Under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, in force since 1970:
Five states are permitted by the NPT to own nuclear weapons: the United States (signed 1968), United Kingdom (1968), France (1992), Soviet Union (1968; obligations and rights assumed by Russia), and the People's Republic of China (1992). These were the only states possessing such weapons at that time, and are also the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council. These 5 Nuclear Weapons States (NWS) agree not to transfer nuclear weapons technology to other states, and the non-NWS state parties agree not to seek to develop nuclear weapons.
The 5 NWS parties have made undertakings not to use their nuclear weapons against a non-NWS party except in response to a nuclear attack, or a conventional attack in alliance with a Nuclear Weapons State. However, these undertakings have not been incorporated formally into the treaty, and the exact details have varied over time. The United States, for instance, has indicated that it may use nuclear weapons in an unprovoked attack on "rogue states".
The United States has also provided nuclear weapons to five additional NATO countries, a practice argued to be illegal under the treaty by many other states.
India, Pakistan, and Israel declined to sign the treaty, arguing that:
[T]he NPT creates a club of "nuclear haves" and a larger group of "nuclear have-nots" by restricting the legal possession of nuclear weapons to those states that tested them before 1967, but the treaty never explains on what ethical grounds such a distinction is valid.
India and Pakistan have since developed and tested nuclear weapons. Israel is widely believed to possess nuclear weapons but is not known to have tested them.
North Korea and Iran, originally signatories to the treaty, appear to have come around to the non-signatories' thinking. North Korea withdrew from the treaty in 2003 and in 2005 announced it possessed nuclear weapons. Iran is still a signatory to the treaty but wants to manage its own nuclear power program without interference from what it perceives as a hostile West. Iran's proximity to Israel -- a non-signatory nuclear power that Iran perceives as a potential threat -- contributes to Iran's desire to be able to defend itself in like kind if need be.
"The Israelis were the first who introduced nuclear weapons in the Middle East and they have huge weapon of mass destruction which is very dangerous and [the] U.S.A. does not talk about that," said one Iranian interviewed by FOX News.
But the U.S. government said the two situations can not be compared.
"There is no comparison between the policies of the government of Israel and the policies of the government of Iran," said Nicholas Burns, undersecretary for political affairs at the State Department. "Israel is a democratic, law-abiding state, a country that time and again has indicated its interest in general peace in the Middle East. Iran is an outlaw state."
Mr. Burns' description of Israel overlooks that country's pre-emptive military strikes and other excessses in the region; and his characterization of Iran sounds like propaganda for another attempt at regime change in the Middle East. Thankfully, the American people are awakening to the executive branch's tendency to label regimes as enemies, demonize them, and drag us into armed hostilities against them preemptively.
Tens of thousands of American troops still based in South Korea more than fifty years after the Korean War continue to aggravate North Korea's security concerns. It's time for our troops to come home and to bring China into negotiations, not just to deal with North Korea's nuclear capability but also to provide for lasting peace on the entire peninsula.
Further pressure on Iran not to join the nuclear weapons club, without successful pressure on Israel to give up its nukes, is unlikely to succeed and unlikely to promote peace in the Middle East.
The cat is too far out of the bag for the "haves" to deny nuclear technology for the rest of history to nations whose resources and self-defense concerns lead them to want to join the nuclear club. We must find other ways to achieve peace between all peoples, such as more disarmament -- as urged by most countries party to the treaty -- and by settling -- through concerted multinational influence -- the territorial conflicts that still linger as results of a century of war.
UPDATE: Mohamed ElBaradei's Nobel Message
UPDATE: CIA’s Goss Reportedly Warned Ankara Of Iranian Threat
UPDATE: Is Washington Planning a Military Strike?
UPDATE: Axis of Fanatics -- Netanyahu and Ahmadinejad
UPDATE: Israelis plan pre-emptive strike on Iran
UPDATE: Iran Sanctions Could Drive Oil Past $100
"India must not allow itself to be dragooned into joining the Washington-led nuclear lynch mob against Iran," The Hindu, one of India's most influential newspapers, cautioned Thursday. "Aside from the lack of any legal basis for threatening Iran with sanctions, India should consider what the U.S. pressure on Tehran will do to international oil prices as well as to the overall security scenario in West Asia."
UPDATE: It's the Regime, Stupid
We need to reorient our strategy. Our justifiable fixation on preventing Iran from getting the bomb has somehow kept us from pursuing a more fundamental and more essential goal: political change in Iran. We need to start supporting liberal and democratic change for an Iranian population that we know seeks both.
UPDATE: Cato Institute: Dubious Assumptions about Iran
UPDATE: Saudia Arabia working on secret nuclear program with Pakistan help
UPDATE: How to Regulate Nuclear Weapons
UPDATE: Zbigniew Brzezinski: Do not attack Iran
If undertaken without formal Congressional declaration, it would be unconstitutional and merit the impeachment of the president.
North Korea invaded South Korea, and our troops are there to prevent a repeat, yet they are said to "aggravate North Korea's security concerns."
ReplyDeleteI'm confused.
When has South Korea ever invaded North Korea? When has the U.S. ever invaded North Korea?
NEVER.
For North Korea, the sole party to that war whichs responsibility for starting it, to now try to play the victim and claim it needs nukes to defend itself is absurd. It's military posture vis a vis South Korea has always been offensive, not defensive.
That you fall for their description of themselves as the victim in that situation tells me you don't really understand what is at stake.
As for the non-proliferation treaty, it's kind of beside the point. I don't mind India having nukes, or even Russia, because they aren't governed by members of a cult that views self-martydom in the cause of killing "infidels" to be a noble thing. Iran, on the other hand, is - as its leaders have stated - bent on "wiping Israel from the map" and on creating a global Islamic state, by slaughtering the infidels.
Well, as an infidel, I'd prefer they not have nukes. I don't think we should be ready to take out their nuke program because it violates some treaty. I think we should be ready to take out their nuke programs because I don't want them to kill me.
Bill, thanks for coming over and commenting. In the link to the Korean War in my post, you find that the US did indeed invade North Korea after the Inchon landing, an act that brought China into the conflict. North Korea claimed that South Korea invaded it first.
ReplyDeleteThese disputes seem typical of post-World War II territorial divisions that need to be resolved with the cooperation of the great powers that created them. I do consider Korea, like Vietnam, more of a Chinese concern, just as under our own Monroe Doctrine a country near the United States would be more our concern.
Iran has no delivery systems for nuclear weapons to threaten the US. It would be better to revisit ABM agreements and develop effective defenses against possible rogue attacks than to "kill them before they kill us."
Well, of course we "invaded" at Inchon, but that was after the war started, and it was necessary to cut their supply lines and get them out of South Korea, which they had almost completely taken over.
ReplyDeleteThe history of the Korean war is clear that North Korea invaded. You say they say they didn't start it, as if North Korea has any credibility. It's current leader starved two million of his own people - and denied there was a famine.
Iran has missiles capable of reaching Israel.
Last time I looked, Israel was not one of the 50 states, or even in the Western Hemisphere.
ReplyDelete