Israel, Iran, and nuclear weapons programs

Israel wants the US to increase pressure on Iran to give up all elements of its nuclear program, but analysts are now wondering whether recent statements by non-senior State Department officials signal a key shift in US policy vis-a-vis Israel's alleged possession of nuclear weapons.

According to the Times report, US "officials said the evidence Mr. Sharon presented, including aerial photographs of sites in Iran, was neither startling nor new to Mr. Bush."

Nonetheless, Mr. Sharon's extended conversation - bolstered by the Israeli photographs and intelligence presented by his chief military aide, Brig. Gen. Yaakov Galant - showed tension between Israel and its biggest ally over how much time is available to deal with the issue.

04/12/05 India and China forge new relationship 04/11/05 Talabani proposes amnesty for Iraqi insurgents 04/08/05 Footsteps heard at sea

Sign up to be notified daily: Find out more.

Iran continues to insist that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only, and has that it has the right to enrich uranium under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

As for its own nuclear weapons, Israel follows a policy of "nuclear ambiguity," neither admiting nor denying possession a nuclear weapons program.

But there are recent signs the US might break its long-held silence on the issue.

Referring to Israel as a nuclear power – even implicitly – has been a definite no-no for US diplomats and officials. Yet, in the last couple weeks, US officials have indirectly called on Israel to phase out its nuclear weapons programs.

Jackie Wolcott Sanders, the special representative of the president for the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, wrote in the State Department's electronic journal that it should be "reaffirmed that India, Israel, and Pakistan may join the NPT only as non-nuclear-weapon states."

Just as South Africa and Ukraine did in the early 1990s, these states should foreswear nuclear weapons and accept IAEA safeguards on all nuclear activities to join the treaty. At the same time, we recognize that progress toward universal adherence is not likely in the foreseeable future. The United States continues to support the goals of the Middle East resolution adopted at the 1995 NPT Review and Extension Conference, including the achievement of a Middle East free of weapons of mass destruction.

The Conference should also reinforce the goal of universal NPT adherence and reaffirm that India, Israel and Pakistan may join the NPT only as non-nuclear-weapon states. Just as South Africa and Ukraine did in the early 1990s, these states should forswear nuclear weapons and accept IAEA safeguards on all nuclear activities.

The Israeli daily Ha'aretz points out that "the rare use of these terms contradicts the custom of senior [US] administration officials to avoid any possible confirming reference to Israeli nuclear weapons."

In an opinion piece published in Global Politician magazine, former Cairo-based freelance Middle East correspondent Angelique van Engelen, writes that this "might be a sign that the US perceives of nuclear issues as too serious to condone the double standards it employs freely on other issues."

In a close parsing of the US officials' comments, Ha'aretz points out that their words were carefully selected to stop short of calling for any nonproliferation action from India, Pakistan, or Israel.

Sanders and Fitzpatrick refrained from calling on Israel, India and Pakistan explicitly to renounce their weapons. The expectation of these three states was phrased in terms of a vow - a verbal pledge to forswear, rather than real action. Nor was this demand accompanied by a time table, conditions and sanctions.

This doesn't necessarily negate the possibility of a real change to US policy on the issue, according to Ms. van Engelen.

The call on Israel to 'accept international Atomic Energy Agency safeguards on all nuclear activities' lacks any urgency, but then it would. If the US foreign policy were to clearly steer in this direction, possibly to reduce Iranian risks, its early start would only be very subtle like this.

Meanwhile, the man who started the speculation about Israel's nuclear weapons decades ago – former nuclear technician of an Israeli nuclear plant, Mordecai Vanunu – went on trial Tuesday for allegedly violating the terms of his release. Mr. Vanunu was released last April after serving an 18-year sentence for revealing secrets of Israel's atomic program to London's Sunday Times newspaper in 1986. The Israeli daily Ha'aretz reports that his revelations " confirmed to experts that Israel had nuclear weapons."

At a hearing Tuesday, prosecutors accused Vanunu of giving interviews to foreign media, despite a ban on contacts with foreigners. Arutz Sheva reports that "Vanunu faces a 22 count indictment, charges stemming from his alleged blatant and repeated violations of restrictions governing his release from prison."

"It's a shameful day for Israel's democracy, that a man who served 18 years, a full sentence, is brought to court for exercizing his freedom of speech," Vanunu told The Associated Press. "I have no more secrets. Only Israel has secrets about its atomic program," he added.

The issue of both Iran and Israel's alleged nuclear weapons programs is likely to figure prominently in the quinquennial review conference of the now 35-year-old nuclear NPT, which will be held in New York next month.

Also...
• A most dangerous message ( The Guardian)
• Bush is from Mars, Sharon is from Venus ( Ha'aretz)
• Israel became a nuclear power in 1965: Former Israeli Science Minister – where did they test their nukes? ( India Daily)
• Suspected Al Qaeda terrorists await trail in Great Britain ( Voice of America)
• UN pick portrayed as a bully ( The New York Times)
• Japan risks China anger over gas ( BBC)

• Feedback appreciated. E-mail Matthew Clark.