( Want A Nuclear Free Middle East? Israeli's nukes must be included in a banof WMD. [BATR] )
By Matthew Good
06/09/08
Courtesy Of ThePeoplesVoice
When madmen open their mouths these days the severity of their words tends to get more attention depending on where they’re from. For example, what do you think the response would be were a high ranking Iranian official to utter the following…
By Matthew Good
06/09/08
Courtesy Of ThePeoplesVoice
When madmen open their mouths these days the severity of their words tends to get more attention depending on where they’re from. For example, what do you think the response would be were a high ranking Iranian official to utter the following…
“A top Iranian official has said that if Israel continues with its alleged nuclear arms programme, Iran will attack it.”
First, spare me the tired argument that Ahmadinejad claimed that Israel should be wiped off the face of the map. Despite the fact that the media promoted that phrase, the translation was utterly inaccurate. Of course, that didn’t stop it from becoming carved in stone as far as Western public perception is concerned. That said; let’s look at the above statement for a second.
First, Israel’s nuclear program is officially ‘alleged’. Despite the fact that it is widely known that Israel has a nuclear arsenal that ranges between 100 and 300 weapons, the Israeli government has refused for decades to admit that they exist.
Second, the United Nations (the IAEA) has never been granted access to Israeli nuclear facilities. Of course, that only makes sense being that the Israelis claim that they don’t have a nuclear weapons program. It’s a lie, of course, but one that most of the world is comfortable with for some bizarre reason.
It all comes down to one very simple outlook – that Israel is not perceived as an aggressor but rather a victim. Israel’s military actions are viewed as defensive, never aggressive, and therefore questions regarding its secretive nuclear program are viewed in much the same way. That even though they claim to not possess nuclear weapons, if they do it’s completely understandable given the threats that surround them, even if those threats do not possess nuclear capabilities. Even more, were Israel to openly admit to possessing a nuclear arsenal it would immediately set a regional precedent, gifting others justification for developing their own programs. That, in truth, is the hypocrisy of the Israeli position.
How we view the world is paramount. When it comes to Israel the stereotypical view of the Arab and Persian world is amplified. While the Israelis are viewed as a people that would never dream of employing nuclear weapons, the Iranians, for example, are viewed as being ignorant enough to employ them without forethought or question. Even more, that they would be ignorant enough to gift them to a terrorist organization and not realize the implications of such an act were that organization to employ them against Israel.
Unfortunately, most of the Western world believes that Iran would use nuclear force against Israel in a first strike capacity, even though they would be utterly overwhelmed by not only the Israeli nuclear response, but the American response as well.
All of that said, let’s return to the above quote. Here it is in its actual form…
First, Israel’s nuclear program is officially ‘alleged’. Despite the fact that it is widely known that Israel has a nuclear arsenal that ranges between 100 and 300 weapons, the Israeli government has refused for decades to admit that they exist.
Second, the United Nations (the IAEA) has never been granted access to Israeli nuclear facilities. Of course, that only makes sense being that the Israelis claim that they don’t have a nuclear weapons program. It’s a lie, of course, but one that most of the world is comfortable with for some bizarre reason.
It all comes down to one very simple outlook – that Israel is not perceived as an aggressor but rather a victim. Israel’s military actions are viewed as defensive, never aggressive, and therefore questions regarding its secretive nuclear program are viewed in much the same way. That even though they claim to not possess nuclear weapons, if they do it’s completely understandable given the threats that surround them, even if those threats do not possess nuclear capabilities. Even more, were Israel to openly admit to possessing a nuclear arsenal it would immediately set a regional precedent, gifting others justification for developing their own programs. That, in truth, is the hypocrisy of the Israeli position.
How we view the world is paramount. When it comes to Israel the stereotypical view of the Arab and Persian world is amplified. While the Israelis are viewed as a people that would never dream of employing nuclear weapons, the Iranians, for example, are viewed as being ignorant enough to employ them without forethought or question. Even more, that they would be ignorant enough to gift them to a terrorist organization and not realize the implications of such an act were that organization to employ them against Israel.
Unfortunately, most of the Western world believes that Iran would use nuclear force against Israel in a first strike capacity, even though they would be utterly overwhelmed by not only the Israeli nuclear response, but the American response as well.
All of that said, let’s return to the above quote. Here it is in its actual form…
“A top Israeli official has said that if Iran continues with its alleged nuclear arms programme, Israel will attack it.
Speaking to Yediot Ahronot newspaper, Deputy Prime Minister Shaul Mofaz said sanctions on Iran were ineffective.”
On top of that, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert recently commented…
“The international community has a duty and responsibility to clarify to Iran, through drastic measures, that the repercussions of their continued pursuit of nuclear weapons will be devastating.”
These comments, given that they were made by Israelis, are not viewed with the same sort of shock or concern as they would had they been made by their Iranian counterparts. And that is something that more people need to take note of. Because aggression is aggression, no matter what face it wears.
In essence, a country with a nuclear program that it denies exists, and that has never been scrutinized by the United Nations, is making extremely serious overtures regarding a nation that has, to some extent, at least allowed the IAEA access to its facilities. Further, Iran has ratified the NPT and has not attempted to hide the fact that it is developing its nuclear sector. And yet it is considered the foremost regional threat with regards to the possibility of nuclear aggression.
There is no questioning the fact that Hezbollah is supported by Iran. That being said, one can deduce that by way of a military proxy the Iranians have long funded a militant organization that has jousted with the IDF numerous times in the past, and one that has also come to represent a significant political force in Lebanon.
On the other hand, Israel can certainly be viewed as a US military proxy of sorts, and possesses one of the world’s most formidable militaries. Unlike Hezbollah, the IDF is replete with state of the art attack helicopters, fighters, bombers, armour, vehicles, missile systems, small arms, and so forth. The possession of such a formidable arsenal has been made possible largely because of Israel’s relationship with the United States, who provides Israel a significant amount of military assistance. Thus, the United States has a stake in the actions of the Israelis and their position in the region.
An interesting irony that has been significantly overlooked regarding the invasion of Iraq is that it has emboldened Iran. The Iraqi government is now predominantly Shi’ite, as are the more formidable militias in Iraq. The Interior Ministry has been infiltrated by Shi’ite militant groups leading to the purging of Sunnis from various positions. In effect, Iraq has been rid of a dictator that was utterly anti-Iranian and replaced with a government that is more likely to treat with Tehran.
In essence, a country with a nuclear program that it denies exists, and that has never been scrutinized by the United Nations, is making extremely serious overtures regarding a nation that has, to some extent, at least allowed the IAEA access to its facilities. Further, Iran has ratified the NPT and has not attempted to hide the fact that it is developing its nuclear sector. And yet it is considered the foremost regional threat with regards to the possibility of nuclear aggression.
There is no questioning the fact that Hezbollah is supported by Iran. That being said, one can deduce that by way of a military proxy the Iranians have long funded a militant organization that has jousted with the IDF numerous times in the past, and one that has also come to represent a significant political force in Lebanon.
On the other hand, Israel can certainly be viewed as a US military proxy of sorts, and possesses one of the world’s most formidable militaries. Unlike Hezbollah, the IDF is replete with state of the art attack helicopters, fighters, bombers, armour, vehicles, missile systems, small arms, and so forth. The possession of such a formidable arsenal has been made possible largely because of Israel’s relationship with the United States, who provides Israel a significant amount of military assistance. Thus, the United States has a stake in the actions of the Israelis and their position in the region.
An interesting irony that has been significantly overlooked regarding the invasion of Iraq is that it has emboldened Iran. The Iraqi government is now predominantly Shi’ite, as are the more formidable militias in Iraq. The Interior Ministry has been infiltrated by Shi’ite militant groups leading to the purging of Sunnis from various positions. In effect, Iraq has been rid of a dictator that was utterly anti-Iranian and replaced with a government that is more likely to treat with Tehran.
Ironically, while the United States claims that democracy has been gifted the Iraqi people, its supposed institution has only helped create a government that is largely controlled by a Shi’ite majority that is more likely to negotiate with the Iranians than follow any other course of action. This, of course, places the United States in an interesting spot given its position regarding Iran.
It is also the reason why a sustained US military presence is required in Iraq. Therefore, extreme rhetoric on the part of the Israelis is quintessential with regards to the current US position on Iran.
¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤
© 2008 Matthew Good
SOURCE: MatthewGood.org
¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤
© 2008 Matthew Good
SOURCE: MatthewGood.org
No comments:
Post a Comment