Friday, October 21, 2005

Nukes and Double Standards

Israeli Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz believes that "None of the Western countries can live with Iran having a nuclear capability - not the U.S., not the European countries and nor other countries."

He adds that "It is a vital matter for Israel. This is a threat not only against our country but against the entire free world." [reference]

"I believe the concern of Israel is shared by many other countries that know how the Iranians are trying to develop new missiles with much longer range," he said, adding that they might hit many European countries, such as France, Britain, Germany and Russia. [see USAtoday]

Give me a break. How many times did Iran attack a country? Probably Israelis couldn’t find one so that Prime Minister Ariel Sharon focuses on his country and calls Iran's nuclear program "the biggest threat to the existence of Israel" and that "Israel will not allow Iran to be equipped with a nuclear weapon." [see Times Online article].

Well, at least Sharon is more honest than Mofaz.

Let us look at history. Here is a list of his country’s recorded attacks:
On October 29, 1956 Israel attacked Egypt, with the help of France and Britain (see Suez War)

In June 1967, Israel started the Six-Day War by attacking Egypt in Sinai, Syria in the Golan Heights and Jordan in east of Jerusalem. Funny enough this attack was considered preemptive by many historians.

However, instead of being considered as deliberate and coordinated, when on June 8, 1967 Israel attacked the USS Liberty (with aircraft and torpedo boats), the attack was accepted as a "tragic accident" and case closed (see counterpunch article for more on this).

On June 7, 1981 Israeli war planes bombed the Osiraq nuclear reactor under construction outside of Baghdad in Iraq.

In 1982-1984 Israeli Invasion of Lebanon involved Syria and the PLO. 1982 Lebanon War
1984-1984 was Israeli-Lebanese Border War involving Syria, the PLO and Lebanese militia's such as Hezbollah.

In addition, well, no need to mention Israel’s policy over the past years in Palestine.

Mr. Mofaz, of course, oversees all those attacks and thinks that Iran is the one who is dangerous and hence to be stopped. But "The way to stop Iran is by the leadership of the U.S., supported by European countries and taking this issue to the UN, and using the diplomatic channel with sanctions as a tool and a very deep inspection regime and full transparency," he adds. [see Aljazeera]

Come on, give me another break!

First of all, Iran signed and ratified the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1968 (see wikipedia)

Second, Iran says that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only, and it has the right to enrich uranium under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Third, it is Israel that is widely believed to possess nuclear weapon. For example, in the conclusions part of a Canadian Security Intelligence Service report it says that “Iraq, with its demonstrated history of a large-scale program, appears determined to acquire a nuclear weapons capability at the earliest opportunity. So do Iran and Libya, albeit being considerably less advanced. Meanwhile, Israel shows no willingness to give up its substantial arsenal of nuclear weapons despite widespread criticism.”

Forth, it is Israel that continuously follows a policy of "nuclear ambiguity," neither admitting nor denying possession a nuclear weapons program. And Sharon makes it clear that Israel will continue to do so: "Our policy of ambiguity on nuclear arms has proved its worth, and it will continue," [see BBC]

On top of that, Israel refused to sign the international nuclear non-proliferation treaty even though IAEA Director Mohammed El Baradei says that Israel's nuclear weapons are an obstacle to peace in the Middle East. "This is not really sustainable that you have Israel sitting with nuclear weapons capability there while everyone else is part of the non-proliferation regime," El Baradei told [see reference].

Fifth, it is Israel that opposes to begin a dialogue on a nuclear free zone. See for example below parts of the letter from Israeli Atomic Energy Commission addressed to the Director General of the IAEA in reply to the Director General’s addressed to Foreign Minister of the Middle East on application of IAEA safeguards in the Middle East.

“The IAEA by its Statute and mission has no role to play in settling political conflicts. Involvement of international organizations such as the IAEA in regional disputes would even be counterproductive to the prospects for attaining a regional settlement as well as for the Agency itself. Not in the 1east because it may be inappropriately perceived as a substitute to an effort by the regional parties themselves to settle their own differences. The regrettable trend of attempting to bypass a dialogue among the concerned parties in the Middle East has been repeatedly demonstrated in the Agency's Policy Making Organs.”

“In the Middle East, as earlier in other regions, progress in the areas of arms control and disarmament can come about only through political accommodation and reconciliation. This process, inherently an incremental one, can only realistically begin with modest, even voluntary arrangements.”

Sixth, there is no evidence that Iran has nuclear weapons. Here is what El Baradei said to Washington Post on Iran’s nuclear facilities: “Through our tenacity, Iran's facilities that could produce fissile material are frozen. And we are still going everywhere we think we need to go to be sure there are no undeclared activities in Iran…If they are still cheating, we haven't seen any evidence of that. . . . When they cheated, we said so. When they are cooperating, we say so.”

Seventh, wasn’t it the US that helped Iran to develop the nuclear industry? Note that by 1975, Henry Kissinger, had signed National Security Decision Memorandum 292, titled "U.S.-Iran Nuclear Cooperation." Oh yes, things were different then…

Eight, don’t India and Pakistan possess any nuclear weapons? Why they are simply ignored as if they are not in this planet? Don’t they refuse to sign either the NPT or the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty? Why Bush rewards India as “work to achieve full civil nuclear energy cooperation with India.” Isn’t this a violation of the NPT? Doesn’t NPT forbid signatories from exchanging nuclear materials or support with non-signatories? Because….

Ninth, why corporate media is fully utilized by the US administration as a tool to disseminate misinformation, brainwashing and create hate? Why completely biased articles such as the one by D. Linzer in Washington Post or Washington Post editorial on September 27, 2005, or paranoiac thoughts against Iran such as Ilan Berman (vice President for Policy at the American Foreign Policy Council, see his views summarized at US Congress funded Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty) are always welcomed in the White House?

Tenth, why to use the word “regime” for countries the US doesn’t like and use “administration” or “government” for the others?

The list goes on, but better stop here. By the way, I have nothing against Israel and have no Iranian friend. Just can’t accept this double standard, injustice, mass deception and inequality!

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home