Israel Matzav

IAEA springs into action, condemns Israel

The 144-nation IAEA voted 53-2 with 47 abstentions to condemn Israel for not putting its alleged nuclear program under the agency's auspices. The remaining IAEA members were not present. Only the United States and Israel voted against.

The remaining nations were absent for the highly unusual vote - only the second in the 16 years the issue has been on the agenda of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Up to last year, the resolution on "Application of IAEA Safeguards in the Middle East" had been adopted by consensus, but in 2006, and again this year, Israeli objections forced a vote.

This year, Israel opposed two paragraphs - one calling all nations in the Middle East "not to develop, test or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons," the other urging nuclear weapons states to "refrain from any action" hindering the establishment of a Mideast zone free of nuclear weapons.

Both passages were clearly aimed at Israel, which is considered to have nuclear weapons despite its "no tell" policy on the issue and which counts on the United States as its chief ally for support - both in the outside world and in forums such as the conference.

Israeli opposition last year was sparked by a separate Arab-sponsored resolution deeming Israel a "nuclear threat" and refusal by its sponsors to withdraw it.

While that resolution was put up for adoption it was not voted on. A similar resolution was being prepared for consideration at the gathering Friday.

A Western diplomat whose country normally is supportive of Israel sought to diminish the negative impact of the vote, pointing out that last year, 98 approved the resolution, with three abstaining and the United States and Israel opposed.

If these people are right, Israel has been a nuclear power for about 40 years. During that time, we have gone through five wars (1967 and 1973 when our very existence was threatened, 1982, 1991 when we weren't allowed to fight back, and 2006) and have never used the nuclear weapons we allegedly have. If we really intended to use them for offensive purposes, I think that would have happened by now. In 1967 and 1973, Israel's very existence hung in the balance, and if we had nuclear weapons, we obviously did not use them.

The difference between a nuclear Israel and a nuclear Iran is that Israel's government is a democratically elected rational actor. Iran's government is led by an irrational dictator with an apocalyptic world view. Israel threatens no one with the nukes it may or may not have; it doesn't even admit to having them. Iran is threatening to destroy Israel and to use its nukes against American interests even before it has them. Israel's government exists to serve its people. Iran's government exists to exploit its people. Israel can be trusted to use any nukes it might have prudently. Iran cannot be trusted. The difference should be obvious to everyone. Too bad the IAEA has no interest in understanding.

Substitute Syria for Iran and re-read the previous paragraph. Yes, Syria has a nuclear program as well, and it goes back to 1986. For that matter, you could substitute any Arab country into that last paragraph because none of them are democracies, and most of them wish they had nuclear weapons.

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 8:09 PM