|
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/israel__give_up_your_nukes.html
Israel: Give Up Your
Nukes
[Ha!ha!ha!ha!- Funny, funny. Those
war College analysts
have a great sense of humor. I
didn't think they had it
in them. -
R. ]
Army War College Analysts Believe that Iran Would
Abandon Nuclear Program if Israel Did
A report recently published by the distinguished U.S. Army War
College has publicly targeted Israels controversialbut officially
nonexistentarsenal of nuclear weapons of mass destruction.
In
the wake of a growing American media cacophony about Irans purported
aims of building its own nuclear arsenalnews that has largely been
stimulated by bellicose rhetoric in Israel itselfthe Strategic Studies
Institute of the Army War College, which is a training ground for the
best and the brightest among up-and-coming military officers, has
taken quite a different approach.
The colleges reportwhich has
never once been publicized in the major media in Americasays that
neither talk of a military attack on Iran by Israel nor ongoing American
diplomatic initiatives are likely to stop Iran from pursuing its goals.
Either course could result in disaster, said Americas military
strategists.
Instead, the report, titled Getting Ready for a
Nuclear-Ready Iran, says, quite in contrast, that it is Israel that
should take the initiative.
The American military officers say
that Israel should close down its Dimona nuclear reactor, turn over
nuclear materiel to a third party, and allow the International Atomic
Energy Agency to maintain regular inspection of Israels nuclear
operations. The report urges the United States to put pressure on Israel
to make this possible.
Americas military thinkers believe that
if Israel were to curtail its nuclear offensive, the United States would
be more easily able to convince other nuclear states in the Middle East
to do likewise. It is, in fact, a historic truth that it was Israels
determined push for nuclear weaponsa documented foundation of that
nations geopolitical defense policythat led Arab nations, Pakistan and
Iran to pursue nuclear weapons in response.
For example, although
in 2003 Syria asked for a United Nations resolution calling for nuclear
arms inspections all across the Middle Eastincluding Israelfew
expected that the United States would rally behind Syrias request. This
came despite the official U.S. position that, according to
then-Secretary of State Colin Powell, the United States would like to
see the entire region free of weapons of mass destruction. Nevertheless,
the United States did not support Syria on banning all
nukes.
Even The Washington Post reported, on April 17, 2003, that
Syrias current arsenal of chemical warheads and Scud [Scud-D] missiles
to deliver them was started more than 30 years ago to counter Israels
development and possession of nuclear weapons, according to present and
former U.S. intelligence officials.
The Post cited an unnamed
former senior intelligence analyst as saying that Hafez al-Assad,
Syrias former leader and the father of the current Syrian ruler,
believed that the military aid that the Syrians received from the former
USSR would never be able to match what Israel developed in the nuclear
field and received from the U.S.
Joseph Cirincione, head of the
nonproliferation program of the Carnegie Endowment for International
Peace, told the Post, at the time that, You cant get rid of chemical
or biological or nuclear programs in Arab countries unless you also
address the elimination of Israels nuclear and chemical
programs.
Cirincione pointed out that the primary reason for
other nations in the region building their own weapons of mass
destruction was due to Israels own initiatives.
What is
particularly notable about the recent Army War College report calling
for Israel to effectively de-nuke is that the co-author of that report
is Patrick Clawson, deputy director of the Washington Institute for Near
East Policy (WINEP), a long and well-established pro-Israel lobby in
Washington.
However, WINEP is generally identified with Israels
socalled peace movement, which has been at odds with the elements in
Israel associated with ailing Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and former
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. Sharon and Netanyahu are, in turn,
allied with members of the fanatic pro-Israel neo-conservative
elements who have been directing U.S. Middle East policy in the Bush
administration.
All of this suggests that, once again, internal
Israeli political conflicts are flowing over into the American political
process within this instancethe top-notch officers at the Army War
College allying with Israels left wing.
Thus, the men who are
charged with fighting Americas wars are taking a public stand that
couldif their advice is followedhelp defuse the problem of nuclear
proliferation in the Middle East, if only Israel agrees to go along and
the Bush administration sees the logic of what Americas military
leaders are proposing.
(Issue #4, January 23, 2006) | 