Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

U.S. Not Seeking Disclosure of Israeli Nuclear Arsenal

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-06-09 02:16 PM
Original message
U.S. Not Seeking Disclosure of Israeli Nuclear Arsenal


U.S. Not Seeking Disclosure of Israeli Nuclear Arsenal
Friday, Oct. 2, 2009

The Obama administration does not intend to press Israel to give international monitors access to its nuclear weapons, the Washington Times reported today.

Israel has never officially acknowledged possession of what is believed to be the Middle East's only nuclear arsenal, which is roughly estimated at between 100 and 200 warheads.

Then-U.S. President Richard Nixon and former Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meier in 1969 reportedly agreed that Washington would not challenge Jerusalem on the issue. The deal -- of which there is no official accounting -- essentially means that "the United States passively Israel's nuclear weapons status as long as Israel does not unveil publicly its capability or test a weapon," according to expert Avner Cohen.

The understanding has held up for 40 years. President Barack Obama indicated during a meeting in May with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that he did not intend to change that policy, three officials told the Times.

Arms Control Association chief Daryl Kimball played down the importance of Obama's decision, but said Netanyahu should not believe that the U.N. Security Council resolution passed last week in hopes of promoting nuclear disarmament does not apply to his nation.

"I would respectfully disagree with Mr. Netanyahu. President Obama's speech and U.N. Security Council Resolution 1887 apply to all countries irrespective of secret understandings between the U.S. and Israel," Kimball said. "A world without nuclear weapons is consistent with Israel's stated goal of achieving a Middle East free of weapons of mass destruction. Obama's message is that the same nonproliferation and disarmament responsibilities should apply to all states and not just a few"

http://www.globalsecuritynewswire.org/gsn/nw_20091002_7204.php

-----------------------------------------------

Obama reaffirms Israel-US secret accord on nuke bombs
Sindh Today
October 2, 2009

US President Barack Obama has assured Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that the four-decade-old secret Israel-American accord, allowing Israel to keep a nuclear arsenal without opening it to international inspections, would continue.

.... Israel had been nervous that Obama would not continue the understanding because of his strong support for non-proliferation and priority on preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

In fact, Netanyahu ’s reaction to a question last week clearly reflected of the continuing US-Israel understanding, but it went unnoticed.

‘Iin my first meeting with President Obama in Washington I received from him, and I asked to receive from him, an itemized list of the strategic understandings that have existed for many years between Israel and the United States on that issue. It was not for naught that I requested, and it was not for naught that I received.’

The chief nuclear understanding was reached at a summit between President Nixon and Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir that began on Sept. 25, 1969.

Although there is no formal record of the agreement, the Nixon library declassified a July 19, 1969, memo on the issue.

‘While we might ideally like to halt actual Israeli possession, what we really want at a minimum may be just to keep Israeli possession from becoming an established international fact,’ it said.

http://www.sindhtoday.net/news/1/56534.htm

--------------------------------------------

Obama agrees to keep Israel's nukes secret
By Eli Lake
Washington Times
October 2, 2009

President Obama has reaffirmed a 4-decade-old secret understanding that has allowed Israel to keep a nuclear arsenal without opening it to international inspections, three officials familiar with the understanding said.

The officials, who spoke on the condition that they not be named because they were discussing private conversations, said Mr. Obama pledged to maintain the agreement when he first hosted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House in May.

Under the understanding, the U.S. has not pressured Israel to disclose its nuclear weapons or to sign the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which could require Israel to give up its estimated several hundred nuclear bombs.

Israel had been nervous that Mr. Obama would not continue the 1969 understanding because of his strong support for nonproliferation and priority on preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons. The U.S. and five other world powers made progress during talks with Iran in Geneva on Thursday as Iran agreed in principle to transfer some potential bomb fuel out of the country and to open a recently disclosed facility to international inspection.

Mr. Netanyahu let the news of the continued U.S.-Israeli accord slip last week in a remark that attracted little notice. He was asked by Israel's Channel 2 whether he was worried that Mr. Obama's speech at the U.N. General Assembly, calling for a world without nuclear weapons, would apply to Israel.

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/02/president-obama-has-reaffirmed-a-4-decade-old-secr/?feat=home_top5_shared#

You can read the complete news articles at the above posted links.







Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
LovinLife Donating Member (366 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-06-09 02:24 PM
Response to Original message
1. Sounds like a big double standard. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
invictus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-06-09 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-06-09 02:25 PM
Response to Original message
2. Is it any wonder it boils down to the USA and Israel against World Opinion? eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Echo In Light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-06-09 02:27 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Sounds Rapture-Ready to me
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gratuitous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-06-09 02:28 PM
Response to Original message
4. Cause then we'd have to do something about it
Much more palatable to the warhawks, chickenhawks and lobbyists to pretend that the fiction still holds, and the lie that everyone has agreed to is still not a lie. Otherwise, our blathering about Iranian activities would look like the blatant hypocrisy it is, and we can't have that!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frebrd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-06-09 02:32 PM
Response to Original message
5. K&R
Edited on Tue Oct-06-09 02:39 PM by frebrd
So Israel has this sweetheart deal, but wants Iran to submit to inspections.

Double standard, indeed!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HERVEPA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-06-09 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. Sorry, but Iran a much bigger danger to the world at large than Israel
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Flaneur Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-06-09 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. Precisely how is Iran a danger to the world at large?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LovinLife Donating Member (366 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-06-09 03:40 PM
Response to Reply #11
16. Iran is a danger to Israel, not the world. They both seem obsessed with eachother.
I just thinks it looks bad to tell one group of people we don't trust u with something, but its ok for these other people to have them. Nobody is going to nuke Israel w/o our military going after them. We have enough nukes to protect us and Israel, so why does Israel need nukes? I just wish they would make more of an effort in the peace process.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-06-09 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #9
15. I don't buy that for a moment. In fact, the World is much more afraid of the USA
and Israel's AGRESSION than it is about Iran. Israel's present leader is IMO, all kinds of crazy ... equal to Iran's Amhu-A-diner-jacket any day of the week. We should chip in so they both could share 'a rubber room' together? :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-06-09 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #9
17. really? How many Countries has Iran invaded
Edited on Tue Oct-06-09 03:44 PM by fascisthunter
in the last century?

Israel has the nukes, and the last time I looked, they were the aggressors who use terrorism as an excuse to invade and take land away from Muslims. They are afraid because they know they may reap what they sow. What's funny is it's all in the Israeli government's twisted head.

"we can do no wrong""they started it... wahhhh"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polly7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-06-09 04:40 PM
Response to Reply #9
18. self-delete
Edited on Tue Oct-06-09 04:47 PM by polly7
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-07-09 11:25 AM
Response to Reply #9
19. The trigger happy extreme right Israeli regime armed to the teeth with 200 nukes is a huge danger!
Edited on Wed Oct-07-09 11:26 AM by Better Believe It

We need to find a way to disarm the nutcases running Israel.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cant trust em Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-06-09 02:34 PM
Response to Original message
6. It's an indefensible double standard, yet probably not a fight worth fighting.
It would probably make the US seem like a more honest broker though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LovinLife Donating Member (366 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-06-09 03:03 PM
Response to Original message
8. I also get the feeling that Iran only wants nukes becuz Israel has them. It would go a long way to
mid east peace if Israel agreed to give up their Nukes. But that's just fantasy I suppose.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HERVEPA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-06-09 03:15 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. Oh Yeah. That would be a brilliant move by Israel.
Edited on Tue Oct-06-09 03:17 PM by HERVEPA
Living close to a country whose leader denies the German holocaust.
:sarcasm:

By the way, I strongly dislike many of Israels actions, the settlements especially.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
14thColony Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-06-09 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #8
13. Welcome to DU
Don't take the criticism to personally. The "Israel gets a permanent exception to everything" crowd usually descends on these types of posts pretty quickly.

And for what it's worth I think you're right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LovinLife Donating Member (366 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-06-09 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. Thanx. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HERVEPA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-06-09 03:20 PM
Response to Original message
12. "Who's Next" by Tom Lehrer
One of the big news items of the past year concerned the fact that China, which we called "Red China," exploded a nuclear bomb, which we called a device. Then Indonesia announced that it was going to have one soon, and proliferation became the word of the day. Here's a song about that:

First we got the bomb, and that was good,
'Cause we love peace and motherhood.
Then Russia got the bomb, but that's okay,
'Cause the balance of power's maintained that way.
Who's next?

France got the bomb, but don't you grieve,
'Cause they're on our side (I believe).
China got the bomb, but have no fears,
They can't wipe us out for at least five years.
Who's next?

Then Indonesia claimed that they
Were gonna get one any day.
South Africa wants two, that's right:
One for the black and one for the white.
Who's next?

Egypt's gonna get one too,
Just to use on you know who.
So Israel's getting tense.
Wants one in self defense.
"The Lord's our shepherd," says the psalm,
But just in case, we better get a bomb.
Who's next?

Luxembourg is next to go,
And (who knows?) maybe Monaco.
We'll try to stay serene and calm
When Alabama gets the bomb.
Who's next?
Who's next?
Who's next?
Who's next?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 07:22 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC