obvious, so long as you are willing to look at its actions and the comments of its leading lights.
As to Israel's nukes, and its secrecy, it's unlikely knowledge of these nukes was unknown to the Western powers, if not the Arab states, prior to Vanunu's courageous expose. I'm aware certainly of US and UK direct involvement in the development of Israel's nuclear arsenal. Further, even as early as the 1960s, Israeli planners had begun contemplating creating a nuclear arsenal. Sources for these assertions are widely available. A good reference is Chomsky's Fateful Triange.
As for Iran and Iraq attacking Israel, I think this is a pretty big myth. The mullahs of Iran and Saddam in Iraq were more concerned with consolidating internal control. State-sanctioned Israel-hating is a tool of rhetorical expedience for these people. Any serious military challenge of Israel would've (and would, in the present tense as concerns Iran) jeopardize those in power in those countries so it's unlikely it would be considered. Of course this is not to say that Iran, and even post-Saddam Iraq, don't have regional ambitions. Only that these ambitions are fundamentally cowardly and expedient. Which is pretty stereotypical in geopolitics. Cf the relative contraint of the United States outside its hemisphere during the period of its initial creation and the end of the Second World War.
Now there's a good chance the Arab states would've known the Israelis were developing or had nuclear weapons. The Middle East is a relatively small place and the regimes tend to have the same sources for their military hardware, viz the US, and the EU (to a much lesser extent Russia and China, but this continues to develop). Tactically the advantage Israel gains by officially being 'agnostic' with regards to their possession of nuclear weapons is this. It lets the Arab states know that they posses them, but doesn't tell them how many, what type of nuclear weapons they have, and so on. This is a well worn military strategy.
Sorry for the long post. Keep up the good work.
Cheers,
Iqbal.
Comment by Iqbal Khaldun— 2005/10/21 @ 10:17 PM — (Reply)