WINSTON MID EAST ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY September 11, 2010
Email: winston@winstonglobal.org Please disseminate & re-post. If you publish, send us a copy. Many of our articles appear in www.freeman.org; JewishIndy.com; Outgoing mail is virus-checked.
Email: winston@winstonglobal.org Please disseminate & re-post. If you publish, send us a copy. Many of our articles appear in www.freeman.org; JewishIndy.com; Outgoing mail is virus-checked.
OBAMA WANTS TO KILL OFF ISRAEL’S NUCLEAR DETERRENT
by Emanuel A. Winston,
by Emanuel A. Winston,
Freeman Center Middle East Analyst & Commentator
Before you read this excellent article written by A. Savyon (Director of the Iranian Media Project) and published by MEMRI, The Middle East Media Research Institute, on President Barack Hussein Obama’s collaboration with the Muslim Arab world to force Israel to put her Nuclear Deterrence under U.N. controls. Also attached is a Wall St. Journal article by Jay Solomon September 11, 2010 entitled “Nuclear Scrutiny to Turn to Israel”.
I wrote several exposés from1991 to 2010 - predicting a similar plot by Secretary of State James Baker and those guys who came to be known as his three “Jew” boys: Dennis Ross, Aaron David Miller and Daniel Kurtzer. Baker has currently been an advisor to Obama and, given their mutual animus toward the Jewish Nation/State, it is not surprising that the Baker Plan would once again morph into the Obama Plan to cripple and eliminate Israel’s Nuclear Deterrence against her Muslim Arab enemies.
I wrote several exposés from1991 to 2010 - predicting a similar plot by Secretary of State James Baker and those guys who came to be known as his three “Jew” boys: Dennis Ross, Aaron David Miller and Daniel Kurtzer. Baker has currently been an advisor to Obama and, given their mutual animus toward the Jewish Nation/State, it is not surprising that the Baker Plan would once again morph into the Obama Plan to cripple and eliminate Israel’s Nuclear Deterrence against her Muslim Arab enemies.
Netanyahu Artfully Avoids Obama's Nuclear Trap April 11, 2010
by Emanuel A. Winston, Middle East Analyst & Commentator
This week there is to be a Nuclear Security Summit in Washington, called by President Barack Hussein Obama to "discuss" Global Nuclear Security Matters. Since Obama has done everything possible to insure Iran will reach its oft-expressed goal of having and using Nuclear Weapons, the whole matter is beginning to smell like the 1991 Madrid International Conference, arranged in part as a plan of deliberate entrapment for Israel's Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir and the Jewish Nation/State of Israel.
I wrote numerous articles before the Madrid Conference in 1991, defining it as a Kangaroo Court arranged primarily by the Arabist State Department. Shamir was warned repeatedly that he was walking into a trap but, he wrongly assumed he could handle whatever was thrown at him. He was wrong! The Muslim Arab and European nations swarmed against Shamir with the assistance of then Secretary of State James Baker III and the Arabist State Department.
During the Madrid Conference, denials notwithstanding, Baker, through his staff of what came to be known as "Baker's Jew Boys" (Dennis Ross, Aaron David Miller and Daniel Kurtzer) circulated from room to room, guiding the appeasement agenda, while denying their influential presence.
For me, it smelled like a trap about to be sprung, I opined before the Conference ended that one of the delegates from an Arab country would challenge Israel on its undeclared status of being Nuclear-Capable.
As predicted, just before last statements were read to the assembly, the Egyptian delegate asked that the entire Middle-East region be officially a Nuclear-Free Zone. Take that to mean that Israel was to stand down any Nuclear Deterrence she may have and to submit herself to inspection by the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), no doubt, overseen by Baker's Arabist State Department.
Taken in full context, President George Herbert Walker Bush, James Baker III, the Arabist State Department, the Multi-national oil companies - all connected to the Arab oil pipe-line - did not want Israel to have Nuclear Deterrence. All knew that, despite Israel's success in holding off the Arab Muslims in seven wars and continual cruel acts of violent Terrorism, there would come a time when the Arab Muslims (with overwhelming manpower, unlimited military supplies from the U.S., France, Germany, Russia) would sooner or later be able to overcome Israel IF she had to rely upon only conventional weapons to fight many Muslim Arab armies on four fronts (East, North, South and from the sea on the West). It was her undeclared, ambiguous Nuclear Deterrence that the Arabists - like Bush, Baker, Brzezinski, the E.U., Russia, 'et al', wanted Israel to surrender. Now, it's Obama's turn to bond with the Muslim Arab oil nations, reflecting his early, impressionable years as a Muslim in a "Madrassa" (school for strict Islam), learning the Koran and Mohammed's "Hadith" (his oral teachings). President Obama has gathered around him many of the same Arabists from the past and the present. Counseled now by James Baker III, the early court Jews of Baker (Dennis Ross, Aaron David Miller, Daniel Kurtzer - with the later addition of Martin Indyk),Zbigniew Brzezinski, Brent Scowcroft, General James Jones.....one can see how the coming Nuclear Security Summit might be an even deadlier trap for Israel and Binyamin Netanyahu than was the Madrid entrapment.
We have observed the immediate attack on Israel by Obama once he took office. It seems evident that, following the desires of the Arabists who are his advisors and the demands of the Arab League - including the Saudi King - there seems little doubt that he is working toward severing relations with Israel. This, of course, happened before when General Charles De Gaulle - as Prime Minister of France - went from being a supporting friend of Israel to severing relations - which including cutting off all arms shipments, even those for which Israel had already paid.
Once Arab Muslim oil was the motivation, the red light went on in France and Europe. The same could be said for the "Shadow Arabist Government" in Washington as it became the Muslim and Arab oil representatives.
Prime Minister Binyamin (Bibi) Netanyahu must have learned a painful lesson from the entrapment of PM Shamir during the Madrid Conference. It's not surprising to see all the former players of Madrid trying to use their Kangaroo Court "Trick" again.
Perhaps even without Netanyahu present, they may try to draft some sort of crooked agreement, trying to force Israel into signing the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, mandating U.N. control and inspection, in effect, putting a leash on Israel's ability to respond and/or pre-empt when faced with an existential threat such as Iran's Nuclear threats to wipe Israel off the map.
If Obama can force Israel to give up her Nuclear Deterrence, then the U.S., E.U., and Russia could send in a massive so-called "Peace-Keeping Force" to take over Judea, Samaria, the Jordan Valley, Golan Heights - all in the name of "having to protect a now vulnerable Israel".
As we watch Obama cave in to Russian demands, putting restraints on America's Nuclear Deterrence capability, one begins to wonder: Who is really Obama's employer and what is really his assigned agenda?
Netanyahu is sending Deputy Prime Minister Dan Meridor as his replacement. Regrettably, Meridor is too well-known for his weakness and passivity. It would be like sending Left-Leaning Tzippi Livni or Shimon Peres to stand up for Israel's sovereignty. Hopefully, Netanyahu will send Meridor with very specific instructions to keep his mouth shut and not to engage in any discussions that will serve as an entrapment for Israel.
As a relevant aside, we have heard that the attending Muslim Arabs have said they have no intentions of bringing up Israel's Nuclear Deterrence after they heard that Netanyahu side-stepped the trap.
As for the American people's reliance on Obama and his collaborators to protect America and her allies, current polls show an overwhelming distrust, both for the man and the Democratic Party which proved to be so easy to buy.
Perhaps he is assisting Iran in order to allow it to become Nuclear Proficient will be sufficient to bring about Obama's impeachment.
###
Possible Acceleration of Arab World's Nuclearization as a Result of President Obama's Global Nuclear Disarmament Policy By: A. Savyon Published by MEMRI, the Middle East Media Research Institute
Introduction
The past few months have seen some highly significant developments in U.S. nuclear policy, and in this policy's ramifications for the Middle East. This paper will examine these developments.
The Pendulum of the Obama Administration's Nuclear Policy
Upon taking office in 2009, U.S. President Barack Obama announced his intention to promote his vision of global nuclear disarmament. On April 5, 2009 in Prague, he presented an ambitious strategy for achieving this goal, based on three major components: 1) Taking concrete steps towards a world without nuclear weapons by reducing existing nuclear arsenals; 2) Strengthening the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and keeping new countries from acquiring nuclear weapons; 3) Ensuring that terrorists never acquire a nuclear weapon. To achieve the last, President Obama announced a new international effort to secure all vulnerable nuclear material around the world within four years.
As a further step towards the realization of these goals, on April 12, 2010 President Obama convened the Nuclear Security Summit in Washington, DC, with the participation of most of the leaders of the free world.[1]
One month later, in May, the 2010 Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) was convened in New York. In light of President Obama's desire to harness this conference to his own vision, and to make sure that it would be a success – i.e. that it would produce resolutions passed by consensus – his administration was forced into agreeing to the condition, set by the Arab countries and led by Egypt, for international pressure on Israel and for Israel's isolation in the international nuclear community in exchange for such consensual resolutions.[2] Capitulating to the Arab-Egyptian pressure, the Obama administration ultimately decided not to use its power of veto, but to vote for the concluding resolution calling on Israel to accede to the NPT and to place all its nuclear facilities under comprehensive IAEA safeguards.[3]
President Obama himself welcomed the resolution, saying that it "includes balanced and practical steps that will advance non-proliferation, nuclear disarmament, and peaceful uses of nuclear energy, which are critical pillars of the global non-proliferation regime."[4]
By voting for the resolution, the U.S. abandoned its traditional stance supporting Israel's position that a nuclear weapons-free zone in the Middle East is possible and in fact essential, but must include not only nuclear weapons but all types of non-conventional weapons – such as chemical and biological weapons in the possession of Israel's neighbors – and, moreover, that this goal can be realized only after the attaining of comprehensive peace agreements in the region.
The Obama administration's acquiescence to Arab pressure, and its deviation from long-standing U.S. policy, was perceived by Israel as a threat to its security, and Israel demanded that the situation be rectified. The administration complied; as soon as the conference's concluding resolution passed, administration officials hastened to issue statements aimed at softening the impact of the U.S.'s vote on Israel-U.S. relations. For example, in a May 28 statement, President Obama's national security advisor Gen. James Jones said that the U.S. deplored the decision to single out Israel in the NPT document's Middle East section, and that the U.S. remained committed to Israel's security.[5]
A more significant backtrack came during Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's visit to Washington on July 6. The Israeli daily Ha’aretz reported that in talks since the conference, the Americans clarified that the decision had been a "mistake," and that "in an effort to clarify the administration's stance on the Israeli nuclear question, it was determined that – in coordination with Israel – the full details of the high-level understandings [on Israel's status of nuclear ambiguity] between the two sides, reached during the 1960s, would finally be revealed."[6] The White House released a special press announcement stating: "President [Obama] told Prime Minister [Netanyahu] he recognizes that Israel must always have the ability to defend itself, by itself, against any threat or possible combination of threats, and that only Israel can determine its security needs."[7]
With this public proclamation, the Obama pendulum swung back to long-standing U.S. policy. However, in the circumstances in which the statement was made – that is, to rectify the U.S.'s vote for the NPT Review conference resolution isolating Israel – Obama's declaration constitutes a public and explicit confirmation of Israel's special nuclear status. The statement expresses the U.S.'s guarantee of Israel's existence and security, and its preservation of Israel's preferred nuclear status in the Middle East. President Obama went even farther, also recognizing Israel's right to deterrence – that is, that Israel is entitled to possess its own strategic deterrent capability. Thus, this statement by President Obama ushered in the end of the era of Israel's nuclear ambiguity.
Consequently, the White House statements following the Netanyahu meeting, i.e. that the U.S. would not touch Israel's policy of nuclear ambiguity, mean nothing, because President Obama had already recognized Israel's nuclear status and its right to maintain it.
Conclusions and Ramifications
The actions in recent months by the Obama administration in nuclear affairs, aimed at advancing a vision and a policy of global nuclear disarmament, have had the exact opposite effect. In his efforts to advance global nuclear disarmament, Obama brought to the fore what the U.S. had for four decades managed to downplay and marginalize – U.S. recognition of and partnership with Israel's policy of nuclear ambiguity. By openly acknowledging what his eight presidential predecessors had recognized implicitly – i.e. that Israel needs nuclear capability to defend its very existence – President Obama has put an end to Israel's status of nuclear ambiguity.
This development could lead to stepped-up demands for nuclearization by leading Arab states that feel threatened by both Israel and by Iran – and could result in accelerated moves in that direction.
*A. Savyon is Director of the Iranian Media Project.
Possible Acceleration of Arab World's Nuclearization as a Result of President Obama's Global Nuclear Disarmament Policy By: A. Savyon Published by MEMRI, the Middle East Media Research Institute
Introduction
The past few months have seen some highly significant developments in U.S. nuclear policy, and in this policy's ramifications for the Middle East. This paper will examine these developments.
The Pendulum of the Obama Administration's Nuclear Policy
Upon taking office in 2009, U.S. President Barack Obama announced his intention to promote his vision of global nuclear disarmament. On April 5, 2009 in Prague, he presented an ambitious strategy for achieving this goal, based on three major components: 1) Taking concrete steps towards a world without nuclear weapons by reducing existing nuclear arsenals; 2) Strengthening the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and keeping new countries from acquiring nuclear weapons; 3) Ensuring that terrorists never acquire a nuclear weapon. To achieve the last, President Obama announced a new international effort to secure all vulnerable nuclear material around the world within four years.
As a further step towards the realization of these goals, on April 12, 2010 President Obama convened the Nuclear Security Summit in Washington, DC, with the participation of most of the leaders of the free world.[1]
One month later, in May, the 2010 Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) was convened in New York. In light of President Obama's desire to harness this conference to his own vision, and to make sure that it would be a success – i.e. that it would produce resolutions passed by consensus – his administration was forced into agreeing to the condition, set by the Arab countries and led by Egypt, for international pressure on Israel and for Israel's isolation in the international nuclear community in exchange for such consensual resolutions.[2] Capitulating to the Arab-Egyptian pressure, the Obama administration ultimately decided not to use its power of veto, but to vote for the concluding resolution calling on Israel to accede to the NPT and to place all its nuclear facilities under comprehensive IAEA safeguards.[3]
President Obama himself welcomed the resolution, saying that it "includes balanced and practical steps that will advance non-proliferation, nuclear disarmament, and peaceful uses of nuclear energy, which are critical pillars of the global non-proliferation regime."[4]
By voting for the resolution, the U.S. abandoned its traditional stance supporting Israel's position that a nuclear weapons-free zone in the Middle East is possible and in fact essential, but must include not only nuclear weapons but all types of non-conventional weapons – such as chemical and biological weapons in the possession of Israel's neighbors – and, moreover, that this goal can be realized only after the attaining of comprehensive peace agreements in the region.
The Obama administration's acquiescence to Arab pressure, and its deviation from long-standing U.S. policy, was perceived by Israel as a threat to its security, and Israel demanded that the situation be rectified. The administration complied; as soon as the conference's concluding resolution passed, administration officials hastened to issue statements aimed at softening the impact of the U.S.'s vote on Israel-U.S. relations. For example, in a May 28 statement, President Obama's national security advisor Gen. James Jones said that the U.S. deplored the decision to single out Israel in the NPT document's Middle East section, and that the U.S. remained committed to Israel's security.[5]
A more significant backtrack came during Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's visit to Washington on July 6. The Israeli daily Ha’aretz reported that in talks since the conference, the Americans clarified that the decision had been a "mistake," and that "in an effort to clarify the administration's stance on the Israeli nuclear question, it was determined that – in coordination with Israel – the full details of the high-level understandings [on Israel's status of nuclear ambiguity] between the two sides, reached during the 1960s, would finally be revealed."[6] The White House released a special press announcement stating: "President [Obama] told Prime Minister [Netanyahu] he recognizes that Israel must always have the ability to defend itself, by itself, against any threat or possible combination of threats, and that only Israel can determine its security needs."[7]
With this public proclamation, the Obama pendulum swung back to long-standing U.S. policy. However, in the circumstances in which the statement was made – that is, to rectify the U.S.'s vote for the NPT Review conference resolution isolating Israel – Obama's declaration constitutes a public and explicit confirmation of Israel's special nuclear status. The statement expresses the U.S.'s guarantee of Israel's existence and security, and its preservation of Israel's preferred nuclear status in the Middle East. President Obama went even farther, also recognizing Israel's right to deterrence – that is, that Israel is entitled to possess its own strategic deterrent capability. Thus, this statement by President Obama ushered in the end of the era of Israel's nuclear ambiguity.
Consequently, the White House statements following the Netanyahu meeting, i.e. that the U.S. would not touch Israel's policy of nuclear ambiguity, mean nothing, because President Obama had already recognized Israel's nuclear status and its right to maintain it.
Conclusions and Ramifications
The actions in recent months by the Obama administration in nuclear affairs, aimed at advancing a vision and a policy of global nuclear disarmament, have had the exact opposite effect. In his efforts to advance global nuclear disarmament, Obama brought to the fore what the U.S. had for four decades managed to downplay and marginalize – U.S. recognition of and partnership with Israel's policy of nuclear ambiguity. By openly acknowledging what his eight presidential predecessors had recognized implicitly – i.e. that Israel needs nuclear capability to defend its very existence – President Obama has put an end to Israel's status of nuclear ambiguity.
This development could lead to stepped-up demands for nuclearization by leading Arab states that feel threatened by both Israel and by Iran – and could result in accelerated moves in that direction.
*A. Savyon is Director of the Iranian Media Project.
[1] The stated goals of the April 12, 2009 summit were: "Discussion of the nature of the threat and development of steps that can be taken together to secure vulnerable materials, combat nuclear smuggling and deter, detect, and disrupt attempts at nuclear terrorism;" and "agreement on a joint communiqué pledging efforts to attain the highest levels of nuclear security, which is essential for international security as well as the development and expansion of peaceful nuclear energy worldwide."http://www.america.gov/st/peacesec-english/2010/April/20100406143850zjsredna0.789776.html.
[2] See MEMRI Inquiry and Analysis No. 617, "The New UNSC Iran Sanctions Resolution – Main Ramifications," June 22, 2010,http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/4394.htm.
[3] http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=NPT/CONF.2010/50%20%28VOL.I%29.
[4] http://www.america.gov/st/peacesec.../20100601133524esnamfuak0.697735.html.
[5] http://www.america.gov/st/peacesec-english/2010/June/20100601133524esnamfuak0.697735.html
[6] Ha’aretz (Israel), July 8, 2010 http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/obama-administration-israel-has-right-to-nuclear-capability-for-deterrence-purposes-1.300652.
[7] http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/readout-presidents-meeting-with-prime-minister-netanyahu-israel-0.
SEPTEMBER 11, 2010 MIDDLE EAST NEWS
Nuclear Scrutiny to Turn to Israel By JAY SOLOMON
WASHINGTON—Arab states are preparing to press for far greater United Nations controls over Israel's nuclear program, in a move that could complicate the Obama administration's broader nonproliferation campaign and Middle East peace drive.
Beginning Monday, the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, will hold two sets of meetings in Vienna aimed at strengthening international efforts to stanch the spread of atomic weapons.
Access thousands of business sources not available on the free web. Learn More
Arab diplomats say they are preparing to use the conferences—for the second consecutive year—to pass a resolution through the IAEA's member states aimed at bringing Israel's nuclear program under tighter international controls.
The resolution seeks to pressure Israel into signing the U.N.'s principal counter-proliferation document, the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, and to place Israel's nuclear assets under IAEA safeguards. A similar resolution passed last year.
Israel is believed to be the only Middle East country to possess atomic weapons. Its government neither confirms nor denies their existence.
The U.S. has already begun trying to head off the Arab initiative, according to American and Arab diplomats, due to concerns it will distract from the conferences' focus on the proliferation cases of Iran and Syria.
U.S. officials said they are worried the Arab-led resolution could antagonize Israel just as direct Mideast peace talks are resuming in Egypt next week.
At a White House news conference Friday, President Barack Obama revealed that he had asked Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to extend the freeze on Jewish settlements in Palestinian territories when the moratorium expires on Sept. 26.
Speaking about the Arab-Israeli conflict, Mr. Obama said: "What I've said to Prime Minister Netanyahu is that, given, so far, the talks are moving forward in a constructive way, it makes sense to extend that moratorium, so long as the talks are moving in a constructive way."
U.S. officials also said the Arab-led resolution could also cause Israel to reject any participation in a planned 2012 conference aimed at establishing a Middle East free of weapons of mass destruction.
"Another resolution singling out Israel and ignoring proliferation issues like Iran and Syria would seriously diminish the chances for convening a 2012 meeting," said Glyn Davies, the U.S. ambassador to the IAEA, in an interview.
International focus on Israel's nuclear program has heightened considerably over the past year, to the chagrin of Mr. Netanyahu's government.
The Arab states scored a diplomatic coup last year at the IAEA's General Conference by securing passage of a resolution targeting Israel.
The Obama administration then signed on in May to a U.N. statement that calls for the holding of the 2012 Mideast conference and for Israel to accede to the NPT, stirring tensions between the U.S. and Israel.
U.S. officials have emphasized that the actions outlined in the U.N. statement can be taken only following significant advances are made in the Middle East peace process.
The Obama administration has also pressed the Arab states not to single out Israel, due to fears it could undercut the peace talks and distract the international focus away from Tehran's nuclear program.
Arab diplomats counter that the IAEA has done little to implement the Israel-focused resolution since last year.
The IAEA's director-general, Yukiya Amano, visited Jerusalem in August but got no new commitments from Mr. Netanyahu's government, according to Israeli and IAEA officials. The IAEA also hasn't provided any detailed new accounting to its members on the state of Israel's nuclear program.
IAEA officials say the agency has little leverage over Israel, specifically because Jerusalem isn't bound by the NPT.
Arab diplomats, however, say they are seeking a more detailed accounting from Mr. Amano on how Israel could comply with the new resolution.
The Arab countries are also seeking international consensus on banning nuclear cooperation with Israel until it signs the NPT.
"We don't like Amano's current approach," said an Arab diplomat briefed on the new resolution being prepared for the IAEA.
U.S. and European officials said they plan on using the IAEA meetings to intensify pressure on Iran and Syria.
The IAEA issued new reports this week that reprimanded both Tehran and Damascus for continuing to deny U.N. inspectors access to sites alleged to be involved in covert nuclear work. The IAEA particularly criticized Iran's decision to deny two U.N. staff any future entrance to the country. Washington fears Tehran is increasingly shutting down monitoring of its nuclear sites, as its ramps up the production of nuclear fuel.
Mr. Davies has said the U.S. and its allies might push in coming months for the IAEA to conduct a "special inspection" of Syria's alleged nuclear infrastructure. Such a measure would compel Damascus to comply with Mr. Amano's requests or risk facing a U.N. Security Council censure, if not sanctions. Iran was hit with its fourth round of sanctions in June for its defiance of the U.N.
Israeli warplanes in 2007 destroyed a facility near the eastern Syrian town of Dair Alzour that the U.S. believes was a nearly operational nuclear reactor built in cooperation with North Korea. A subsequent IAEA visit to the site found significant traces of natural uranium. And in its most recent report, the agency detailed what it said were unreported experiments conducted by Syria that could be utilized to produce nuclear fuel.
This month, Syria and the IAEA agreed to an action plan that would allow U.N. monitors greater access to Damascus's research reactor, where the experiments were held. But Syria has continued to deny the IAEA any new visits to the site destroyed by the Israelis two years ago, or to make available officials and documents related to the facility.
"It's important for the agency ... to resolve all questions about the scope of Syria's undeclared nuclear activities," said Mr. Davies. "Ultimately the issue is gaining unfettered IAEA access to the Dair Alzour site, which we are confident was a secret nuclear reactor."
Syria denies it was developing a nuclear reactor. And Syrian officials said the IAEA won't be allowed to visit sites that have military purposes.
Write to Jay Solomon at jay.solomon@wsj.com
[2] See MEMRI Inquiry and Analysis No. 617, "The New UNSC Iran Sanctions Resolution – Main Ramifications," June 22, 2010,http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/4394.htm.
[3] http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=NPT/CONF.2010/50%20%28VOL.I%29.
[4] http://www.america.gov/st/peacesec.../20100601133524esnamfuak0.697735.html.
[5] http://www.america.gov/st/peacesec-english/2010/June/20100601133524esnamfuak0.697735.html
[6] Ha’aretz (Israel), July 8, 2010 http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/obama-administration-israel-has-right-to-nuclear-capability-for-deterrence-purposes-1.300652.
[7] http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/readout-presidents-meeting-with-prime-minister-netanyahu-israel-0.
SEPTEMBER 11, 2010 MIDDLE EAST NEWS
Nuclear Scrutiny to Turn to Israel By JAY SOLOMON
WASHINGTON—Arab states are preparing to press for far greater United Nations controls over Israel's nuclear program, in a move that could complicate the Obama administration's broader nonproliferation campaign and Middle East peace drive.
Beginning Monday, the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, will hold two sets of meetings in Vienna aimed at strengthening international efforts to stanch the spread of atomic weapons.
Access thousands of business sources not available on the free web. Learn More
Arab diplomats say they are preparing to use the conferences—for the second consecutive year—to pass a resolution through the IAEA's member states aimed at bringing Israel's nuclear program under tighter international controls.
The resolution seeks to pressure Israel into signing the U.N.'s principal counter-proliferation document, the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, and to place Israel's nuclear assets under IAEA safeguards. A similar resolution passed last year.
Israel is believed to be the only Middle East country to possess atomic weapons. Its government neither confirms nor denies their existence.
The U.S. has already begun trying to head off the Arab initiative, according to American and Arab diplomats, due to concerns it will distract from the conferences' focus on the proliferation cases of Iran and Syria.
U.S. officials said they are worried the Arab-led resolution could antagonize Israel just as direct Mideast peace talks are resuming in Egypt next week.
At a White House news conference Friday, President Barack Obama revealed that he had asked Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to extend the freeze on Jewish settlements in Palestinian territories when the moratorium expires on Sept. 26.
Speaking about the Arab-Israeli conflict, Mr. Obama said: "What I've said to Prime Minister Netanyahu is that, given, so far, the talks are moving forward in a constructive way, it makes sense to extend that moratorium, so long as the talks are moving in a constructive way."
U.S. officials also said the Arab-led resolution could also cause Israel to reject any participation in a planned 2012 conference aimed at establishing a Middle East free of weapons of mass destruction.
"Another resolution singling out Israel and ignoring proliferation issues like Iran and Syria would seriously diminish the chances for convening a 2012 meeting," said Glyn Davies, the U.S. ambassador to the IAEA, in an interview.
International focus on Israel's nuclear program has heightened considerably over the past year, to the chagrin of Mr. Netanyahu's government.
The Arab states scored a diplomatic coup last year at the IAEA's General Conference by securing passage of a resolution targeting Israel.
The Obama administration then signed on in May to a U.N. statement that calls for the holding of the 2012 Mideast conference and for Israel to accede to the NPT, stirring tensions between the U.S. and Israel.
U.S. officials have emphasized that the actions outlined in the U.N. statement can be taken only following significant advances are made in the Middle East peace process.
The Obama administration has also pressed the Arab states not to single out Israel, due to fears it could undercut the peace talks and distract the international focus away from Tehran's nuclear program.
Arab diplomats counter that the IAEA has done little to implement the Israel-focused resolution since last year.
The IAEA's director-general, Yukiya Amano, visited Jerusalem in August but got no new commitments from Mr. Netanyahu's government, according to Israeli and IAEA officials. The IAEA also hasn't provided any detailed new accounting to its members on the state of Israel's nuclear program.
IAEA officials say the agency has little leverage over Israel, specifically because Jerusalem isn't bound by the NPT.
Arab diplomats, however, say they are seeking a more detailed accounting from Mr. Amano on how Israel could comply with the new resolution.
The Arab countries are also seeking international consensus on banning nuclear cooperation with Israel until it signs the NPT.
"We don't like Amano's current approach," said an Arab diplomat briefed on the new resolution being prepared for the IAEA.
U.S. and European officials said they plan on using the IAEA meetings to intensify pressure on Iran and Syria.
The IAEA issued new reports this week that reprimanded both Tehran and Damascus for continuing to deny U.N. inspectors access to sites alleged to be involved in covert nuclear work. The IAEA particularly criticized Iran's decision to deny two U.N. staff any future entrance to the country. Washington fears Tehran is increasingly shutting down monitoring of its nuclear sites, as its ramps up the production of nuclear fuel.
Mr. Davies has said the U.S. and its allies might push in coming months for the IAEA to conduct a "special inspection" of Syria's alleged nuclear infrastructure. Such a measure would compel Damascus to comply with Mr. Amano's requests or risk facing a U.N. Security Council censure, if not sanctions. Iran was hit with its fourth round of sanctions in June for its defiance of the U.N.
Israeli warplanes in 2007 destroyed a facility near the eastern Syrian town of Dair Alzour that the U.S. believes was a nearly operational nuclear reactor built in cooperation with North Korea. A subsequent IAEA visit to the site found significant traces of natural uranium. And in its most recent report, the agency detailed what it said were unreported experiments conducted by Syria that could be utilized to produce nuclear fuel.
This month, Syria and the IAEA agreed to an action plan that would allow U.N. monitors greater access to Damascus's research reactor, where the experiments were held. But Syria has continued to deny the IAEA any new visits to the site destroyed by the Israelis two years ago, or to make available officials and documents related to the facility.
"It's important for the agency ... to resolve all questions about the scope of Syria's undeclared nuclear activities," said Mr. Davies. "Ultimately the issue is gaining unfettered IAEA access to the Dair Alzour site, which we are confident was a secret nuclear reactor."
Syria denies it was developing a nuclear reactor. And Syrian officials said the IAEA won't be allowed to visit sites that have military purposes.
Write to Jay Solomon at jay.solomon@wsj.com
Posts
