U.S. urges Arab states to drop Israel nuclear treaty demand

[Poll_Blind]

Source: Haaretz

The U.S. envoy to the UN atomic watchdog urged Arab states on Monday to withdraw a resolution calling on Israel to sign an anti-nuclear arms treaty, warning it would send a negative signal to Middle East peace talks.

Arab countries, backed by Iran, are seeking to build on a victory at an assembly meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency last year when they narrowly won support for a
non-binding resolution calling on Israel to join the Non-Proliferation treaty. They are expected to propose a similar text to this year's meeting of the 151-nation assembly starting on Sept. 20, diplomats say.

The United States says that zeroing in on Israel, widely believed to be the region's only nuclear power, could jeopardize an Egyptian-proposed conference in 2012 to discuss creating a Middle East free of weapons of mass destruction.

--snip--

Israel, which would have to forswear atomic arms and place all its nuclear facilities under the IAEA's watch if it signed the NPT, says full Middle East peace is a condition for it to join

Read more: http://www.haaretz.com/news/international/u-s-urges-arab-states-to-drop-israel-nuclear-treaty-demand-1.313622

---

The whole article is worth a read. Our widely-varied treatment of India, Pakistan, North Korea, Iran and Israel when it comes to the NNPT is one of the reasons why we have pissed away any authoritative voice when it comes to negotiating the matter.

I don't think it's controversial to call policy enforcement of the NNPT by the United States one-sided and politically-motivated...at best. Considering Iran doesn't even have nuclear weapons, the focus we put on them above India & Pakistan (who are actually much more likely to actually use nuclear weapons, especially in a destabilized Pakistan) is a J-O-K-E.

PB

[leveymg]

1. The while NPT regime has lost much of its legitimacy because of multiple standards

It's now seen as little more than a tool for the Club Members to maintain a nuclear weapons monopoly, and a legalistic pointed stick to selectively threaten those who want to get in the door.

[kristopher]

2. You're right.

And that is a very, very bad development.

[damntexdem]

3. Why the hell should they?

It's time for the U.S. to stop defending the rogue state of Israel.

[Heywood J]

4. God forbid we ask them to

consider not using nuclear weapons near the world's holy sites.

[Vehl]

5. The reason why NPT is useless was clearly spelled out by India.....and is still not addressed

Indian Minister for External Affairs Pranab Mukherjee said on Sunday that New Delhi did not sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty in the late 1960s because it was fundamentally an unequal treaty.


he added, "Being a dissenter at that time did imply pressures, costs and burdens, But, in our view, to become party to an unequal arrangement would have been worse." New Delhi has never been on the wrong side of international law or non-proliferation efforts, he noted.


I second the view of the Indian government regarding NPT. NPT allows the so called "big five" to keep their nukes while prohibiting it for the rest of the signatories. Furthermore, the "big five" never did anything to get rid of their nukes either. India rightly pointed out that it will never sign such a hypo critic treaty. In fact I'm amazed that everyone except for 3 countries signed this blatantly discriminatory treaty.



why does the NPT allow five nations to have nuclear weapons, while banning it for others?

Iran was stupid to sign that treaty...but now that its signed..it has to abide by it