World>Terrorism & Security
posted July 6, 2004, updated 12:00 p.m.

Nukes, barrier put Israel in spotlight

ElBaradei visit, int'l court opinion on 'security wall' make for tough week.

by Tom Regan | csmonitor.com

Israel finds itself in the international spotlight on two key security issues this week: the presumed existence of its nuclear weapons arsenal and what it means for peace in the region, and Friday's expected decision on what the Israeli government calls a "security barrier" being built between Israel and the West Bank.

The Independent reports that Mohamed ElBaradei, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), will use a rare trip Tuesday to Israel to "suggest" to the Mideast nation that its policy of "nuclear ambiguity" should not stand in they way of Israel taking part in talks about region-wide security issues. (Israel will neither officially confirm nor deny it posseses nuclear weapons.) Mr. ElBaradei has said that he would eventually like to see the entire Middle East become a " weapons of mass destruction-free zone."

ElBaradei said before his visit: "I think everybody takes it as a given that Israel has a nuclear capability, if not nuclear weapons. So whether they would like to come in the open, whether they maintain ... ambiguity, it's for them to decide."


07/02/04 No blinking on Darfur 07/01/04 Was British apology to Iran premature? 06/30/04 The transatlantic rift

Sign up to be notified daily: Find out more.

ElBaradei has said that he will not push Israel to declare that it does in fact have nuclear weapons. Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said Monday that Israel will not do so. The Guardian reports, however, that ElBaradei's visit comes at a time when Israel is "increasingly sensitive to pressure for it to be subject to the same standards of international accountability demanded of other countries in the Middle East." Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said Monday that Israel will not do so. Perhaps in anticipation of ElBaradei's visit, Israel's atomic energy program launched a website Monday that provides some details about its activities, but nothing about nuclear weapons.

The Israeli daily Ha'aretz reports that the Israeli government is trying to keep ElBaradei's visit as low-key as possible. There will be no photo-ops and the schedule of his visit was not released to the press. On Thursday he will deliver a speech at the Hebrew University's Davis Institute, in which "he is expected to explain the IAEA's policies and his personal approach to ending nuclear proliferation."

ElBaradei will not visit the Dimona facility, where US and European security experts say Israel produces plutonium for its nuclear weapons. [The Israeli government and the Israeli media have a policy of never actually quoting an Israeli source about what happens at Dimona; instead both refer to "reports in the foreign media."]

Commentators in Israel have reacted largely negatively to El Baradei's visit. In the right-of-center Jerusalem Post, Gerald Steinburg argues that the head of the IAEA should be paying more attention to what is happening in Iran than anything that is happening at Dimona. In the left-of-center Ha'aretz, Uzi Arad writes that Israel's policy of "nuclear ambiguity" (which is very popular among Israelis) makes comlete sense and that Israel shouldn't necessary wait for ElBaradei to deal with Iran's developing nuclear capability.

Israel, for its part, must examine the role that ElBaradei intends for himself (assuming that he will continue in his position) and for the IAEA. Will he forcefully confront Iran, which is clearly in material breach of the NPT? Given that Dr. ElBaradei is an authority on law and international organizations, the measures necessitated by the gravity of the situation are surely clear to him. Will he strengthen the instruments for non-proliferation – for example, in the area of inspection arrangements, in which the IAEA has failed more than once, or by promoting a new fuel cycle regime?

But Arnaud de Borchgrave, the editor at large of The Washington Times, writes that it has become almost impossible politically for Israel, with US support, to deal with Iran's nuclear capability in a military way, as it did with Iraq in the 80s.

One scenario now bruited would involve a joint US-Israel precision-guided strike against the Bushehr, Natanz and Arak nuclear projects in Iran. But the Bush administration has concluded a US air attack against Iran would trigger a major Iranian campaign to destabilize Iraq. The two countries share a 1,458-kilometer (906-mile) border stretching from Turkey to the Shatt al Arab terminal on the Gulf. Iran also enjoys wide grass-roots support among Iraq's dominant Shiite population. ... While an "October surprise" of US air strikes to rid the world of Iran's looming nuclear threat might help President Bush Nov. 2, the blowback of unintended consequences would further destabilize the world's most volatile region – the Middle East.

Israel first began to develop nuclear capability in the late 50s after France rewarded it with a nuclear reactor in payment for Israel's support during the Suez Canal crisis. In the 60s then defense minister Yitzhak Rabin promised US President John Kennedy that Israel "would not introduce" nuclear weapons into any conflict in the region. Israel's program remained largely secret until 1986 when Israeli nuclear technician Mordechai Vanunu gave a British newspaper details and pictures about the Dimona reactor and Israel's nuclear weapons program. Mr. Vanunu served 18 years in an Israel prison for his act, eleven of those years in solitary confinement. He was released in April of 2004.

MSNBC provides a map that details the suspected positions of Israel's strategic weapons programs. The Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Monterrey Institute for International Studies provides a detailed look at Israel's nuclear, biological and chemical weapons programs.

Meanwhile, Al Jazeera reports that Israel's government is preparing for defeat at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) this Friday over the issue of its " security barrier."

Last week, Israel's Supreme Court ordered the government to redraw 20 miles of the barrier's path, saying that certain parts are causing too much harm to the local Palestinian population. Mr. Sharon has used this ruling to argue that there is no need for the ICJ to issue a ruling on Friday. Reuters reports that Israel's foreign minister has said that if the ICJ does issue a ruling against Israel, the government will reject it.

While the ICJ's decision has no binding impact on Israel, it is expected to have an impact on international public opinion. Ha'aretz reports that Israel will seek European support to " bury" the ICJ's ruling on the barrier.

The Washington Times reported in late June that the Israeli army is reporting a sharp drop in fatalities from Palestinian militant attacks, giving credit to the "security barrier" for the decline.