Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

State Dept. Calls on Israel to “Foreswear” Nuclear Arms
Arutz 7 ^ | Apr 03, '05 | staff

Posted on 04/03/2005 9:48:32 AM PDT by Nachum

In a move that could curtail Israeli power in the Middle East, the US is calling on Israel to sign the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) and forego the use and stockpile of nuclear weapons.

Twice in the past two weeks, State Department officials have compared Israel’s status as a nuclear power with that of India and Pakistan, calling on all three nations to give up their nuclear arms.

The statements were made by two mid-level State Department Officials, ahead of the NPT Review Conference, scheduled to open in New York on May 2.

The purpose of the conference is to evaluate implementation of the NPT and determine its future course. The officials’ comments regarding Israel’s weapons capability were made, apparently, in order to put the issue of Israel’s nukes on the conference’s agenda. The comments appeared to deviate from Bush Administration policy, which up to now, refrained from using terminology that confirms Israel’s status as a nuclear nation.

The most recent statement came from Jackie Wolcott Sanders, the president’s representative for the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. In an essay titled “How to Strengthen the NPT” Sanders mentions Israel, along with India and Pakistan, within the context of enforcing “universal NPT adherence,” but adds that it’s not likely “in the foreseeable future.”

“The Review Conference should 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 would have to forswear 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,” writes Sanders.

She adds, “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.”

Another statement, using similar language, was made by Mark Fitzpatrick, acting deputy assistant secretary for nuclear proliferation, on March 17, at a Meeting of the Organization of American States Committee on Hemispheric Security, in Washington, D.C. He also held the status of Israel’s nuclear armaments on a par with those of Pakistan and India:

“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.”

Fitzpatrick’s comments regarding Israel were made just after proclaiming, “Iran and North Korea must not be permitted to violate the NPT without consequences.”

The statements of the two officials contrast with President Bush’s own reference to the NPT in a speech he made on March 7 when he called for enforcing the treaty’s provisions on NPT members, which conveniently include both Iran and North Korea. Bush did not refer to his policy regarding non-member states, which include Israel, Pakistan, and India.

The U.S. State Department has often taken pro-Arab positions on the Arab-Israeli dispute over the years, and has been wary of projecting Israeli power in the Middle East.

Sometimes the department’s positions ostensibly contradict those of the president. For example, Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice recently declared in two separate newspaper interviews that President Bush did not make any guarantees to Israel regarding Israel’s right to retain certain settlement blocs as part of a permanent status agreement with the Palestinians. The president purported to make such promises to Israel in a letter he wrote to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon last spring, but the interpretation of Bush’s statements have been the subject of much controversy, some of it spurred on by State Department officials.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Israel; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: arms; calls; dept; foreswear; israel; markfitzpatrick; nuclear; on; state; to
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-112 next last
To: JimRed

Why is Bush turning his back on Israel?? Something's going on, and, Bush IS NOT what he seems. Clintoon would have been "crucified" for suggesting Israel do this , not to mention promoting a Philistine state in the middle of Israel!!


21 posted on 04/03/2005 10:07:27 AM PDT by MrLee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Canard
It's only proper that the US should be advocating non-proliferation and a nuclear free Middle East, it's the only consistent standpoint to take.

Right..../s

The US and Israel walk hand in hand, and if Israel is to give up her nukes, then it should be professed that the US does the same.

It "ain't" gonna happen.

22 posted on 04/03/2005 10:11:14 AM PDT by EGPWS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: MrLee
Sometimes the department’s positions ostensibly contradict those of the president.

Bush hasn't spoken on this issue yet....

23 posted on 04/03/2005 10:13:45 AM PDT by EGPWS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: MrDem
Where is Israel?

Oop's, sorry I had a gnat on my screen.

There she is!

24 posted on 04/03/2005 10:15:52 AM PDT by EGPWS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Danae

By having surrogates say the things you want to, but can't, that has been the way of leaders forever. This is Bush policy, handed down to Condi and mouthed by those charged to do so.


25 posted on 04/03/2005 10:19:28 AM PDT by jeremiah (The ACLU and lawyers in general, are responsible for 90% of all problems nationwide)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
Remember the good ol' days {last week}, when the only power mad dictators in this country had to wear robes?
Seriously, it is time to put the ruling class in its place.
26 posted on 04/03/2005 10:19:58 AM PDT by labette
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrDem

Great photo ;)


27 posted on 04/03/2005 10:23:58 AM PDT by IAF ThunderPilot (The basic point of the Israel Defense Forces: -Israel cannot afford to lose a single war.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: expatguy

"Partisan Politics

This is something that I personally have first hand knowledge of. Individuals within our State department and career diplomats who are willing to do anything in their power to discredit the Bush administration. Why are these people still employed? Have we got a deathwish or something? "

Death wish? One would think so. And based on my conversations with 2 State Department career employees who lived next door to my hotel(Lanson Place, 1 Jalan Ampang Hilir), I would guarantee it.


28 posted on 04/03/2005 10:24:59 AM PDT by international american (Tagline now fireproof....purchased from "Conspiracy Guy Custom Taglines"LLC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: IAF ThunderPilot; All

For the record: I shamelessly 'stole' the map in #15 from IAF ThunderPilot. :)


29 posted on 04/03/2005 10:30:43 AM PDT by MrDem (Monthly Special: Will write OPUS's for Whiners and Crybabies for no charge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Nachum; All
Sounds great doesn't it?

First Israel give up its nukes.
Then Iran announces that it produced nuclear bombs.
After a while Iran demands from Israel to leave all the "Arab lands", otherwise it will nuke Israel.

Sounds great doesn't it?
30 posted on 04/03/2005 10:30:53 AM PDT by IAF ThunderPilot (The basic point of the Israel Defense Forces: -Israel cannot afford to lose a single war.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Grzegorz 246

Yep,Hitler was elected democratically alright,but he dismantled Germany's democratic institutions before doing the things that made him (in)famous.There is a world of difference from being elected democratically & running a functioning democracy.


31 posted on 04/03/2005 10:32:43 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: MrDem

I was already planning to sue you, but it won't be needed :)


32 posted on 04/03/2005 10:33:15 AM PDT by IAF ThunderPilot (The basic point of the Israel Defense Forces: -Israel cannot afford to lose a single war.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

I think they should worry about Pakistan (MUCH MORE than is evident). I don't think there is much reason to fear Israel selling nuke tech to Iran for example. I also don't think there is much chance that an unfriendly goverment will take control of Israel's nukes and use them against, or sell them to others to be used against us.


33 posted on 04/03/2005 10:38:34 AM PDT by OneTimeLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: international american

You still stay there now?


34 posted on 04/03/2005 10:40:46 AM PDT by expatguy (http://laotze.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: IAF ThunderPilot
First Israel give up its nukes

You know it won't happen;). On a different note, I see from your about page that you are not flying F-16's, is that a Kfir? I worked at Base 1 and Base 4 in the late '80's and I thought they refered to Kfir pilots as "ThunderPilots".

35 posted on 04/03/2005 10:44:13 AM PDT by ScreamingFist (Peace through Ignorance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: EGPWS

" The US and Israel walk hand in hand, and if Israel is to give up her nukes, then it should be professed that the US does the same.

It "ain't" gonna happen."

Well, the US is a signatory to the non-proliferation treaty, which commits them to doing that. I don't see any way that a solution to the various Middle East problems could not include ensuring that it is a nuclear weapon free zone.


36 posted on 04/03/2005 10:45:57 AM PDT by Canard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: expatguy

No. I lived there all of 2003, and part of 2004. I bought a condo under construction across from the Petronas Towers. I should be moved in by June. I am currently in Ventura, Ca.


37 posted on 04/03/2005 10:46:01 AM PDT by international american (Tagline now fireproof....purchased from "Conspiracy Guy Custom Taglines"LLC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Canard
I don't see any way that a solution to the various Middle East problems could not include ensuring that it is a nuclear weapon free zone.

Trust but verify?

Second verse same as the first!

38 posted on 04/03/2005 10:48:42 AM PDT by EGPWS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Disgruntled Clinton holdovers spouting off. Condi needs to go down there and kick their butts.


39 posted on 04/03/2005 10:52:36 AM PDT by Mad_Tom_Rackham (Florida: suppressio veri, suggestio falsi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Uh--We will if you will might be a more appropriate line. And that's the line the Israelis should use to us.


40 posted on 04/03/2005 10:52:49 AM PDT by freeangel ( (free speech is only good until someone else doesn't like what you say))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-112 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson