There has long been a secret agreement between the US and Israel, concerning Israel’s nuclear weapons. I had hoped that the Obama administration would change that as part of the openness Obama promised us during his campaign. Sadly, I was disappointed.
Barack Obama, the US president, has agreed to abide by a 40-year policy of allowing Israel to keep nuclear weapons without opening them to international inspection, according to a US newspaper.
In a report on Saturday, The Washington Times quoted three unnamed sources as saying Obama had confirmed to Binyamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister, that he would maintain the "don’t ask, don’t tell" policy.
The incident reportedly occurred when the two met at the White House in Washington DC in May.
Neither Israel’s embassy in Washington, nor the White House National Security Council would comment on the claim.
Avner Cohen, an Israeli expert and author, was quoted by the paper as saying that under the deal "the United States passively [accepts] Israel’s nuclear weapons status as long as Israel does not unveil publicly its capability or test a weapon".
There is no official accounting of the deal, supposedly agreed in 1969 between Richard Nixon, then US president, and Golda Meir, the Israeli prime minister at the time… [emphasis added]
Inserted from <Common Dreams>
Don’t ask, don’t tell is a lousy way to run our military. It requires LGBT service personnel to live a lie in order to serve our nation in the military. A standard of openness requires that they be able to serve with honor without having to hide their sexuality.
In the same way, don’t ask, don’t tell is a lousy way to run our international relations. A standard of openness requires a level playing field for all participants. How can we be taken seriously, when we demand that North Korea give up or that Iran not develop nuclear weapons when we look the other way at Israel’s nukes?
Furthermore, this policy poisons our relationships with the Muslim world. When Muslim countries consider this this policy, they believe, with just cause, that the US considers them second class world citizens, because we give preferential treatment to a nation they consider a foe. Many of them have to live in Israel’s nuclear shadow, and they are rightly indignant.
Some may argue that Israel, surrounded by enemies, needs nuclear weapons to insure their national security. However, the US has more than enough power to insure Israel’s security, if we choose to do so, but I can’t see any way that Israel will ever give up nuclear weapons. I’m not saying we should attempt to force them to do so, just as we have made no such attempts with India or Pakistan. But why can’t we at least be honest about it?
14 Responses to “US Silent on Israeli Nuclear Arms”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
america keeping silent on israel's nukes and constantly giving a veto against any sanctions towards israel is a prime example of the tail wagging the dog. how is it that we give them a green light for all of their crimes and then sweep them under the rug. we carry the water for them, this makes us complicit.
RZ,
I was watching a TV program on Dimona a while back.Detailing how JFK didn't like it,and sent inspectors.The Israelis evidently built some false non-weapons areas directly over the weapons facilities there so the US inspection came up clean.Open secret in Israel.Kennedy wasn't satisfied and ordered a more in-depth inspection.This was around August or September of 1963.JFK was assassinated before the second inspection became a reality.
I'm just sayin'……………..
JFK, and daley plaza have a lot of dis-connect, connecting, events of the time. executive order 11110 imo; was pertinent. the israeli connection has been out there for some time. i believe israel got a lot of it in the late 50's. some even from russia at the time. there was chatter out there about the soviet emigres into israel. the nukes are there, and they have been there. it is like a [run silent run deep operation] you notice i put the other topic up about israel receiving 2 more state of the art german made dolphin submarines. these subs are "capable " of carrying nukes. why does the world not say anything when these subs are cruising around the red sea. what is the israeli navy doing in Eriteria?
dang anti-semite 🙂
The military policy was misleadingly labeled "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" when it was deliberately designed to increase the numbers of witchhunts and discharges. It was one of many of Bill Clinton's Republican lies.
Really quite perplexing attitude.
"When Muslim countries consider this policy, they believe, with just cause, that the US considers them second class world citizens, because we give preferential treatment to a nation they consider a foe."
But, Tom, the Muslim countries consider the U.S. a foe. What is that saying — "The enemy of my enemy is my friend…" The United States needs at least one ally in the Middle East, and Israel happens to be it. The U.S. is always going to back anything Israel does.
I think Obama's term of office as President is turning into a "learn on the job" experience. Very few of his campaign promises are going to come to fruition, sadly.
Re; "The enemy of my enemy is my friend…" this is recognized more among western cultures. in regional tribal areas when an occupation occurs the saying is more like. [ the enemy of my enemy is my enemy].we are seen as invaders, occupiers, and colonists. the same as many before our time. and just as the others we shall also fail. af/pak is where empires go to die.
Jo,
“Every time anyone says that Israel is our only friend in the Middle East, I can’t help but think that before Israel, we had no enemies in the Middle East.”
By Franklin Lamb – Along the Blue Line in South Lebanon
Israel's not our friend,a friend does not always put his welfare above yours.
RZ, I agree. We are comp-licit.
Oso, I have no evidence that there was an Israeli connection yo JFK's assassination. That he was about to announce his intent to withdraw support from the Diem government is a more likely cause.
Welcome, libhom. I always thought Clinton's heart was in the right place on that, but that he stupidly went along with "bipartisanship".
HB, it's just irrational, isn't it.
Josie, as Oso said, we had no enemies in the middle east before our support of Israel created that enmity. I'm not saying we should not have supported Israel in the beginning or now. However, when Israel acts against achieving a peaceful resolution, shouldn't we join the rest of the world in condemning that behavior?
RZ, you correctly state that enemies will band together in the face of a greater threat.
Oso, well said indeed.
Israel, for all of its faults, should in no way be compared to North Korea and Iran. The former is a Democracy. The latter are repressive regimes with lunatics running them (the election in Iran was a joke). And, besides, Israel didn't start the Iran-Iraq War, the Lebanese civil war, the first of the 2 gulf wars. I really think we need to face it here. That whole region would be a cauldron, with or without Israel.
will hart; re-" israel is a democracy" LMAO, are you looking at the same israel that i am looking at.
Israeli Arabs have more rights than Arabs in any other part of that region. And as far as the West Bank goes, if Jordan (which never ONCE offered the Palestinians their own state when THEY had the land) had stayed out of the war (as they were pleaded to by Israel), the West Bank would still be in their hands. I'll tell you what. Read the Israeli constitution, and then read the Hamas charter. And from that tell me who the real Democrats are. You might want to get your hands on a few of Arafat's speeches in Arabic (and compare THOSE to the B.S. he was feeding Barak and President Clinton), too.
Will, the only thing about Israel that I was comparing to North Korea and Iran is the stance of the US regarding their acquisition of or, in Iran's case, possible intent to acquire nuclear weapons. Regardless of what Jordan did forty years ago, Israel committed themselves to a two state solution and are trying to abrogate that commitment by force. Piling on unrelated complaints just muddies the waters.